An Ordinance Creating The Coastal Dredging Municipal Services Benefit Unit (MSBU); Providing For Boundaries; Providing For Levy Of Non-Ad Valorem Special Assessment; Providing For The Municipal Services To Be Funded; Providing For Severability And An Effective Date
What the county recorded
Staff recommendation
Approve
DispositionAdopted
Approved to adopt by a roll call vote with Chairman Mariano abstaining from the vote due to a conflict of interest.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Board of County Commissioners, Feb 21, 2023
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
The county’s minutes for Board of County Commissioners, Feb 21, 2023
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
This case, across meetings
PIFBA-23-0172 in full →Heard once. PIFBA-23-0172 appears on no other agenda in the archive.
- Feb 21, 2023BoardP55▶Adoptedthis item
What was said
Machine transcription of 1h 14m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 74% of 263 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Now we'll proceed with the public hearing. Will the county attorney please review the procedures for the rezoning?
You
didn't
get one D file.
Well that might that might be the point one today. Uh P fifty five. Yes, sir.
It was published in the Tampa Bay Times February fifth, twenty twenty-three.
Good afternoon, Justin Grant, Director of Public Infrastructure, Fiscal and Business Administration. Item PIFA 230172 is an ordinance creating the Coastal Dredging Municipal Service Benefit Unit, also known as an MSBU.
There's an extensive background on dredging. This county's discussed this for a number of years, dating all the way back to 2017 with studies and reports done. This is just a brief synopsis of a couple of recent events. Um back in 2019, the board approved the task order for some preliminary engineering studies that were done out in Gulf Harbors and Hudson Channel. Then here recently in January, the board also approved an evaluation committee shortlist recommendation to secure an agreement for final engineering for those same two channels that are referenced. And then today, here at this point in the process,
we are presenting this ordinance for adoption, and this ordinance for adoption is to create the legal structure and the benefiting areas for dredging, not necessarily to level levy any kind of assessment at this point. Yeah. As you can see here, this is a map of potential coastal dredging MSBU areas. There is a total of eight areas, just shy of 6,100 parcels. And when looking at canal frontage feet on a linear basis, there's about 510,000, ranging from the farthest north at Sun West to the southernmost
at Bayley's Bluff.
When you look at MSBU cost apportionment uh approaches, we have we consult closely with the County Attorney's Office to determine the right way to do this. And so MSBUs require that the way they're set up, you have to apportion direct benefit. There has to be a clear record that shows direct benefit for that parcel. And so we've we've worked closely with uh with the consultant to determine the right apportionment methodologies, and we've got an examples of three different ways to do this. Here on the screen. The yellow is equal per parcel, just like it sounds, right? Very basic. Single family and non-residential
are evaluated in the same. You just take the total cost of the project, everything that's baked into it, and divide it by the number of parcels that are being assessed. Canal frontage, also very straightforward and to the point, just like it sounds, right? It looks at the total frontage, waterfront frontage in this case, assigned to those different parcels. And so the differences between how single family and non-residential partials are evaluated is based solely on their canal frontage. EAU uh is an equivalent. assessment unit, this is where it recognizes
and tries to apportion benefit in recognizing the difference between heterogeneous areas, right? Where you've got a mixture of both residential and non-residential parcels. As we work closely in assigning that benefit to those parcels, this is the methodology that we are recommending here as we move forward is to use the EAU because it most closely is able to consider those different factors between the different property classes.
Here's a high level Uh snapshot here of cost estimates. And so the last time the board saw this, right, there were three different areas that were talked about Gulf Harbors, Hudson Beach, and Signal Cove. And you see those estimates are are from when that study was completed, back in 2021. And so uh for illustration purposes, right, recognize that we are not at this point in design where these dollars are not been fully vetted out. But using inflation and some uh known escalators, right, we've tried to escalate those to twenty twenty. $24 to give the board and the public a good representation of what that might look
like as early as 24 in those three areas. And you can see there Gulf Harbor is ranging from $4.6 million up to 3.4. So those three areas looking at about $14.2 million. You can see the difference uh in in number of parcels that are in each one of those different areas. And so that last line in the table gives you kind of that wide range. And so when you look at there's a lot of different unknowns as we start to move forward with with uh the projects and things like that and looking at them at the next level of design. Um that there's a wide range of cost. And
a lot of that has to do not only with the project specifics and those canals that are being uh addressed, but also the number of parcels, the denominator in the equation. So you look here that your range in Gulf Harbors could be as low as around 25, all the way up to 65. Again, recognize these are not final numbers. This is not what is going to be assessed. It is just merely for illustration purposes at this point.
So the assessment assumptions, right? When we look at look to work into this here, we try and net canal improvement costs, right? There's lots of discussions about this, and of course, the county and staff is working very hard to make sure that we uh we work on looking at outside funding, whether there's grant sources and other different sources of dollars that can help fund that project, uh, those that are legally available and and the county is able to obtain would come. off the total project cost and then we would work on uh finalizing an assessment that would go to each one of those areas. The assumption
here at this point is a 10-year repayment and that we would likely end up in a financing situation to be able to do that, but the 10-year term is what we're recommending. Make sure we um allocate the the cost for O and M and administration, right? So we want to make sure that we're contemplating things like um Maintenance across that, and so you don't have a situation where you do a project, don't touch it for years, and then you have to come back and do even more on that project. We talk a lot about that with the MSTU and things that we're we're talking about with paving. Similar idea here. We
also have to make sure that the county uh contemplates the tax collector costs to administer and collect on the unit. So the recommendations here, and I know we've got a number of folks signed up to speak today, is to accept public comment. apportion the benefit based on the EAU approach that we uh discussed earlier. adopt the proposed MSBU ordinance to identify and define the areas and the legal structure to have an MSBU that is I that is purposed for dredging. And following the adoption of this to hear the item
that is very next on your agenda, which is PIPPA 230172, uh that is a procedural item that we need to do to adopt the uniform method of collection.
So the next steps as we move forward in this process. Today, uh so here in the spring we're gonna be working on we talked about that purchasing contract, they're gonna be working on negotiations and trying to move forward with design. Also here in the spring, we'll be completing final agreements and working to pending today's hearing with property appraiser and the tax collector and and working to get confirmation from this board and all the parties that are involved if it's the intent to try and assess a first year's assessment on this year's tax bill or if that would be later years. And then ultimately, depending on that decision, right, we may return back
in summer of 2023 here when we would follow the normal trim process to put this on the tax bill. That goes concurrent with the normal 2024 budget process.
That concludes the presentation.
