A Resolution Of The Board Of County Commissioners Of Pasco County, Florida, Authorizing The Issuance Of Not-To-Exceed $80,000,000 In Aggregate Principal Amount Of Pasco County, Florida, Capital Improvement Non-Ad Valorem Revenue Bonds, Series 2025A, For The Purpose Of Financing And/Or Reimbursing The Costs Of The Acquisition, Expansion, Design, Construction And Equipping Of Various Capital Improvements Of The County, Including Without Limitation, Parks And Recreation Projects, And Paying Associated Transactional Costs; Covenanting To Budget, Appropriate And Deposit Legally Available Non-Ad Valorem Revenues To Provide For The Payment Thereof; Making Certain Covenants And Agreements For The Benefit Of The Owners Of Such Bonds; Authorizing Certain Officials And Employees Of The County To Execute Any Document And Take All Actions Required In Connection With The Competitive Sale, Issuance And Delivery Of Such Bonds; Taking Certain Other Actions With Respect To Such Bonds; Providing For Severability; And Providing For An Effective Date.

1:29:02And now we'll go to R

1:29:0332. Uh before we bring um Office of Management and Budget up, uh Mr. Chairman I'd like to bring uh our Parks and Recreations and Natural Resources Director, Keith Wiley. Um R thirty two and R thirty three are um uh bond issuances uh request from the board of up to eighty million dollars, but feel it might be in our our best interest to have uh Mr. Wiley talk a little bit about uh the state of parks, especially in the east side, and kinda a little bit about what uh what the plans are for for these dollars. Keith?

1:29:33So good morning, Keith Wiley, Director of Parks Recreation Natural Resources Department. Um to Mike's point, just gonna put a little context to to the request for the bones uh bonds that are actually in front of you. This map you've seen me talk about many times before. This is the level of service slash parks capital project plan. What you see here, just as a reminder, is the um color in orange or or red, light, light red. Is the is the area within the county where we're not actually providing park service and that future parks would actually provide

1:30:03that park service. And again, that was supported by the 2015 master plan and the supplemental information that we did in the parks impact fee study a couple years ago. So just to zoom in on the east side of the county, as a reminder, um the impact fee zone is broken into three areas. Specifically we're gonna talk about the east zone. These are the major projects that were identified in the capital plan and the impact fee study. Not all projects, but just Major projects and this is your parks director listing them in priority or preference if you

1:30:33will. So you have VOPH District Park, uh the bike park, Dade City Recreation Complex, slash shelter. The Two Rivers District Park, Connected Cities Community Park, question mark on that. I know there's been discussion, not exactly sure we we do not have clear board direction on that, but put it into the mix of conversation. San Pasco Park Expansion and then the Windfields Community Park.

1:30:55Actually back up. So um A couple points of clarity here. Pretty much everything that you see here was with the exception of connected cities was required through a concurrency requirement in the comp plan. So basically, development application comes in, concurrency is triggered, we negotiate the acquisition of you will of the of the land through either cash or credit, and this is why we're basically having these conversations. Actually, also San Pasco Park was not a part of that.

1:31:30So tied to the specific bond, these are these are what we're requesting um these are the projects that we're requesting specifically for the bonds. You would have two Rivers District Park, which would include the acquisition. 16 and a half million is the agreed upon sale price. That agreement is tentatively projected to be presented to the board on June 17th. Also, within the request for bond is the cost to design, permit, and construct. And then several workshops

1:32:00ago, the board, I think it was in the joint city workshop, talked about the collaborative effort with the City of Dade City to do uh recreation complex slash shelter to provide that sheltering opportunity east side of Pasco County. So there is money in uh uh proposed in the bond to do that project. And then for whatever reason. If if any of those projects above do not happen, the proceeds could be used for other projects that are currently in process and under design. So that would be VOPH District Park slash bike park or possibly Connected Cities

