Elevated Youth Services Section 407.4 treatment facility alternative relief

3:13:54Yes, Mr. McDonald McDonald is on WebEx and we have promoted him.

3:13:59Okay. And Mr. Browning's in the audience somewhere. Good. Okay. Um so Planning Commission members, this this application is fairly unique, and I will start by saying we haven't had an application like this probably since the DRC was in existence. So it's been that long since we've had this kind of application. But it's an application under section four or seven point four of the land development code. And I want to start by saying that this is not a conditional use hearing.

3:14:29And you realize that most of you, most of the time when we're hearing these kinds of things, you're hearing it as a conditional use. You're looking at things like consistency with a comprehensive plan. You're looking at compatibility. You're looking at quality of life, property values. adequacy of the infrastructure, all of those things. Um, all of those things today are not really relevant because today the inquiry is whether the applicant has met the criterion 407.4 of the Land Development Code. Specifically They

3:15:00are seeking to for appro for approval of a state licensed housing and residential and treatment facility for minors with handicaps and disabilities, but they do not want to go through the conditional use process. Their arguments are essentially that to require them to go through the conditional use process would violate the Fair Housing Act, an Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act, violate their equal protection rights, and or unreasonably un or unfairly burden their use of the property. Um I just want to give you a little bit of background.

3:15:32About so Generally, single-family uses in a single family neighborhood are permitted as a right. Um, residential treatment and care facilities generally require conditional use if they are six or more residents. That's essentially what our code requires. Um, I should say seven to fourteen residents is what our code says for residential treatment and care facilities. In addition, there's a state statute, which is section 419.0011A Florida statute, which

3:16:03defines a community residential home as a dwelling unit licensed to serve residents who are clients of the Department of Elderly Affairs. The Agency for Persons with Disabilities, Department of Juvenile Justice, or the Department of Children and Families are licensed by the Agency for Healthcare Administration, which provides living environment for seven to fourteen unrelated residents who operate as a functional equivalent of a family, including supervision and care by a supportive staff as may be necessary to meet physical, emotional, and social needs of the resident. I I raise this definition because that's

3:16:33effectively what this facility would meet, that definition. The statute then goes on to say that if that same home has six or fewer residents Which meet that definition. they are deemed to be and this is state law. Okay, I didn't write this law. This is what the Florida Legislature did. They are deemed to be a single family unit and a non-commercial residential use for purposes of local laws and they have to be approved. In other words, they don't require any local government approval. Now they have to meet certain distance criteria, but this particular

3:17:03facility does meet those distance criteria. Assuming they meet the distance criteria and assuming it's six or fewer residents, and assuming they meet that definition and they're licensed by one of those agencies. The local government has to approve them. And that's an important fact, okay, because I'd I've heard a lot of people. concerns about this type of facility. I wanted to be clear, the state legislature, not Pasco County. mandated that if it's six or fewer residents, we have to approve of them. Okay. I didn't write that law. Talk

3:17:34to their legislature if you don't like the law, but that's what the law is in the state of Florida. Um So the reason that they would normally have to require conditional use approval is solely because they are seeking more than six residents. Again, if they for six or under, We we couldn't we didn't we don't have to approve them. We couldn't impose any conditions of approval on them. And that's gonna be important later because I'm gonna talk about some conditions of approval for this facility. But I wanted to be clear that if they were six or under, we could not impose any conditions on them whatsoever.

3:18:05Um And we'll talk about that. A little more later. Um

3:18:10How many are there, David?

3:18:12Well, that's still a subject of discussion. Um the applicant originally requested 16. Um I I believe and and we can let the applicant address this and the opponents that they're probably not gonna get sixteen residents in this facility under state licensing rules. They Likely it'll probably be closer to 10 to 12 residents that are actually in this facility. Um the other important fact that I need to bring to your attention is that this per this particular

3:18:42operator, Elevated Youth Services, on August 17th, 2021, asked the county for a zoning verification letter for this property. And it's pretty common for people before they buy property to get a zoning verification letter. In response, the County Planning and Development Department, uh Mr. Humberstone Sent a zoning verification letter to elevated youth services on August eighteenth and it's attached to your packet. that specifically says that their proposed use would be a permitted use

3:19:12in the AR1 zoning district. Did not say it would be a conditional use. They specifically said he's Mr. Hummers specifically said it would be a permitted use. And after elevated use services bought uh got that letter, they then closed on the property. Um so we do have an issue as it relates to that as well.

3:19:31Did he know at the time when they submitted that letter that it was going to be more than six?

3:19:36Yes. And that's in your publication materials too. In fact, I can since since you bring that up, it's one of the attachments, um, exhibit nine. LVD services when they sent the request to Mr. Humberstone specifically and I and it's highlighted. We are looking to provide housing for up to twelve youth in the home. So it was disclosed to the county Before the zoning vacation zoning verification letter was issued that there would be more than six residents in this home. Now,

3:20:06unquestionably, if it had been under six, the the letter probably would have been accurate. Because if it was six or under, it is a permitted use. It's not a conditional use. Was the letter probably erroneous under our code? Yes. However, it's clear that the applicant relied on it and then bought the property after they got the letter. Um So Um

3:20:34Getting back to

3:20:38The art I mean, I'm gonna let the applicant address, you know, why they believe that it's a violation of the Fair Housing Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act, and the equal protection rights to require them to go through a conditional use approval. And And Mr. Link is gonna try to is gonna explain to you why he thinks it's not a violation of the Federal Housing Act to require them to go through a conditional use approval. But the way I look at it is this. Um, and the reason I'm recommending approval of the application is A

3:21:08couple of reasons. One, whether it is or is is not a violation of the Fair Housing Act, I think they have a legitimate argument that that to apply require them to go through a conditional use approval after we told them they didn't have to. would be an unfair burden on this property owner. Because we told them they didn't have to. They closed on the property. And and now we're saying you have to do it. So do I think that could be argued to be unfair? Yes, I do. In addition, I try to look at things from a practical

3:21:38standpoint. And let's just say that we won the case, the fair housing at case. What we would win is that we'd require them to go through the conditional use process. That's effectively what we'd win. Well, if they have to go through the conditional use process we'd probably end up with conditions that are very similar with the ones I'm about to discuss with you. So In my opinion, I'm not sure it's gonna make a huge practical difference about whether we're imposing conditions under this process. or under the conditional use process because I think we can impose

3:22:08conditions that are in my opinion, equally stringent as what we would impose through the conditional use process. Um And then I guess the last reason is because I try to look at this from the public's perspective. Do I think the public would be better off with a facility with 10 residents or 12 residents that are subject to these conditions versus a facility with six residents that has no conditions whatsoever? I'd rather live next to the facility that has 10 with all of these conditions. And I'm

3:22:39gonna get into those conditions now because I think they are important. So at this point, can we I guess you did put them up there? Okay. So

3:22:47can I ask you one question before you start? Because so what would be their remedy if They went through the conditional y use process and they were not approved. And they They're still in our legal sense relying upon our letter to them saying they should not have gone through it.

3:23:06So

3:23:07we'd have to buy the property back.

3:23:09Well, we'd probably pay damage well, first of all they probably wouldn't sue us because of the letter.

3:23:13Uh

3:23:14the they probably, based on my conversations with the applicant, they would see what's under the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, and then the county is potentially subject to damages if we lost that lawsuit. Which is another factor because I don't know that the county. Whether or not we'd win that case is to be decided by a court, I guess. But I look at it from a what is the benefit most beneficial to the public. And to me, what is most beneficial to the public is getting these conditions of approval

3:23:44in a form that protects their concerns. And then I feel like I've done my job to protect their concerns. W that I could not protect. if this facility was six or fewer residents. And and just by way of example, one of the conditions you know, requires that they don't accept any residents that have been adjudicated as sexual offenders. If they were six or fewer residents, they could accept residents that are sexual offenders and there'd be nothing I could do about it. Nothing anybody in this room could do about it because That's

3:24:14what the law allows under state law. I again I didn't write that law. State legislature did, but but they could do that. These conditions of approval actually restrict them from accepting residents that have been adjudicated as sexual offenders. It requires them to have 24 hours, seven days a week supervision. Again, I couldn't re impose that if it was a facility with six or fewer residents because I'd have to approve it via allowed as a right. So I'm gonna go over these conditions and and I'm gonna as I go over them, I'm gonna disclose the fact that that

3:24:45the attorney for the opposition or one of the opponents um and the attorney for the applicant have been for the last three hours while you've been hearing about RB parks, they've been discussing these conditions and I will tell you that they are not in cl complete agreement on two of the conditions But I think we're getting close. And so, you know, I think with some time with those provisions to those two conditions, we could get to the point where these are at least somewhat acceptable to

3:25:15both sides. So let me go over them. And so the first condition would be that residency of the facility is limited to minors with handicaps or disabilities as defined by the Fair Housing Act or Americans with Disabilities Act. Plus any adult supervisors of those minors. That's important because the applicant is seeking to seeking this protection because th these minors are disabilities, so it is important that the they actually have handicaps or disabilities as defined by those acts and

3:25:45not be some other type of resident. Um Condition two, again, it starts by saying there's a maximum of 16 minor residents. That may change as we move through more discussions. Um, but it does say that, or they're limited by the maximum amount that the applicable state licensing agencies will allow in the facility, whichever is more stringent. As I mentioned earlier, it may be that DCF only allows them to have 12 residents in this facility, um, or maybe less. Um but I think it's important that while we

3:26:15are requiring them to go through the State licensing process. That is not a process that is regulated by Pasco County. It's a regulated by the state. They're the ones that analyzed, you know, is there enough space in these bedrooms to accommodate this many individuals? Do they have enough? you know, staff to accommodate this many individuals. That's a state licensing issue, not a county land use issue. That being said, this condition goes on to say that they that they won't accept clients that are transferred

3:26:45from the Department of Juvenile Justice. Those would typically be the types of facility the types of residents that have been adjudicated as being sexual offenders. So they will not accept those types of residents. They have to undergo a screening process by the facility. That excludes residents that have been adjudicated as delinquent based on charges of sexual assault, juvenile sexual assault, or their equivalent. They won't accept residents that pose a direct threat of harm to others. And they'll make this determination based on an individualized risk assessment and psychosexual

3:27:16evaluation of each proposed resident that indicates the proposed resident is not a high risk for harming others. Again. This is probably the most important condition in the sense that If this facility had six or fewer residents, none of this would apply. Okay, but the applicant is willing to agree to this to get this approval. with some potential modifications that we'll we can talk about later. Condition three says that the facility will maintain an adult supervisor to minor resident ratio of one to four. which means at least one

