Request by Logan Outdoor Advertising, Inc. to enter into a Billboard Relocation and Construction Agreement pursuant to Section 70.20, Florida Statutes

30:36This is fun. It's still a good one, Seth. All right, so we're gonna go to the consent agenda. Um items I have scheduled for pull are C forty six, which is a withdrawal, C eight, C thirty-two, C sixty, and C sixty-eight. Are there any other items to be pulled? Okay. Well that can have a motion for approval. Second. Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Um So C eight, we're gonna have a discussion on that. Uh this

31:06is something I was going to pull pull, but I did have a good conversation with Ms. Blair, I didn't uh Ms. Blair, I didn't have a chance to do it earlier, but uh I was happy with the the explanation. So if you want to kind of Describe what we talked about and

31:20Elizabeth Lair, Pasco County Attorney's Office. Um what's before you is a request from Logan Outdoor for a conversion of static billboards for the ability to have digital display. The county's program established in 2017 was set up for a certain number of billboards to come down in exchange for the ability to convert. You've entered into numerous agreements since then to take down billboards. The three other companies that you've negotiated with have all taken down static face billboards that were not slatted for some other

31:50form of removal. They weren't taken down by hurricanes, they were billboards purely. relocated throughout the county, they wanted to exchange for digital conversion. Unfortunately, the request right now that's in front of you is for the Using some billboards that Aren't having to come down and some that are already required to come down. Currently there's a site plan in planning and development right now, which is attached to your memo, that shows that we have billboards on this particular piece of property that already have to come down. So under the terms of the land development

32:20code and consistency with prior agreements, those billboards can't be counted as part of the removal ratio. They can choose other billboards they own elsewhere in the county, which They do own other billboards and put that together as part of their package. And if they submit a new application set up like that, that will certainly be able to bring that to you and show it to you as being consistent with the land development code and other agreements. So

32:41Elizabeth, I appreciate that. And again, it basically is there's not going to get credit for building build billboards that have to come down.

32:48Correct.

32:48What I wouldn't mind doing is t having a future conversation, like we talked about when we had a hurricane workshop. If they want to look at some things that are on nineteen, we can replace some of the on eighteen for the digital billboards. So when there is a hurricane, we can do it for awareness and the warnings. Uh happy to sit down and have that conversation.

33:04Sounds good.

33:05I'm happy with the item that I pulled it. Uh

33:07C eight.

33:09Second. Okay. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. And item C thirty-two.

33:23I just wanted to highlight this because you know, years ago we talked about How much blight was actually out there in in Port Ritchie, New Port Richey? Um These checks that we've got to come out come out of our budget that would be spread around the county, which at these times we need to take a look at. I don't know if the board has a will to actually go look at these blighted areas to see if they should be cons keep coming there and put some pressure to get that lighted up. Um You know, Zephyrhills, Dade City of very little. Um So I don't know if there's any appetite for the board to take a closer look at that for the future.

33:56Um I mean I I think we should Always take a look under hood. Yeah.

34:04Thanks for being on time. Mike.

34:07Do we uh

34:09Uh Commissioner Starkey.

34:10Do we get um an annual update of what they've done with the money?

34:16Do we, the board?

34:20It would I would love to know what projects they're working on.

34:24Maybe we could put a request in and have an ask for a presentation.

34:30Do we need a motion for that or do we just have a little bit of a little bit more?

34:32Uh

34:33move to approve.

34:34I can ask. Yeah, I

34:36he'll do the ask. Right. And we have a motion to approve C thirty two. Some move. Second.

34:45Second.

34:46All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Okay.

34:49I said it, but I didn't say it loudly.

34:51Sorry.

34:54Uh and now we'll go to C sixty.

34:59I pulled this one just to have a discussion about The cost that we have for every project that we approve, I don't want to change what we've got because the timing of this needs to to continue forward. The research we've done is great, but Um I know we had some things with the restart committee. We looked at closely how much money it took to administrate some of those projects and that's what kind of uh changed some of the things we were looking at doing. And I'm just wondering How much does it take to do these smaller grants or the bigger grants and Um Feeling. Could elaborate on that a little bit.

35:30The administration Mary Theory on Community Development, the administration of the grant, regardless of the award. It takes the same amount of time to administer the grants. We're still reviewing all invoices, we're reviewing everything that's submitted for the grant before we approve for reimbursement. So it doesn't matter if it's a $25,000 grant or if it's a $500,000 grant. The administration is pretty much the same regardless. So

35:55if we're gonna get our best bang for the buck and reduce administration costs, bigger projects are are better are better value wise than the smaller projects.