1:32:31or any other park project that seems to kind of be created whenever I'm in a meeting recently. So which is good news. Okay, so a little details on the Two Rivers Park Land Deal and just some options to put everything into perspective. So the agreement that will be presented on June 17th, background on that is the MPUD application, the conditions to negotiate the park agreement was approximately three years ago. At that time we had the old impact fee that was in place. So the credit value for land was

1:33:01like not even a hundred and I think it was $112 per dwelling unit. So when you're trying to negotiate At the time it was I think a hundred acres and you're uh and Mr. Goldstein can speak to this and you're you have the ability to offer credits, but the developer cannot monetize the credits, right? Because your fee is not low enough. Very, very difficult to kind of structure. Or I'm sorry, yeah, not high enough, correct. Yeah. It's too low. I was stuck on that. Uh so difficult to negotiate. In addition to

1:33:31that, when you're looking at The old fee and the revenue collected, not having a whole lot of money in the bank, you don't have cash to negotiate. So at the time of the the kickoff of the negotiation, we were in the process of getting the impact fee updated. And uh, once obviously that was updated, we had a little more ability to negotiate a credit deal and a cash deal, which is pretty much what we did. Uh also the school board at the time was um was involved. And it was going to be a heavily co-located project. They actually backed out, then came

1:34:01back in, they bought 40 acres, which kind of brought us back into the table to do the negotiation. And this is kind of the rough term. So three and a half million cash, three million in land credits specifically in the east with the ability to use some credits in central, and then a cost share with the school board and the developer on the road that would actually be the entrance to the project in the school at one and a half million dollars. So when we're figuring this out, zoomed in a little further on where this is at. And

1:34:32The question is is do we go all in on option one and we we basically purchase eighty f which is now eighty-five acres within the actual MPUD of where the concurrency trigger happened? Or do we take a step back and look at um Well we control we the county control parkland at the Winfields Community Development as well as an existing acreage of 40 acres across the street at San Pasco. Which then would be a little bit more than a little bit. You'd be creating two smaller community parks. Um, and and those are really the

1:35:02options that we have to pick from. When you look at option one, you're basically gonna locate a facility that is again in the main hub of the trigger for the concurrency requirement. You get everything all in. I will also say that the land that was offered in the deal, highest and best park land I think that I've ever seen in my in in in my at least fifteen years working with Pasco County. Uh so yes it it It's about eight million more than the um than the impact fee study

1:35:33projected at the time it was four years ago. So uh but what you have is you have high and dry site conditions that would keep the construction costs down because we won't have to bring in a lot of fill to elevate the site. And again logistically one site versus two sites uh long term you're gonna be spending more money operationally kind of basically managing two facilities versus one. So I just kind of wanted to to paint the picture. I know in in the briefings uh it became very clear that the context should have been probably presented a little clearer

1:36:03before so my apologies on that. Uh and with that I'll entertain any questions. I know Amy Amy's here to talk about the financial side of the deal, but if you have any questions just overarching about the the park information, I can answer those.

1:36:18Right. Ms. Robert? I'm good. All right. I wanna push Way then. Not yet. Commissioner Yeager? Commissioner Starkey? Okay. Alright, so I guess I'm the alone who's not good, but let me have my discussion. Um Well and I l I look at this a few different ways. First of all, two hundred thousand dollars an acre is an absurd number to pay. With the state regulations that it to us, how we can control things is tough. Think about the Windfield Project. We own that the that property

1:36:48out there for fifty thousand an acre. uh uh a much better value. When I look at San Pasco, uh I think sa and I think we want to We have an opportunity to partner with the city of Zephyrhills. I think there's an opportunity there to do something really good out there to stretch the money. When I look at we're gonna have to come up with thirteen point five million in cash, that means we're gonna be paying a bond and financing that for that whole period of time. Um I would like to see that thing negotiated back down to a a definitely a lower number and and

1:37:18have a less of a balance with more credits than I would cash up front. Um At the connected cities, there's an opportunity to do something there as well. I just think that with what we're doing here, with the state legislator talking about how they may be changing property tax, we may get some hits with the local, to throw this burden on the rest of the taxpayers that if this doesn't pa d if this doesn't pay out well, uh, that we can go to general fund money, which you know could get real tight coming down the road. But I think it's a it's a risky maneuver that I'd like

1:37:48to at least have this discussion before we uh make the final steps coming up.

