PRN-22-0196

Every appearance1 of 1 are in a recording

TranscriptWhat was said at each appearance is below it. Machine transcription, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 97% of 145 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.

1. 1Sep 20, 2022
   Board of County CommissionersR105Regular businessApproved

   Approved minutes

   Approved the item per Staff’s recommendation without a phase in and to go directly to $3,450.15 with Chairman Starkey voting nay.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 1:28:09
   ▶ 1:28:0933m

   StarkeyChair

   1:28:09Is it ki are we up to Keith? Is it here?

   StarkeyChair

   1:28:15R one oh five.

   StarkeyChair

   1:28:16R one oh five.

   1:28:19Does that mean? That's what I thought.

   1:28:22And our screens are working just in time for you. So we can turn those back to the public if you'd like.

   Keith

   1:28:27Madam Chair, members of the board, good morning. Keith Wiley, Director of Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources. Um before I read this title, um I'm gonna really just kinda wanna do a quick opening and and a quick recap on Um the park's capital journey, if you will. Um obviously this has been something that we've been working on since 2015 when we had the master plan put together and approved by the board. Then if you recall in 2018 we had the general obligation bond to address deferred maintenance. And then between that time and present,

   1:28:58we've been really working on Basically tweaking the capital plan to make sure that it actually addressed all the un the highest unmet needs and then started the um impact fee study that I'm getting ready to present today briefly. Uh and I just wanted the the public to know that this is this is not something that we've thrown together. It's been a it's been a long work and and and a very long journey to get here. It's kind of surreal actually to be presenting it because I feel like I've been working on this project for five years. I would also like to thank the board for all their continued support. I think that the board and county administration

   1:29:28has been very good to the Parks Department in Pasco County. We've seen tremendous gains, and for on behalf of my team, I appreciate all the support. High-level theme for this is the capital plan that we're going to basically present in this that's in this study ultimately addresses the parks needs for Pasco County through 2045. I think that's the takeaway message that I really want to start with. And more importantly, that it's a plan-based approach, which means that it's very specifically focused on projects.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:29:58Okay.

   Keith

   1:29:59So where are we today? Next slide, please. Where are we today is that we have a park impact fee that has not been changed since 2002. The current fee uh per sink Yeah.

   1:30:14Uh the the current fee is um for single family is eight hundred and ninety-one dollars and eighty-two cents. For multifamily it is six hundred and twenty-seven dollars per unit.

   1:30:25What are we trying to do? Basically, we're we're really trying to kind of true up the fee. Ultimately, again to Commissioner Starkey's point, we haven't changed this fee since 2002. We have to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances underneath the new statute. We have to demonstrate that in order to actually make the request to increase the fee beyond 50%. I think that you all on the board know that we've actually it's that's an easy demonstration. We've had unprecedented growth, we've been, we've been, we've all seen it. All the departments that actually

   1:30:56work for county administration and you, we've all seen that. So the other theme of this project is that the majority of the capital plan is based off concurrency requirements, which I'll get to a little bit later. But again, cost of materials have increased, land values have increased, and the facilities. Facility and the demands. I think uh public comment, um, Mr. Mark was talking about the demands on fields. My team is inundated with requests for field use constantly. Pretty much all of our facilities are at capacity. So this this proposal to increase the impact fee

   1:31:26is really is is an effort to update all those costs so we can actually Do what we need to do. Next slide. This kind of just quickly recaps. Uh in the Com plan you have a concurrency requirement that's triggered off population. Basically to date, over the last fifteen years, we've pretty much negotiated around new six district parks, the land for those facilities. We're seeking the money to actually get those facilities built. Next slide. So, what are the numbers? So, originally

   1:31:57when we went out to the consultant, we said, We're kind of behind, so we really want to get this done in the next 15 years, so we set a horizon of 2035. I'm gonna just jump right to the fee because I think that's the most important. The total capital cost again is around $266 million for a bunch of projects that I'll show you later. But if you set the horizon underneath alternative one at 2035, That sets the fee at forty eight hundred o forty eight four forty eight hundred dollars, tw twenty dollars and nineteen cents, which is a pretty substantial increase, not gonna lie. After

   1:32:27talking to stakeholders, next slide.