Okay, thank you. Questions. Commissioner Oakley. Uh Justin, how long have you been looking at canals in in Pasco County on our west side of the county?
Oh goodness. So so in terms of just our office or the c or the county as a whole?
Um we've seen, you know, in our research going back and forth, I know there's been different batches of staff and everybody that's involved. Uh, you know, we're probably approaching e uh somewhere in the neighborhood of eight to nine years at least. Um documentation we were able to locate that this has been a discussion in some way, shape, or form.
Yeah, I've been a commissioner for six years. And we've been talking about it ever since I've been here about doing something with these canals. And I think it's like that. Uh project we took up on uh Covers way back. Uh this is one of those items we talk about a lot of times and and talks good to talk about it and talk it out and do the right thing. But We've talked about this so much. It's it's like that project we had before that's this can't kicked up against the side of the curb. And it can't be
kicked anymore. And the only way we're gonna get it started is to prove this to go forward. And we get these canals fixed for an all of our citizens on the west side and I support my uh commissioners that are on the west side that have a lot of people in their districts that that use these canals and all. And if I lived on that canal I'd want it fixed. And and if all of us agree to do the right thing. Please don't folks. If all of us agree to do the right thing, I know it
costs money. Everything costs money. And uh I know a dollar means a lot more to some people 'cause they don't have as much but This is one of those things that's gonna actually change the value of your home if you're on a canal or if you're on a Um an inlet or something or a beach or something like that that you clean up the west side and clean up these canals where they can be used. uh we'll get a lot more use and um and it's one of those things that we just need to do. for our citizens here on the west side and for support of our
commissioners. So but I I just Nine or ten years is too long to be talking about something to get done. And I have nothing against the commissioners that came before me. But the fact of it is they didn't develop the right way to to approach it and do it the right way. I think now we've got a a process to go through and I think it'll be done the right way. So and for maintenance in the future.
Absolutely. I would just amend the the eight to nine years is is when you look farther back, right, those are a lot more just general conceptual discussions. The the you know the vast majority of of work that's been done on the issue has been in the last three or four. Right. Okay.
Commissioner Starkey.
Yeah, um and I you know, I live on the South Channel of Gulf Harbor, so Um I I'm aware some of my fellow boaters can't get out in the low tide if you're especially if you're in a sailboat. And we hit something with our Prop in the channel um a couple months ago. Um But I did have a question on Sun West. I d I didn't remember seeing that before, though I I don't doubt that it would benefit for that Sun West Channel to be dredged. I just remember when
we had the Army Corps here and what a challenge that was to get that permit. So Um
Since I'm in great support of this and want to get moving on it I think some of the permits are gonna take a little more work than others and I wouldn't want anyone's Dredging to be held up by a permit that may take longer. So how will we diff differentiate um
And and I and I guess I just don't want to be held up by a Army Corps issue at Sun West. So,
yeah, so that's a great question. So I went back to this slide here where we've got the number of map the maps here with the eight areas. So the county our intention here is staff as we move forward in the process. Obviously there'll be a number of decision points by this board uh when we talk about um when to assess and things like that. Uh the way I've kind of described it in a number of dis different discussions is Almost offering eight light switches, right? And so this board can decide when you choose to turn each light switch on. And so we purposely designed this. We've talked a lot about the Highlands MSBU and that it has multiple different districts
and different areas. That gives us a couple different advantages, right? One is we're able to take and look at each one of these projects in the isolated areas that they are. capture all of the costs and stuff that go to that direct benefit area, then determine that assessment. And we can also turn that assessment on at a different time as we can construct that project on at a different time than another. So in theory, with that, you shouldn't have one area hold up another.
Okay. Okay.
And depend of course how you go through your procurement process. And when you go and you bid these types of things, whether it's design and construction, it would depend on how those things get packaged. But the structure of the MSBU allows for that level of flexibility.
All right. And on Bailey's Bluff, I mean we already have a project that should be hopefully done, being permitted and ready to go. So
another great
on parts of it.
Yeah. Sorry, sorry to interrupt the commission.
No, that's okay. Go ahead.
That's where we talk a little bit about and and I don't have a laser pointer here, but when you look at uh here on this map, Hudson Beach, Signal Cove, Leisure Beach, and Gulf Harbors, right? Uh I know in conversation stuff we commonly refer to those right now as kind of the original three as we looked at that timeline. Those are the three that are the most mature in the process right now. So that's where we're going through and we're doing design. Some of these other areas have been identified as hey, the These are future areas that on a coastal basis we can go in and we can look and do some s do some design and ultimately maybe
do a project. Right now, it's an area that says, hey, great, there's a number of canals in the area that provide access. You've got a number of residential parcels and canals that go all the way from where those residential parcels are all the way out to the Gulf. And so there's a potential need that, hey, in the future we might be able to do a project. We are not mature enough in the process to be able to identify How many, you know, what the depth and and structure of each one of those canals is and when we would actually even be able to get to design and permitting. We do, however, know the number of parcels. So we've gone and done into the
limit outside of those three areas we've gone and done here is is determining the number of parcels and the linear frontage, right? Because at this point in the process, we have to adopt the MSBU and the legal structure, and we need that information. Not necessarily the design and construction costs just yet. Does that answer your question?
Yep, thank you.
Any other questions for staff? Okay. Justin, thank you. Let's do uh public comment.
Okay. So the first one signed up is Andreas Wacker. And I'm gonna actually call about three at a time. Um if you'll line up behind Andreas. The next two are Mitchell Cobernick and Diane Cobernick. And when you approach the podium, if you'll give your name and address for the record, please.
Thank you. Um I have lived on Gulf Island
Sure,
I'm sorry, can you give your name and address for the record first?
Oh, my name?
Yes, please.
Andre Wacker. Okay. [address removed]. All right. Thank you. You can proceed. Okay. So I've watched the nature walk which goes along the channel that leads the boats out into the gulf. And because of the weather and the wake of the boats there have been a lot of erosion. And the roots of the vegetation has been exposed. And this suggestion
is maybe to save some money on this project. Because the last time they did the dredging to the Hudson Channel They built a gigantic pipeline all the way down to US nineteen. Maybe we could just take some of this sand and put it back on the nature walk. That would help the nature walk and it would also help With the cost of transport and the sand all the way to who knows where Thank you. Thank you.
