County Administrator and County Attorney
What the county recorded
This item is not from the published agenda
It is a stretch of the recording that this archive identified as a separate matter — a call to order, a recess, or something taken up that the agenda does not list. There is no official title, no staff recommendation and no disposition, because the county never recorded one. Everything below is inferred.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Board of County Commissioners, May 9, 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, May 9, 2023
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 15m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 61% of 89 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
All right. County Administrator, Mike Carmella.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just uh want to thank the board for that uh discussion previously on mobility fees, credits, transportation program, because it's it's an important one for for our citizens and our transportation network. So I'm looking forward to to more to come on that. Just a couple of quick uh shout-outs. I I'd like to congratulate publicly uh Esther Oliemi, our building official. She was named the top building official. of twenty twenty three by the state of Florida. So that's uh indeed a a a great honor for the um Building
Officials Association of Florida to bestow on this county and the work that she's doing there. It's also important to note that shout out to our media relations and communications team. And so again, we talk about you know putting forward a lot of a lot of great uh lot of great news stories out there. Um we're we're looking forward to um uh agreed upon segments with Good Morning Tampa Bay and ABC Action. news on everything from pets to our parks, AM skills, uh redevelopment and renovation. So this is gonna be a lot
of good stuff about Pasco County being in the news. So we're we're very excited about that. That's also okay.
County Attorney.
Uh Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
We had a declaratory judgment action filed against the county some time back, uh, by a company that bill uh that that installs uh fabric covers over boat lifts, co coastline boat covers, uh Nature Coast L L C. Um we recently, within the last couple of weeks, uh received a judge the
judge's order on a mar motion for partial summary judgment Um Invalidating ordinance nineteen twelve, which was the last dock cover ordinance that um the board adopted. That that ordinance actually allowed uh inland lakes to have covers. Um Which means it reverts to the earlier
version which no one's allowed to have covers. Um
I am I I would like to add the the grounds w in which she Yeah. invalidated the ordinance was Pasco County failed to abide by the heightened notice requirements of section 125.664B when enacting Ordinance 1912. Um which is The notice requirements that are required for a county initiated rezoning of property um not an
amendment to your land development code. Um I I think basically she got the law wrong. Um and I would like to get the board's authorization to appeal that ruling to the uh appellate court.
Yeah, well you would have my support.
Well let me let's let's discuss this a little bit if we could. Um When this was coming forward you had people on the Hudson area that wanted to have their boats covered. Uh they weren't worried about the view. They figured if you have a boat lift that was up there, the boat lift, if the boat's on it, whether it covers on it or not, it's only a foot difference. They weren't worried about it. There's a lot of them that are still on that they had put on. What we did was we told them they couldn't do it and we separated them out so the lakes people they could protect their boats and put a boat cover on
it. Uh and it was determined with the view shed around a lake less obtrusive that that's how it was gonna go. And the law states you cannot separate the two out. That's our problem. So I'm gonna say we could spend a lot of time.
That's not true for sure. That we can separate the it out. That's what we did.
Well isn't that what we got called out on?
No. No.
Okay.
It wasn't a zoning ordinance. It was it it it's a doc docs ordinance. It it had nothing to do with the Increased intensity of the use of property. That's what she used which which basically means to make any changes in your land development code, you would have to do the 125-4B notice requirements rather than the way we normally notice This has
big ram ramifications.
This has this has ramifications to to
a lot
all of your um all of your changes to the land development code. Now
Again. If the if the change in uh there there is nothing that prohibits the board from revisiting the issue of whether or not you want to allow
Um but Based on this order I'm it's My recommendation that the board appeals it.
think we have to or we've got issues. So, um
That's why I'm I'm absolutely in favor of it.
So Commissioner
Oakley.
Jeff, state that again. It's something about the way we advertise.
We ran the ad in the legal section of the Tampa Bay Times, not in in the full paper section. So the the there is a there is a provision in one twenty-five sixty-six that the that governs how you would how you advertise an ordinance that says you must advertise If the county is going to rezone property, county initiated
rezones. Or the county is going to change the list of permitted uses in a zoning category, you must advertise as a display ad someplace other than the legal notice sections of the paper. So that anybody or everybody that reads the paper could see that. That's the theory, yes. Yeah. For the most part, since I've been doing this, most people who look for rezoning look in the legal ad section because that's where the projects are being rezoned.
Uh so specific ones we'll in the future we will have to advertise And
just the normal paper. This is this is a I think a bad interpretation of this section of the of the statute that that we've got to challenge whether or not you decide that you want to allow these boat covers.
Push away.
Isn't it cheaper just to r rerun that? The rule said you gotta run the ad. Why why can't we just rerun the ad?