   1:32:31What we did is we stretched the term out through 2045, which ultimately lowers the fee to $3,450.15 per unit. We're also recommending that we go away from multifamily and single family and just sit settle on one dwelling unit. So this is the staff recommendation to date presented in front of you. And ultimately, what's in front of you today to approve is the the request is to um basically trigger the process to change the comp plan to address the l to clean up the level of service per the impact fee

   1:33:01study and then follow that up with an L D C change that would ultimately result in the increases presented. Underneath alternative two. Next slide. After meeting with stakeholders and many of you and uh other other folks that are concerned about this increase, what we've suggesting to do is something very similar to what the school board has done, which is the two-year phase in. So up on the screen, what I have is I have the increases focusing on dwelling unit by year one and year two. So in year one, you would see the fee go to two

   1:33:31thousand four hundred twenty-six dollars and eighty-two cents. In year two, you would Get to the recommended $3,450.15. To the right, we have what those increases are by the existing categories, just for illustration purposes. Remember that if approved, the multifamily category goes away. The main reason for that is that through all reviewing all the data, we really didn't see much of a difference between single-family and multifamily individuals per dwelling unit. So to simplify accounting, I know my fiscal manager would appreciate that and so would everyone in

   1:34:01um in developing services that has to collect the impact fees. We're recommending that we just you know go down to that single family uh or excuse me one dwelling unit. What are we gonna get? What's in the capital plan? Next slide. So this is remember I talked about being very plan-based focused. This actually, there's one error on this. We broke this down into five, ten, and fifteen-year increments. The section that says ELAMP is actually in the study in the materials that you have, it says natural resource-based infrastructure.

   1:34:32That's basically, you know, what that's basically improvements on ELAMP. land or in uh regional wilderness parks, things like that that we can get done and we broke those down into phases. So This is the one benefit, I think, to focusing on a plan based approach is when you shop around the plan, everyone knows what they're gonna get. for the actual fee. Uh I think we received a lot of positive impact a lot of positive uh input on that. Um it was very transparent and I think that's ultimately what got us I think to this point to presenting this uh proposal

   1:35:02to you for consideration. Next slide. So, what's next? Um, if approved today, we have to do um we have to amend the comp plan to to true up the level of service for the the parks concurrency piece. And then we also after that, I don't know if we can do this concurrently or not, I'd have to talk to the county attorney's office, but we have to do the land development code. So this is really just the starting point that will then set us down the path. There'll be public hearing and whatnot that we'll have to go through. But really, what we're asking for You today is to approve alternative two.

   1:35:33With the recommended fee of $34, $3,450.15 per dwelling unit. And as I understand in conversations with the County Attorney's Office, if the board selects that number, we can work through the phasing options as put on the screen earlier or any other minor changes. The goal is to actually settle on the number, the cost of the plan, if you will, today. So with that, that's the end of my presentation. I'm here for any Questions that you may have.

   StarkeyChair

   1:36:01Uh Commissioner Mariano.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:36:02Thank you, Madam Chair. Keith I want to say since you've come on board you've done a phenomenal job helping with parks. Christina, your team, unbelievable what you guys have done. Uh so Kathy, you pick the right people to bring 'em up. Um having said that, um We've talked about Sun West funding and that's gonna be covered different parts of money, correct?

   Keith

   1:36:23S so yeah it's currently funded. All the capital improvements that we have discussed is currently funded. But the natural resource-based piece could be allocated toward toward improvements to a facility of that category, yes.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:36:33Okay. You're talking about doing a phasing of the fee to go from one number to the highest number.

   Keith

   1:36:40Yeah.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:36:41I don't know what the board thinks, but if I think right now if we're gonna take all these homes that are coming in that want to get these services right now as well, I think we should not even do a phase in. We should go right to the high number.