Okay, ready? Uh Mitchell Cobernick, I live on on South Shore in Gulf Harbors. Um I've got a couple of points that I I just wanted to make. Um the first one is constructive criticism. Uh when the notice was published for this hearing, uh it stated in the notice that documents pertinent to the hearing would be available for review in Land O' Lakes. Um Diane who you'll be hearing from shortly. Um a week after the published notice went to Land O' Lakes to review the documents and nobody there knew what she was talking about. Um
Eventually she did get those documents emailed to her. Um but my point is that it would it would behoove the county to make sure that on the date that these notices are published that states the documents will be available, somebody makes sure that those documents are actually available for review. Um so that's my first constructive criticism. The second point I want to talk about is just MSBUs in general, which which is the funding mechanism for this dredging. Um MSBUs by their nature are regressive
taxes. And by that I mean that everybody pays the same dollar amount. Somebody who has a $100,000 home is going to pay the same dollar amount when they're assessed as someone who has a million dollar home. And we do have some low-income people in the area, so that seems fundamentally unfair as a funding mechanism. Just MSBUs in general and this one in particular would s that seems to be somewhat of an unfair mechanism to to assess people where uh people who are gonna be Benefiting the most the higher
priced homes on the canals. are gonna pay the same amount as people who may be further inland who are not gonna have as direct a benefit from the dredging. So that's something that I Would like to point out that maybe some maybe there's a tweak that can be made in the MSBU to try to alleviate some of the disproportionate taxation that the lower income people are going to be suffering from. Um since I have time, one last point. Um I live in Gulf Harbors, and uh the last report that was done, the GBA
report. specifically was not making any recommendation for dredging in Gulf Harbors. I realize this may not be the final report. There may be a uh a subsequent report being issued. But if those are the recommendations that are going to be followed where Gulf Harbors will not be getting any dredging, then I would submit that Gulf Harbor should not be part of the MSBU. It should be carved out. If we're not getting a benefit from the dredging, I hope that's not the case. But I do want to just m lay that on this marker that if Gulf Harbors is not going to be receiving any
direct benefit by Gulf Harbors being dredged, I don't believe it should be part of the MSBU boundaries. Thank you.
Thank you.
Can't wait. Um
Do you want to correct what might be a mis information?
We will go through that when staff comes back up after the like we normally do.
All right, thanks.
Sorry, I'm short. You're good. My name is Diane Kobernick, [address removed]. I understand that it does not matter what I say here, that will change your minds. But for the record, your legacy will be a commission that has ruined our beautiful quiet county. by overbuilding and over taxing your citizens. Under your commission, we now have three separate school taxes. two
separate fire rescue bonds to repay, two separate jail bonds to repay, two separate parks and recs bonds to repay, two separate library bonds to repay, and not to mention the stormwater that was increased sixty one percent a few years ago. Under your commission, you have removed the county's responsibility for safe roads first with P paving assessments and now you intend to create MSTU for this. Need street lights for safety? No problem. Street light
assessments. Your commission has used the novel MSBU tax for the purchase of land at overinflated prices by saying it will benefit the area. What do our regular property taxes pay for? Well, my research shows increases in salaries of elected officials, salary increases for Pasco County employees, renovations for this county's buildings and others, building and maintenance for pet projects such as
Miles for Bike Trails, Sports Complex, Ice Hockey, Sun West. the purchase of wetlands, credits, To allow more building, lobbyist. Outside attorneys for defending the county, and lots of money on various studies for pet projects. The explosion of homeless in Pasco should give you pause for creating another tax.
The dredging cost is unknown. The contract has not been given. And most of all, The cost of your constituent to your constituents is unknown. Please vote no until you get your facts straight. It is premature. You don't even know if HB 1061 will even allow you to dredge in certain areas. Thank you.
Okay, I'm going to call the next three on the list. The first one is Melissa Horn, followed by Mark Ridiger, followed by Margie Bradley.
Hello there, Melissa Horn, [address removed]. Along with Commissioner Oakley, this has been an agenda since I started coming to these meetings in 2017. And here we are talking about the same thing. Um, I totally agree that Hudson Beach Channel needs to be done, and I think it needs to be done. Before Gulf Harbors. Hudson Beach supports eight different residential neighborhoods.
It also supports three marinas. A public boat ramp at Robert Stuckland Park. a Freedom Boat Club at Port Hudson, and the Pasco County Sheriff's Office and the Marine Patrol. My question is, yes, it does all cost money and I agree with that, but are those businesses going to pay into this project as well that utilize that channel? I'd also like to know: it was mentioned back in 2017
that there was money set aside from the BP oil spill. for this project. Where's that? Is this all funding gonna come from the taxpayers? I also want to mention that along with what the previous speaker said, Rising costs of those living on the water is going up. Our homeowners insurance doubled last year. Um according to a WFLA report. Um, in the last three years, Florida
homeowners' insurance rates have gone up 100% and are expected to go up another 40 and 50 percent in June. Our flood insurance rates are outrageous, with another increase expected in April. These costs alone are killing the dream of living on the water and pushing people out. Not just working people, but these senior citizens and those on fixed incomes. So my question is again, what is this tax assessment gonna cost us to have this project done? And uh, you know, based on
the slide, twenty five to sixty-five million dollars, that's a huge gap. Like we need some concrete numbers and some concrete cost to the individual taxpayers. Yeah. Thank you.
Mark Rediger, [address removed]. I first started following this at our first meeting with The Chairman Marifte at Seapines. It's been a long process. We avoided twenty twenty two like the plague. Twenty twenty one in October. Our Chairman says nothing will happen to this project during twenty twenty two. Here we are in twenty twenty three Now we're talking about MSBU.
Originally we talked about B P money and other funding from the state and federal grants to help us with this. Seems like that's all gone. I'm curious about the accounting of expenditures for the B P funds. Where do they go? Does ever anybody know?
We also have runoff issues from Bear Creek that fill our channels. That's created by D O T cleaning of Bear Creek.
Be responsible for all those problems. Thank you.