3:27:46supervisor for every four minor residents. And this is important condition number four, the minor residents shall be under adult supervision twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, including in times when the residents are outside or otherwise leave the housing treatment facility. Again, if this facility has six or fewer residents, these residents could wander the streets unsupervised, and there'd be nothing we could do about it. But the applicant has agreeing that they will be under adult supervision, twenty four hours a day, seven days a week. as a condition of this approval. Condition five. There

3:28:18won't be any exterior signage placed on or at the housing treatment facility that indicates the housing treatment facility is anything other than a residential home. We've heard a lot of arguments that this is effectively a commercial business. But from the outside it won't look like a commercial business. It will not have any signage. Um It it's just gonna look like a residential home. Um in terms of parking, that's addressed by condition six. The they've agreed they will have a maximum number of vehicles of six vehicles. And then no vehicles

3:28:48will be parked on the grass or on the street. There is some discussion about whether six vehicles can be accommodated in the existing garage and driveway, but I believe the applicant is committed to build additional driveway space so that they can comply with this condition and not have any vehicles in the street or on the grass. I mean I have been to the site. It does have a fairly large driveway. It might accommodate six, but Possibly not. Um Number seven, the housing treatment facilities to comply with all applicable state

3:29:18licensing requirements, rules, and regulations. They have to obtain a new certificate of occupancy demonstrating compliance with the building code, the fire code, sanitation health code. and establishing maximum occupancy limit. So They're agreeing they're subject to all of our normal building code requirements, fire code requirements, health code requirements, and that they're going to have to demonstrate compliance with those before they occupy the facility. They have to get number eight requires them to get their DCF license and provide it to our department, our building and construction services

3:29:48department and planning development department required to accepting any residence. And then number nine is a lengthy condition, but I'm not gonna bore you with all of it. It basically says they won't sue us if we approve this. I'm not gonna read the whole thing, but effectively that's what number nine says. Um So With all that said, um again, the County Attorney's Office is recommending approval. um for the reasons that I stated because um I do feel that the surrounding residents, whether I think this is an appropriate use for this facility this

3:30:19air neighborhood or not is sort of it may or may not be. Um, but do I think the surrounding residents are better off with the these a controlled facility under these conditions versus an uncontrolled facility. Yes, I do. And that's why I'm ultimately recommending approval. Um there may some be some subsequent discussions about conditions two and six. But I think those can be resolved either after this hearing or maybe at a future hearing.

3:30:46Okay, so two and six are the uh only ones that are in question.

3:30:49Well, I would say that no, I haven't heard from every member of the public. Okay, I I

3:30:52No, I'm talking about

3:30:53I'm going by with the attorney for one of the opponents represented, that he still has some concerns. I mean, maybe be clear, his client has concerns with the facility in general. I don't I don't want to discount that. Okay. But But e but the client has concerns about accepting these conditions unless there's additional modifications to condition number two and condition number six. Six is dealing with parking. The only real change to that would be that They add additional driveway space for those things. Okay, this that's easy

3:31:24enough to add. The probably the bigger issue discussion issue would be condition two, because That deals with screening and the types of residents that will be in the facility. And how many will be there? that probably requires more lengthy conversation that's that we may not be able to finish today. So So but let's but we we do want to have the public hearing today because everybody's come to talk about this. I think you should hear from the residents. I'm just letting you know that at the end of the day, my recommendation will be with it for approval

3:31:54with these conditions with some potential modifications to two and six.

3:32:00And then I don't take any

3:32:01questions.

3:32:01And uh the residents will all be minor persons? Yes,

3:32:04they have to be minor, and that's required by condition number one. There are staff members who who will be at the facility, but they don't my understanding is they are not um they don't they're not living there. They're they're they're serving the the the minor residents that live there.

3:32:20The the definition of a minor is under eighteen.

3:32:24Yes. Yes.

3:32:25What happens if an individual goes into the home who is 17.5 and

3:32:30turns 18? Well I guess that would they would no longer be a minor and and therefore not be no longer be consistent with condition number one. So I would say that they'd have to move out at that point. I mean the applicant can address that, but I think that's a good question. The way I'm reading condition number one If they're not a minor anymore, they wouldn't be allowed there anymore.

3:32:49Okay.

3:32:50David, to your point about the adult supervisors though, you're saying that there's twenty four seven supervision of the the uh children, the teens at that facility. There's a one to four um adult supervisor ratio to that. So in in essence that one of those people's or f if it's sixteen, four of them are gonna have to live on site or there's gonna have to be a constant adult on

3:33:13site. My understanding I'll let the applicant I'll let the applicant address the specific my understanding though from the applicant is they The adult supervisors, this is not their permanent home. They don't they don't reside there. They live somewhere else, but they they staff it. There is overnight staffing, if that's your question, but that's still not their home. Does that make sense? It's sort of like a nurse that works the night shift. It makes sense, but again, you're

3:33:37looking you're looking at I can see up to twenty people potentially in an overnight stay there.

3:33:42Yeah, they're not sleeping there, they're working.

3:33:44Right.

3:33:44Yes. I mean they're there to supervise the residents. Okay.

3:33:50But you can ask the applicant how they actually are going to sleep there and maybe Mr. Browning can address that. When he comes up. I think the under there are rules of procedure, the applicant did not request additional time, but he does have five minutes um of time to make his case. I'll let Mr. Browning and Mr. McDonald decide how they want to divvy up their five minutes. Uh do you want to speak first, Mr. Browning, or do you want Mr. McDonald to do that? Okay. All right. So let's hear from Mr. McDonald.

3:34:19David, real quick, do we are we making a recommendation to the board?

3:34:22No, you actually are the final decision maker on this item. It could be appealed to the Board of County Commissioners, but you are the final decision maker.

3:34:30Thank you.

3:34:34Thank you. Uh Chairman

3:34:35Mariano.

3:34:36Mr.

3:34:36McDonald, can you hear us?

3:34:39Yes, can you hear me okay?

3:34:41We can't hear you very well, so if you could Whatever you can do to augment your system?

3:34:48Can you hear me

3:34:49better microphone a second over here the sound?

3:34:55Can you hear me better now?

3:34:58Can't hear you yet, no. I think you adjusted my microphone.

3:35:02Yeah.

3:35:04Different speakers

3:35:05are

3:35:05as well as I can

3:35:06get.

3:35:07Say it again.

3:35:09Try again, Mr. McDonald, please.

3:35:11Can you hear me better now?

3:35:14Not really. Can't do a hundred.

3:35:18Uh one or two No

3:35:22no we're just joking.

3:35:23Oh,

3:35:24serious.

3:35:25Okay.

3:35:27Might take a while, you know. We're doing our best.

3:35:30I'm not good with numbers, I'm a lawyer, so this might

3:35:33be aggravated.

3:35:36Well, we do have other people that are registered for WebEx on this item, right? We do.

3:35:42Do you wanna see test them and see how they sound?

3:35:46Well, can that be done without losing Mr. McDonald? 'Cause I'm curious is whether this is just an issue on Mr. McDonald's end or whether we have an issue.

3:35:55I just turned up my I just turned up my microphone. Does this help? No, not

3:36:01really.

3:36:02It's a tad bit better though.

3:36:04Well let's let's find out whether any of the other people that are on WebEx

3:36:08Okay, why don't we try see if you could promote um Amber Evans and see if we can t test her and see what she sounds like.

3:36:24She's already on the moment.

3:36:27Miss Evans, can you say something to see if we're we're testing our microphone over on this side?

3:36:35Can you hear me? We hear you perfectly. Okay. All right. We're we're muting you out. Just a just a moment. Um, is there anyone else that's on very similarly than Mr. McDonald? Okay, why don't we try Nare Narini Diocarin?

3:36:54Hello,

3:36:55good afternoon. Can you hear me? We can see you perfectly as well. Okay, that's okay, Miss Ms. Noreini. We don't want to skip Mr. McDonald. We're we're gonna mute you mute you out just a moment. Mr. McDonald, would you try again please?

3:37:12Can't hear him at all.

3:37:13Yeah.

3:37:14You're muted, Mr. McDonald.

3:37:17Okay, can you hear me better now? Oh, there you go.

3:37:22There you go. Hit gold. I don't know what you did, but it worked.

3:37:26So we'll need Mr. McDonald your name and address for the record and whether you've been sworn, David. Yes? Yeah,

3:37:32he yeah, he should go ahead and be sworn in. Okay.

3:37:35Make that Mr. McDonald, could you give an address and raise your right hand?

3:37:40Sure, my name is Dan McDonald, Post Office Box eleven eighty four, Pleasant Row, Utah. eight four six zero two

3:37:50Okay.

3:37:51If you swear or firm the testimony, you'll give us the truth, so help you back.

3:37:55I do.

3:37:57Thank you.

3:37:59All right, thank you.

3:38:00Go ahead. Yes, honorable chairman and members of the commission. My name is Dan McDonald. I'm a fair housing lawyer for Elevated Youth Services Inc. I'm a fair housing specialist. And I handle FHA cases all throughout the United States of America. I also adjudicate them as an administrative law judge. I have three points I want to make very quickly about our application. Point one. For our handicapped children, living

3:38:30in a residential family-like setting is essential to ameliorate their handicaps and disabilities. This is the only family setting that they can live in at this time in their lives. This home serves as the functional equivalent of a family. In fact, we even meet the de the county's definition of a family of unrelated persons under the county code. Thus, it's our position that the home should be treated as a single family residence, which is a permitted use

3:39:00in this zone, with no requirement of obtaining a conditional use permit. Indeed, mister Humberstone was correct from the very beginning. Point two. The County Code is facially discriminatory. because residential treatment and care facilities for unrelated persons who require housing and food services, personal services, and physical or mental health services are not deemed a family and must seek a conditional use permit. We

3:39:31would have no problem with going through the CUP process if it was required of all groups of unrelated persons. But it's only required of handicapped persons needing treatment and care at a treatment and care facility. The case law is very, very clear on this. This is discriminatory. Point three Even if we did not qualify as a family under the County Code, and even if the County Code was not facially discriminatory, we

3:40:01are nonetheless entitled to a reasonable accommodation under the Fair Housing Act in ADA. We have presented unrebutted expert testimony and research that the accommodation is therapeutically and medically necessary and that it's reasonable. Our request is reasonable because enforcement of a facially discriminatory CUP requirement cannot under federal law be deemed fundamentally essential to any zoning program. Also, we've produced

3:40:31unrebutted evidence that the home will not fundamentally alter the residential character of the neighborhood. There is Pardon me? Uh there is no I'm sorry, what There is no individualized or objective evidence that our youth will pose a direct threat to person or property. We will not accept youth who pose a direct threat of harming others. And we will make that determination based on an individualized risk assessment

3:41:02and psychosexual evaluation that ensures each resident is not a high risk for harming others. We do not take DJJ referred youth. We do not take adjudicated or convicted sex offenders or high-risk youth. We've listened to the concerns of Ms. Ron Row and agreed to most of her suggested conditions of approval, which your council has reviewed with you. Your county attorney has wisely recommended approval is necessary to comply with federal law. I would urge you to follow his recommendation

3:41:32and approve our request for alternative relief. For the reasons we've submitted in writing. And that I've just stated, alternative relief is justified under County Code Section 407.4. A one. A five, a seven, and a nine. Mr. Browning, the operator, is here and some of his staff is here. If you have questions, we can entertain those. Otherwise, I'd like to reserve any remaining time for rebuttal.