You can readopt the ordinance. Up or down. I mean you can you can re readopt the ordinance. But My concern is that every change to your land development code based on this ruling would have to be done with that more expensive, heightened notice requirements, and you've got ordinances that you didn't advertise that way. for the five year period that's exposed.
What's it gonna be more expensive to go into court or how often are we doing this?
I think we get summary judgment with the next judge.
So You've got a case with a A circuit court ruling
But that will be u that can be used as precedent for other cases in this circuit. So you think we need to Challenge it. Yes, I think I think you need to file a notice of appeal with the appellate court and and this would be done in-house with our office.
I
agree with that. I'll second the motion.
Okay. Commissioner.
Recommendation.
Commissioner Starkey has
uh you had I made that motion.
Yeah.
Okay. Motion, we had a second, Commissioner Oakley? Second. Okay. All right. Um as we talk this through, I mean I don't want to see the ramifications of the judgment here. I do think that we need to look at and relook at. I I suggest we bring the item back up anyway. We're gonna have to at some point. But There are the people in Hudson they want their boat covers, they want to be able to do it, they want to find a way. Um From what I was shown, County Attorney's disagreeing with it, but what I was shown from long before that you can't really separate
out how you treat canals to lakes. I think it's worthy of a discussion going forward. I haven't touched the issue because I knew we were in litigation to let it go, but I think it's something to bring back and look at as well. Commissioner Weightman.
But Chair, yes, I I do agree. If you want a boat cover, it's your property you should be able to protect it. I I agree with that. I'm just worried about
All the L D C issues that can
correct
a better bigger picture.
Right. And since f for that reason I'm going
to
support the motion, but I just want to be clear as to why. But okay.
And to be clear, County Attorney doesn't care about the policy decision of whether covers are allowed or not. Right. We took this forward to the board, uh the zoning the the planning department brought forward a landing development code Yeah. amendment that would Have allowed them And it failed. Two to two to three I think. I I don't remember what the the it failed. That doesn't mean that you that if the if
the policy of the board has changed. That that could couldn't that that's not a matter of discussion. I I have you know that's
fine. Alright, so for that reason I'm gonna call the motion. All in favor say aye. Aye aye. Any opposed? So passage unit to go fight that. Thank you. Um I would like this to bring us back though to let's let's review this. We got two new board members. I think you've got some history out there with these covers, how they lasted, etcetera. And I think better discussions can happen from what you've done.
neighborhood Gulf Harbor is very much opposed to it.
Oh I understand.
And um and that I will bring in commissioners from South Florida That in a hurricane Those boat covers became missiles and damaged nearby boats.
And again I think a full open
discussion is
worthy.
When when it becomes a missile by an act of God and goes into the side of your neighbor's boat, you don't get to get the money to repair your boat from the neighbor whose cover became the missile.
Cool.
Yeah.
I think it's better.
All right. Uh anything further? Yes. Um I do have one more item. Um it The this one should be easier. Um
So um I believe it was in February uh Commissioner Weightman asked for the County Attorney's Office to review uh the sexually oriented business uh ordinance and to add were to see if we could add registration requirements uh based on a case uh and apparently there are a couple of cases where underage females were working in um these
clubs. Um Legislature apparently heard the concern from others. They have adopted Senate Bill 7064. It is enrolled and is headed on its way to the governor's office. It's an act related to human trafficking that The owners of these facilities are to obtain the proof of identity
and age of each employee or independent contractor. Um it does I believe what the Commissioner was intending for us to do by local ordinance, and the penalties are more severe, I would uh suggest that uh and the county attorney's office can draft a letter um in support of Senate Bill seventy sixty four um to
send to the governor's office to to have to ask him to sign.
Okay
Commissioner Weightman thank you for that yeah this Um when we kicked kicked this this subject matter off and what happened in our own county and then a neighboring Oran County, Orange County, um I reached out to our local legislative delegation issues and hoping that Tallahassee of all the issues they brought up that this was one that they could bring up and hopefully set a policy standard statewide. Um Um this is very good to hear. Uh
this has more stringent consequences and I was hoping this board instead of us going down and hiring third party attorneys to write ordinance and everything that goes into it. That this board we could do a a unified letter to to our governor and and asking that you support and sign this and then we adopt it and I I think it's a it's a great start and gives our uh state attorney and local law enforcement officials what they need to do to to start
tightening tightening um rules and other things around these types of of businesses.
That's great to hear. Would you like to make a motion for that?
Uh yes, motion to send a letter to uh Governor DeSantis and his team to that we're in support of
What's the Senate bill? What's it?
Senate Bill 7064 Human Trafficking.
Uh related to
Human Trafficking.
Yeah, motion and second. All in
favor say. And that's to authorize the Chair to sign that letter or do you want to all sign? Whatever is most effective. It it will be quicker to have your chair sign. All right. Okay. Big bold
letters, Chair.
Big bold