Hello, my name's Margie Bradley and I'll be quite frank with you, I'm near deaf so I heard nothing people said. You're not closed caption here. Um I'm a owner in Gulf. Harbors condominium and I went on Friday to your infrastructure office to get a lot of information, which I was presented today but was not available on Friday. So some of the things I had to say were not appropriate. But um I'm actually opposed to this project. Um Gulf
Harbors has um a seawall, no docks. There's sev I counted seventy-five properties across the way that had docks or are on the seawall. I lived on an island before. and the tide goes in, the tide goes out, the canals go away, the storms come in, they damage the work you've done. I think the idea of this district is kind of on the ridiculous side. I thought it was a jump ahead to form the district and and charge the people in the tax but I didn't realize
there was a meeting before. I've checked your uh websites and uh there was no attachments to anything for me to see. And I think in a time of runaway inflation, this is a burden to the homeowners who um when you add it to their tax bills. And this is an affordable housing complex in Gulf Harbors. And uh the complex struggles to it was built in 1960, it struggles to keep up with the insurance increase, the reserves that are inadequate. for the inflation. The
cost of everything's going up, the income, your in cont constituents is not increasing adequately to cover these costs. And the Commission has allowed the growth in Pasco to become runaway. Um infrastructure for roads, water, parks, utilities, waste, and the incinerator can't keep up. For one, the smell for the sewage treatment plant on Parkway and Land O' Lakes near your veterans home is so bad. And is I know that it's overused. I know it's a countywide problem. There's
other treatment plants on the same problem. And I think we need to look at Those kind of issues before we worry about somebody's boat being able to go in and out of the the canals. And I'm opposed to it.
Okay, thank you. I'm gonna call the next three. The first one is Mike Leg, followed by I think it says Del Chichil and Antoreto Chichil.
Mm-hmm.
Okay, thank you.
So my name is Mike Legg. I live at [address removed] in the Gulf Island condos. [address removed].
Yeah, yeah.
Um I'm I'm here somewhat representing the whole group. We've got some current officers of the boards and previous board members uh from Gulf Island here. And I'd like to uh ask that we please that you please vote yes to start the process of considering adopting an MSBU. to fund the construction efforts to clean the canals and improve water quality. in a fiscally responsible manner in our area.
So I would agree with the Uh request in terms of the Gulf Oil spill that took place some time ago was our understanding that money would be allocated. Um for improvement of the waterways in Hudson and I'm not sure where that ended up. So again, make sure we're fiscally responsible. I would also like to ask from a detail standpoint, Mr. Grant, do you know if Gulf Island the lagoon and the two historic channels.
that are on the Gulf next to Gulf Island, are they included in this? uh dredging process.
Yeah it's the day we're talking about the same
So Nathaniel is our Stormwater engineer, he can answer that directly. Yeah. QA now.
That's
whatever do you want to complete with. Yes.
Just let just go ahead and answer the question if we do it quickly. Sure.
The the lagoon is not part of the judging plans at this time.
Okay, so I guess I would like to have further discussion and consideration on that, Ben. Uh we have 324 units uh within Gulf Island, and if we are gonna be a part of that tax assessment, uh which I expect we will be, then certainly that lagoon needs to be considered as well from a dredging standpoint. Is there a way I could follow up on that later? Yeah, should Nathaniel. Thank you.
Okay, so the next three I have are Albert Hiller, Dave Mueller, and Aggie Purnifo.
I apologize for Hurting that name.
Good afternoon. Um Al Hiller, [address removed]. I'd like to thank all the commissioners, especially Commissioner Mariano, for pursuing this issue of our waterway problems. We have all been to many meetings and heard so much over the many years.
Lots of environmental and impact studies and more than I can imagine. And lots of money spent. But we all sit here facing the same worsening problems.
In meetings in meetings past, I was told the County had various funds for this project. Now we're being told of a proposed tax for waterfront owners. I'm not opposed to this so long as it's realistic.
When I pay for something, I expect to receive what I pay for in a reasonable time. and a satisfactory product. So I would ask the commissioners to keep this in mind. when they make these decisions. Again, my question too is I was aware over the past of the fundings that we the county was to receive for from the BP problems and so forth. And it and what do we have to show for this? Thank you.
Dave Mueller, [address removed]. Uh Chairman Mari Commissioner, thank you for the opportunity to uh address you with regard to this position or situation. I currently am a resident in the city of Port Ritchie. I happen to reside on canal number fifteen. One of four actually owned by Pasco County. Uh my concern is these should be also included in there, as
well as the city of Port Ritchie. In addition to the right-of And the surrounding areas. that funnel water or channel water through our canals, rivers, if I use, and streams. I believe we need to look at you do uh a potentially larger group because it's the stormwater runoff that's actually causing this problem with neglect of over sixty years from when these cre canals were
created. And it ends up on our doorsteps. And the potential is is to have the canal owners Well the waterfront owners pay for that, but I I believe it's a larger problem than that. And There's other groups outside of those uh Canal Front uh members that are uh that would benefit from this as well. As they're getting uh the benefit of having to deal with this water. entering our channels and bayous. And that should be addressed.
in this provision. Uh the stormwater. uh and run off into the canals. uh in the city of Port Ritchie creates an issue. Uh and By addressing that, it's going to improve the water quality in the Cody River, Miller Bayou, all these streams and canals. and make for better habitat for our marine life. Uh these canals have not been maintained for over 60 years. And it's about time that we uh encourage
adopt adopting uh a plan like this to address it. But I believe it needs to just go bigger than that. I would like to amend um Uh your provision for the MSU to include the city of Port Ritchie as well. Thank you.
Hello. My name is Aggie Purrington. I live at [address removed]. in uh [address removed] and I'm also the president of [address removed] Owners uh Incorporated. Um at the risk of sounding repetitious uh and many of the things that were said previously, um, I'd like to say that Signal Co first and foremost wants to make sure that We have t priority in this project as well. Our canals are really uh in bad shape. Um most of us have uh relatives or friends that can't come through
the canals because of how bad. Uh they need to be dredged and and boats that are continuously um props and everything uh d destroyed and a lot of cost to the homeowners and that's just a minor probably a minor thing but it's it's part of the dredging project. Um we've been property owners here since two thousand and six and I can tell you clearly that Since the two years that I've been president, I've heard about this project, the Dredging Project, for years. And I feel that it's really not
come any further ahead. And we don't have any financial uh information uh more than we did previously that the studies have been done. We all agree that we all need it done. Um, but somehow we are continuously stopped. It's like you said, kicking it, kicking the can to the curb and just waiting for more uh information, more uh uh investigations and and projects being done. So um I guess in in my in my wrap up here, I would just want to acknowledge that yes, we do need this
dredging. Is it part of the cost that we all take? Uh Single Cove clearly remembers the BP project was part of the funding and all the the meetings that we've had in our private organization that We were told that quite often. So from the uh people that live in Signal Cove, I think that those are some of the answers they're going to be looking for. How much is this project going to cost? And where's the funding coming from? Um and so I'm going to leave it just at that, at the risk of sounding more repetitious. Thank you.
Okay, thank you. So the next three signed up are James Manuko, Greg Spivey, and Nicholas Mudbury. If you'll please line up behind Mr. Manuko. Mink Wzo, I apologize.
Can can someone help this gentleman maybe even get him a mic, please?
