R30 tree mitigation fund contribution rates

2:17:26Well that's what we that's why we're

2:17:2830 file number PDE 26-0005 is a resolution amending resolution number 25-291 of the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners by the County. by the Board of County Commissioners, sorry, setting the rate for contributions to the tree mitigation fund, the use of such funds, and delegating authority to distribute such funds and repealer.

2:17:53So, just for a brief history lesson here, uh the Tree Mitigation Fund was originally established in 2001. with amendments in two thousand five and two thousand eight to update the contribution rates and further direct the administration of the fund. On july fifteenth, two thousand twenty five Resolution number 25 291 was approved by the board to increase the contribution rates as identified on this slide. So as I previously mentioned, uh $75 per inch for all project types. For trees classified as a heritage tree, a payment

2:18:23of $150 per inch. And I have here the definition for the heritage tree. And the resolution also revised the uses and administration of the tree medication fund. At the January 6th BCC meeting, the board directed staff to remove the previously proposed cap for the contribution rate of thirty five hundred dollars per upland developable acre. And this is reflected in the draft that's currently in today's agenda packet. Now this for direction listed several discussions and comments from stakeholders, ranging from maintaining no cap to

2:18:54increase in the previous cap of thirty five hundred dollars. And staff would like to bring to the board's attention that a cap would assist in providing stakeholders with a predictable cost for trees, which are essentially unable to be accommodated on the site. So as previously indicated, staff would like to have some additional direction from the board as to whether or not a cap would be appropriate for the resolution moving forward.

2:19:19Other than that change, uh we discussed on January 6th some changes to the authorized expenditures in the resolution. And for the most part, these have remained the same. There's one tiny change that staff has included here. To further support other departments in meeting the board's goal to increase the planting of trees in the county using tree mitigation funds. So we just added the word installation. So you could see there under proposal for amended resolution, reimbursement

2:19:50for the installation, irrigation, landscaping design, mulching and repairs associated with canopy trees, or landscaping plants and shrubs on county-owned or maintained property. Yeah. So that's the only other change to authorized expenditures that we did from our discussion back in January.

2:20:05Okay. So let me just go over the reimbursement. Part of for installation, irrigation, et cetera. Um for instance the Steps to Recovery Program, we try to get them to save money so they can Use the tree mitigation fund to actually do that for other redevelopment stuff as well. So I don't know if the word should be reimbursement, but once the work is done Whether it be direct to the person who's getting the work done or the person who just did the work, that's where the reimbursement should happen. It's better

2:20:35for the cash flow such as the nonprofit. You know, it could be a housing authority or whatever it may be. So I don't know if you want to say the word reimbursement or once the insulation is done contract gets paid or the person gets reimbursed, but I think that option should be in there. Because you get some of these contracts will do the work. And just get paid when the work is done.

2:20:56So I did want to clarify that this item specifically is related to uh installations on county owned or maintained properties. Yeah. There's a separate item for a public purpose.

2:21:08Well we get the pause, so we'll let me wait for public purpose. But I'm gonna be the same question so you can think about it. Mr. Starkey.

2:21:16Um You know, I was against this at first because I want the money to go to put the tree canopy back in the county. But if we're talking about and I'm fine with tre putting trees on back onto non profit property, but I'm not okay with doing everything else on non-county owned property. We'll go we'll go through the the tree money and we won't be putting the trees back. So um But I ha I have a question

2:21:46here with expenditure shall not exceed fifty percent of the total funds. I the administrator and I had a conversation on this, but The next sentence is not what I thought we discussed. I thought it was per project. But you're saying n fun expenditure shall not exceed fifty percent of the total funds used from the tree mitigation fund for the purchase of canopy trees in the previous year. So it's the whole year. Not just per project.

2:22:18And is that purchased and installed or I d I I just that gives me angst as well. Because my goal is to get trees back into the ground.

2:22:36And didn't we have something that said said

2:22:38what

2:22:38trees are

2:22:39you waiting for response for that? Commissioner Oak Mr Engel's coming up.

2:22:45Oh, okay. Hi, um David Engel, Planning and Economic Development Director. So I just wanted to maybe clarify a couple of things. Fir first of all, the public purpose, I I wanted to be clear and transparent with the Board. That the Board would have to deliberate on the use of funds for public purposes. The administrative discretion in the ordinance through the County Administrator is for county-owned or maintained properties. So if if there was a nonprofit that had requested some remote, the resolution was a very reimbursement or some funding, we'd

2:23:15come back with the board with that initiative for a vote.

2:23:19Yeah. Is this like what we're doing on nineteen with um your grants where they're matching? Is that what you're speaking of?

2:23:28No, no.

2:23:31Yeah.

2:23:32That's done administratively. We have board authorization. So what

2:23:35money are you using for that?

2:23:37Well we use tree mitigation m funds for that as a separate we we we're the funds are derived through the tree mitigation fund. And every every when we deplete the amount of money we go back to the county administrator, we show him what we've done, and then he replenishes the fund because we're spending it wisely.

2:23:54And we're stopping putting crate myrtles in?

2:23:56We don't we don't we don't um incentivize c uh crepe myrtles. In fact, um when we're talking with um our peers, because we got together we had public works, parks, facilities, focusing on how we could expense the county owned property tree mitigation money. And one of the initiatives that came out of public works was they're gonna pull the crepe myrtles out of the right-of-way and install better trees.

2:24:23I feel like we should be putting shade trees in these in these grants, not

2:24:29I mean we need we need to put a canopy back.

2:24:31We agree.

2:24:32Gonna heat up. Okay. Um

2:24:35Commissioner, if I may, real quickly, on the second half of the question regarding the expenditures not exceeding fifty percent, I think it an example would be if we spent a million dollars on tree canopy replacement last year, we would limit landscaping and other appro um other supporting greenery, whether it's irrigation, mulch or anything like that to fifty percent of what was spent last year so that would be capped at five hundred thousand dollars. And and the idea again is to focus the investment on canopy tree replacement as opposed to landscaping.

2:25:05Is that is that um on trees purchased or trees purchased that planted?

2:25:15It's a good question.

2:25:16Yeah.

2:25:17Purchased and planted.

2:25:19I gotta think which way's better for more trees in the grass.

2:25:22I don't vote. Yes, per purchase and planted would would keep the the dollars focused more on trees than landscaping.

2:25:29Um I'm I'm willing to knock that fifty percent down a little bit if anyone else is.

2:25:38Maybe forty percent.

2:25:41As a because I I wanted zero on that. What is that now?

2:25:46Well, I mean if it's for commer I mean the commercial businesses are paying full hill. This is for the

2:25:52county on county property.

2:25:53Oh county? We need to have the inmates doing this and have them start their own programs. Well I I like

2:25:59more

2:25:59money.

2:26:01They don't have the equipment or the tools, the expertise.