1:37:53Yeah.

1:37:54Commissioner Oakley. Thank you.

1:37:57Uh impact fee money, won't that take care of that cash eventually?

1:38:02So yeah, and the I think the terms of the deal that Amy would present is the debt service would fall would fall to the impact fee to pay and and both teams, uh my department and O and B work together to ensure that the future revenue projections would address the debt service. Yes, sir.

1:38:17No? Let's say something dramatic happens with the economy like back in uh two thousand seven. I lived through it, the first thing was cut, parks and wreck, thirty percent, libraries, thirty percent. Guess where the cuts were? And the economy was dropping so bad we looked at even cutting impact fee down to try to get things going to to make it move. So I like I said, uh this is a lot of money to go forward. Uh we're paying a top dollar price. We've never paid that much money for a part, right? Nowhere near it.

1:38:42No.

1:38:42And and and the way the rules are set up and what's coming up, you don't know what's gonna happen. So It should cover it if things keep on going the way they're going. I don't doubt that. But if things drop Now you're gonna throw a bigger burden when you're gonna be cutting other things as well. Do you really need to do that? Or can you go look at is there better opportunities out there? And being that I had never seen this before, we had this discussion. I first thing I saw was, wait a second, how we spend an eighty million dollars, how's it gonna go? How's the deal set up? And I didn't get those details. Matter of fact, I don't even know at this

1:39:12point. Did the windfields say that we had to build a park there? Do we know that yet?

1:39:19Let me let me try to answer that. So on the zoning map it shows it as a park. When we acquired it from the developer, we said that we were acquiring it for a park. However, the deed, my understanding Keith looked at it, it does not have a deed restriction that restricts it to a park.

1:39:35That's correct.

1:39:36Um if we were to surplus the property you would have to pay back the impact fee funds that were used to provide credits to the developer for that site. Um and you probably have to rezone it to some use other than a park. But Could you do that? Yes you could.

1:39:54So if we did that, that would be able to cut your bond financing down to go to g get some cash out of that and just instead of building it there, you build it down there. Um It's not my district, so I don't know exactly how people feel about making that move, but um to do that I'm looking at how do we lower this number down. That could be a way to do it. And I guess you could you could actually even if you wanted to the sell the San Pasco recreational facility land too if you wanted to. There's no burdens on that.

1:40:21Yeah, not that I'm aware of, but again I my r I wouldn't recommend that we consider that just because uh you know, I think uh I think the growth projections in East Pasco, I think we would probably need to hold at least one of the one of those. I will say that when we did the Parks Master Plan, we two rivers was not in play at the time, but we knew a concurrency requirement would be triggered. So the question I got through the briefings was well do you need all three? So just on the record I'll say Uh you know, if with a large uh with a large district park on the table like two rivers, I think that that gives us the ability to

1:40:51take one of those down and my recommendation it would be windfields. And I say that primarily because the site conditions are not optimal for development. So you have Uh approximately forty acres and and significantly less of that has development potential, unlike San Pasco, which it's almost a hundred percent developable.

1:41:08And this and we could partner with the city on doing a project there too, which there's gonna be a lot of growth coming there. I agree with that too. But yes. Again, I'm just looking at I want to make sure we're protected every step of the way. If we're looking at to go put that Windfield's property on the market, to me this makes it a lot more palatable. Um

1:41:25Well it it is my district and I feel like it I mean that number is a high number. I'm not taking that number lightly, but the fact of it is There's a lot of property out here selling for a lot more money than we ever dreamed it would be selling for. And uh this park's gonna be a very important to not only the Two Rivers area but also a large part of the Zephyrhills themselves will be able to use some of this park. So it's uh very important for for Rec to have

1:41:55these parks fit in. And there was if I'm not mistaken, I don't believe there was any m real monies set aside a long time ago that, you know, even came close to this kind of money. But We have to make do, but the impact fee that uh Keith had brought us earlier on. Everybody said, oh gosh, that's too much for us today. There's no citizen here now. paying that. But the people that are coming, bringing the children