My name's James Bancuzo, I live at [address removed]. Um I am in favor of this project. And I appreciate the commissioners putting it on their docket. And I hope that you vote yes. We are advancing. This is a complex project with many facets to consider. The presenter touched upon a good topic and maintenance over the next ten years during the lifespan in this project. One of that and this is narrowly focused,
so this is just a clip shot of what the project would entail.
The staging is going to require heavy equipment. spoil hauling and staging areas are gonna be obviously in residential areas. So there's gonna have to be some sort of contingency computation for the The welfare of the asphalt Asshole has a useful life. So depending upon where a staging area is. You're gonna have to a limited life left in that for that particular area for the asphalt as opposed to another staging area that might
be new asphalt. So there's computations that you're gonna have to figure. And it's very complex. Now I have good faith in the management of Pasco. There are good staffing here. There's good engineers. I did a local project here. In Pasco County, Boyette Reservoir. and I had the pleasure of working with very qualified personnel. So my faith is with Pasco County and its staff. I just asked that they review the project
under a m microscope. For these particular areas. like health and safety, staging areas and whatnot. And I wish the project the most success. Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay. Hi. After being to many, many oh Greg Spivey, [address removed]. Have you been meaning meetings with Jack Mariano? and um listening to all this stuff about the B P money and all my stuff. I really only had two points was number one, after looking at the thing about I guess it's gonna be sixty five dollars a square foot or something like that. Um for Leisure Beach and Signal Cove, I'd just like to make sure that the money that's collected from our neighborhoods
is used in those neighborhoods. It's not taken to some other place and stuff like that. you would collect money for Sun West or this and that, but at least it wouldn't come there. Another point I would like to make is Maybe some funding for Hudson Beach and stuff could be done through the boat ramp usage. for the people that do use the boats that come from twenty miles away. Maybe they could contribute for Hudson Beach. Um the other point I wanted to bring up was that
I think Leisure Beach and Signal Cove probably have the worst situation that I know of. as far as the depth of the channel. I mean Gulf Harbors, uh Commissioner Starkey was pointing that you can't get a six foot sail, you know, sailboat that uses six foot of water. Yeah. winter tides, we have no water. Our channel is almost completely filled. And That's all I had.
West Point, I I agree too. I've been in there before. But I think the I think we have the probably the worst ones. Very significant both ways.
Good afternoon, Commissioner. My name is Nicholas Mudder. I live at [address removed]. [address removed]. I'm in favor of the project in the MSBU for several reasons. Number one as you navigate through our canals and further and further away from the Gulf. those canals are virtually environmentally dead. Three years ago I fell on With my left hand I fell. On our boat ramp,
concrete boat ramp. I had a one inch cut on my hand. I went to the hospital. I spent five days in the hospital. It was from the Environmental bacteria. Or in Commissioner Mariano's office. I didn't want to bring them here. But I invite all you commissioners to see it. Number two. I would make it more public. The fun the aspects of the funding.
I know Pasco County is asking for federal money, state money. And m several years ago I'd like to address the public if it's okay. No,
stay here. Address us.
Several years ago Two counties up north. Citrus in Ornando County. They did some dredging and some cleaning out of the area up there. Part of getting federal money is having a stake in the game. the county we have to present to the government that the county has a stake in the game. Now I know Pasco County doesn't have pools of money. For
this But it will be v beneficial for all. The federal government came in there and on some of the projects up there, they wrote 99 uh a check for 99 percent of the project.
That needs to be made out to the public so they understand. A better understanding of the finance. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you.
Okay, thank you. I'm going to call the final four that are signed up for uh public comment. Michael Armado. Followed by Michael Boswell. David Compton and then Tim Bowden is the last one.
Good afternoon, gentlemen and ladies and gentlemen. Uh I'm Michael Armado, uh [address removed]. Uh [address removed]. Um In the Uh to paraphrase uh my ancestors many, many genera uh many many centuries ago, I've come to praise the board. Not to bury them. Um I think the uh the the funding mechanism that you have uh proposed sounds fine. I'm not gonna
nitpick it about Who's gonna pay more, who's gonna pay less. I think it's a step in the right direction. At least we got something going. But this been close to four years now. that this has been hanged. And in four years the canals have not gotten any uh deeper. They've gotten less deep. More water comes down. From as far, I'm sure, as Little Road and maybe farther. All of the people. that live in all of the subdivisions that have canals.
Or a de facto part of the easy. of the stormwater system.
So maybe Some money needs to be raised, some levies need to be raised for the stormwater. System. It's obviously not E every every drop of water that comes down this way is not just a drop of water. There's sediment in that water. And that sediment ends up in our canals and it has for years and years and years. I've been I've been in Westport for almost twenty years now. We didn't used to have this big
a problem getting out.
Oh, I'll I'll get off my Sam on my my soapbox for a minute. But like I say, I I'm happy to see this happen. I think it's a step in the right direction. I didn't see Westport's name up there. With the various but but Jack has told me that that we're there. I I'd see Westport there, but I didn't see where we were in a area that had been um Um uh an estimate or whatever a budget number had derived yet. So hopefully I won't die in office before this happens. Thank
you.
I feel the same.
Good afternoon. Um I'm Michael Boswell, um [address removed] uh [address removed], and I'm uh speaking on behalf of the um Suarez Family Trust who owns property in the signal Cove uh M SBU And um We are in favor of the uh project uh of the adoption of the uh MSB Ubs uh and we'd like to see you do so today. Um in
addition to myself um Colleen Weaver has uh received uh favorable emails from uh Chris Poole and uh Eva Suarez Farmer who is the trustee of the
And so we hope that uh you will uh adopt the uh proposed SP. Thank you.
Uh good afternoon. My name is David Compton. I'm presently living at [address removed]. And the reason why I'm kind of a distance from home, I understand, but um I'm here also with Suarez Family Trust. Um I'm I'm here today to give my total support. For for the actual um MSBU funding and the plans to do that through the taxation
and that Evus Farmer, who is the owner of the property presently. Um that um she's in full support as well.
Can I say South Miami High
Oh congratulations,
yeah.
Thank you so much for now. Lighten the atmosphere a little bit. I I know a lot of people have have said good and bad things about about living on the canals, but I I see a bright future there in that with the with the dredging and the nourishment of that area is necessary in order to improve the water quality, to improve the the the life or the the living quality in that area. Um and I give my full support. Thank you so much.