2:26:05You're gonna spend more money with a

2:26:06deputy watching them over.

2:26:08Put 'em to work.

2:26:12Well we have a pilot, Chairman Mariano. Okay,

2:26:15so it's it's purchased and planted then. Okay, and what is the other one you were gonna say public purpose? Where is where's that language?

2:26:25That is already approved under resolution number twenty-five-two nine one. It's section two five. So I just mentioned it, but it's not something that was currently being proposed as a change.

2:26:36I guess I missed that one.

2:26:41Okay. Do you need

2:26:42a question? No, once there's more questions coming. Oh

2:26:44okay.

2:26:45Commissioner Yeager?

2:26:46Okay.

2:26:47Mr. Wayman? Now I'm good on this section. Commissioner Oakley? No. Okay. All right, so I want to get to back to more trees in the ground. How much do we have in the tree mitigation fund right now?

2:26:58Ten million?

2:27:01Mr. Breidbox looking that up. Something like ten million?

2:27:09I don't think it's that much 'cause we're close

2:27:12to

2:27:12the road in.

2:27:13I would say ten million, give or take a few.

2:27:15So give or take ten million dollars that we've taken from developers, we're sitting on that money instead of getting more trees in the ground. Now I will tell you well. I will tell you that um I think we need to look at find a ways to get these trees in faster. Now, as I had mentioned, part of the program that David works on as far as to take care of people that are coming into compliance up and down nineteen wherever, redevelopments coming in, nonprofits coming in, we need to make it easier for them to be able to get the work done. So I wanna

2:27:46look at uh the changing of the reimbursement part of it, but if they get once the work is done, whether it be through the um person doing the work or the person that's just got it done 'cause the contractor did ahead of time and just get them reimbursed. I'm okay with either way. Does anybody really care?

2:28:03We just pay the bill.

2:28:04Well we'll yeah

2:28:05well is there a way that we could be the bill payer on

2:28:10I I just so you know, nonprofits don't necessarily have the money to put it out to get reimbursed. I mean they have to add skills.

2:28:17And your small business.

2:28:19Yeah. So if we have the money, why don't we just go ahead and put it Why go through that? Why make them go get a bank loan to put trees in?

2:28:29Okay, so everyone's good with that change?

2:28:30Repeat it, please.

2:28:32We're gonna allow the person to either get paid after they've done the work Or to pay the contractor directly after he's done the work.

2:28:40Nonfor profits and commercial.

2:28:42Non profits, commercial, whatever. Just to make it easier for cash. It's great for cash flow. You're saying on the you're saying on the grants.

2:28:47Yeah, well and I'm gonna tell the board that we have a precedent for that. In the commercial landscaping grant, we give fifty percent up front so they can buy the materials. Then we reimburse the adminis uh the installation. So if if that if you want to be consistent, that would give some upfront money. Or you can make it tw you know, twenty seventy five, twenty-five.

2:29:12And make a deal with the contractor. Once the work is done, that's when you should get paid

2:29:16Well we don't deal directly unless it's uh with with not-for-profits. We don't deal with the right-of-way.

2:29:20If they finish, if the if the person comes in and finishes with the work, we go and see the trees were done, then just cut the check and pay it directly to the company.

2:29:26Well that yeah, that's that's a re that's a reimbursement program. With the commercial landscape, we give fifty percent before so they can go out and buy the plantings, then we give the other fifty percent upon installation after the final inspection. Once it's done. Yes sir.

2:29:40I

2:29:40have

2:29:40a question for you, David, or comment.

2:29:41That's fifty-fifty.

2:29:42David, and can you tell us how much exactly is in the grant? I know you get fifty percent, so what how much is the total that

2:29:51Sure. Um for most pieces of property we give up to twenty thousand dollars. For larger tracts, from I believe from I think seven acres to ten acres, we give fifty thousand dollars to forty thousand and then if If they upgrade the parking, we'll give them another 10 because we want to get our parking into conformance. And we require a 20% match. And generally they're associated with uh capital improvements on property, so it's easy to make the 20% match. And that's the way we do it.

2:30:18Okay.

2:30:26Uh we need to incentivize redevelopment and you know let these people know that you know what this money's out there. Oh we went door to door on nineteen. No we we actively

2:30:36marketed. Uh

2:30:37that's a lot of money to offer a a business.

2:30:39Yeah, we do a we we have a a kind of a portfolio of things we give small business now to redevelop nineteen. We do have um we also provide a the board approved in January of two thousand twenty. to a a substantial in decrease in the mobility impact fee for small businesses. And uh there's other things that we do. I I think we have to do more and we're gonna work on that for you, ma'am. Thank you.

2:31:03So as far as a cap goes, you said what was the number?

2:31:06Uh well it was thirty five hundred the the f the cap that's been floating around is ten thousand with no with no credits against the Upland Acres. But don't credit the preservation of these heritage trees against that cap. It's gotta go in tandem.

2:31:20Okay, but it's but as far if I've got someone who's gonna come in and we'll talk anybody's community. If they get the most a lot of them are getting a bill between forty, fifty, sixty, seven, eighty thousand,

2:31:33Then I can be able to get it done. So to me, I think we should get more treatment.

2:31:38Yeah, yeah.

2:31:41Right. Uh

2:31:42well I'm I'm trying to get to where I wanted to get to and that's to take care of the small businesses that are out there, even the non profits, but We took care of the nonprofit and and the reimbursement stuff, that's good and that as well. But as far as there's a cap now for the small business guy that's in there, if he's got a hundred thousand dollar bill and we're gonna give him twenty thousand, what does that really help?

2:32:00Well, that's the landscaping grant. You may be able, you know, case by case, if it's a not for profit, the twenty thousand is not sufficient. Yeah. They can apply to the board for additional tree mitigation funds. But

2:32:11Why why why are we going through that step? If we want trees in the ground, I got ten million in the bank, what's the easiest way to get the trees in the ground? Give them more money. Why am I limited

2:32:21to twenty grand? I mean you're talking like an eighty twenty kind of split. Well I I think there's some confusion. Oh what you're saying is is let's let's take the commercial landscape grant program and increase the amount of money. All right, we can come back with that. That's that's fine. I don't want to come back to it. I wanna do it

2:32:34right

2:32:35now while

2:32:35we're

2:32:35here.

2:32:35No, they would what they wanna do is look, it's fifty percent, seventy or up to our discretion, up to a certain percentage.

2:32:43Yeah.

2:32:43Eighty percent. Up to

2:32:46Up to eighty percent. So we they'll pay twenty, we pay eighty.

2:32:49Okay, so we'll pay so we'll pay eighty percent um and then they'll pay the twenty, that'll be their local match, which is consistent with the current program.

2:32:57Okay.

2:32:57Okay.