3:42:04All right.

3:42:05So Mr. McDonald, uh I guess we'll ask Mr. Browning. There was a question about the staff at the facility and you know, do they reside there or sleep there? How does that work? And can maybe Mr. Browning can address that.

3:42:26These were

3:42:30Please go.

3:42:32other thing? Um I don't yes.

3:42:34Anybody else who has not been sworn in?

3:42:35Let's just do it now for anybody that's gonna speak.

3:42:43And let me mention that that's going to include the ones who are WebEx as well.

3:42:47Yeah, anybody that intends to Make comment. This is an opportunity for you to stand up and be sworn.

3:43:02Right.

3:43:05Yeah, so uh the stat the staffing question about it being

3:43:10Excuse me, Mr. Browning. I don't think we got your name and address.

3:43:13Oh, I'm sorry. Um Nicholas Browning, [address removed].

3:43:19Thank you.

3:43:20Um Yeah, so twenty-four hour awake staff will will be on shift and they'll rotate their shifts, but it's it's a line of sight and sound um staffing situation that is a one to four ratio.

3:43:36So do they I guess the question is do

3:43:38they sleep there or they what are they they do not. It's an awake staff situation, so n no staff will sleep there.

3:43:45Did I ask a question? Does the

3:43:47ratio change at night? Um it does to one to six. While they're sleeping.

3:43:56In the line of sight meaning when the staff is there they actually have visual On each of the eight. Yes,

3:44:05and sound. So there can't be like a partition between where they can't hear what's going on.

3:44:12Yeah. Any other questions?

3:44:15I I don't have a question for him, but his answer does raise an issue under condition three because it says one to four. If we're inclined to approve this, we're probably gonna have to change that to one to six at night. But okay. Uh that can be dealt with whenever we bring these conditions back. I'm just making note of it that that needs to be revised. So Okay. But then you've answered the question.

3:44:40Thank you very much. Okay, and I understand does the applicant wants to reserve their time to answer.

3:44:46I thought we were given five minutes.

3:44:48Well he gets three minutes for rebuttal.

3:44:51Yeah.

3:44:53Okay. Um so do we have anybody in attendance here that would like to speak? That has questions, concerns, or

3:45:00So you've Mr. Lincoln, you've granted twenty minutes of time. Right. And And he's a lawyer and Probably the most competent to address these issues. You may want to hear from him first. All right, Mr.

3:45:12Lincoln,

3:45:13would you like to come forward? Yes, thank

3:45:15you. It was your name and address and

3:45:18uh thank you. My name is Robert Lincoln, uh 2055 Wood Street, suite 206, Sarasota, Florida. And I have been sworn. Um, thank you very much. I am gonna go briefly through why we do not believe that uh they are qualified for relief under 407.4. Um my letter addressed a whole lot of the other issues with um federal law, equal protection, everything else. I think

3:45:48the critical issue really is the would it violate the FHA, the Fair Housing Act, and the other acts, and we'll focus mostly on those arguments. But also to to begin with, because um Mr. McDonald brought up standing in the issues. And if in the event that this were to be appealed either to the Board of County Commissioners or to later to circuit court, I want to make sure that we've addressed that. So I'm going to bring it up my client, Noelle Munro,

3:46:19just to make a brief statement that addresses some of those issues.

3:46:24Hey, Mr. Rowe. Mrs. Rowe.

3:46:27Um and I had brought some photos if those are missing.

3:46:31So do you want us to receive and file those?

3:46:34Motion to

3:46:34accept. Second.

3:46:36We have a motion to receive and file. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.

3:46:42So while while we're receiving filing things, um Uh d I didn't provide handouts of it, but all of you were emailed some recent correspondence from both the applicant, Mr. McDonald, and Mr. Lincoln. Um, I think you all received those emails, I believe. There was additional argument for and against this. Um, I would ask you to receive and file the correspondence as well as part of the record.

3:47:06I hear that motion.

3:47:08Approved.

3:47:11Have a second.

3:47:13Have a motion and a second. Discussion of the motion. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Like sign? Motion carries.

3:47:30This time actually on Mr. Lincoln's

3:47:33Mr. Lincoln's time. He is twenty minutes.

3:47:37Oh, I'm part of your time? Okay, I thought I had my own. Um, I apologize. Um, my name is Noelle Monroe. I live at [address removed]. Um, my house is three doors down from um two six three one eight Lawrence Avenue, where elevated use services is proposing a residential treatment facility. Um I've lived at my current residence for over seven years. Um I grew up in the Cuillhalo neighborhood. neighborhood since I was three years old. I have two young um children, a seven year old and a five year old. Um, if this request

3:48:07is approved with only the conditions that EYS has already accepted, I will be adversely affected to a greater extent than the community at large. as you can see from my photo. First, the parking configuration. um as it currently stands is inadequate and will adversely affect the traffic on my street. I've shown some images that were taken yesterday. Of the property. at 26318 Lawrence Avenue, showing four vehicles in the driveway and two vehicles parking along the street.

3:48:38Um This is consistent with the um number of vehicles that elevated use services said that they would have on the premises, two multi-passenger vans and four staff vehicles. This shows that they cannot park that many vehicles on the property without either blocking the garage or using the street. The street has no sidewalks, minimal streetlights, many potholes, and overgrowth on some sections that make it difficult for two cars to pass each other. um having vehicles parking along the street. right away on

3:49:08a regular basis will create a hazard. I do understand that elevated use services has has agreed to address this parking issue. Um but it has not been fully decided upon yet. Second, elevated use services has not provided enough evidence that the residence will not be a hazard to my safety or the safety of my family who live three doors away. Not because the residents may have disabling mental issues, but because Elevated Youth Services admits that they will have committed behaviors, has public information

3:49:38indicating that they will be sexually sexual offenders. and refuses to accept a condition that they will screen out the residents who have had educ education withheld for acts that constitute sexual assault, juvenile sexual assault, or their equivalent. They now claim that they will screen up potentially j dangerous um residents but won't agree to the state screening criteria and processes. They have not put their procedures into record so they could be evaluated by competent

3:50:09professionals to determine whether they are effective. Again, this is not prejudice against teens with who are mentally ill. This is elevated use services admitting that their residents have engaged in harmful behaviors and won't provide adequate guarantees that they will not. Furthermore, I would like to address Mr. McDonald's objection about the late submission of our written objections. I received the mailing regarding the request for alternative relief on Saturday, December 11th. I contacted David Goldstein's office on Monday, December

3:50:3913th, stating that I and other members of the community. had concerns about the proposed use of this property and requested an extension so that we can have time to find out more about this business. I was informed on December 17th by Miss Linda Rios that Mr. Browning was not in agreement with continuing the public hearing. I then began seeking legal counsel. This gave me less than three weeks to work with. And of course this also fell into the time during the holidays. I am asking the Planning Commission to deny elevated use services requests for alternative relief. Thank you for

3:51:09your time.

3:51:11Yeah. Um, can I just ask one question before you sit? Um

3:51:18Have you uh were y were you able to determine whether there's evidence of violations of of this by this organization. I know you're concerned about their screening process and so forth. Have you any evidence of the fact that they've violated that on any kind of a regular basis anywhere else.

3:51:38Um no

3:51:39no

3:51:40but there's limited evidence about EYS actually running other facilities in other places that you can find for public records. So while we've looked at that, uh, we haven't seen it. Part of the issue is they haven't operated in Florida yet. And this is what I was going to go to. And this all goes to the issues of needing to negotiate. over condition two. I'll hit that momentarily.

3:52:06Okay.

3:52:07Um I I do want to point out that if you look at the picture up there. the back end of those trucks are either right on or over the right-of-way line, which is uh right there where the edge of the swale and the and the culvert are.

3:52:24And uh and I think we'll be able to fix that and g get away that the cars will come in and out, but it ha as she said, it hasn't been done yet. Um

3:52:34When we look at the uh question of whether they're eligible for relief here because this would violate the FHA, the first issue that I want to just hit on is the is the fact that the FHA does not p protect people who might be a threat to their. Uh to others or to the neighborhood, a direct threat of harm. And there's guidance indicating that that includes that it doesn't include. It doesn't include and protect sex offenders.

3:53:06And let me just say what the issue here is. Um

3:53:12The screening processes that the children that we're talking about. Sometimes they might be com from completely private referrals. For the most part, they're going to quote be in the system somewhere. Бо і Флоридас систем. The difference between Dependent kids or potentially dependent kids, the ones who are abandoned, who are in need of services, runaways, you know, all of those kinds of kids who might have mental health issues, and the system that deals

3:53:42with juvenile delinquents, well, they overlap. It's the same caseworkers, it's the same prosecutors who handle those cases. They're all in the same circumstance. And AYS's materials, and I gave you some of this stuff in my letter, not only does the affidavit admit that these will be people who have engaged in uh inappropriate sexual behaviors, their profile page for this facility on another private website

3:54:13indicates that they are not there they will be surfing non-adjudicated offenders. Okay, and that sexual offenders, because that's the nature of the site. And so we have a situation, and this isn't prejudice against disabled people, where they've said that these um that the people that they serve and will serve at this facility have committed harmful acts. Now Are those so severe that they create an issue for

3:54:43the Community, they've already agreed to say that oh we won't take anybody who's adjudicated. uh as a sexual offender, as a juvenile through that process. They all go somewhere else. But the problem is there's a whole slew of of kids in the system that might be in here. And the question is how are they going to be screened? If they came through the state system, uh completely and They struck out my condition that would say

3:55:13that they were going to go through the skate screening system. That system actually has specific things to address all this, and it's done by the people who are working with the kids and know actually what they've done and all the other kinds of things. Uh But without some sort of a uh either a direct condition that they won't accept people who have committed sexual assaults. You

3:55:44know, more egregious, um, harmful behaviour. Or much more information about the screening process to guarantee that those people really are screened out and won't be at the facility. Then they haven't Uh met their initial proof to demonstrate that these people are not sexual offenders, aren't people who might harm the community. And Again, this isn't your rank speculation that you hear from People all the time, they're gonna flood me, they're gonna, you know, do all

3:56:14these other kinds of things. This isn't saying that because these kids have suffered, um suffer from other mental illnesses or or situations that they're inherently violent. It's because the information that they've put forward, that EYS has put forward. indicates that they have committed offenses, that they have committed harmful acts towards others and We need to make sure that people who are actually violent, who've committed sexual assaults. are

3:56:45screened from the program. Because if they're not The entire program is not eligible for protection under the FHA.