Good afternoon. I'm Tim Bowden, uh Second Isle Leisure Beach. And I'd like to say that uh I'm all for the dredge. It's certainly necessary for everything going on along our waterfront. Uh but I also need to think we take we need to take a good look at how we pay for this. I've been following this for six or seven years. Uh of course in the beginning everybody was revved up. We had B P money coming, boy, we got a pot m we got a pot here of money, we got a pot here for store money, and we got well maybe we'll have to do a little uh tax at the end. We'll n The latest discussions
we've heard of all leading now toward towards this MSBU. What I want to know what happened to the BP money. I thought that was going to be a huge part of this. I'd like to see that cover it. I'd like to see some of the stormwater money cover it because that was in discussion. Like like the last gentleman said, I think I'm re reiterating what everybody said. The water comes off the roads and pours in and brings all that silt with it. Stormwater should pay for that, DOT should pay for some of that. I was just happened to be at a Kona meeting last week and they talked about a thirty-seven mile long walking
path and bicycle path that's coming through Pasco. That's being paid for with penny for Pasco dollars. So I think uh the total thing is being paid for with paying for Pasco. Where's Penny for Pasco? Can we get some pennies for Leisure Beach? For these for this dredge. These are things that we need to look at, folks. I think there's there's money in other places that before we go with an MSBU, I think I also think The water from homes, listen, listen, we're all fortunate enough to have these homes on the water, we get to utilize the water. But with that We pay some of the highest
taxes, I believe, in Pasco County because of the because of the value of our properties. I feel we've already paid for this in our taxes. So before we go and address it with an MSBU and hit everybody up with taxes, I think we need to look at everything else. Again, it needs to be done, otherwise our our property becomes useless. But we need to find a good way to pay for it. Thank you for hearing me.
And I'm going to pause c public comment just for a minute because I don't want to have the same things over. I want to straighten something out. Justin, if you would just talk just very briefly about the funding that's already been looked at and what could happen as well. Just so everybody hears it, we so we'd have to hear this. Details where it went.
Sure. So funding uh so currently um the Restore Act that's being referred to is is the BP oil spill, right?
Can I stop you for one second? Um I understand that this is the last person signed up. Are there if there if anyone else is going to speak to public comment, could I just see a raise of hands? So two more? All right, why don't we take their com comment then we'll just do the whole thing in one shot. Sorry about that. No problem.
So those two folks please come on up for public comment. And is there any on the on the WebEx on the queue?
There's no one on WebEx.
Okay, uh Chuck Crane, uh [address removed]. And maybe he was about to answer the question I have, but Been talking to Kathryn Commissioner Starkey over the years about uh Uh dredging. I just want to make sure that what's already in place at uh Key Vista Park. And Rocky Creek is still on in is ongoing. And we are totally supporting the dredging in general, but I want to make sure that doesn't get lumped into what's going on here and we've got to start all over again after ten
years. I wanna make sure that uh Rocky Creek still is dredging is going forward. Absolutely it is.
Yeah. And hopefully soon. Very soon. Right.
Thank you. And and just so you know, the only reason you're added on, because we may go further up the channel later on for you.
Even better.
All right?
Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
Hello, I'm Mike Wright, [address removed]. I first wanted to say I'm I'm all for the dredging as needed. And where needed? I tell you directly behind my place it's fifteen foot deep. But Um You know, sometimes I see on on planning maps where they got a line and it goes for miles And it's like okay, I I hope somebody's not bidding on all those miles. They're gonna, you know, do some sounding or or you know,
some way of sonar so that they can highlight in red ahead of time the footage you're actually gonna do. So that we're not paying in excess, a contractor for something they've never done. Um the other question I've got is it is this gonna make it a private canal system with no outsiders? The fishing charters ripped through our neighborhood, throwing three foot waves. Some of these guys I think they're licensed charters. Other ones I think they're just who knows,
maybe even neighbors. that are fishing charters, but they come through on a daily basis. eroding the the walls and and ripping the dacks off the the floating docks off the walls to our expense. Uh somebody says something about up in property value. Uh I don't think more taxes up to property value. I I I really don't. Unless you've got a huge yacht. that you gotta get in and out of here. I think this is actually a project for limited people
with big boats, but that's just me personally and I'm not picking on the guys that got big boats. And again I think this Project should go on, but Um I w I would like to see if if we're gonna allow Uh fishing charters or commercial people in there. Put a big red sticker on their boat. Okay. And if they got a big red red sticker on their bolt and they go through, I don't take a picture. Otherwise they take a picture and somebody writes them a nice fine. Because they
don't belong back in there. If I'm understanding this project right. And we're gonna pay for the canal. Just for those people on the canal. then those are the only people sh that should be on the canal. Okay. Yeah, that's the that's my point there.
Is this county property? Yeah, I always was under the understanding that Water was neutral and you could float on the new the the water, but And nobody could stop you from doing that. But somebody owns the land underneath. If it's the county's land, Why doesn't our county's tax go towards that dredging? Uh at what point does our property stop behind our property. Does it go to the center of the canal? Um And then can we build all the way out to
the center of the canal?
Next question. I know some of these are redundant, but uh just just so we're all on the pa same page that we're all on the same page.
What happened to the PAX tax funds? from our property tax and the BP oil spill. They say when you float. Yeah, I already covered that one. Uh another one this kinda off the
three minutes is up. Can you wrap it up real quick?
Yeah. The other one there's about six ships or more floating in our our uh channels. I don't know how you're gonna dredge them anyhow. They said they're spilling oil, gas, and raw sewage. I've got some beautiful raw sewage pictures I'd like to share with you. And and where that's coming from. Um Let me wrap this up. I'm sorry.
Is there gonna be a a a tax on the The the owners or or the are businesses again gonna Uh Sure into that and are we gonna vote on this tax? And how many years are we gonna eat the county tax? know should have came out of our property tax.
And if you would sir in the back, Colleen, would you raise your hand? Would you get those pictures? Because I've got some pictures for der derelict boats in the canals. I'll take your pictures too under my own. Sir, did you give your address? And sir, what was your address?
[address removed].
Thank you very much.
cove. Signal cove.
Signal cove. Okay.
Thank All right, so there's any other public comment. Okay, and there's nothing on the web?
Correct. There's no one on WebX.
Okay, we're gonna close public comment. And Justin, if you'd come back up and Nathaniel think you need to stick by too?