1:42:25that need the park eventually. they will be paying that as they're building houses or or purchasing houses built in two rivers and and in the east side of the county. So I I think it can be worked out and I I'm I'm for saving money, I understand that. But you gotta remember also um Some of the cities don't set aside money to do a lot of work for in the east side to for these recreation parks and things

1:42:55of nature. They're not keeping keeping their value. They're lowering their values as much as they can and don't have money to to put in when they really need to put in to help build a park. They depend on the county to do most of that work for them. So the fact of it is I appreciate what they do, but they need to start step back and look at themselves and actually help put money in these parks to help us. So on the east side. Okay.

1:43:24Okay.

1:43:25Did

1:43:25you want to talk about the other building? The Rec Center. Is that for another conversation later?

1:43:30Yeah, I think later.

1:43:36Dade City Rec Center. Yeah. So um yeah, I I would definitely like to talk about that. So that is um that was a project that was identified as purely a recreational complex within the capital plan when we presented the impact fee study. And um partnering with the city of Dade City, we basically you know came to the conclusion that they needed a larger community center, we needed a rec complex, they needed, we needed a shelter collectively as a region. So we decided to kind of go in all in on the concept, hence the the project that I know Commissioner Oakley is familiar

1:44:06with and again was brought up at the Joint Cities Workshop. Um if for whatever reason the state money doesn't support so we put in for so 20 million was was the revenue projected out of the the the impact fee specifically and then we asked for 20 million from the state. If for whatever reason if if the money's not twenty million, my professional recommendation is we still proceed with the recreation complex in the city limits because that's again a project that we've been trying to fund for 15 years. We could pursue either additional funding or

1:44:36grant funding or some other earlier presentation that I saw possibly that might be eligible maybe somehow. Very well done by the way. Um and and get that money. So that's uh yeah, that's the specifics on that project. I

1:44:51can give you I can give you some more information on it. Sure. But this came about a meeting with with uh one of the commissioners here in Dade City. and realizing we needed to do something here in Dates 'cause we didn't have the wreck. We have plenty of kids, but we don't have enough Birch Park's overflowing with kids. It's full all the time. Um But That's needed here in this county. It's not only needed for a wreck area But it's also very uh important 'Cause

1:45:22when we have these hurricanes and and storms like we had this past year. We have nowhere to go but in some of the schools and they're they're not rated for, you know, five K storms and things of that nature that uh continues to to batter even the east side. It's it's usually better over here, but this because it's a rural community here in Dade City and East Pasco County. We actually want to show that we care about

1:45:52our citizens on the coast and we will have that need for bringing those folks over to this side so they feel safer. This is very similar to the fasano shelter on the west side. It's more than just a shelter here in Dade City. It's for all East Pasco County. It's for all the and it represents the rural area of Pasco County. It also can reach out to Pine Ellis and Hillsbury County for those people that need help

1:46:22for sheltering to come this way away from the coast. And this last storm was a great example of what that was. That was showing because of all the damage we had on the coast. But the fact of it is this is going to serve a lot of people in our area. It's more of a regional type shelter than just a local shelter because we need to invite those other counties to come in with people. And it's already set up for emergency services, for oxygen and other things. It's

1:46:52going to be there and it's gonna also be the future home of a VA office that's here on the east side. That will be in this new building. The building they're in right now was built in the 1950s. That's how old that building is that they're in that VA service is in. The fact of it is you sit right there around an elementary school or junior high school and very close to the high school here in the Dade City area. So it's got a lot of uses

1:47:22in. And really will well the storm showed that we need this. We really do.

1:47:29Okay. So so and and I'm a fan of the project. Oh right. Okay. So the the the fact that the early l rains last year caused so much more damage when the heavy storms came later on that these peop people suffer with the banks of the with Lakuchi come out. I get that. I wanna see that that they have a place. 'Cause they sh it's so hard. I mean we we opened the place down on holiday, but people in Hudson didn't want to go to holiday, they want to be close to their homes doing their thing. Oh

1:47:52I understand.