3:56:53The other thing that I want to address, and as I said, I I this also goes to the number because the entire issue here goes to how are they going to be licensed, how are they going to be screened, and who and is a third party gonna be looking at those results to make sure that they're right. If they use the state processes, And frankly I think they will end up doing that, but they refuse to stipulate to it or In fact, you know, they struck that out. Um, I believe that we can find some indication and

3:57:23some clarity that. That that'll be the case. But they haven't agreed to that and specifically refuse to agree to that. And so it's an issue. The other thing that I want to address goes to their claim that of facial discrimination. And so we have this uh definition of a residential treatment and care facility, and it it has this line about that it's serving um uh uh populations um. With food, housing, shelter.

3:57:54um i and physical or mental care. uh uh services um for residents who need those services. And the interpretation that EYS has put on it is that that means that the residents of those facilities have to be in the facilities because they need Um Uh physical or mental treatment that is that they're disabled. Well That may be the right interpretation of that, but

3:58:24the story doesn't end there. Because they want to compare that to a family. But the real comparison would be, well, how would the county regulate the same kind of a facility? And if you look at the rest of that paragraph, it talks about shelters for runaways, for abused women, for and it talks about juvenile detention centers. All these other kinds of uh circumstances. Well, if you had one of those facilities But the residents didn't just weren't there because

3:58:54they required Physical or mental care. How would the county regulate it? Well, the answer is they're not a family because these are institutional people. They're not a household. As you heard, no one's living there with them 24 hours a day. You know, it's an into institutional setting. And I think that Mr. Natus would say that that means it's an unclassified use. And if it came in, what would happen is They look at the list and say, gosh, this

3:59:25isn't expressly laid out as a use somewhere in the zoning code. So we go to the provisions that govern unclassified lists, and guess what happens? Oh, it's got similar characteristics to a use, the residential treatment center, that requires a conditional use approval. That means it needs a conditional use approval. And under the code, even if it also had the characteristics of a single family use and a residential care and treatment facility,

3:59:55under the code, as an unclassified use, it would require the conditional use approval that the residential care and treatment facility requires. So the best comparison is not against a just a single-family home that might have six, 16. People in it. But against another facility just like it that didn't happen to have disabled people in it. And the county, I believe, would regulate it exactly the same and therefore it's not facially discriminatory And

4:00:26they don't have an FHA claim. Now

4:00:31All of that. Is that Reason why you could deny this application. Um, I know that Mr. Goldstein has, you know, all these other concerns. And the if you deny the application, yes, the result would be that it would have to go through a conditional use approval. And What would happen at that point? Well, they would probably have to have a site plan that would address some of the parking in these other kinds of issues that we're dealing with. There would be they

4:01:02would have to go through some additional um hoops to demonstrate that they can meet the site plan criteria. And ultimately There's be some compatibility and other issues that might uh trigger, let's just say might trigger some additional uh uh conditions. And the problem is we don't know because at this point they haven't gone through that process. Um I don't believe it would be an undue burden on them to do it because it's legally required. Um

4:01:33And for that reason, I don't believe that you would be violating the FHA if you denied this application, which is why we asked to do that. You know, again, all of that said, we've been trying to negotiate in good faith to make sure that if you choose not to deny this application. Um and if you follow Mr. Goldstein's um recommendation, that at the very least we're not in a situation where uh The facility will pose an

4:02:03unacceptable risk to the. Community. Um and in fact that it that it would be necess that the conditions that would be necessary for it to you know, qualify uh for the uh uh uh for any kind of r alternate relief uh were met. Um, that's the the the the core, I think, of the issue in front of you. Um, I mean, I gave you dozens of pages. We're talking about an issue that does end up playing

4:02:34out through the state licensing process, because that will have a fair amount of control of what happens. Um and I do believe that um we we have a situation where. Um.

4:02:48The applicant has it, I don't think, has fully recognized how they're gonna have to operate in Florida because if as they say they're gonna end operate under uh and take st uh uh children from uh Yeah. uh the Department of Family and Children's Services, DFS, C. Um They're gonna end up having to be uh licensed at m as a therapeutic group home, and the maximum number that we'll have is 12, not 16. They're still saying that they Са

4:03:19болів да терето сістень. These are some of the things that I think would get worked out. Uh if the uh If you decide to approve it and we are negotiating about that condition number two, it's one of the things that we would try to address to make sure that this is locked down and everybody actually knows what's going on.

4:03:44Yeah.

4:03:50And again, I want to say that the opposition to this is not opposition to a mental health care treatment. facility for miners. This isn't about, and it's not about the fact that EYS is from out of state and may not be completely familiar with all the Florida rules. I mean, all of those things happen and frankly, we, you know, Florida desperately needs these facilities. More power to somebody could come into Florida and do this right.

4:04:21But whether this is the right place, whether this is the right application, whether they actually have demonstrated that they're entitled to this, I think is a separate issue. And I just want to say that this isn't a circumstance where we're asking you to say no to mentally disabled kids because they're mentally disabled. This is a very specific issue that they're trying to avoid the process that's uh in the LDC, which requires the conditional use.

4:04:51And um uh and we don't believe that they have uh demonstrated that they're entitled uh to that relief. Again. We think you would be justified in denying it, but if you don't deny it, we do believe that at the very least these conditions that are outstanding need to be addressed. Uh thank you all in there unless there are any questions.

4:05:15Yeah, I I do have a question and be pr from your perspective. I'm just Wondering um in a traditional family quote unquote, if there is one anymore. Um

4:05:30If you have children, you can under eighteen minors in the family that live there. Yeah, let's say you have sixteen of them. Um And those children. Break the law. violates us in the law. hurt somebody, whatever. The parents responsible. Who's the parent in this group?

4:05:56Then there has to be a parent, somebody designated and take the fall.

4:06:00And one of the things that I think that I would really wanna know, and this is one of the reasons why I suggested that again, the other thing that would happen and can if they this was denied and they had to go through the process is that We could get all the licensing information. There's other things about exactly how they'll operate, what the contracts will look like, because quite frankly, I believe that if they had a private placement, the private place in uh would make the program their the child's guardian uh temporarily.

4:06:32Whether when they take a child from DCF, whether they're the guardian, I'll just say that in the going to the the issue that you're identifying, or whether DCF remains the guardian and they're simply a designated caregiver, I don't know. And what the legal liability implications for that is. I don't know. Um You know, and and part of that is that the Uh the

4:07:00the overall structure of how this is gonna be work how this is gonna work um i isn't revealed by the application materials or or the information that we've got available.

4:07:11So you may want to Mr. Chairman pose that same question to the applicant. I will. They may have an answer for you about who the guardian, the legal guardian is

4:07:19in this situation.

4:07:21You know, if any one of us, anybody on this board bought a home in a community, moved in, brought our family and one of our children Burglarize the neighbor, We'd be responsible. For a minor. Right. So I just want to know who's responsible. Yeah.

4:07:39Well I'm not sure you're criminally responsible. I mean

4:07:43I don't know about that.

4:07:44Oh I don't I don't I think it's the minor that goes to it goes through the judicial system, not the parent.

4:07:49Right.

4:07:50Yeah, cr

4:07:51not criminally, but we could

4:07:52in terms of civilly responsible and and and again, whether or not this is a situation where the state might be responsible for any damages coming from that or whether it would be uh EYS. Um let's just say that again, I I'm not sure it would depend on uh uh a lot of the contracts and the you would be

4:08:15I'm not saying to be okay with it, but one of the important points to you is what screening process they go through. So if they went through the state screening process, you would be less objectionable to it.

4:08:29Yes, the in if you saw the original conditions, I referenced a particular statute in a whole set of rules. And the statute is a statute that applies when children who are in the depend I'll call it the dependency system. They're maybe in need of services, they may have been found dependent. These are the runaways, the abandoned kids, the kids who are so ill or whatever that are, you know, or their parents are addicts, you know, all the kids who are

4:09:00there, and I'll just say are in the system that way, if they need these fac these uh this kind of treatment, um Those are the rules that govern that and it provides for a significant screening by the the caseworkers and the a professional and then a separate outside review. So that There's uh uh you know, there's a check on uh a situation where nobody's gonna

4:09:30uh

4:09:33put a child into an inappropriate program to get them off their hands or uh you know, put them in a more uh expensive program that isn't otherwise justified. And the the yeah, the concern is that Bad. The процес that they suggested.

4:09:55It may be good up to effect, but they can't guarantee right now. That it's screening out

4:10:04Um people who committed um sexual assaults. or these higher level things before it even gets to them. um if they if they weren't adjudicated.

4:10:16Well, I think it's if you're also fair to say that it's true that if uh family moves in there and you you don't have any screening process for any family that might move in there. And what their children might do. So I mean Yeah, I'm I'm trying to look at both sides of the coin.

4:10:33And one one that's true. But in this particular case, we're talking about a an institution and a family whose Are specifically saying that they're gonna bring in a set of children who have. Engaged in behaviours. that overlap with that. It's it it it's not it it's not the population at large. It's not even a mentally uh a mental health care uh issue population

4:11:03at large. It's children that have already are there because they're they have behaviors and they may have. The you know, and they again the only behavior that we No will be excluded right now is a conviction for in in delinquency court for. Sexual assault.

4:11:29Yeah, I think The uh one question that did come up for me, and I guess I'll have to ask the applicant too. Is McDon Mr. McDonald used the term that you have? Their residents are handicapped.

4:11:42I don't I'm not sure I know what that means anymore.