   StarkeyChair

   1:36:50Well I have a suggestion. Um because So I I've I've lived here now 31 years and I I know I brought this up here before, but we have new commissioners here. So my husband and I with youth were youth coaches for 25 years. I've got a D1 soccer player. Um I think the first fields that were added since I moved here thirty one years ago. was Starkey Ranch District Park. And

   1:37:21um they're it's not even done yet because we went for quality, not quantity, and which I totally am behind. The the facility before that, um the last park added was veterans. And on on the west side and then we then the next district park on the west side was was Starkey. I mean, we are so far behind in providing facilities for our kids. My my kids played Little League at Pine Hill. When was the when was the next um Little League complex

   1:37:51built?

   Keith

   1:37:53On it to to your point, Commissioner Weightman. I don't have all the dates because I don't have the institutional knowledge, but it's it's been some time.

   StarkeyChair

   1:38:00That was a uh holiday wreck was the last Little League fields built on the West Side. That was built before I moved here. So that was more than thirty years ago. So um we now have a a a new little league um what's the word for it, the Starkey?

   Keith

   1:38:15Uh Starkey Ranch Little League.

   StarkeyChair

   1:38:16So we now have a Starkey Ranch Little League chartered with no fields. No fields. Um this weekend. Um and Novi's here. Thank you, Novi. I kicked the the ball out. for a a game of between His um girls team and one from I think from Al from Alabama. We had another um big soccer tournament going on over in Weston Chapel. And they they didn't have enough fields. They had to send them out of county to go play in other fields because our fields were underwater and there weren't enough turf

   1:38:46fields. So the families that came here at the last minute from out of state, they had to be sent to other counties to play. I d I don't think The housing that's lived here, the new homes that have lived here for the last thirty years have really paid their fair share of the impacts of what we're dealing with. And um I wanted to suggest that we Not only consider this impact fee, which I think is is sufficient. But uh I want to suggest that we

   1:39:17go to a countywide MSTU So that the homes that have moved here in the last thirty years are also helping to pay for the impacts that they're They're um moving here have have caused. And so and I'm not talking about a big number. I'm talking fifteen dollars a year, something small. And I had asked staff to get me some numbers and I don't I don't know if they gave 'em to you 'cause I haven't gotten them yet. But do you have any information on what a say fifteen twenty dollar MSTU

   1:39:47county wide would look like?

   Keith

   1:39:48So Um based on the logic that you're that you know uh that you're following, what we did was we took the projects that would have should have been built, let's just say, the ones that we're behind on in terms of growth. It's around ninety-six million dollars. Um I have not received those direct calculations back from OMB, but you can draw some conclusions on some of the stuff that we've presented recently. For example, I think the jail go bond or the jail bond was less than twenty-something dollars a household. Now property values are you know have increased and therefore that ultimately

   1:40:18impacts what it is. But I think it depends on what you're looking for. But I unfortunately I don't have those numbers to present to you. I I would ask that Um since this is gonna require numerous public hearing through the comp plan and and the land development code change that that maybe we work I've also talked to Mr. Caval about this, that maybe we work through that time and try to get that information and present it back so we have some actual Numbers that quite honestly I don't want to I don't want to mention a number up here if it's not if it's not correct. So

   StarkeyChair

   1:40:45this is how other counties pay for their parks and um I don't think it should be a high number. I think it should be a number that ten ten to twenty dollars. It's bondable and we can start building stuff right away. Commissioner Oakley.

   Oakley

   1:40:58Uh, Keith, when I came here six years ago Parks and Rec were behind by Was it millions of dollars or was it Ten yeah, yeah. Several years back. I mean, I'm I'm trying to remember that date and I can't remember it right now, but uh the fact of it is Is that For that six years you've been behind, but during COVID He caught up a lot of maintenance that closer on because the fields were closed and we're not using them all we're able to go ahead and do some of that

   1:41:28work. So are we still behind like we were before or are we just starting new projects because of our growth?