2:32:58Uh last thing. Palm trees, some people want 'em. I think they look good. I think we're in Florida. We should have more palm trees. Put 'em in groups of three is fine. But allow them to go out there as well to be part of this. And we'll take out the queen palms.

2:33:12But look look at Ashley Furniture. That was not appropriate for

2:33:16the

2:33:16amount of asphalt they put in. So I think you have to be careful what

2:33:21Well the problem came with the crepe myrtles.

2:33:23The

2:33:23crepe myrtles were the problem. 'Cause they're the ones that are dead, when you look at those pictures closer you get sticks in the ground. Same thing in front of Newport Corners, you got sticks in the ground. That's what you don't want to get rid of and I I I agree with that a hundred percent. But if someone's gonna big three palms, the palms look good. And you just put other things around it.

2:33:40I hate to see us taking out so many oak trees and putting a palm tree in it so we're not going to be able to do it.

2:33:46This is like just redevelopment stuff. Up and down nineteen. I mean part of the reason people didn't go do your tree mitigation fund and and doing all the re re redevelopment stuff? Because you the oak trees when they grow up they block everything. So commissioner should find you get a better view.

2:34:02Um so resolution number twenty-five-two nine one actually already includes reimbursement for the purchase of palm trees except for the queen palms. That is number section three point two. Right, but I'll look at three.

2:34:21Which one's gonna keep your car from burning up and gas fumes? Well

2:34:25the oak trees gonna mess

2:34:26going into the air.

2:34:27Huh? The oak tree will mess your car up. Certain times

2:34:31I was oh I was trying to pipe park under the oak tree here. Someone sometimes someone beats me to it. Sometimes

2:34:45But anyway, I I think they should have the opportunity to pick whichever tree they want. Palm trees were in Florida and especially along the coast we should be looking to put the palm

2:34:52trees. The

2:34:53tannic acid that's in the oak trees is not good for the water, so Perfect. Uh Mr. Chair,

2:34:59I'm not sure on the commercial landscape grant, we are going to an eighty percent county contribution. Based on the cost of the overall landscaping project with a twenty percent uh property owner match. Is that correct? Perfect. Okay, thank you.

2:35:13Do we have to vote on that or is that

2:35:17Well it it's a separate program but I think it can be included in this ordinance as a as a add on and we'll we'll make the alterations to the uh regulations. And they have

2:35:25to put in irrigation, right?

2:35:27Uh yes, ma'am. Yeah. And

2:35:30they have to be maintained

2:35:32for five years. Yeah. They'll claw back and if they don't maintain it for five years and it's dead. Okay.

2:35:37Mr. Carbella? No, I was just I had updated numbers on the tree fund. So approximately twelve point seven in the fund, about ten are in reserves, the rest is remains budgeted. Now So I think that's a good question.

2:35:52And the beauty of the program is to get those trees in the ground to actually help the environment better. So what we're doing now is freeing that money up to get out there. Commissioner Oakley.

2:35:59Uh Mr. Could we have an audit of that ever so often so we keep up with the fact that's moving and and that's being spent that right-of-way?

2:36:08Yeah, I

2:36:08think

2:36:08once we get these changes here on the books, now that the it's it's opened it up, I I would love to come back to the board maybe every six months and give you an idea of what's what's going on.

2:36:18You're gonna have a ticker like the population that it's going down.

2:36:21Is Barrett here? Oh

2:36:24I'm sorry, we already uh apparently um the PED is to provide quarterly reports anyways on the expenditure of funds as noted items. We'll let you know that.

2:36:33So you would have been if you were driving to work on Little Road You should have seen a whole bunch of new trees, but they got delayed, right, Barrett? Um starting next week, this week? Next week. Next week you're gonna see a lot of trees planted in the little road. You can see all the irrigation um tubes sticking up out of the ground, but they're they're coming.

2:36:53Okay. Mr. Kabala, um

2:36:58I'm having a pre-audit question in my mind that we need to uh I'm a little concerned about money going out the door that isn't for product that's being delivered or retained, restored, and without being committed to and in in advance. So there's probably something we need to Think through just a little bit as to how we don't lose

2:37:22our investment, so to speak. Yeah, I think uh that would be wise, Mr. Clerk, to come up with uh accountability and transparency with with relation to those expenditures.

2:37:32And um Ms. Mr.

2:37:34Stark.

2:37:34I would add on to that because we when we started the landscape grants, we did hear that there was some unscrupulous things going on. where there was some folks billing for stuff that actually wasn't um being planted.

2:37:51So we do we do need to have checks and balances on

2:37:56So let me go back to my first suggestion which was let's go get the work done and then pay the bill. Now the work's been done, you can verify the work's been done. You're stroking the check? It's already been there. If they got to maintain it for five years with this problem, we come back to the landowner.

2:38:12And and

2:38:12we

2:38:12do the fifty percent uh up front in the fifty percent.

2:38:16Well y you might have to if by by this protection as you're talking about, you have to skip that fifty percent. You just like pay 'em when the work's done, period. And then just

2:38:25trying to get clarity. Payment when when the work's done, eighty twenty and we we we maintain the five year commitment to

2:38:32Mr. Chairman Mariano Director of a not for profit, I can see Serious problems with that because most don't have the funds to buy the right-of-way.

2:38:45they'll get the work done. We pay them direct.

2:38:50Instead of waiting to go.

2:38:52If a contractor will agree to nothing up front. But again, buying the materials is one thing and having materials in hand and then paying for installation or

2:39:02that.

2:39:10even the trees are expensive. And we're talking major capital outlay here for for a very good purpose, but we gotta make sure we figure

2:39:21I like the fifty percent up front and then the fifty percent because

2:39:26It's been working very well and we're just upping the amount of money we contribute.

2:39:29All right, so let's let's stick with that with eighty twenty and then you guys can work out details as far as I can protect.

2:39:34So Mr. Engel, correct me if I'm wrong here, but That's not part of this resolution. No, you're correct.

2:39:46No Mr. Steinshell, you're correct. I just conferred with M Ms. Blair of your office. And what we're gonna do is we're gonna come back with the commercial landscape grant program with a consent item at the next meeting or so.

2:39:59The next meeting will be great. Okay.

2:40:03Well I better go upstairs and start writing them.

2:40:05Making that a turn of nervous. All right, so with what we have in front of us, any other thoughts, questions, or changes? I'm fine with this section

2:40:13now.

2:40:17With the one addition that was made. Well that's actually the previous one.

2:40:22Yeah that was the ordinance. Alright, so we need a motion.

2:40:27Second Chairman Mariano Commissioner, I do have a question.

2:40:30So wait, so Do we have a discussion about the cap or no?

2:40:36We have not. We have not had that. That was to accept what he was what.

2:40:43We're not done talking about that. Okay.

2:40:44Well I have to run to the next

2:40:46one.