4:11:45Well this also goes to the

4:11:51This also goes to the i the screening process and If you look at both the application, uh uh th the the October twenty eighth letter, the affidavit from Mr. Browning, well not Mr. Browning's affidavit doesn't actually identify the list of Diagnosis, but also the um December 2nd letter uh from Mr. McDonald, there's a list of diagnoses. That these children might be. um uh suffering from and

4:12:21The state system absolutely makes sure that if the diagnosis is there. Um That the progression of that mental illness is also so severe. that Um what Mr. McDonald said wa uh earlier is true that these are s are children who are suffering from these uh mental illnesses to an extent that they absolutely need residential

4:12:52treatment. And the state screening process absolutely Wings out, um uh Children who would not be mentally ill enough to meet that definition. And if they do meet that definition, they They are considered disabled or handicapped, and that's well established in state law. We're not trying to contest that. you know, or or or any other part of that. I do think that if they're not going through the state process

4:13:22and they're being referred privately. There's a bigger issue that somebody, you know, insurance is covering it, the insurance company may be looking at it, but whether anybody else is looking closely enough. You know, at that issue is another R raises a whole nother question in that circumstance.

4:13:41All right, anybody else?

4:13:42I have a question for our counsel. Um

4:13:45the term

4:13:46adjudicated.

4:13:49That usually means that they've been convicted. That as opposed to adjudication withheld means that there was no conviction.

4:13:57And that would be my issue with The statement here that it And what I believe Council there is trying to imply is Um

4:14:08They don't have to do. it doesn't come with conviction, but yet they may have been

4:14:14And and so that's that's the reason why condition two is still under discussion, because that's that's the part of condition two that Yeah. The applicant and Mr. Lincoln are still discussing to try to address that concern.

4:14:28It i i it is because you have a situation where these kids are mentally ill. And I'm just gonna presume they're mentally ill. They've been they've acted out and had other kinds of behaviors. It has been so severe that their caseworker and the juvenile prosecutor. brought them through the system and had them convicted for it in juvenile court. But that doesn't mean that it's not an all-but that, that the action wasn't. Just as severe, but maybe it's

4:14:58only been once or maybe it's twice. Maybe the p I mean we all know that in the juvenile justice system. It's remedial before it's punitive. I mean, they do everything they can to avoid having to. adjudicate someone. And that just leaves open this window where there could be some kids who have Who just aren't adequately pre-identified as

4:15:25Not Uh uh not sufficiently dangerous. You know I th th this is the whole issue. Without all the the more information and all these other definitions, trying to find the exact words for somebody who would be dangerous to the community. be a sex offender and not eligible for the FHA. But not have been yet adjudicated for it. It's all in the decision of the case workers.

4:15:54So again, that's something that would be worked out through modifications to condition two, assuming we get there. But I will remind you that if this facility had six or under residents, it could be Convicted six convicted sexual offenders. And there'd be nothing much referrals from the Department of Juvenile Justice, 'cause that's in the list. And there'd be nothing we could do about it. So I do think these conditions are providing more protection. Then what? The legislature did to you in four nineteen.

4:16:25Yes, because in that definition, students that uh children that are clients of the Department of Juvenile Justice are included in the definition of those clients uh uh who qualify something as a community residential home. It's one of the concerns. I'm just letting you the legislature apparently decided that six

4:16:44convicted child sex offenders in a residential neighborhood is perfectly okay. We didn't do that. I want to be clear, the legislature did that.

4:16:54I th I I my my thinking is just looking at it from a business point of view It's probably not financially feasible. To have that kind of a system with only six Or fewer.

4:17:06I I I don't even want to speculate.

4:17:09I mean that's that's that's my only thought.

4:17:11I know. And and it it it may not be, but the entire question becomes uh How do you Yes, how do you keep a whole set of protections in place?

4:17:24Yeah, I think David is on the right track as far as providing protection. Um, but I'm thinking that that's the reason they made it a low number because they probably figured this not financially

4:17:38Maybe but there probably are a number of homes like this that are six or under that You're just not hearing about because they're not going through any process. They're not going through any local because it's the local government just stamping approved.

4:17:50And historiquely. Uh let's just say that when all these kinds of things started and historically when you look back when these standards were done.

4:17:59We hadn't had the Community Mental Health Uh Act and all the things where they closed down all the centralized uh institutions, whether it was for adults or for children, and put everybody back into the community. So the what we were talking about was foster homes, small orphanages, um uh Uh homes for uh you know mentally disabled folks that were often done as six or

4:18:29less, just as a kind of matter of practice and as a family where there was a live-in. manager for that that home. It's just that Time's evolved, but The definitions did not.

4:18:48No, they get rebuttal, but we do not.

4:19:01Twelve, sixteen. He claims that's it Mr. Brownie claims this is a residence. So I don't know if he's married or single. So

4:19:09let me be clear, Mr. Brownie's not claiming this is his residence. He just

4:19:12did. He stood right there and said, Well, what is my residence?

4:19:23Okay, well when he comes back up,

4:19:25I don't think he's gonna be living there.

4:19:35I I think he probably gave the wrong address because he thought you were talking about the address for the application.

4:19:41And he may be living there until he gets licensed. Yeah. I mean

4:19:44we can ask Mr. Browning to clarify where his resolution is.

4:19:48That's his problem, not mine. I'm just curious, is there a limitation on the number of people?

4:19:55I've seen some figures by the county.

4:19:59There are two sources of that and the FA the the FHA exempts occupancy limits that are based on loads. Okay? На сих пенали. But how many people in a bedroom or how many people in a house? And under the Florida Building Code, that limit is on a bedroom, is you got to have 50 square feet per occupant in a bedroom.

4:20:32Of the licensing requirements for residential treatment homes is uh 50 square feet of uh floor area and a maximum of four. Okay. We don't have their license application. We don't know exactly how they measured out and and said it, but this particular house has

4:20:55One really big master bedroom, one big other bedroom and Two guest bedrooms. You know Why I in my letter I did some calculation from s from some of the plans that they submitted, but um uh They you know the the that creates a limit. State licensing uh requirements imposed some other limits on depending on how the facility is set up for how many people can be in it. But Again, they haven't

4:21:25had obtained that license yet, and we don't even have the application. as part of this application so we don't have a lot of that background.

4:21:34Okay, you said fifty square feet per resident, right?

4:21:38Per i it i in the bedroom. No, no, I'm talking about bedrooms. The Florida Building Code. Says you gotta have fifty square feet per occupant in a bedroom. And the state licensing standard is 50 feet per occupant in a bedroom, but a maximum of four. the Florida Building Code doesn't have the the second limit.

4:22:03Well they they will have up to four employees working for supervision. Anyway, four and depending on two at night, I guess, or something like that.

4:22:14that.

4:22:18No, but they're working there. Did do they not occupy space? Do

4:22:21they

4:22:21not need an office? Do

4:22:22they the the occupancy limits once you get outside of the bedrooms, again by the fire code or anything else, um uh are really predicated on the square foot of the buildings and escape routes and and and all of these other kinds of things. And that will be set in terms of a total occupancy for the building, but Um You know, th that that probably is not an issue in terms of fire codes or I think for anything else.

4:22:55They're gonna have to comply with state licensing requirements and Florida building code requirements and fire code requirements. So whatever those require, they're gonna have to comply with. And Mr. Lincoln

4:23:05Right. And frankly, th they'll have to get the f the fire. One of the things that we wanted to make sure and that they did put in there was for example to go through that so that it would get back to the county because while they'll have to show it to DCF to get their license. We wanted to make sure that it got back to the county too. And for example, the septic system. Septic systems are generally sized by the number of bedrooms, assuming two persons per bedroom, and then, you know, that establishes flow limits. Well, if they're going to have more than that,

4:23:35they're going to have to increase the size of the septic system and apply for a health permit to do that. How and when they would do that is unclear. Um they haven't done it yet. But We also know that you haven't gone through the licensing process yet. No, they will or finalize it. They'll have to demonstrate that there'sn enough septic uh capacity to both the department of uh

4:23:59I I guess my point is if this was a conditional use approval and it's not, if we had a condition saying they'll apply comply with applicable state licensing requirements and Florida Building Code and Fire Prevention Code. We always accept that condition is they will comply with those codes. So it's it's not any different than most of the approvals we process through the Planning Commission. Most of them have a condition saying they're going to comply with applicable county codes. This has the same conditions.

4:24:32Okay, are there any Any other questions from up here?

4:24:36No,

4:24:36not

4:24:36for me.

4:24:37Yeah. All right. Thank you, Mr. Lincoln.

4:24:42All right. Please come forward.

4:24:44We do have several folks on WebEx as well, so I'm not sure how you want to take those.

4:24:49I'm going to take some of you in the audience. They've taken their time to get here and sit here. So thank you

4:24:54very much. I've been sworn in. My name is Sergio Otanis. I live at [address removed]. And the reason I didn't want to jump ahead of people, but my wife's diabetic and I really need to get her out of here. But I live next door. to this particular house. My concern is not the kids, because I know what they got to go through. I had a granddaughter that lived with me till a year and a half ago. For 10 years. I got a grandson that's 16 has been living with me for eleven years. 'Cause of the parents. Wasn't the kids' fault.

4:25:25So I understand that. My concern is I built this house there. The house next door. They've always had trouble with the septic tank. Terrible trouble. How many of you have visited the property? Okay, if you would go and walk in the backyard, if you go past 15 feet from the end of the house, you're gonna be in two and a half to three feet of swamp water. It's all cypress trees. There's no backyard for these kids to have anything to

4:25:55do. There's no front yard because they had to build the house so far To to what the minimum requirement was. My concern is you're talking about, yeah, well, put a bigger driveway. That area already almost floods. It's terrible. You put more dryway, where's the water gonna go? It's gonna go in the backyard. When it goes in the backyard, it goes in everybody's backyard. It's not the kids that I'm worried about. I'm sure that they're gonna

4:26:26work out. I'm worried about what's gonna happen to the neighborhood, what's gonna happen to my backyard. The other thing too is because there's nowhere to go. Where what are these kids gonna do? There's nothing for them to do. There's no sidewalks. These are narrow old streets. It's a public, it's a private street. It's never been, you know, we take care of it ourselves. We patch the holes in it. You barely can get three cars in that driveway. If you put four, you're pushing it. Now

4:26:56you're talking about having And and let me just rephrase this. When I got my letter, what was gonna happen? I called the state attorney. and I got hold of his assistant. He called me back, a very nice gentleman. The problem is I didn't never got all this paperwork. I got it emailed to me from a neighbor. about a week ago. I it never when I talked to the state attorney, And I I had my concerns. He says, Well look at it. a family of eight just living next door. It's

4:27:26gonna be eight. That's what he told me, because I was concerned. I said, how are you going to put a bunch of kids in there? They have no room. They might have room inside the house, but those kids got to have something to do. Now everybody there, if you think of it, oh, everybody's got an acre. Great. That house doesn't have an acre. That house don't even have half an acre. maybe a quarter of an acre because it's all swampland. Part of my back rear is swamp. Thank God

4:27:56that about sixty percent of it this way. It's all pine trees. But you take you look in my backyard towards their house. And you go about 15 feet from their property towards my backyard. And it's all swamp. And when it rains, you can go there now and it's got two and a half feet of water. When it really rains and we get these storms like three or four weeks ago. They have a a hammock in the backyard. That hammock was underwater. Had that much water.