1:47:52So I would do that. make

1:47:53sure

1:47:53we do the same thing here so the people on this side can can do the same. So

1:47:57it'll be the same thing.

1:47:59So what I want to say is When we built the hurricane shelter over in Hudson, the mistake we made, and I brought this up but I couldn't get a change on the board at the time, was to actually raise the roof where we could make it for Just the same activities you're talking about here. Right. So it's a great thing. Now this year with the legislators, we don't know what's gonna happen. We'll know in a couple of days. So hopefully by June seventeenth we'll be a better position to make a final determination or whatever.

1:48:23Hopefully that'll come out better.

1:48:25And and if we go that way then so be it, because I th if we have time to make a final decision exactly what we want to do, because what I don't want to see us do is borrow more money than what we need. I'm glad we get a cap right now of uh that number that can come down, if we have that flexibility. Because what I'm thinking is let's see what the legislature does, what they think we're gonna get. I think if you look at the planning money you could actually take and actually design the shelter for using funds for that rather than just this because it is hurricane related. We want to build it to the CA CAT5 standards

1:48:56so that people can go there, et cetera. And depending that maybe definitely what you want to do to maximize it. Um I think the C D W G D R money could be used for this and justifiably so. And it may take the amount of money we need to borrow from this bond, so we're not finding all that as well. And you maybe lower the number down, but You don't know that till a little bit later. Right. I don't wanna I wanna make sure that uh Connor and um Marcy that we are able to do this, structure this to where I

1:49:26don't want to say we've taken the bond money out for the project. And now that the HUD would say, Well, you've already funded it, so you can't use it. So I need you to put us in a position, if you want to speak to it, that'd be great. But I want to make sure that we don't put ourselves in a trick bag where now I can't go use this money. Because can if I can use that DR money instead of uh the parks money and and funding it and financing, etcetera, then that's where I wanna go. I wanna make sure that we have that opportunity to make it happen.

1:49:52Well because this is it we haven't um haven't not collected any money for this, but we've been thinking about this idea this year uh uh because of these storms. And you understand that no I and I just want to make sure we bring the number down

1:50:05and

1:50:06get the best value for it.

1:50:12It does fit in the

1:50:16For part of that money from five eighty five. But if we can get monies elsewhere and then use impact monies from Rec, then we'll be good. And those monies can go toward more things we do.

1:50:30And I'm agreement with that. Yeah, with connected cities, Windfield, et cetera, other things out there. I want to make sure we maximize what we can do. And again, I think that C D B G D R money works well. I just want to make sure as we set this up, uh, that we don't show that we've already funded it, that we can't use the money for. Well it isn't funded, so but if we pass these bonds and we say that's what it's for, we could be in a trade back. I just wanna

1:50:53Mr Chair just to be clear, there's nothing in these bonds that say that identifies specific parks. It says it has to be used for parks, but it does I not it does not identify any

1:51:12Yeah.

1:51:14Marcy Esperg, Senior Program Administrator for Office of Disaster Recovery Resources. I do want to clarify that the uh and we've spoken about this, Commissioner. that since uh that community center did not exist and was not damaged during a storm, it is a mitigation project. So that would be out of the seventy six million competitive millions of dollars. And I would um So there there are no projects

1:51:44in the action plan and I would uh hate for you to miss an opportunity to bring in funding and then not get funding from a competitive seventy six million dollars. And if if the bonds do not directly tie to anything, then you're not supplanting anything. Okay.

1:52:05Right, very good. That's good.

1:52:10Amy, you wanna say something? I think she does.

1:52:13She's got a whole presentation.

1:52:17Are we are we good to move to the to the financial industry?

1:52:21All right, thank you, Judith. Ha ha.

1:52:29All right, Amy Farrell, Budget Director with Pasco County's Office of Management and Budget. So before you I have two different resolutions all connected to the same bond issuance. So R32 and R33, OMB 250045 and OMB 250046, respectively.