2:40:50So Well, I guess go to the next slide there.

2:40:54Oh no, this was just the recommendations.

2:40:57So the cap on is what, ten thousand per upland acre?

2:41:02Currently there's no cap in the resolution at all.

2:41:06So But there has been some discussion about a ten thousand dollar cap. Per upland acre. Per upland acre, yes.

2:41:23Th the language that I sent to staff would be a ten thousand dollar per upland developable acre plus one hundred and fifty dollars per inch for every tree classified as a heritage tree.

2:41:36Over that would be over and above. So it would be ten thousand dollars per upland acre plus one hundred and fifty dollars per inch for every heritage tree. So that's over and above the ten thousand dollars per acre. Do you have a legal

2:41:51concern with it there being no cap?

2:41:56If the board does not want to have a cap, that's a different conversation.

2:42:05I wanna make sure that the board understands that that that currently what is before them doesn't have a cap and they can stay on that Trail. Or if they want to have a cap. This is the language we're providing.

2:42:19Yes. If the board does not want to the prior to board direction was to have no cap.

2:42:26If the board wants to maintain that direction we can Go with that direction.

2:42:31So I'm stuck if if there's no cap. Mm-hmm. It's just a blanket fee fee. Wait till Commissioner Starkey gets back. So if there's no cap, you pay your your your blanket fee per acre and then there's no incentive To protect the heritage trees that we're trying to protect. That's what we're trying to get to here.

2:42:51So there are some provisions for protecting the heritage trees. So the sheet that I provided, the walk-on edit, um, that entire section is to incentivize applicants to protect trees in excess of the 20%. And there are some s specific call-outs. So um there's street. $300 per inch for each heritage tree preserved, $150 per inch for trees 10 inches in diameter and greater. Uh the ones are preserved within the required site perimeter landscape buffering and screening along arterial

2:43:21and collector roads. There's additional reduction in the additional tree canopy. Uh Reduction for additional tree canopy preserved. So if you preserve 5% more than that initial 20%, you get a 5% credit. And the tables there going up to greater than 15%, you get a 20% credit. And lastly, $150 per inch for trees 10 inches and greater that are preserved within the required neighborhood park. And these can be combined for a maximum credit of 75% of the total monetary contribution due to the tree mitigation

2:43:51fund. You can also see here that these numbers are actually double the numbers that we had proposed for the actual tree mitigation fund contribution rates. So previously, for any tree it would be $75 per inch. You can see here that the incentive is double that at $150. So that incentivizes persons to preserve more of those trees. And similarly for the heritage trees, the fee would be $150 per inch. We have doubled that incentive to $300 per inch.

2:44:21I like it because it's kind of a carrot and a stick.

2:44:24So let me ask a question. What what's the current cap? Is it twenty five hundred, thirty five hundred?

2:44:29Currently there's no cap in the one that was provided within the agenda packet per the directions in January.

2:44:38So right now it's five hundred dollars per unit.

2:44:41Per acre.

2:44:42Per unit.

2:44:42No, per unit unit. It's on a house. That's correct. Okay. It's we should have done selection. So yeah, we're going to go from five hundred unit to ten grand if we went to the ten grand number. Let's see if

2:44:56that's apples to oranges.

2:44:58Is it? If you put four houses per acre, right, that would have been two thousand dollars versus ten or unlimited.

2:45:08Say that again? You're you're doing h units to acres is all I'm saying. If you develop

2:45:12so before was it by acre? Before it was by unit. By unit. And now it's going by acre. Correct.

2:45:18Okay. Chairman Mariano Cousin District Two, there were six hundred and eighty-seven live oaks that are gonna be taken out. There's going to be 222 residential units at 500 bucks apiece. It comes out to $111,000. And so there'll be significantly less trees put back in and a significantly less rate than what was that's just live herbs. That's not talking about

2:45:46uh m the magnolias and all the other tree I mean you're talking almost twenty five hundred trees total in this area. It's it's a completely lopsided deal if if you're wanting to preserve

2:46:01Trees. So can can you estimate what the number would be to what they would have what they're gonna pay now? Come what they're gonna pay if this was in place right now. If it was a ten grand cap.

2:46:14Well how many acres is it?

2:46:15So um Patrick Dutter Development Review, when we kinda did this math and we went to developable acreage, Um i we switched it from the per unit for single family. Commercial is a different ratio, but for single family, um average density for our projects are roughly three dwelling units per acre, basically. So if that's five hundred dollars times three, you could more or less say that it was fifteen hundred dollars was almost what the original version of this looked like. Yeah.

2:46:46So I think that's answered.

2:46:50Correct. That's is assuming that our density you would say it's three dwelling units per acre, that's right.

2:46:58So would an apartment now get hit harder?

2:47:01I'm sorry?

2:47:02Would an apartment get hurt harder than a single family home?

2:47:05Um previously, yes. But now it's just based off of land you're developing, regardless if it's for single-family homes, regardless if it's for multifamily, regardless if it's for commercial, if you're developing that land, you're required to mitigate regardless of of the type of development.

2:47:30Apartments were based off of units. So if there's a three hundred unit apartment complex it would be three hundred uh but that's assuming most apartment complexes because they're smaller. are not even getting to the cap the previous cap anyways, because the sites were so small that it's generally better for them to pay fifty dollars per inch, which was the previous code, than it was to even come close to the cap.

2:47:51So right now the apartments have no incentive to follow this at all?

2:47:55To follow what right now?

2:47:57If we put this new code in place they're just still gonna strip the land and go build what they want to build?

2:48:02Um well they're still gonna i assuming that they there is a cap installed, they're still gonna have to do tree mitigation, they're still gonna have to account for the inches that they're moving. If they do hit a cap, if we do add a cap and they do hit that cap, they will still have to pay that fee.

2:48:19What about no cap the no cap scenario for the

2:48:22No cap's still the same. They're still gonna have to do tree surveys. They're still gonna have to tell us what trees they're taking out. They're still gonna have to say which trees they're putting back. If there's still a deficit with no cap, based off of those inches and those trees, whether they're live oak, magnolia, regular trees, they're gonna be paying.

2:48:44They're gonna be paying if there's a deficit.

2:48:47Patrick, can I ask a question?

2:48:50If there were a ten thousand dollar per acre cap, which types of projects are most likely to use that cap? Good question.

2:49:00I'm going to assume single family development projects, larger sprawling projects, if I had to guess. Cooker. Though usually our larger projects, single family homes sprawling, are taking out the most trees. Um it's our smaller commercial, our smaller multifamily that are more compact are not taking out as many trees. So um they're probably not going to be paying as much as those larger single family home communities that um have

2:49:30lesser densities. Think that answers your question?