4:28:26I hate to cut you off, but your time is.

4:28:27Okay, so

4:28:28I got

4:28:29you very much for your time. That's my concern. What are these kids going to be able to do?

4:28:34Okay. Thank you very much. Yes, ma'am.

4:28:47Good evening commissioners. Um my name is Mariah Messa. Our family has lived on two oh Julie Sworn, sorry. Okay, yes. Um our family has lived on [address removed]. um about three quarters of a mile from the proposed facility on Lawrence Avenue since nineteen ninety five. I routinely walk that uh road with my dog. I have been a s victim of sexual assault. I'm also a special needs mom. When

4:29:19we moved to Quail Hollow, I was grateful for a safe space where I could be in nature, where I could heal. and be able to walk down the street without looking over my shoulders.

4:29:32The Elevated Youth Services site is very clear as to whom its target audience is: mental health disabilities with problem sexualized behaviors. My youngest son, Nicholas, is twenty years old and he has Down syndrome. A real handicap. He's here with us today.

4:29:52The ramifications of this proposed facility are horrifying to us. Sexual violence against disabled people is a silent epidemic. They are more than three times more likely than non-disabled people to experience serious violent crime, such as rape and sexual assault. Children with mental health or intellectual disabilities are almost five times more likely than their non-disabled peers to experience sexual abuse. This is easily verifiable with a Google search for sexual abuse and disabilities, but

4:30:22I can provide the link if needed. And I can assure you, it is the nightmare of every special needs family that something like this happens to our children. Now I do not claim to be a federal housing attorney. Um I'm obviously just a layperson, but Special needs moms. We know how to do research. I went to the Fair Housing Act site. And it says in clear and simple language, sex offenders and juvenile offenders are not considered disabled

4:30:52under the Fair Housing Act by virtue of that status. The interested parties are attempting to circumvent this through a loophole to place a facility that will have an extremely negative impact on our quiet residential community. As special needs parents, we are disgusted that this is even under consideration. The Fair Housing Act was meant to protect individuals like my son. Not to provide cover to Um Juvenile sex offenders. I understand the need to try to rehabilitate

4:31:23individuals like this. I completely empathize with it. But our quiet residential area is not the place, as the gentleman before me stated. That house has no lot. I walk by it all the time. Young men of this age, they need exercise. Who's gonna supervise them? Who's gonna wanna uh what you if they've only got one counselor at night, like was just stated, who what's to stop them from s from uh sneaking out?

4:31:49As you can see how vulnerable my son is. He knows no fear, and he thinks anybody could be his friend. He always tends to gravitate towards the cuff kit. Can may I finish? I'm almost done. Please

4:32:02go ahead.

4:32:03We participate in a ministry called Capernaum, um, and it brings in inner city kids to be with our kids. I'm not prejudiced. I'm not. I think it's great that they do this. I I do notice though that Nicholas always wants to be with the toughest kid. Um he does not know fear. He just wants to be friends. Um I'm also curious about the proposed counselors, how will they be screened, and what is the turnover rate? We can tell you firsthand, as special needs parents,

4:32:33that it has always been extremely difficult to find reliable respite care. When we did find a good one, they never stayed for long. It finally became easier to just do it ourselves via the Med Waiver program. Finally, if something happens to our vulnerable son because of the decision to place this facility, we will hold the parties responsible. We implore you to put a stop to this right now for the sake of my son, the children of our community. I also wanted to mention

4:33:03that that that house is very close to the corner of Lawrence and Quail Hollow Boulevard. That is a school bus stop. Um, children get on and off the bus there? Are the residents of this facility riding the school buses with the neighborhood children? Do the neighborhood parents know? Um That's all I had to say. Thank you so much for listening.

4:33:23Thank you. Thank you for coming.

4:33:29Who else would like to

4:33:29speak? We have some people on WebEx too, not Penny for

4:33:34Pasco.

4:33:35Sure. Go ahead.

4:33:37We have to become manual at six. So

4:33:43hello, my name is uh Thomas. Last name is Trlop. I live at [address removed]. I live within a thousand feet of this facility that they're proposing put in. I I've been a resident of Quail Hollywood for over 33 years. I moved out there in 1988. I was born and raised in Tampa. I moved there to get out of Tampa to raise my children in a safer environment. Over the years, uh, we did have a few incidents, but nothing major, but we always felt safe and secure in our residence. I can go to work and not have to worry about my wife and my family

4:34:13at home and my grandchildren. who my wife watches every day, being able to run around the yard and play in a backyard, Or go out to the barn, take care of the horses, ride the horses. Or just have a good time in our yard. Okay. Um My own grown children has also moved back into the area to raise their children for the same reason I did for safety and security. I've spoken to a few of the neighbors in the resident in the area and they also have done the same thing. And the children and their family have moved

4:34:43into that area. 'Cause we have a very nice neighborhood. Then on twelfth on December twelfth I received a letter. Notifying from Pasco County that Now I have very big concerns and feel very threatened by the facility. E.Y. S. is wanting to move into our single family neighborhood. and the possible residence they specialize in. Based on the public information I looked up. I have a

4:35:13very major concern for my wife, the safety of my children, the safety of my grandchildren. We have a very nice neighborhood. Remember, it's a neighborhood, single family. Um I agree with Mr. Lincoln. I don't think they have shown any

4:35:31They don't really deserve to have the Relief Act, I think they need to have to go through to conditional use permit. Um I don't think they have the They are protected by the Fair House Housing Act. Um I request to the planning committee To deny EYS requ uh request for the alternative relief. has many questions and concerns that need to be addressed. Have not been answered. There's

4:36:01a lot of concerns. There's a lot of things that have not been answered. Very, very vague. I think they need to go through. to conditional use. Permit and have to have to obtain it. Um

4:36:14Then you guys can decide. But I think that all has to be her. Thank you very much.

4:36:23Who else would like to speak? Anyone? Is there anybody in the room that would like to speak? If not, we'll go to the WebX.

4:36:30Mr. Chair, I do want to mention that we do have one other person that hasn't come up, Noelle Munro, to speak. You do okay, perfect. Sorry, I apologize. There were your name was kind of butchered a little bit. Come on, Mr.

4:36:41Monroe.

4:36:41All right, no, she's already spoken. Somebody else.

4:36:44Oh, this is somebody else.

4:36:45Oh, there is somebody else. Okay, perfect.

4:36:48Is there Noel Monroe? Oh that was you, okay. Sorry, I forgot your

4:36:53Just say your first last name and out.

4:36:55Okay, Emilio Mesa, uh [address removed], Western Chapel, Florida, 33544. I wasn't gonna say anything. Uh my wife was just here before me. And uh talked about our son ha handicap and so on and But what I was picking up was what you said about uh you said that they could legally put six people in a residence with no no no exemptions whatsoever,

4:37:26but it wouldn't be financially beneficial for them because they can't make any money. These people are not doing this out of the kindness of their heart. They they they putting 16 kids. They want to put sixteen kids in a residential home. That's not suited for that. The neighborhood was was print presented already. The the the roads are not the uh adequate uh and the area is not adequate. So they're in it for the money like just like anybody else. And if they want

4:37:56to put it in, let them let them do it with six six people and see if they can make a little uh uh any money on it. And that's all I have to say. Thank you for listening.

4:38:06Thank you very much.

4:38:09Uh did I see a hand go up back there in a Come forward if you're gonna speak. Let's not be bashful. Let's get up here. We don't want to spend the whole night here.

4:38:25Yeah. Do you swear for the testimony you'll give us the truth so what you got? Yes I do. Okay. Has everyone else been sworn that

4:38:32My name is Tara Castro. I live at [address removed]. I bought this house six years ago. It's a private street. I did not anticipate having a group home. When I did my homework, I'm buying my property coming from another state, Arizona, moving here. It was a big decision trying to buy a house. When I did buy the house, I did my homework. I didn't buy my house purposely and then try to build my business. That's what this organization is trying

4:39:03to do. They're capturing money on each individual that's coming in. As a resident, and that's how they're getting their money. It's a corporation. This is a private street. We do not want it on our street. This house cannot equip it, is not smaller than mine. Mine's 2,400 square feet. Their house is the same. They are not structured. They're going to be putting these kids in cages. I worked at North Tampa Behavioral Health for many years as a revenue cycle. director. As I work there, I watch these

4:39:33kids, I watch these adults come in and out of our program, IOP, PHP, in-house treatment. This is not designed in our neighborhood as a commercial business. This is designed for residential, and we should not be allowing this in our neighborhood. And I would ask if you guys lived on our street and you bought a house that we you invested in on a private street that you knew was private. Would you want somebody coming in and trying to change all

4:40:03that? Because after you approve this, what's that gonna do to my home? What's that gonna do to my street of my neighbors? We are very close as a community in my neighborhood. We all speak. And I would ask that you really look at this and consider not to allow this because them sidestepping their conditional approvals is not. acceptable. We should all have to go through the same process. And if they bought their home before they did their homework, not my problem, sir. And I'm speaking to you, Mr. David Gibb

4:40:34Goldstein, because I understand when you said that the county would have to pay it back, that's not my problem. They should have done their homework. And that's what you guys should be taking into consideration is the people, the residents in that area. We didn't all just show up here because we wanted to. We're all voicing our concerns. And I think you guys really should take it upon yourselves and take homeowners consideration and not some party that's coming in from another state trying to impede us that we're telling you no, we don't

4:41:04want it.

4:41:14Okay. Well if you're both gonna speak, why don't you come up front? So we can get it. He was raising for me. Oh you just you? Yes. You're the only brave one.

4:41:27Um my name is Lauren Taylor. I live at [address removed]. Um and sworn sworn. Um, so I myself I'm a healthcare provider. Um I'm I treat patients, I see them, I give referrals. Um I've researched this website and the owner is a licensed social worker. He is not licensed to treat, he is not licensed to sit there and have therapy, he's not licensed to refer, okay? That's my job

4:41:57and that concerns me. Um all these kids in the house um it's too many children in one house and can't go anywhere. So Take it take me out of living in the neighborhood and I don't want this there. Let's think about these children that aren't doing well and have all these problems. Is that really good for them? Where are they going to go? They have nowhere to go. They're all on top of each other. Um Also, when you have these kind of mental issues, you

4:42:28are not only seen by a psychologist, but you're seen by a psychiatrist. And typically, you need pharmacological intervention to assist you with your issues. Who's going to be administering the medications? Who's going to be watching them for the side effects? He calls them in his videos his staff. Does he call his provider? Writer staff. No, you don't call a provider staff. You say we have a licensed psychiatrist. We have, you know, two RNs who are administering the medications. That's

4:42:58also a concern.