   Keith

   1:41:35Good good I have two answers to that. So yes, you're correct, we were behind. The initial conversation that we had was we were behind on deferred ma we called it deferred maintenance at the time. It was a backlog of twenty-five million dollars. Um so there's always a reoccurring maintenance cost that happens every year. That's basic operations. So I do think we've caught up on some of the deferred maintenance. I do think we still have after that, that was like the worst of the worst, right? We said, hey, at a minimum we have to address this or we're gonna close facilities. So the public supported that, that was amazing. Um

   1:42:05We still are sitting on uh working with County Administrator and O and B on how we address stuff that maybe didn't qualify as the worst of the worst, but was still pretty bad, that's gonna come online soon. And that would be, you know, that's around $3.2 million a year in average of facilities replacement. So I don't want to call that deferred maintenance. Let's just call it Mr. Cabal, I don't remember what you called it earlier, but uh uh operation expenses, replacement. know, um we both have different terms that we use in different businesses, but the end the end the end goal is is the same is

   1:42:35that you have stuff that's aging that needs to be replaced. So that's the maintenance side of stuff. The the the other piece is the is just dealing with the growth of which in my presentation I talked about Actually can I can I show a graphic real quick because I think this will be very telling. Is there any way I can share a graphic?

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:42:52Public safety, you've got parks and libraries.

   Keith

   1:42:56I'll keep talking and getting that going. So is just dealing with the growth itself. I had mentioned that there's six district parks through concurrency that we've addressed. So it's really twofold, Commissioner. It's the maintenance side, which again the board has been very supportive. We've seen significant increases in the operating budget. Um but when you see this graphic, I think it tells the story. It's the combination of the growth element plus the maintenance piece. What I'm presenting today is really just about the capital growth piece. It's not it's not attempting to even discuss

   1:43:27maintenance concerns at this point in time. I should have talked to you about this before earlier. I apologize. Maybe it's not as important while

   Oakley

   1:43:33he while he's doing that. Uh I'm in agreement with the fact that we continue this conversation and you get the numbers you need and bring 'em back to us and uh Look forward to seeing those. Any any way that it can easel on our citizens, you know, we gotta be very Um mindful of everything costs are up and things of that nature too. But you've got to be mindful of what you put on your citizens to help take care of. So Absolutely. But um I think I think

   1:44:03that's the right thing to Get those numbers and come back and I think it'll give us a good Look at something maybe we can do that be better than what we got there. So

   Moore

   1:44:15I'm

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   1:44:15sure just quick

   Moore

   1:44:15questions.

   Oakley

   1:44:16Mr. Moore.

   Moore

   1:44:16Thank you, ma'am. Guesstimate uh when Connerton might be able to come online?

   Keith

   1:44:22So um if if this so Commissioner Mariano mentioned not interest not being interested in the phase in. Um all I can do is tell you that we generate around three million dollars a year now. Uh if a district park costs twenty-five million dollars, you can do the math on that. It'll take some time before we'll have enough revenue to to make that happen. If this fee in place it gets put into place, Uh that is that project is one of the major projects in the first five year window that we would try

   Moore

   1:44:49to do. Just because of the as we know where the growth is. I mean the majority of the growth being a lot of it, you know, with the central Pasco area. We're seeing more on the west side now too. But um um just to help relieve those uh two Lana Lake parks And Wesley Chapel District Park, 'cause so many of those people go over there, right? So if Connerton comes online that's gonna Make uh Yeah, it'll it'll it'll you know like you mentioned before when you Commissioner O Starkey and and our Chairman Starkey and Commissioner Oakley mentioned it, you know, it's just it's better quality of life, right? You don't

   1:45:19have to sp in the c stay in the car for twenty five, thirty minutes to take your kid to wreck soccer practice. Well, I think a rec soccer practice. I'm gonna like be able to ride my bike there.

   Keith

   1:45:29You've just teed me up for my neck for this. I have to just take the moment. If you look at the screen, so this is something we worked on a few years ago, but it's basically our service area. So everything in blue is an existing facility in the terms of the service area of the polygons. Everything in red is what we haven't built yet that would be tied to this funding request. So if you can imagine the actual red polygons going going away. That's the area of service that we're not addressing. To Commissioner Moore's point, that means someone's driving an unnecessary amount of time to get to one park to another. So uh you

   1:45:59know, I've been saying this for a while, parks are essential in you know public infrastructure, they they they they warrant the investment. So

   Moore

   1:46:07Madam Chairman Mariano thank you ma'am. V O P uh that big park.