36:04Depending on the project, yes. Some of these service projects are the smaller value projects because we're limited by our funding source on how much we can put allocate for

36:14services. So again I don't want to change what we have now, but I just wanna bring that awareness out maybe the next year you can kinda factor that in.

36:22Absolutely. I hear your concerns and we will look at that and come back with a resolution. Okay, thank you.

36:27Move approval.

36:28Um I'm sorry, I have a question.

36:29All right. Uh do I have a second over there first? Okay.

36:32I have a second.

36:32Okay. And Commissioner Starkey.

36:36Kind of like um with our housing authority. Um I heard recently that it's possible that we're bringing in people who aren't Pasco residents to some of our shelters. And Knowing The great need that we have Here unless it's a dire circumstance. And I I know one where we had a woman who was at Metropolitan Ministries. Um and she was a victim of domestic violence and her perpetrator find out where she was and

37:06they had to move her out of the county. But I wanna be sure that that

37:12all the support we're giving to our Um Mm. Homeless

37:19nonprofits,

37:20nonprofits that we're focusing on our Pasco County residents first. I just wanted to say that.

37:26Excellent. Okay. So I have a motion of a second. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? And C six eight, Mike Garbella.

37:39Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman Mariano I'm gonna ask uh Chuck Lane. I'm gonna ask Chuck to come up to um speak a little bit about uh one of the elements of of our Better Futures program. So item C sixty eight has a number of policies in them but um Specific policy regarding mortgages and the uh protection of the money uh has has come up in in conversations and so I felt it was prudent to have this conversation with the board. I'm gonna let Chuck uh kind of describe into the details

38:09and and what it is that we would like to get guidance on and make sure that the board is is comfortable with what we're proposing moving forward.

38:16Uh thank you. Chuck Lane, uh Director, Office of Dis Disaster Recovery Resources. So staff is requesting policy direction regarding a component of policies and procedures for the individual housing program. As written, policies require the household to live in the home for three years following construction. and a mortgage will be used to protect the county's interest. There are different circumstances that we have to do. The trigger. These requirements. But for projects north of fifty thousand dollars, the policies require a mortgage and a three-year residency requirement.

38:48So it's important to understand that we may have rare circumstances where we discover a fraudulent application after funds have been dispersed, or we may find that there's been a duplication of benefits. Under either case, we may be required to pay the funds back to HUD. A mortgage is the most effective instrument to ensure we can recapture those funds from the homeowner with reliability and with minimal cost. Depending on the board's risk tolerance, you may wish to leave this policy as is or you may wish

39:18to make changes. Landlords have more restrict more stringent rules required by HUD and we will follow those rules. We're asking you to weigh in on the requirements for homeowners only. So, what you see on the screen here, this is information we gathered from other disaster recovery programs in Florida. You can see that five of nine have a residency requirement or a compliance period, same thing, but only Lee County requires a mortgage. A more common practice to enforce the residency requirement is to uh incorporate

39:48the requirement into uh a grant agreement, and then staff thereafter will monitor. to make sure the rules are being followed. Uh this is information um from From uh policies d from organizations outside of Florida, you can see it's pretty much about the same uh the same percentage of those that require residency requirements and those that do not. Um so we're asking for your approval of the policies and procedures today. Any delay would cause us to delay our individual housing

40:19program. Um Whether you would approve as is or as amended. So I'm here to answer any questions as you talk through this. Tim Luguti, uh who is the um Uh program manager on the IEM side, our consultant for this program. He's also available for comment. Tim, please confirm that you're available. He is online, is not filming.

40:42Um if we could Chuck. Uh Tim, would you explain we talked on a conference call yesterday? about the risk that's really involved here and Um you went through the situation in New York and how that's a very important thing. uh played out as far as what the expenses really were compared to what the risk really was.

41:00Sure. So the the risk is minimal. As Chuck mentioned, the two risks that you have with applications are predominantly related to information or misinformation that's been given by the applicant and duplication of benefits. One of the backstops that we have on duplication of benefits is typically the third-party data sets that we receive from FEMA, the Small Business Administration, and the National Fund.

41:28It were working to try and get that information uh as quickly as possible. Uh, but our program works off of documentation that is submitted by applicants. And so there's a very thorough review of their application, their income, and their duplication of benefits. Uh for instances where we did need to recapture funds in New York, uh, we worked with uh the the state of New York to develop a policy and we were able to reach out to those applicants to obtain any funds that

41:58were paid in excess of what their award should be. So uh we do feel that the the risk is low here.

42:07I have a comment or a question. So being a flood victim myself I just wanna throw this out there. So If I let's say I'm not me, but let's say you take the money, right? And in a year and a half you say I wanna move, I wanna get out of the flood zone. I can't afford to absorb another hit like this. Are you locked in for those three years to stay in that home?