4:43:02Where are they going to go to school? Are they riding the buses with our kids? Um they have to go to school. They're children, right? But who's monitoring it? We all know us. I mean being in the same the school bus can be kind of Wow Wow West, right? So people that we know already have issues and are disadvantaged, we're gonna throw them into Wow Wow West. And what do what kind of outcome do we expect to happen? We're almost setting them up for failure.

4:43:33It does not sound like to me a controlled environment where you can closely monitor and help these people, these children, excel in life. And I think I'm out of time. Thank you. No, you have another minute. Oh. Um no, I lost mine. It's just it's upsetting. Um, I feel bad for the kids. I feel bad for the neighborhood. Um, I don't think they're gonna be There there's no you read on the website, it's just staff, there's no there's no plan, there's

4:44:03no This is what we do. It's just we want a kitchen. We want to have a family room. It's it's not. Not with sixteen, twelve kids and revolving staff members. Here's the other thing. How long do the staff actually stay? Do they quit? That's another problem with healthcare places is when you don't have consistent staff Your care is poor.

4:44:28I'm just like at a loss for words. So

4:44:31Well thank you. You did very well. Thank

4:44:32you.

4:44:39All right. Is there anybody else other than who was online?

4:44:44Okay.

4:44:46Is there anybody after this gentleman?

4:44:50I haven't been sworn

4:44:51in. I wasn't planning on

4:44:52coming out.

4:44:53Do you swear from the testimony you'll give is the truth so I'll be back?

4:44:56Yes, I do. My name is Todd Robeshaw. I live at [address removed]. I live three houses down on the other side of this proposed group home. I have concerns as a parent as well. I have a nine and eleven year old that live with me, and my lot is actually a big lot to where they can play. This home where they're proposing to put sixteen children in. The my neighbor Sergio, as he stated, it's right, there it's all swamp

4:45:26out back. There's no place for these children to play. The front yard There's hardly any front yard for these kids to play. So what does that mean? They're gonna be out roaming the neighborhood. Now they're proposing that they they're gonna have one person per every four kid, you know, supervising them. Me myself, I have a you know, I'm 48 years old. I have a hard time keeping up with my nine and eleven year old. So who's gonna monitor these kids when they take and run down the street? Nobody. They're gonna be

4:45:56out roaming the roaming the neighborhood, and I'm gonna have to worry about my nine and eleven-year-old. And not only that. I have a twenty four year old son. That has Down syndrome. Similar to like my other neighbor stated. Same exact way. They're very trustworthy, they look up to other kids, but they have the mentality. Of a Very young individual. And it's not their fault, but they they actually have that disability. I don't agree with this group home

4:46:26state and that these kids they're bringing in actually have that a disability. I think they're taking and uh abusing the term. And I ask that you guys don't approve this. You know, don't approve this alternative relief. Make 'em go you know, the other way and be held to these restrictions and stuff. And like my sister said, It's not our fault that you took and you know sent that letter out and this guy went and bought this home. David

4:46:56didn't say Pasco, whoever. But it's not my fault. And if there's repercussions because of that, that's not our fault either. That's that's something that Pasco is gonna have to deal with. This group home should not be going in our neighborhood. I moved here back in June from another state specifically because this is such a nice neighborhood. It's a single family housing neighborhood. And it's and it's nice and quiet. And I feel that my disabled wife is safe when I'm

4:47:26not home. My kids are safe. And with you guys, With this proposed group home coming into the neighborhood, I'm gonna have to constantly worry about my family and that I shouldn't have to do that. That's all I gotta say.

4:47:40Thank you.

4:47:44Okay, so well let's see who's on WebEx then.

4:47:47Okay, so let's start with Amber Evans.

4:47:54Amber, are you with us?

4:47:58Ms. Evans, would you state your name and address for the record, please, and whether you've been sworn?

4:48:17Yes.

4:48:21Okay, so we're gonna now move on to uh Nar Nare. Diocarin, would you please state your name and address for the record and whether or not you've been sworn?

4:48:44According to this, he's still on.

4:48:50Ms. Nareimi Diocharin, would you please state your name and address for the record and whether or not you've been sworn, please?

4:49:05Is there anyone else on? Can we come back to her?

4:49:10No, the the other person we had looks like he dropped off Mr. Britt Robertson.

4:49:17Okay. Let's try

4:49:31Ms. Narini, can you can you hear us?

4:49:46Uh they they are apt they're listed as active panelists and they're unmuted, the b both Ms. Um Amber Evans and Ms. Noreenie Diochoran.

4:49:56It is If they're not responding, I think you can move on. I mean it's not any different than if they were in the audience and you call them and And they don't come up, there's not much we can do.

4:50:08And it and it doesn't appear to be a problem with their equipment because we heard them earlier when we were testing Mr McDonald. I

4:50:13mean, it could be this hearing's gone on so long that they gave up. I I don't I mean But we don't know.

4:50:24Yeah.

4:50:26Okay. Then uh let's let's hear from uh the applicant.

4:50:33So Mr. McDonald or Mr. Browning, do you wanna do your rebuttal?

4:50:38Yes. Can you hear me?

4:50:41Yes.

4:50:43Thank you. The photo that was produced by Ms. Monroe today shows four cars parked outside the garage, which shows that the home can accommodate six vehicles, two in the garage, four in the driveway. Um Next, a lot of the concerns I've heard today are concerns that in essence boil down to this. We don't trust DCF. We don't trust DCF's licensing and regulatory authority. We don't trust DCF's supervision. The DCF

4:51:14will regulate this facility. This is not the Wild, Wild West. The DCF will regulate this facility. We've agreed to that as a condition of approval. Licensure with the DCF is not a light thing. The DCF has the authority to regulate these technical concerns, these issues. It is not the province of the Pasco County Planning Commission. There's been speculation that our residents will not be handicapped. That's a non-issue. Handicapped is a

4:51:44term of art under the Fair Housing Act. Disabled is a term of art under the ADA. This is a non-issue. We've agreed as a condition that we will only accept handicapped or disabled individuals. They have comorbidities, meaning they have multiple diagnoses that include some sexual dysfunction, but they will have handicaps and They don't get stripped of their ADA protection. Because of that. I can assure you that they'll have qualifying handicapped. Ms. Munro and

4:52:14her counsel stated that we serve sex offenders. There's no evidence that we serve sex offenders. A sex offender is someone who's been convicted of a sex offense. This is still America. Are people innocent until proven guilty? We we've agreed that we will not admit convicted sex offenders. So there's no risk we will admit sex offenders. This whole speculation and conjecture, in fact, that we've had to endure today about whether EYS clients are a direct

4:52:44threat is illegal and what happened here today violated the FHA. Let me be clear, and I will read from page nine of the DOJ Hudd joint statement, quote. A determination that an individual poses a direct threat must rely on an individualized assessment that is based on reliable, objective evidence. The state or local government must have reliable, objective evidence that the tenancy of a person with a disability

4:53:14poses a direct threat before excluding him or her from housing on that. basis. And in making that assessment, the state or local government may not ignore evidence showing that the individual's tendency would no longer pose a direct threat. Close quote. That is what we have produced in condition two that we've agreed to. We will do a sexual psychosexual evaluation. We will do a risk assessment. We we will agree not to take adjudicated youth. With

4:53:45all due respect to Mr. Lincoln, his analysis of federal law is just dead wrong on the issue of facial discrimination, on the issue of disparate treatment discrimination, on the issue of burden of proof, on reasonable accommodation, on the issue of direct threat. It's just simply wrong. This is what I do for a living. I go all over the country and handle these cases. This is my specialty. I won't bore you with the details. But let me just say that if you go down this road. uh you're walking and skating on very thin

4:54:15ice. Why don't we want to go through the C UP process? Well, it's because of the type of prejudicial stereotypical, blanket stereotypical fears that we've had to hear today. about our clientele. They've been amply placed on the record here today, demonstrate why we don't want to endure further discrimination by two public hearing through a CUP process. And that's exactly why federal law doesn't require us to be subjected to further discrimination. So I

4:54:46would urge the Planning Commission to follow the advice of your legal counsel. Approve this. We have put forth conditions that will protect the neighbors. We have put forth conditions that will protect everyone. Um you cannot uh usurp the jurisdiction of the DCF and you cannot violate the Fair Housing Act or the ADA. So we urge you to just uh Approve our alternative request. with the conditions that

4:55:16you've seen today. Thank you.

4:55:18Mr. McDonald could ask you a question.

4:55:20You bet.

4:55:21So Um a question was raised about school, um, and there is a condition that requires the residents to be under twenty four hour, seven day a week adult supervision, so How does that work with school? Do they attend virtual school or wha how does that work?

4:55:37That's correct. They attend virtual school in the house.

4:55:42Okay, so they won't be leaving on a school bus With other kids,

4:55:48basically.

4:55:48Okay.

4:55:51So Mr. McDonald, you're saying that we have no choice but to approve you no matter what. So I'm just curious why we're here. Well we've been here all day. Um, if if we don't have any choice, why is it necessary for you to Come to this meeting at all?

4:56:06Yeah, I can probably answer that question.

4:56:08I'd like Commissioner McDonald to answer it if you don't mind.

4:56:10Go ahead.

4:56:11I don't want to put you on a hot seat.

4:56:13Well I can answer.

4:56:15I didn't want to be here today. Um, I feel like it's a violation of federal law that we have to be here today. If we were a family of unrelated persons, we wouldn't be here today.

4:56:27Well then why are you here? Because

4:56:31can I can I can answer it? Because under our code, section 407.4, the decision to waive our code based on Fair Housing Act, you know, Americans with Disabilities Act, or any of the other other criteria in 407.4 has to be made by the Planning Commission. County Attorney's Office does not have unilateral authority to wave our code. In fact, I believe if I just blanket wave the code, as Mr. McDonald suggested, without going through this process. I would've I'd been

4:57:01in trouble. I couldn't have done that. I didn't have authority to do that.

4:57:06No that being said, you know I I I I do wanna before we conclude, though I want Mr. Browning to get up and clarify his address because I don't want that to be misstated on the record. So can we get him to do that?

4:57:24Yes, please, Mr. Browning. It'll unmask and give us your Correct address?

4:57:31Yeah. Throughout that.