All right. Uh first thing I want to make sure advised with the county attorney I'm gonna read the item in full title into the record so we make sure we check that box. This item is an ordinance creating the Coastal Dredging Municipal Service Benefit Unit MSBU, providing for boundaries, providing for levy of non-advalorum special assessment, providing for the municipal services to be funded, providing for several and an effective date. This is file number PIFPA 23-0172. So
now that that is uh into record, uh a number of different things here to unpack. Uh Commissioner, do you have a preference on where you'd like to start? Go ahead with my notes, that's fine. All right. So funding sources. One of the biggest things everybody wants to talk about uh is what funding sources have already been identified. Uh there's been a lot of reference to uh the Restore Act, right? Currently there is a $1.4 million ask or thereabouts to that committee that has not yet been approved through session. That committee needs to meet again to do that, but that is a proposal
that's been worked up. If that was awarded, as we talked about, and we go into kind of what's baked into The assessment, right? When we talk about net canal improvement costs, that is kind of one of those grant funding sources that would come off the top. And so we would look at how that gets awarded through there. There's also a touch
on that just for a second, just for a little extra clarity. As I sit in the Gulf Coast Consortium Committee That's the local as well as the consortium that represents statewide for the twenty three counties. Um The expenditure of for Part 3 money where that Cruise Lakes money is being taken out of as well. Uh there's actually more money available. The way projects have got done. Even though it's a fifteen year payout, we can actually advance some of that as well. So as we do hire a coordinator to come in hopefully very soon. We'll be able to come back with that and show what is available there
as well, as well as even part one money which is we can go over those numbers as well. So those funds are on the table, haven't been discussed yet.
Right, right. And the point being they haven't been full formally awarded by that unit yet. But yes, those are discussions that will certainly be had over the coming months. The other identified funding source, this board has talked about it when uh ARPA money were was received, that there is an appropriation uh through the ARPA funds. Uh currently that is uh earmarked at about five million uh to be allocated through there, and that'll be something this board will have further discussion on how that gets allocated in terms of what The areas within the maps. But those are the two known funding sources that the county is currently pursuing. Certainly, we're having a number of
different conversations with all sorts of different agencies and trying to do lots of research. I know Nathaniel and the public works team, as well as various areas of public infrastructure, are looking at different granting funding sources and any allowable funds that are out there. The aim here is to try and get as much of that as possible to mitigate and lessen the cost ultimately. So I'll roll right in with that in terms of there's been a lot of reference to the Yeah. taxing sources that are currently um you know in place. So stormwater ordinance. That was
a discussion that happened a number of years ago where there was some direct discussions about is the stormwater order ordinance does it allow uh for dread Dredging. The answer after careful evaluation through the County Attorney's Office is no, right? The way the ordinance is currently written, it does not allow for those funds to be spent on dredging. Likewise, that's part of the discussion that happened when the board evaluated ARPA and some other things, right? And has made some decisions via the BPI process to fund some preliminary conceptual studies that there's not an identified
revenue source. Short of a motion being approved by this board to use general fund dollars for this specific thing, there's not another identified source for it. Rolling right into voting fees. So we we did take a look at voting fees as well. And so when I look at the voting fees, there is an optional voting fee that's assessed by a number of other counties. We do not assess that optional fee, but in looking at state statutes, that optional fee also has a prohibition on dredging. So that is an avenue.
We've certainly heard some of this feedback before today and tried to to do as much research as we can uh to uh to address some of those things. Um additionally, so if if you'll allow, right, uh apportionment of benefit, right? So kind of discussing that radiating
The other funding source that was mentioned in public comment was Penny for Pasco. Penny for Pasco is an infrastructure sales tax. It cannot be used for a dredging type project, no nor was it even mentioned to the voters when it was approved.
Correct, yes sir. And yeah, I mean the the blanket statement is outside of the funding sources we've mentioned by name today that are potential sources, right? That would be the MSBU, uh ARPA, and the um The Restore Act, right? There is not we've tried to go down a number of those other different paths and and determine that after re reviewing that with County Attorney's Office, there are not those other identified allowable sources.
And if I could for others, um there are a number of federal opportunities that could be out there as well after just coming from D.C., listening to the funding that's out there. Um you'll hear me ask later on to actually add the word dredge slash restore. Restoration later on. There's a lot of restoration grants out there. Uh when people talk about canals being dead because there's no water flow coming in out. This will help with that. It'll help sea life. It'll help a lot of great things that are part of the grants that have been put out there uh with the latest infrastructure billets there. So that is possible to
go out there, but This first step really just lets us up to go and Commissioner Starkey I I commend you again for bringing this idea up as far as doing the MSPU because it opens up all the fun funding opportunities that could be out there.
Yeah, so so the next thing if we'll I'll I'll do a quick kind of review of the apportionment of benefit and then if we can we do have our consultant here. I'd like him to come up kind of give a very short explanation in terms of how we landed at that EAU and why it ends up being waterfront based and so waterfront access. Um but before we do that Um in terms of Here we go. Um Actually let's go let's go right to that. So Jeff, if you could come up here, um talk about that, and then I can Follow up at the end. Thank
you. Okay.
Good afternoon, Commissioner's Jeff Dijkstra with Stat Tech. Um We helped the county evaluate the apportionment methodologies, and as Justin presented, we came up with three initial ones. We settled on the EAU option because of a wide variety of properties, and you have commercial, you have residential, a whole host of different property types of land uses within the area. And so using the EAU, it helps. helps sort of normalize or or apportion that benefit equally according to the use of the property. Um
in in situations in communities that I've used Say an equal per parcel option. Um those are usually examples smaller scale you've got just Single family residential homes, and so there's really not a difference in the benefit. So when you when you incorporate a whole variety of different land uses and property types. That's why we settled on the EAU option as the recommendation. Um As far as the MSBU, you have a two-prong test where the properties have to receive a special benefit and then
the costs have to be apportioned. Um in a fair and reasonable way. And so the the main benefit of the dredging is uh is navigab navigability um of the canals. And so that's the primary benefit um you know considered here in our analysis and that's how we settled on the uh properties with canal access and frontage.
So Following up on that, so it's only those lots that have access to the can that have fire front engine access that you are in the methodology, correct? That's correct. Thank you.
Can I ask a question on that? In Gulf Harbor we have local Boat ramps for our community members. So if you don't live on the water you can put your boat in. Are we doing anything for those or no? They may not live on the water, but They can put their boat in the water.
Yeah, and so that that property if it's uh is it an HOA or or something, who whoever the property owner is would receive the assessment. according to the meth methodology and then you know how they recover that cost from their members is a different question. Um they would have to decide how to do that. If it has canal frontage would be assessed.
Well I understand that. But we have some property that doesn't, but um
We I can ask that later.