   1:46:17Um Supposedly, if I'm not correct, um the build out of FOPH is supposed to be able to sustain that park when it comes eventually when it comes to maintenance, but the capital needed uh that's gonna be You know. Until you see enough rooftops, you're not gonna have th enough capital generated from impact fee to to build that park. Right. But but at the same time, aren't those rooftops the ones that are supposed to be the one of

   1:46:47the main contributors to that superpark.

   Keith

   1:46:50So there um couple couple points on that. So the V OPH park is eighty-five to ninety percent funded. Um that was that was through this last budget. Yeah, through ARP. So we're fortunate to get started on that project, hopefully this fall. And I th um the actual surcharge, uh Mr. Goldstein can speak to this, but the surcharge attached to that is was intended to pay back both the park facility piece but the land piece for the original takedowns. So,

   Moore

   1:47:18okay, got so it was almost we almost it was almost a loan.

   Keith

   1:47:22Yes. Yeah. It was a loan against the district, if you will, from actually from the park impact fee land uh balance.

   Moore

   1:47:29So Mr. Goldstein, I'm let you jump in. But so it sounds to me like okay, so now those those surcharges will go to pay back.

   Keith

   1:47:38The land portion.

   1:47:39Okay.

   1:47:40Just the land

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   1:47:40portion.

   Keith

   1:47:40Yeah, it's a little tricky.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   1:47:43It's it's it's only paying back the land portion of the of that acquisition. The facility portion will be funded through other means as Keith mentioned through the federal funding that we received.

   Moore

   1:47:54Okay. So when then when so when that eventually then when that's built out

   1:48:00Those funds ki will go into the kitty. So if there's another park that you know needs those funds, that will help. Subsidize the shortfalls possibly. Let's say you need another one at West Pasco.

   StarkeyChair

   1:48:14I think he's got that all built into his

   Keith

   1:48:17zone. So Commissioner, in that zone it would refund it, it would it would replenish the the fund balance on the east side. So any project that was on the east. Correct. Yes. Two rivers would be a good one.

   Moore

   1:48:27I know sometimes we borrow we're gonna borrow from Peter to pay Paul at the same time, right? We do.

   Keith

   1:48:33Again, the accounting team doesn't appreciate that. But

   StarkeyChair

   1:48:35and and don't forget, and I don't even know if you have it in here, Keith, is we're looking at another property that we're trying to purchase.

   1:48:45That will have a boat ramp and um in an area that has no parks because it was built a long time ago. Um But I I also um I wanna say, you know, we we're talking about the youth sports and like I said I'm I got grandkids playing hockey, soccer, everything. Uh But I also am a big user of parks. And I'm not going out there to play um soccer. I want to be a user of a park. And as we

   1:49:15have uh many I guess I turned sixty-five last week, so maybe I'm a senior citizen. I don't know. Um Middle aged citizen as far as I'm concerned.

   Moore

   1:49:25They told me

   1:49:25if they told me

   1:49:26at fifty one I can go to the senior game. So if if you're calling me a senior citizen, yeah, you are too.

   StarkeyChair

   1:49:32I I like using parks. I I ride my bike in Starkey Wilderness Park. I I ride the trail um over there at the Coastal Anc Anclo Trail. I I you know, it's not only about our youth, it's about our older youth, like me. Yeah. And so um We have a lot of needs and I I I look forward to seeing what We can do Commissioner Mariano with a combination because with a combination like that We can get started. Uh quicker. Because you can't bond impact

   1:50:02fee, correct?

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:50:03So you you can bond impact fee the the problem with bonding impact fee is that you have to in basically insure them because it's not a stable revenue source. Uh but if you the market

   1:50:22So you end up you end uh while it is a legitimate revenue source, you almost always uh end up pledging something else to get a better interest rate. Interesting. Okay.

   StarkeyChair

   1:50:32And you know if the market slows down and not as many people move here, we don't get as much money. Right. But we're built we've built thousands of homes in the last twenty years. And where's that money coming from? Commissioner Mariano.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:50:44Thank you, Madam Chair. Keith, one of the things you mentioned before, and I just want to make sure we get get it clear. Apartments are not going to pay the same as a single residential family home, correct?

   Keith

   1:50:52So we're going to we're going to go to one dwelling unit, so yes they will.

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:50:56Okay.