42:33Well the way the policy is written now it requires the three year residency, right? Requirement. Um we will y we will have carve-outs in there for uh hardships and discretion of the county in order to waive that requirement.

42:45Okay. Me personally I'm I'm not for the three years. So I I feel like if a family says, you know, I wanna better myself, I wanna get out of a flood zone, that they should be able to do that within three years and not have um the government telling them they could do that. So

43:01I'll say, Commissioner Yeager, I had I did the same conversation from the get-go. You could have different life situations going on. And the great thing about this program is that the problem is that the program is a very important thing It is disaster recovery. So we're improving our housing stock every every situation. Uh that that goes on. And those people can be bound by flood insurance rule crimes, et cetera. And maybe they find life changes. Yep. Jobs happen. Kids move, you go follow the kids, whatever the whatever may happen, I don't want to keep anybody from going away. If they're following the rules, they're improving their home, which is substantial,

43:32it's gonna make it better for Pasco County residents that may come in there later on anyway. So we're minimizing flood risk. We're we're giving people an opportunity to recoup, and the Federal Government wants the recovery. I'm I agree with you. If someone wants to go the next day, I don't care. Any other thoughts?

43:51I'm not big on copying New York over anything. Um

43:59Then you're in favor of a milk mortgage, I h you're saying

44:04it's been a fun morning so far. No, I mean look, this this this is our this is our money that the Feds released to us and um you know it should be put back in the hands of of of the taxpayer and be put to work sooner than later. Um So You know, the more Flexibility we have. Should probably do that since the time is taken for six years. And um If we run up against any any challenges

44:35uh Is that the thirty-two million dollar man? Coming from the speaker, the thirty-two million dollar consulting firm that we've we've we've paid, I I have full confidence that they'll figure it out for this county and for our customers. Sure.

44:52Mr. Chairman Mariano. So uh it's completely a policy decision for the board. Um I but the board needs to be aware that if something goes wrong in the future. The county attorney's office is going to be hard pressed to litigate your way to getting the money back. It will probably be more expensive to litigate individual cases.

45:23reimbursed um

45:27without some sort of a document like a mortgage. But that's you know that's the board that's board's choice and it your consultant has said the risk is low. Our job is to present those risks to you and have you make a Business decision about it. Sure. Okay.

45:49Say something happened.

45:53We would have to pay the county general fund would have to pay that fund back, pay back those that that portion of the money, or what what are the com what's the penalty?

46:01That's that's my concern is if if if in fact you have funded a duplicative It's they received money through the Feds, through flood insurance or whatever. They also received money for that same damage From this pot of money. it's likely that if if that surfaces the feds will ask for that money back from you all and the only pot of money you have at that point in

46:31time would be the general revenue. Mr. Lane can correct me if I'm off base, but that's

46:40And there is a form that these people sign That says clearly this is this is the money we're getting and they understand it's a uh violation of law if found that they're lying on the application.

46:53Yes, we have a grant agreement with each

46:55with each homeowner. And and these people could go to jail if they fraudulently did a did an application found and found guilty.

47:02I don't know jail,

47:03but it is cr

47:04i it it is

47:04a crime. Okay.

47:07Yes.

47:10If that's the case. And say that scenario were to happen. Would the county file a lien against the property and recoup Yeah. what the taxpayer is having to fund up front, then if that property is sold then we would just capture and pay back the general fund, pay back the taxpayer for For that situation?

47:29No, sir. You wouldn't you wouldn't have the ability to do that. You wouldn't be have that's what the mortgage document was for.

47:36Well

47:37Yes, but I didn't know if there was an other forms of collateral so you so the scenario we've j that we've just discussed would be A crime. That would be up to the state attorney to prosecute. Um that would not in and of itself you might get restitution out of that. that criminal proceeding but it would not allow you to To put a lien on the property.

48:03I have a question. Is there a database where you can check with FEMA and all these other organizations? Like where they all talk? So you can do that.

48:15Um but we we do get information that we can we can look at and we can cross-check what residents have told us.

48:21Okay. And when they said the percentage was low in these other states where there's no compliance, what has been the percentage of uh cases that need to be litigated?

48:33Tim, can you speak to that?

48:36So that is not publicly available information. Uh I know that there were a handful in the state of New York that required litigation, but most often when we reached out as a program to go and recollect those funds before it even got to the litigation step, the very strong majority of those applicants either paid it back in full or were able to enter into a payment plan to pay back those funds.

49:01That was my thought too. I mean, like if they're gonna perjure themselves, you know, I'm saying I'm sure that penalty would be going to I mean, it's a criminal offense, so Um I'm fine with what we spoke about. I'm willing to give it a chance.