Yeah, so the the other thing before um we had Jeff come up to provide some additional details is just a reminder that when we talk about one this is waterfront benefit and two the ability here to segment the different units. So there's a number of different uh folks that have public comment that were concerned about the apportionment of costs and and and how we do this. That's why when we go back to the map here um of those eight different areas. Right, and and proverbially those eight different light switches that this commission can make the choice uh when they're presented with the information
to be able to turn those on is we can we can choose Depending on how we bid them and things like that, but you can have eight different projects that could go and you would want to try and make sure that those costs only attributable to say Bailey's Bluff are only assessed to Bailey's Bluff and they are not assessed to a different unit. And so that's part of that dual prong benefit test that Jeff is talking about. And we've taken careful steps here to create the MSPU in such a way that we can do that.
Um a c a question when I I get that the Stark.
I get that the main benefit is navigab navigability. But um at least in my neighborhood, um, Gulf Harbors People cut their lawn. The stormwater drain goes right into the canals. So the grass and everything goes right into the canals and s and And I can't imagine that our canals aren't covered with silt. So um So they may not need to be um
dredged, but w will there be the ability to c get the silt off the bottom? And anything else that's fallen in, like some people's furniture off the dock and stuff that gets blown off. Well um Will the dredge cle clean the canals up and and therefore start working on water quality because I believe we have a real effort on the west side to Go after water quality.
So depending on the level of detail we want to get into, right? Uh Nathaniel from our public works team and the engineers that are working on doing the formal design on that, right? I mean, you would want to go through the design processes and contemplate a number of those things, right? What's the scope, what's the width, what's the depth, right? Um, you know, the the reminder I think for this measure, right-all great questions uh for sure, um, is that this measure it doesn't necessarily determine that, right? It it basically Basically, it opens the door to allow for staff to work with those experts and then clearly define each project area within each one of the eight to
determine how wide, how deep. Right? Where does material go? What all those different questions are are tangential and happen a little bit later in the process. So and and certainly I'm not an engineer, so I wouldn't be able to you know give you a great answer on w how we would do that at this point, uh but the experts that the county would bring in to assess that project and design it would.
I'd like to add that for the this for the gentleman from Stantec. Um as you're doing your study as you kinda like Figure out what we're gonna be looking at. I think if you look at different areas all around the county from the first GBA study and even the Dubry study. You're gonna find that where a lot of the drains coming in, as Commissioner Starkey references, that's where you see the silt. I mean I I know even at uh off Marine Park Way Gulf Harbors with the condos are down that way there. If you look at all the water comes from US 19, runs down all that way, and it runs right into
a swale. No protection whatsoever. and dumps right into the canal. And that's where one of the heaviest silt areas are. All around that with studies we've shown have show shown the same thing. So I think if you can find a correlation That runoff attributes to where most of the dredging opportunities are and there's a tie into it that we should actually be looking for either our own our own stormwater utility, but DOT has stormwater funds available as well that we should be able to tap into.
Co commission Mariano car carrying on with that, I think that you know if you read in the paper the amount of seagrass that oh the Tampa Bay has lost recently and as we're Just beginning our own um Um scalloping season and you know wanna make sure that we keep our coastline healthy. Um and and didn't we just call part of it a preserve or uh didn't we didn't the state just do that? So seems to me if we t we tackle navigability. That's a
hard word to say fast. But we also tackle water quality and environmental quality, then we open ourselves up for more opportunity for federal grants.
And I'll just touch on one of the things we're looking at with Regional Planning Council that we talked about, baffle boxes, litter boxes, and all that to treat the water. So we actually Yeah. Colleen was fantastic being down there. I had been talking about it for about a year. Um and where actually got a grant from uh the state for actually part three uh part two money, first time we got part two money to actually to go through the state to us with the regional planning council and planning council gets the funds and the estuary gets a f gets funds. So
we're gonna be able to doing a study, they're doing the first one in Wesley Chapel. Uh but the others we're gonna be looking up and down the coast. So every one of these canals we have going out, we're gonna try to look at those baffle boxes. So that could be part of this, it won't just be part of this MSBU, but as we go for water quality, we'll be touching on that as well.
Yeah, my quick.
Nope. Yeah. If you want to pull them to the side you can ask somebody.
Um Mr. Chairman M if I may, uh that while I think that It's a good point about water quality. I'm not sure that you want to mix Water quality fixes with this MSP.
Okay. A number of different things that uh we tried to unpack here. So we talked about the apportionment of benefit, funding sources, um, the voter fees, right? And so uh so certainly gonna try and make sure we take um all the public comment, get with those folks that have detailed questions. I'm trying to go through notes. We had a lot of repeat commentary. So is there any uh specific questions that the members of this board uh have not feel that they've gotten answered?
Question. Commissioner Oakley. I just want to call for a question.
Okay.
Ms. Dorky.
All right. We have a motion motion for approval.
Oh second. Is that a motion for
approval?
I was asking her to make a motion. It's her district. Okay.
Oh, yes. Um I would move to approve P fifty five. Second.
Okay. And this is a roll call vote?
This is a roll call vote. So District One, Commissioner Oakley. Aye. District two, Commissioner Weightman.
Yes.
District three, Commissioner Starkey. Yes. District four, Commissioner Bradford?
Yes.
District five, Chairman Mariano.
I'm going to abstain. Oh yeah.
And um County Attorney, can you explain my ability to vote since I live on a can a channel.
So I The advice I would give both of you is um This is a
Unlike when these come in and then that would be a uh an analysis at that time. But uh unlike when these come in as as the assessment the assessments This is a this uh Justin told me before the hearing that there are over sixteen hundred parcels. The general advice of the Commission on Ethics with regard to vote is Yeah. You're in that large of a project your
property interests are small enough that you may vote. You don't have to vote, you can abstain in the abundance of caution, but you may vote.
So Mr. County Attorney, sixty one hundred? Sixty one is the figure. Yes, sir. Sixty one hundred. Sixty one hundred. So six thousand zero ninety six. Just amending the record. Thank you, sir.
And uh one one question real quick. quick to the m to the motion rank what we've just done.
Yeah,
I think up to
zero. Four zero? Yes. No. Okay. Just a question. The motion is there w was it we're gonna add the word dredging in there? I mean uh restoration?
So currently the way the ordinance was noticed and is written is written as dredging. If there is a request of the board to amend the language in that, that's a discussion that we would need to run through the county attorney in this session to do that.
I would suggest that you leave it as dredging just because that's the way it was advertised, and we do not have restoration as a defined. term. Again, as I as I said, water quality we can address differently and still avail ourselves of those.
Okay.
Okay.
All right. Motion passes 4-0. Thank
you.