2:49:36Sure. But the Mr. Witman. Patrick, but the the the premise is we're not it's mint so when these projects come in, they're taking out more than what's going back in and route, which is why you pay for the fund and the county's figuring out how to spend twelve million bucks on limited space. That's that's what it is. care it is for them to keep more trees in the ground.

2:50:02So we're trying to do and I gave you an example right here on Little Road of a stormwater pond. There's a couple stormwater ponds, maybe three, that are surrounded by ligh books that we're planting. You we most of these developments with the stormwater ponds, they don't put any trees on the edges when they could.

2:50:23It's a great place to put shade trees.

2:50:27Commissioner Starkey. Um I will tell you I pictures when I went down to Uh Fort Myers Beach. Done. The main road along all this. Development that was there? And all along the retention areas they had all these oak trees. And guess where they were? in the pond, torn up the sidewalk, turn up turn just turned upside down because they got wet and they fell in. You don't want these

2:50:50turkey oats, not life oats. But look at Little Road. Those those have been here since I moved here thirty four years ago. They were right across from Mitchell Field. They're fine. I would say someone probably planted them a little too close together. 'Cause you don't want to plant eye boats too close together, but You can plant them off. What

2:51:11about

2:51:12stormwater plot?

2:51:13What about when the governor came down? What about when the governor came down into Bedmark? And we saw all those oaks that were down everywhere.

2:51:21Well

2:51:21because they got wet.

2:51:22Okay, but how long have they stood there?

2:51:25I don't know, one good stormwater.

2:51:28What I'm saying is if you put them near the ponds and the waters fill up And it goes, those trees are gonna come down over.

2:51:35The the the example A real-time example is on Cannon Ranch, Connected City, on New 52, on the south side of the road. where floodplain was built, and you had grandfather oaks in the middle of these ponds. The hurricanes came through, the water fills up, those trees drowned, they fell over.

2:51:56If you Humans happen of manipulated the land and put the water there, those trees would have continued on living. Like they have lived on that ranch for hundreds of years. That's the example that Commissioner Mariano's getting getting to. uh putting those trees in areas that Time is

2:52:17These were replanted. Th th this is an area that was cleared. um for the development. They did the stormwater ponds, then they planted oak trees on on the top, not in the pond. Not on the pond.

2:52:32And um and they've survived many hurricanes. So you know we're not arborists. I would love to hear an arborist discuss this. Um but I'm gonna show you that picture again.

2:52:48Well exactly. Just so you you remember. What I'm talking about?

2:52:55G nex. Uh Gina, why don't you drop a a pin on Little Road? That's fifty four.

2:53:06Little Road and um Let's see.

2:53:13near near um south of Cypress Lakes Boulevard.

2:53:30Um I but I I'm just bringing this up to say this is a way this is a way that we could get more trees in the developments. That should be fine. I'm not saying uh

2:53:44Okay, good now yeah, go down the road. Um it's across uh is it the other way? Sorry. Yeah, keep going. So um This is just a way we can get even more trees in. Right, you're coming up on 'em okay, across the street there.

2:54:08There's a rare example when the grape bars are looking half decent. Well, you're on the wrong side of the street. Um Your pen's on the wrong side of the street.

2:54:21Yep.

2:54:24Oh yeah, no at all.

2:54:26Those have been there for thirty The thirty four years I've been here.

2:54:34I would say they probably shouldn't have planted them so close.

2:54:38Mm. That might have been a requirement back then.

2:54:46I don't know who developed that. Maybe John Hudson, but Yeah. The county did it. The county did it? We put 'em around the pond? Why Well good for us.

2:54:58We did something right. We could do that all over the county and culling and twelve million. It's wonderful. I mean picture twelve million dollars. Picture driving up the road and not having any trees there and driving up the road and what you see there now. It's lovely. Yeah, twelve million bucks. Well like I said, we've we planted them too close. Okay. So where are we?

2:55:21I'm from the Penny for Pasco. Jean, I just sent you two pictures.

2:55:28I was researching, I wasn't on my phone yet.

2:55:36This is after the storm that we went down to see.

2:55:44Okay.

2:55:47So there's um This is along the right of way, near a sidewalk. in where it's supposed to retain sh tension area width. You're just down like on letter road. So there's one the next picture shows a little even better.

2:56:08So that that scenario was all the way up and down that roadway going in. That would just held onto the water and just what all those giant trees they all came down.

2:56:23But continually that was the type of thing that was out there. So too close to the ponds that get wet, that's what's gonna happen. Especially a good wind with water you're done.

2:56:36Okay, where what are what are we on?

2:56:39Mr. Chairman Mariano that no one remembers at this point. Well no we've just

2:56:46made a decision.

2:56:47Oh on whether to count or not.

2:56:51I I want to make sure we're not making it easier on apartments to come in or incentivize them in any way, uh compact, not compact them. I don't know if there's any way to divide that, but at the same time. If you've got all these people coming in with Development's coming in and all of a sudden you take no cap. Compared to a ten grand cap. Um let's I mean. This is a big jump probably looks like sounds like it's about triple the effect financially. The other one is exponential. Depending

2:57:21on the line.

2:57:23Oh, I'll do staff recommendation based upon House Bill three ninety nine that we're gonna discuss earlier today. That's gonna be how we start defending ourselves from that piece of legislation that's coming down the pipe, which we'll bring up during commissioner time. Doing the ten grand then? Well, no cap staff recommendation.

2:57:42Yeah. What are the other counties that don't have a cap?

2:57:46Give me a second.

2:57:51Was oh Hillsborough, Penellas, Achula, Rivard, right?

2:57:58Okay. Can you unhide slide nine? Well the trees down there.

2:58:03Well they looked at it, Commissioner Yeager. When did they put theirs in place? Was it years ago or was it recent? Because I'm wondering and I talked to the county attorney if we push this law through What's gonna be the effect based upon legislation that if we do harm an industry by putting a law in place There's an issue. If you want to discuss it with you.

2:58:25You'll just prove the point that anything local government does. The legislature just won't beat us over the

2:58:30head. They put the they put us in place we didn't do something that would be devastating to an industry no matter what it was. But if you would Got it. Yeah.

2:58:41The only law that's currently in place is the law that requires the business impact estimate which staff has prepared for you. It does show that there's a at least a potential and staff can summarize that analysis that on a heavily wooded site, there is a potential that it could have a business impact. Now whether a particular property owner might file some claim, you know, arguing a taking or a heraside claim, we won't know until that claim is actually filed and w we'd

2:59:11have to defend that claim when it's filed. So I can't predict for you what might actually get filed, but on its face I can't tell you that there's anything illegal about

2:59:24The the piece of legislation that passed just requires us to do the business impact statement. Correct. The other piece of legislation which created a cause of action did not. Is that

2:59:35correct? Correct. The only cause of action that might be alleged is is existing law like Harris Act. Taking those types of claims that we'd have to see what was filed and and see what was alleged before we could advise you on that. But those would be fact specific claims that we'd have to evaluate.