   1:50:59I also think that, you know, we've got a lot of parks to do and Commissioner Oakley as you said the catching up from years before Doing a lot of good things as the go bonds going through has has helped. And I think down the road we can look at that MSTU as well. But I think we've got a lot to do right now.

   1:51:16No phasing in, go right to the top dollar number and keep it there. That'll help us get all the other parts we want for the rest of the county.

   StarkeyChair

   1:51:22So here's my problem with that. And why I'm not sure if you're not I thought of the other is because It's the future resident paying for the miss mis or the underfunding of the past. And I'm not sure that's fair. That's sounds fair.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   1:51:38Well

   StarkeyChair

   1:51:38that's that's why I'm I'm for

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:51:40that's not ac that's not accurate because you wouldn't be able to do the impact fee If that was the way you were funding it. So an impact fee by its very definition can only pay for new growth. Right. You have to come up with another source. That's what I'm talking about, MSTU. Yeah. But you have to come up with another source To do backlog and to do maintenance. You can't use the impact fee for that. So to say that new residents are paying

   1:52:11for that backlog is not a true statement.

   StarkeyChair

   1:52:13Okay. There is a backlog. No doubt. We need where are we getting the funds to pay for the backlog if we can't use impact fee?

   Keith

   1:52:22I think I think what I'm saying is

   1:52:24that the right-of-way

   1:52:25that's a better way to put it, yes. I think I have direction from the board to to to come up with a solution.

   Fitzpatrick

   1:52:30Commissioner Fitzpatrick wants to say something. I have multiple things since I've been writing them down. So first, it's very important that we do invest in our youth. It's also very important that as we make and continue to make Pasco at Premier County, is premier throughout the entire county. As the new fields are coming in, they are premiere. As the older fields

   1:52:52and were sufficient when they were originally built. And I know Keith is working on improving these fields to make them premiere. We need to continue to make the older fields premiere. if we only had this specific amount of citizens back then and those fields were sufficient for them, we have all of the new growth that is coming in that has to utilize the older fields right now. So we do need the impact fee to have the new fields. Now Um

   1:53:27Great, thank you. Um so for the past thirty years, citizens have been paying taxes. They have been paying for the parks department through the general funds and through the Geo Bond. So saying that the citizens that have been here for thirty years Haven't been paying wouldn't be completely true because they we do have We have been paying taxes through property taxes and the geobonds and other taxes. In

   1:53:57addition, we are looking at other avenues coming up with the PVAS programs and other MSTUs that we're going to be working on. Right now we have a housing crisis, especially for our senior populations, our elderly, our disabled, and everyone else.

   1:54:16When looking at a street and one person on that street is paying twelve hundred a year in taxes, but the house down the street sells for triple the amount and now that house is bringing in Triple the amount of taxes. If one person's paying a hundred dollars a month but the same person on the street that's moving in is paying two hundred and fifty dollars a month, that's an additional one hundred and fifty dollars. Just from that home and speaking of if we do have to look at a

   1:54:47new PVAS system or MSTUs to cover different items. We are and if we increase the taxes by one hundred and fifty a year, that's one thing. But if you are increasing taxes by one hundred and fifty a month by people seniors that may have been moving from one place to another or they haven't had a home, they don't have portability programs to move into the new home. So the taxes are increasing. The growth of the right-of-way. we do

   1:55:17need for it to pay for itself and this is also I'm gonna jump topics is another reason it's imperative that we work with the schools and the schools start opening their playgrounds. We have four schools right now that are open their playgrounds after school and on weekends. Mm. As citizens, we pay our taxes and looking at the impact fee We pay just as much in impact fee to our school system as we pay to the county. And at that point

   1:55:47we should be able to utilize the playgrounds, instead of having to recreate and duplicate the wheel of all these additional playgrounds, we should be utilizing the ones we already have, especially the tracks and the fields and everything else that we have. instead of having to pay all this extra money to duplicate 'em.