1:52:50All right, so the first one, 0045, is a resolution authorizing the issuance of a not to exceed eighty million dollars in aggregate principal amount of Pasco County, Florida capital improvement, non-advalorum revenue bonds. Um series twenty twenty five A for the purpose of financing and or reimbursing the costs of the acquisition, expansion, design, construction, and equipping of various capital improvements of the county, including without limitation, Parks and recreation projects and paying associated transactional

1:53:20costs, covenanting to budget, appropriate, and deposit legally available non-advalorum revenues to provide for the payment thereof, making certain covenants and agreements for the benefit of the owners of such bonds, authorizing certain officials and employees of the county to execute Any document intake all actions required in connection with the competitive sale, issuance, and delivery of such bonds, taking certain other actions with respect to such bonds, providing for severability and providing for an effective

1:53:51date.

1:53:54All right. Now 0046. This is a resolution authorizing competitive bids and approving the forms of the official notice of sale and summary notice of sale pertaining to such bonds, making certain provisions and delegating certain responsibilities with respect to the official notice of sale, bidding and sales of such bonds, approving the form and authorizing the execution and delivery of a disclosure dissemination agent agreement. Approving the form of and the distribution of a preliminary official statement and authorizing the execution and delivery

1:54:24of a final official statement pertaining to said bonds. Appointing a paying agent and bond registrar, making certain covenants and agreements in connection therewith, authorizing certain officials of the county to execute any document or to take any actions required in connection with the issuance of said bonds, providing for several. and providing for an effective date.

1:54:46Okay, so um in short, we're looking to do a covenant to budget and appropriate, which means we'll use legally available revenue sources that are non-ad Valorum to pay the debt. Primarily we will be looking to use the park impact fee from the east, but a covenant to budget and appropriate allows us to use any legally available. revenues. Um this allows us to get better interest rates and things like that because sometimes impact fee to Commissioner Mariano's point can become volatile. Um

1:55:17it is an act to exceed amount of eighty million dollars, aggregate principal plus related gross premium. And we will be following a competitive bid process to ensure the lowest possible interest rate given current market conditions. Alright, so what does the timetable for this look like?

1:55:36So important dates we already talked about projects, so I'm gonna skip over those.

1:55:39Uh I'd hand on that slide.

1:55:41Hm?

1:55:41I'd hang on to that slide. You have will provide. I think you should put in may provide.

1:55:47Yes, May provide. Um so like we said the resolution itself gives a very broad definition. I know,

1:55:53but that's a keyword.

1:55:54Yes, so may. We'll scratch that out and make it May.

1:55:57Thank you.

1:56:00All right, so important dates. So right now our timeline has June 16th, as our competitive bond sale date, that is the point at which the amount we're borrowing becomes cemented in stone. So if we would want to push that back, um This would be an excellent time for the board to direct us to do that if there were other things we wanted to explore. Point of note June 17th is when the land agreement comes to the board.

1:56:32June twenty fourth is currently our pre-closing and then June twenty-sixth is that final firm closing.

1:56:44Okay. Any questions?

1:56:48And do we have a motion again I want to make sure that look at that slide where it says the word may that we have the flexibility

1:56:59I think that's if that's the end. Okay. Oh wait, nope.

1:57:05Well, there's more. All right, so okay, so this is our recommended board action. A lot going on here. Um So adopting the authorized the authorizing resolution, approving the issuance of the capital improvement. So this is for the not to exceed $80 million, and we will need two separate motions and approval for the two separate resolutions. So the first one is the not to exceed $80 million.

1:57:32We

1:57:32have a motion. I move. Second. Any further discussion? I'll just say with the the flexibility we have with the word changing the slide to May, I'm good. Do we need a roll

1:57:42call?

1:57:42We need a roll call vote, yeah. Yeah.

1:57:45District one, Commissioner Oakley.

1:57:47Aye.

1:57:47District two, Commissioner Weightman. District four, Commissioner Yeager. Aye. District five, Commissioner Mariano. Aye. District three, Chairman Starkey. Right?