2:59:54So I'm I'm gonna say that I think if we put this through, there's gonna be a lot of Bert Harris, there's gonna be a lot of lawsuits coming. I mean just you are Making a dramatic step without me putting a cap in place. I think it's hard to

3:00:07No I kinda think we need the

3:00:08cap. I mean if you I just I think we're just going down a big road here. I think you need

3:00:12to put a gap in place. I'm not scared of it. A me. Okay.

3:00:20Can I ask a question? Patrick, didn't you do an analysis of what someone could be paying if we didn't have a cap?

3:00:28So as part of the business impact estimate, we did include that for commercial development on a heavy wooded parcel. Um the parcel in question

3:00:41Okay.

3:00:42Um it was 19.94 acres. It was actually a county site that we used, um, with an estimated twelve thousand seven hundred and two inches of regulated trees, and it worked out to be uh $229,425 based off of the proposed changes to the contribution rates. At eleven thousand five hundred and five dollars and seventy-seven cents per acre.

3:01:08And what would it have been the other way if we had developed it?

3:01:11So that was not represented in the calculations here. How many acres?

3:01:16This is nineteen point nine four. So it's

3:01:19a twenty acres at someone did the math?

3:01:24But again once per year. And this is per acre. So

3:01:28I know. I'm just saying tell me me what it would have been in the old way on that line. Figuring it's right.

3:01:37Eleven thousand five hundred an acre, right? Versus a ten thousand dollar cap, so it's fifteen hundred dollars an acre, so Twenty, thirty grams. Oh I think we have Oh under the current five hundred a unit, let's I don't know, but uh say they get a hundred units on it.

3:01:53You said the average is rest three. Three three units an acre, how many acres is it?

3:01:57So it'd be sixty units times five hundred, so thirty grand.

3:02:00So we're going from thirty grand to two hundred. That's what I'm trying to Uh on our sample piece.

3:02:06And that's from two thousand five to now. So

3:02:10So thirty thousand to two hundred and twenty nine thousand. And that's only on nineteen acres. What are you gonna do if someone's got a hundred acres or a thousand acres? Well that's worth

3:02:22three the conversation on House Bill three ninety nine, but I view it like this. Look. We have impact fee, we just move for fire. All these folks move into Florida. My kids are sixth generation Pasco residents. All these folks that are moving here, flocking here. After the closing and the 110 things that these folks demand out of local government when they come here, part of his trees, green space everywhere. These folks are coming here and they're having an impact on our environment, on our communities, all the services

3:02:53we have to provide. The folks that are the the cost is going to be passed on to the consumers just in the the the cost of moving to paradise, moving to Florida. I think everybody who's been a Floridian or been here for any amount of time Has a little bit of And environmentalist conservationist in 'em. I think that's just part of the floor it away. And being a Floridian, which I'm very proud of. And so I welcome all these folks that are

3:03:23moving here. And I'm excited they see opportunity here. But there is a cost to live here. and they're doing it on the backs of us and our environment and our green spaces that people love so dearly. And that's what part of makes what makes our state special. and it's incumbent upon us. Pasco look a hurricane The hurricanes. was Mother Nature Given a great

3:03:50Discount on trees with how many trees, especially the tree canopy and east pass go forever changed. That'll never come back in six generations. And that was a gift unless we start planning. That was a gift to the development community, I guess, by Mother Nature. But moving forward we've lost so much across this county in the Bay Area. And it's time to do something about it, 'cause we're a popular place to be. It's an impact. That's the impact fee of moving here to Florida, moving here to a county that my family's called home. all across this county, from the

3:04:20coast to the swamps. to live here. And I think it's important that we we beef up the the the impact and and preserve our green space and quite frankly I know I keep referencing House Bill three ninety nine but this is one of the ways that we're going to be able to defend ourselves from that bad piece of legislation. And so anyway, I'm for the the staff recommendation. Staff uh recommendation on on this on this. Mr. Yeager.

3:04:49I am too, and only because other counties already have it in place and peop they're still building there, so why wouldn't they build here?

3:04:59So let me if I could Who's done it and how long do they have it in place?

3:05:06So for example, uh Brevard County uh doesn't have a cap on their uh fees, contributed fees, and they've had it in place since two thousand six. We're kind

3:05:17of late.

3:05:18And they're a similar size county to Pasco?

3:05:21Well if you're you're looking at the the chart, that's their last fee revision, so we would assume that the maximum could have been put into place that year or it could have already been ex existing before.

3:05:33But

3:05:33you're deceiving

3:05:34the right-of-way.

3:05:34David, when did the legislature pass what they passed? Last day session. Which law are you talking about?

3:05:44Oh business

3:05:44impact estimates? I would say two or three years ago?

3:05:49So after twenty twenty? Yeah. I believe so, yeah. So all these things are before that.

3:05:57But to be clear, that doesn't it's not a substanti. It doesn't prevent you from adopting a law, it just requires you to Disclose the impact to on businesses when you adopt the law.

3:06:11Okay. Mr. Starkey.

3:06:13Um one thing I want to be sure of is that we're not um

3:06:19getting clear cutting during ag because of this of the number. So I wanna go back to what our rules are for um someone you you know what Mr Mr. Southwind or whatever his name was did took out those trees that he said he needed for his cattle and then six months later we had an Amazon warehouse. Um what are our rules for Clear cutting when you're agreed and then coming in for research.

3:06:48We're not yeah, we're not changing those rules. I

3:06:50d I want to make sure they're strong enough. So I may need 'em

3:06:52stronger. That was the ordinance that you dealt with earlier. Yeah, so That was the old the old rules allowed a developer to basically claim the ag exemption. in one year and then the next year they could submit a development application and basically not have to mitigate for the trees they removed under the ag exemption. Right. We changed that rule I'd say probably five or six years ago. Because we had

3:07:20that that

3:07:21and said that to claim the ag exemption and not have to mitigate for the tree removal you had to at least be under the ag exemption for five years. You had to be under ag zoning and under that exemption for at least five years or We had to be under the exemption for two years and wait three years before developing. So we so we attempted to close that loophole. Now I've asked Patrick, since we've done that, whether anybody has attempted to abuse that system since we closed the loophole, and his

3:07:51answer was no.

3:07:53Do you check?

3:07:55Why?

3:07:56Is he checking? And and I wanna say something.

3:07:59Yes he that's his job so I'm so

3:08:02you do check the tree canopy through

3:08:05Yeah, we review past aerials um f back to five years to see if it's changed.

3:08:10Okay, but w hang on one second. S something you said coming from an ag family still makes me a little nervous because I can be an ag family. Been an Agg family, Starkey, since nineteen thirties. So we can do whatever we want on our property and then I sell it to someone And I clear I clear it. And then I sell it. to a developer and he can start the next day.