49:15Uh Commissioner Weightman, thank you. So um What's the right-of-way? Approximate dollar amounts at r at risk here. Do we have an idea about the approximate dollar amount would be at risk if we did this? Well, comparatively

49:28to the $600 million. The maximum we could spend on one project is $330,000 for a replacement of a home and an additional $100,000 to elevate. That would be the maximum we could spend on any project. The average across the board will be much lower than that.

49:42So 450 on the high end times how many? What's your estimate? Didn't we in the present 250 houses?

49:48Uh uh on the Yeah, probably about 250 houses on the uh replacement side, perhaps. Yeah, that that's a good guess.

49:59She's

49:59better at math than me. Calculator. Commissioner Weightman while you're calculating that, consider this. The average FEMA

50:11If anybody got a large chunk of money, pretty much that's gonna come up I would think pretty quick. So we we're really talking about small amounts of money, whether there's someone got $1,750, $700 for moving, maybe some rental reimbursement. We're not talking, I don't think, high, high dollar numbers here all the way through. And if you ever did get to that point I don't think anybody's gonna put themselves at a at a big risk. coming up with and especially if you get the data sets from FEMA where the biggest chunk's gonna be. Um And again with Tim going through this up in New York and Having just a handful of cases and every one of them resolving, I

50:41I think anybody everybody's gonna get resolved pretty quick.

50:43Yeah.

50:49If you did 250 houses at 450 a pop.

50:52That's if everyone committed fraud.

50:55Yeah. And you could also i if the board desired, you could also set a threshold where at $150,000 would be the first thing that would kick in a mortgage and then we'd we'd do non mortgages below that amount if you were worried about The big ticket. But that again, policy decision for the board.

51:26So right now consensus shows at least two of us, Commissioner Yeager and myself, we don't want to. Yeah, with the two?

51:30Yeah.

51:31So we've got three that say we don't want it. What do you guys think?

51:37Yeah, I'll go for the majority. Just question. Um So we're putting at risk general fund dollars if we don't make them stay the four three years? Is that what we're doing?

51:48If if you were required to pay the federal government back? So the federal government would have to come after the county for that money and then you would be putting the only part of money you would have to pay the feds back. would be general revenue. Yeah.

52:05Well I I don't think that's a good way to spend Citizens money that we we have control over. Because somebody defaults or lie to get on their application. To cause that to happen. I don't I don't think we ought to be sp spending that money down the road. They should be responsible for that.

52:21No no matter what would happen, we'd still have a battle, but you'd have people that would ha be criminally liable. For anything found. that they were wrong. I think as Tim said Those people are going to probably resolve themselves rather than Go go through with it, whether it be payment or getting all the money up front. you've still got a strong form saying This is what the law says. You say you didn't get the money, you sign that document. That's a pretty strong doc document not to go to jail over. I think most people if they're really gonna go

52:51that way they're gonna walk away from this rather than try to scam the government, I think. Maybe a couple out there, but For the dollars we're talking about, I don't think it's a huge risk. And again I think Tim's resolution of the ones it did. were there. That's a pretty big state up there in New York. Uh if that worked up there and he's gonna have the same type of uh leverage forms, I think we're in pretty good shape. A thirty two million dollar man.

53:19They they want to make sure they're gonna get this right. It doesn't look good on them. If it doesn't.

53:25All right, so it looks like we have at least three. Do we have four? I'll roll with it. Uh no. Okay. All right, so consensus says we have four that say no mortgage.

53:36I'll update the policies to reflect that direction and uh and I'll ask the uh county attorney's office to Review and approve. At any point this thing gets a little squirrely. We can change the policy. We can change the policies at any time. All right. Um

53:51and can you bring it can you bring us the language prior to the next uh board meeting? We need to implement Are we?

53:58We we we're implementing right now. Um I can I could bring it to the board a as a follow-up if you'd like. Um again, we can amend these policies at any

54:07Okay. I just want to make sure the verbiage is correct before we go to implement. So,

54:13Okay, so would that note have changed in a motion for approval? Is there anything else to discuss?

54:19Yeah, I think.

54:21If County Attorney's OK with it, I mean I would just say we will amend the policies per this board discussion and you approve the policies and we move forward with them.

54:30Yep. Second.

54:33All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. Okay. Four to one passes. Thank you very much. Thank you. And Chuck. I wanna I wanna just tell everybody here, uh if you I'm sure we all been to the meetings, but you are doing a phenomenal job communicating with with the people, letting them know what's going on. I got great great trust in you and Tim to do a continue a great job and help these people that well I'm trying to recover back and I got great full faith in you and thanks for the great job you're doing.

54:59Thank you, Chairman. Appreciate that.