   Keith

   1:56:06Thank you. Okay. So um Commissioner Fitzpatrick, you bring up a good point. This is um this proposal underneath the existing ordinance that does not support the funding of neighborhood parks. Um I know that that's a hot topic, and I do think that um we need to continue to work with the school board to address where neighborhood park where there are neighborhood park deficiencies in older communities. We've already have mapped out that exercise. I've had a couple initial meetings with the County Attorney's Office and the School Board on how we make that happen.

   1:56:37Luckily, we have a master agreement in place to to um to at least start that process. Um I think that the important thing to the distinction here is that The pr the capital projects presented in this plan Are from a scale perspective completely different than the neighborhood park element, which I think are critically important, but we can address through the through the plan of trying to work with the school board to open some of their facilities. So that is also an ongoing project, though, but very good point.

   Fitzpatrick

   1:57:03Thank you. And then also we do have to be mindful of our citizens that have been here for 30 years because their taxes are going up indirectly because of the property's assessed value. So we have to be mindful to try to keep the taxes lower for them because if you look, if someone purchases a new citizen com is purchasing a new home down the street from one or the other, they're paying two hundred and fifty dollars a month in taxes plus what another hundred and fifty insurance. So you can't even get into a home without paying four hundred and a lot of our

   1:57:34seniors are on social security that are making twelve hundred a month and taxes alone are a quarter of their income. So we just have to be mindful on which taxes are increased or moving.

   StarkeyChair

   1:57:47Are we gonna try and get uh one oh six in before lunch or are we gonna bring that back?

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:57:56Okay. I

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:57:57want to make it. be to the thirty four fifty fifteen is the high the high number. Phased in, right? I'm I'll make a motion to support staff's recommendation without a phase in, but to go go directly to three thousand four hundred and fifty dollars and fifteen cents.

   Fitzpatrick

   1:58:14Wait, is that I'm sorry, is that the final number?

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:58:17That's the high number. Res. The final number that that gets phased in. We're not gonna do the phasing though.

   Fitzpatrick

   1:58:22It would be two to

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:58:23three thirty four fifty fifteen.

   StarkeyChair

   1:58:25I will second that.

   1:58:29Was that was that a phase in over two years?

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:58:31No phase in is my motion though.

   Keith

   1:58:33I know I I just want to hear from Key. So the in so in conversation with the industry they did support a phase-in approach similar to what the school board did for their impact fees. Um that's why that's been presented to you. Obviously it's your discretion to to uh to to make whatever recommendation you want.

   StarkeyChair

   1:58:49Yeah, I I'm more inclined to to do My idea.

   1:58:55try and keep keep moving here is to keep that impact fee. Where it is. and add a countywide MSTU. So I I'm not gonna support your motion. Um We're already The seventh highest Uh impact fee laden home in the state, it's gonna make home ownership even more expensive here in the county. So I I just think We need a two pronged approach. Um So

   1:59:27um But I'll call the question unless anyone else has any discussion. I'll call

   Oakley

   1:59:32the vote. I'd like to support the idea we continue and go to um The fact that we look at the MSPU against what he's brightness to the right-of-way.

   StarkeyChair

   1:59:43want to keep

   MarianoVice Chair

   1:59:45it.

   1:59:48If I can solve it with David for a second. Um Um if they go forward with a non-phazed in approach They alwa that's gonna be the worst. They can always phase it. At the time of ordinance adoption, correct? Yes.

   2:00:07So you may w th the motion that's on the floor you may want to proceed with Because once you take public comment you could you could always phase it in your final adoption.

   Moore

   2:00:19I get it. I don't want us to hold them up to move forward because if we hold them up, they're not gonna be able to move forward. They can bring back the money. You could We could you've got how long is this going to

   Keith

   2:00:29take you again? Four to six months or maybe longer.

   Moore

   2:00:31You got a long time to bring back other ideas. So I'll call the question.

   StarkeyChair

   2:00:38All right. All in favor?

   Moore

   2:00:39Aye.

   StarkeyChair

   2:00:40Aye. Opposed? Nay. Aye. then we'll keep working on it.

   Keith

   2:00:45Thank you.

   StarkeyChair

   2:00:45Thank you. I mean I support an increase, but I want a my preference as a blend so we can get working right away. Okay, um sorry it's lunchtime. Unless you can do it really quick. Shall we go ahead and do this? Okay.