3:08:38But if you were bona fide ag for five years and you cleared it Yeah, I you weren't do you weren't clearing it for purposes of avoiding our ordinance.

3:08:47How do you know that? Mm-hmm.

3:08:51Well, okay, but presumably. But the ordinance the ordinance presumes that you weren't because you did it for five years. I mean, I I can't I'm not sure I can't I don't know for sure. Okay, but

3:09:03I don't think it matters who owns it. that that if you're clear cutting if you're Clearing for ag which is covered, you know, we're we're a strong ag county and a strong ag state. They should be allowed to do it on their property. But they can't do it and then sell it. within a certain amount of time to a developer, then we d we've done that that's what's gonna happen. So we've got it.

3:09:27Right, but but but the commissioner what No,

3:09:31he's

3:09:32but you

3:09:32can sell

3:09:32it. But the develop but the developer bought it in a cleared state.

3:09:36Yeah.

3:09:37When you clear it I

3:09:39I promise you

3:09:39any

3:09:39ag families i is gonna sell it in a cleared state to a developer.

3:09:44But you couldn't

3:09:45clear it.

3:09:46It d he didn't say that. He didn't say that.

3:09:48But but you're but why should the developer be penalized for something you did?

3:09:55Why you had it in an A. Do you don't

3:09:58you don't understand what I'm saying?

3:09:59I think an example might be good. You know, I'd be But re but but regardless the developer's still gonna have to plant trees in accordance with our ordinance. It's not like the developer's gonna get away away with with not not having having to plant trees. They're still gonna have to comply with our code.

3:10:11But if you have a heavily wooded site And you wanna sell it. The developer who wants to buy it I was gonna say clear it first, and then I'll buy it.

3:10:23I'll give you an example. That's what I'm saying. Okay, but it Massav and Little Road. You go down on the right hand side at that intersection. There's a whole bunch of trees in there.

3:10:31They are pine trees most

3:10:33that wanted to sell it? Clare them up. If you if we put this through the way it is, what happens is the people that aren't ag And they wanna sell, they're they're really gonna be buried by this, whether they do it or not, right, financially? What you're doing though is now you're taking all the ag people. And they're gonna start looking, you know what? I can go clear my land. Yeah. Flip my land And my land is worth so much more 'cause I don't have that burden. Yeah. And now you take an ag people out of business.

3:11:01That's what's been going on now. I know but it's gonna go more. Well it's gonna go more, so that's why d I just wanna protect it more. I'm I am happy to protect egg all day long. I'm not happy to take an and let it let 'em skirt around this. Treatment protection ordinance. But that's what's gonna happen if we don't If we go too too much or if we don't

3:11:32Yeah.

3:11:33You cannot clear and then sell with right away. I mean We're gonna have what the w our worst nightmare.

3:11:44There's a lot of items. Right? Yeah, but we look at the majority you look at what's left.

3:11:52I'm just saying it's all gonna be clear, okay.

3:11:55Okay, so your concern is that somebody could

3:11:59You're talking timber versus cattle.

3:12:03Towards the end of their ag exemption and then immediately sell it to a developer and then they would just develop it right after that.

3:12:16I don't know I don't know how you protect that, but

3:12:19We'd have to put it in a waiting period after after the five years.

3:12:26Five

3:12:27years

3:12:27or what? I mean we can do that if if that's if that's a concern. We can add a waiting period after the five years.

3:12:32Yeah, that's what I was going to suggest that we impose a moratorium not to receive development applications for five years on the property if that's legal.

3:12:41I think five years maybe the rules now are changing.

3:12:48Should run with the land, not the owner.

3:12:52This is why I think we need a cat And not a not a anything goes. Because we're gonna we're gonna do better, we're gonna do what they're doing in other counties, but if we go too far, we're gonna have

3:13:10So let me ask the board a question. I see we got a couple of attorneys that represent at least three out there right now. I see one former president of uh D B yeah, do you want to get a little public input, see what they're thinking?

3:13:22Yeah. We've got plenty of time. Yeah.

3:13:25I I've I've I've heard on the on the backside where one guy was Large. Clearer properties really upset what we're doing. Um I don't know about the other landowners, but again if you want to take advantage of what they're hearing, what they may think, 'cause our perspectives we're we're learning as we're talking with dialogue, but do you want to hear from the private sector?

3:13:45Sure, but let me discuss House Bill three ninety nine. If that's the case, then we need to discuss House Bill three ninety nine. I bet it it changes your perspective.

3:13:53I don't know what that is. Exactly.

3:13:54Let's do an open dialogue from the from the anyone anyone from the private sector want to come forward and discuss this at all? Can

3:14:00we

3:14:00have

3:14:00a

3:14:00couple

3:14:01of things?

3:14:01I'm just giving you the opportunity. I saw a Clark get up earlier, so I'd rather have it open for everybody here.

3:14:07Hey, Clark Hobby, Hobby and Hobby PA 109 North Brest Street, Tampa, Florida. Uh my only comment about this at all is on behalf of people who are in legit ag. I thought we had some language in the code as recently as a few years ago that already created the holding period that you're talking about. Maybe it accidentally got deleted or amended, but the one thing I am very s sensitive to is and this affected uh Senator Simpson's property that he bought from one of my buddies in Dade City is we

3:14:38can't uh affect the right of people with bona fide ag uses to remove trees. I mean they remove all of 'em. Under agricultural rules, and we had the site that's uh one of the properties that Senator Simpson bought uh had pine trees on it because the grove had frozen out and he wanted to plant new orange trees, and people flipped out when he clear-cut the pine trees. So, my only thing I would say to you is be cautious so that you

3:15:08don't adversely affect the rights of the remaining agriculture. people we have. We want them to remain in business. Exactly. And they're gonna have to cut trees down. to, you know, conduct agricultural activities. I I understand if there's a a year or eighteen months, if somebody comes in there and clears it and then there's a development permit filed, that would be, you know, like a bad faith thing. But if a guy comes in, you know, and some of my clients have to take oak trees out and stuff like that to plant trees sometime, we don't want to stop that. That's my only concern.

3:15:38Flack my thought is this the the the fear I get to Hurting the ag people. It's not that you're actually gonna hurt 'em. You create more advantage for them to go sell their property compared to like a non-ag who can't take down trees. So I take these ag people that are out there running a ag business, all of a sudden They do the clear cut and all of a sudden you know what? I'm better off just flipping this property to a developer because I've got to clear up to go.

3:16:08Okay. Yes.

3:16:08So so with all that said the the ag guys can go do that. We're not changing any of that. What is gonna happen though, in my opinion, is you now take these non ag people with large tracts of land, with lots of woods on them, et cetera. Now they're not gonna go sell their property because The the values diminished so much by all these fees that are in place for the trees. So does that now promote more pressure for the ad guy to say, you know what, I'm gonna go sell because

3:16:33that is a legitimate issue, and that's what Barbara and I were just talking about in the back. What's gonna happen here, and there I think it's a fundamental misunderstanding with some some board members and people at large, the people who will be adversely affected by this will be the Landowners to be clear. The developers, you guys can jack the rates up and cost twenty grand an acre to to penalize somebody. They just go right to the landowner and they say we can't pay you fifty grand an acre anymore. You just don't get it. And believe me, they will be contacting you

3:17:03in the next year or so if you do it that way.

3:17:11gonna make their living.

3:17:13My my my only point of caution about this is since we adopted that one rule that I think uh your county attorney may be looking at some of our older stuff on the computer now. Since we adopted that rule about ten years ago, it was maybe ten, twelve years ago, I haven't heard of anybody doing that in anticipation of

3:17:31Selfwind did it. Yeah. So I wanna be clear, even the five year rule Requires that it be under ag zoning and an agricultural classification. So

3:17:43But there's nothing that stops them from selling it one year later.

3:17:46I understand that, but they'd have to then rezone it before they could develop it. So the the the time it's gonna take them to rezone it

3:17:55And maybe that's

3:17:55why it hasn't happened.

3:18:00I mean we could put a waiting period in. I'm not I'm not sure.

3:18:03Either way it's three years, whether there's I'm

3:18:04I'm not opposed to putting a waiting period in after they're done with that five year period, but I wanna be clear that the five year period has to be while it's zoned egg. So They'd have to rezone it after that.

3:18:20Maybe that's

3:18:20why I'm not sure why the language that Yeah.

3:18:26two or more consecutive years and has not submitted a development application period for three years doesn't project

3:18:34It's already in there.

3:18:35Well because there's a prior one, Jeff, that says that's there's an OR. There's a prior one that says for five years. Yeah. Did it's been under ag zoning for five years. She's saying that one doesn't have a waiting period.

3:18:49Yeah.

3:18:51My point is that it has to be under ag zoning to the five year one it has to be under ag zoning Pan and ad classification for five years or to get it rezoned.

3:19:04That's gonna take you to the three years probably two to three years just to get it rezoned. I mean we can put a waiting period after the five year one too. I'm not a I'm not opposed to doing it. I'm just letting you know that nobody's gonna be able to take that five year window and immediately develop because

3:19:27It it I think what David's saying in a more simplified turn is your code is more or less already achieving the same means. We ha this hasn't been a big issue. There about fifteen years ago this was happening a lot and we've changed the code and tried to put these little tentacles in there and I haven't I mean I heard you mention one property owner's name. I haven't heard anybody doing that since then. I mean the other people that that took pine trees out, they were gonna take the pines out anyway.

3:19:55Well, you know, we you have to do we do have to remember too well

3:20:01Um Miss that that's silviculture. She said she was gonna take him out anyway.

3:20:07But I wanna be clear. If you want us to add a a waiting period after the five years, we can add it. I'm not

3:20:13Well what's the Where's Seth go? Um

3:20:18I would just be cautious about your look back period is all I'm saying 'cause

3:20:26Yes, we'd

3:20:27have to reconsider the ordinance. We went back and started talking about what the ordinance provisions were that you've already adopted.

3:20:38Hello. I had to stand up, I was falling asleep. Barbara Will High [address removed]. You know, my perspective is you did something w when you just passed your ordinance which was allowed this to be done by resolution. So you can see what bad things people do in the next couple months, tell them to come back and pass a cap, make an incremental step, see what bad things people come up with, and you can fix it. This isn't the end of this discussion. Because it's done by resolution, you're very nimble. You can address it very quickly. Staff see something going on, they're like, ooh.

3:21:09Let's change that cap. Multifamily maybe is an issue. They start seeing applications come in, they can change that cap. So I just 'Cause you could go on here for quite a while. So you're for the cap. I I do think you should make an inkwork mouth step. I think you should put a cap in place. You can change it very very very quickly because it can be done by resolution per the ordinance you just adopted. That's my recommendation. Thanks.

3:21:31We need we've only got a lot more. So we have a motion.

3:21:35Well I I would make a motion. Should we should wait for a set that's here?

3:21:39Yeah. Sorry.

3:21:43Someone go check on Seth?

3:21:45Mm-hmm. I think you'd have to

3:21:47put

3:21:47the men's room.

3:21:49Well I don't have to go inside or anything,

3:21:50but

3:21:50That's right. Also should we want to say something?

3:21:55No, I'm just saying that I'm waiting to see what happens here. I mean uh as it relates to the motion that's uh pending.

3:22:02And should we hear from Ralph to see about House Bill three ninety nine? I don't know what that is. Ralph here? I would love to. I mean is that

3:22:11something we need to know before we vote on this? I don't know.

3:22:16We can have a discussion about three ninety nine, but uh I think it could be a separate conversation in my opinion.

3:22:25Yeah. Are we preempted again?

3:22:27We are preempted on some issues, but I don't know.

3:22:34I don't think it's not directly related to trees or tree mitigation, if that's the question.

3:22:40Can you give us a little bit about the bill?

3:22:44Sure. The the primary pre preemptions relate to compatibility and Um mobile homes in single family neighborhoods.

3:22:56You speak and he returns.

3:23:00I can't see him. He's too thin. There's browser.

3:23:05Good afternoon. Ralph Lair, Intergovernmental Affairs Officer. So you wanted to know information regarding house built? All right, good. So I'm just gonna touch on a uh on a few items that are in the bill and I know David was talking and and uh has looked at it. Um it updates local uh government land development regulations to include specific compatibility consideration for certain residential applications, limiting grounds for denial and requiring detailed jurisdiction

3:23:35or justification. It bars denial of bur building permits. for certified residential manufactured buildings on designated lots, subject to existing requirements and tax provisions. requires that off-site constructed residential dwellings be allowed in any zoning permitting single family homes and bars local regulations. that treat them more restrictively than site built dwellings.

3:24:00So that's for a manufactured home.

3:24:03Correct.

3:24:04That is not the same.

3:24:05Well

3:24:05to be clear, now it appears it applies to mobile homes now too. Yes. Is that now is that now passed?

3:24:12Uh uh it's already passed and it's uh already on the governor's uh desk.

3:24:16Okay.

3:24:17Uh it was signed and sent to him on the eighteenth, he has till uh April second to sign the bill or let it pass

3:24:25a book.

3:24:31To be clear, it wouldn't supersede private deed restrictions. Correct. But if it's an area like Moon Lake, like the one we just heard, where it doesn't have private deed restrictions, it would supersede our local zoning.

3:24:45And again, the what the way they looked at it is they they a they did this uh particular bill to uh to have more affordable housing. products and uh in the state. That's how they see this.