4:57:34Okay, Nicholas Browning, 10928, Eureka Dune Drive. South Jordan, Utah, eight four zero zero nine.

4:57:44Okay, so just to be clear, you're not going to be residing at the zone. Correct. Okay. All right. I just wanna be that clear because earlier you apparently gave the address of this home. So I wanted that to be clear.

4:57:57And it and it was an error b exactly in how you explained why. I was just thinking it was in terms of this application.

4:58:05Okay, did you w do you wanna I don't know how much t rebuttal time you have left, but did you wanna address any of the other questions that came up?

4:58:11I did. Um you know, the implication that there is a threat with this population of youth that I've worked with for 10 years. Um just, you know, I think our interests are aligned because I as a b as an a professional caregiver wouldn't take on the liability Of taking on such a high risk. um what what has been termed offender. And I cringe at

4:58:41that because I've never used offender. because these are these are children who sexually act out. And the recidivism rate. For them to go back and sexually act out again. after they get the treatment that they need. Is they won't recidivate. All the literature says it's in the high 97 percentile. that they will not go back And and do sexually harmful or

4:59:11maladaptive behaviors.

4:59:13Well let me just make sure I understand what you just said. Yeah. That these are children that sexually act out.

4:59:19These are children who have sexually maladaptive behaviors. Now,

4:59:25I I thought we were At the point where you weren't gonna accept any people like that.

4:59:31Well sexually acting out and having sexual needs is different than being No you said it's children

4:59:39sexually act out.

4:59:40Yes, acting out meaning it could be looking at pornography. That's sexually acting out. Well,

4:59:46also rape is sexually acting out.

4:59:48But that would

4:59:49that

4:59:49would be a

4:59:50sex offender. That's the difference.

4:59:56That's all things.

4:59:59So we we are taking this on a case by case basis. Again, it's individualized, it's it's screened to make sure they're not at a risk level where

5:00:10there's a reason why you won't go through the state screening process? We will.

5:00:14Yeah, we will comply with all of the DCF screening process and licensure.

5:00:20Yeah. And that's that's an issue that still needs to be worked out with condition two, is exactly what screening process they will undergo.

5:00:31So Well I wanna let Mr. Browning finish if he has anything else you wanna say before We conclude. Can

5:00:37can I ask one quick question?

5:00:41So if I understood you correctly, you you mentioned like juveniles that sexually act out and you you gave an example of pornography. Is that considered a handicap?

5:00:52No.

5:00:56Please be courteous.

5:00:57But I I just feel like I'm How does it how do I I'm I'm just trying to put the How how do I tie handicapped and the definition of handicapped to what you're 'cause I think that's part of the confusion that's created here was the definition of handicapped versus what you're trying to ch trying to treat or target for your Target Resident. I mean that that's the and I think that a lot of that's a misunderstanding, or maybe it's not a misunderstanding. Maybe

5:01:23And I would love to try to educate the so there, I believe that's a false dichotomy to separate behaviors. Like if you're talking about Tourette syndrome and somebody blurts out, you know, or if you're talking about autism and somebody is destroying property out of stimulation, that's a behavior tied to a disability. And you can't Separate those things out. With these children, the underlying need is the emotional

5:01:53need, the attachment needs, and all of those needs that give rise to some of these behaviors. Now, some of them may be where they need healthy sexual education to be put back on the on the right path to understand what healthy sexuality is. But But the that doesn't have to be their presenting issue. Their presenting issue is the mental, is the mental and emotional health diagnoses that they come in with. That's their disability.

5:02:25Yeah, and I I I I mean again, I apologize because I I mean, first thing I did when I saw you as the applicant, I went to the website and then and I admit I I got lost when I looked at the website because to me the website has conflicting information with what your target resident is. Now I understand your explanation here, but I I Personally I just think that there's a a whole lot that still needs to be worked out in these conditions. Um I mean We we've been here for five hours now listening to the stuff and

5:02:54Again, um, and I'll kind of conclude unless Mr. Brownie has more he wants to say. Okay.

5:03:00I did have one question just like desk. Go ahead as well. Okay. I I just wonder like what's what's a typical life or day in the life for these kids that they're gonna be there?

5:03:10That's one thing that I do think is clear on the website. You can you can click on the day and uh and the timing and when they wake up. And we're a very experiential program where the kids will get will be supervised and have activities planned for them. Um throughout throughout the day. You know, so it's it's kind of like a typical family. We're professional caregivers that do typical family things under supervision.

5:03:41Yeah.

5:03:43I'd like to understand better the relationship with Juvenile Justice and DCF and uh your source

5:03:50of uh patience. Yeah, okay. So we are licensed through DCF and Our our youth or residents come primarily through the CBCs or community-based care agencies that partner with DCF.

5:04:13And I assume you're taking um And we talked about the term adjudicated.

5:04:20I would imagine you're you're dealing with some um individuals that are coming through the court system. This is considered a diversionary To going to trial or any admission of guilt.

5:04:36I I can't really answer that because we take it case by case, e each one, um, but I wouldn't consider us a diversion program. Um we you know we take our referrals from DCF. So

5:04:53um

5:04:53DCF often acts these children and teens are in the court system. But again, they will not be delinquently adjudicated. We do not get from the Like DJ Jack Mariano. population of youth.

5:05:10That's my my biggest fear associated with this is it's it's very nebulous. Uh in in my estimation

5:05:20Again, this turns all turns on the issues with condition two. And Mr. Lincoln's mentioned it, I've mentioned it, I think even the applicant mentioned it that This this screening process and the referral process and the number of residents It's still an outstanding issue with condition two. Um My ultimately I'm gonna recommend that this be continued so that so that I can work on it with Mr. Lincoln, the applicant, and figure out how we

5:05:51can get condition two to the point where it's mutually acceptable and addresses this concern. Um I do have to say though, and I'm not sure if you're not And I heard all the residents and I and I sympathize with them. I really do. Um But at the same time If we even if I litigate with Mr. McDonald, then we win. Okay. And we may or may not win. Okay, you've heard the arguments on both sides. He's very confident he would win. Mr. Lincoln's confident We would win. Okay. But

5:06:21at the end of the day, even if we win, all we get is them requirement for them to go back through the conditional use process. And if they go back through the conditional use process We're gonna be talking about these exact same conditions again. And so All you've done is is by denying this is force us to go through Years of litigation, probably have to pay Damit maybe pay damages. And we'll probably end up in the same spot that we're at. And so I would rather control this facility. through appropriate conditions Now

5:06:52And in And make sure these residents are protected through these conditions. Because I'm also worried, you know. If we didn't if they came in and I realize that may not meet their business model, but if they came in with only six They don't have to comply with any of this stuff. They don't need to have adult supervision. They don't they could take referrals from DJJ all day long, sexual offenders, all every and there'd be nothing we could do about it. And again, I didn't draft 419. That was the legislature that did that. And so the question is is it worth

5:07:22fate And I believe Mr Lincoln that they're not gonna get sixteen residents. I think it's gonna be closer to ten to twelve. The question is, is the addition of six residents worth these additional protections? And I think it is worth these additional protections.

5:07:37Mr.

5:07:37Chairman I'm I'm ready to make a motion. Let me ask a question. I I I gotta find this out. Uh what hold

5:07:43on Pete. Let's just make this motion and then you can do that,

5:07:46okay? I I move on the advice of council that we continue this in an attempt to negotiate. Um

5:07:54Recommended condition number two in particular.

5:07:57Well and condition number six needs modification to deal with the parking as well. Right. So it would be to deal with to to address condition two and condition six.

5:08:11Wait, wait, I got a second. Wait a second.

5:08:14Yeah, I'll I'll I'll second that. I mean, I if if I can state that, you know, if anyone on this diet has experience with residential treatment, it's me. I've got a son that's in a residential treatment program over on the East Coast right now. Very sensitive to it. I see the benefit of it. Um the strategies do work. That being said I just I can't wrap my head around this not being a commercial enterprise that's uh that needs to go through the process to be properly licensed. And I

5:08:45don't mean by DCF, I mean go through the full process. I know the Due diligence that we went with went through before we put our child. or 15 year old at the residential treatment program that we did. We studied all their licenses. We studied everything about the facility. If I'm a parent, I could be doing the same thing. I think that We owe it to the residents to go through this. I understand how how Um How tense of

5:09:15an issue it is, believe me, I understand it. Um And I just I want to say that I am a big proponent of residential treatment. I think it works, but I think it's gotta be done right. And I don't think this is right.

5:09:27Yeah, the only thing I would add is Okay, so we have a motion and a second now for further discussion.

5:09:33Mr. Browning, you stood there and gave us the address. On Lawrence Avenue. Then you came back up here and said you live in Utah. The article's in corporation state you live on Lawrence in Florida. Where do you really live? I really like to know. And and I really like an honest answer up front. And he's shaking his head like don't don't answer.

5:09:54No,

5:09:54I'm not saying Mr. McDonald. I

5:09:57I objected asking you a question, Mr. McConnell.

5:10:02This is harassment. Okay, but wait. Last minute.

5:10:07Oh okay wait for you for us time out time out time out time out of the right-of-way. I think Mr. Browning's already answered this question. That's right. He came up. I specifically asked him what his address was. He gave the Utah address. He explained that he mistakenly gave the other address because he thought it was the facility at issue. He he's already answered that he doesn't live at this facility. But I don't know why you're asking him again. Because his articles and corporations

5:10:34state that's where he lives.

5:10:36Okay, but that could be his corporate address. He he's saying where he lives personally. Corporate

5:10:40address is someplace in uh South Jordan,

5:10:42wherever that's at. Okay. Okay. He's he's answered the question about where he lives. You live in Utah. I just okay.

5:10:50Sure. Yeah. All right, so we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion of the motion? Can

5:10:56I ask for clarification clarification on the motion? Yes. Yes.

5:11:01The motion is to provide a continuance so that uh council can work through conditions uh two in particular and six. But not limited to, right?

5:11:14But not limited.

5:11:15Well I think it it's actually conditioned two six and

5:11:20Three because three needs to be addressed to deal with their ratio because it one to four doesn't work. So so but I guess if you could give us permission to the extent those discussions affect other conditions, uh if you give us leeway to bring back a revised set of conditions, I think that's yeah acceptable. That's my

5:11:42dependent on the conditions.

5:11:43When are we continuing to target on certain date?

5:11:46So the next Planning Commission meeting in Dade City is in fr on February third. Is that correct, Denise?

5:11:51That's correct. February third.

5:11:53That's when you'd be continuing to February third.

5:11:56Mr. Chairman Mariano. Just a quick question to David, do I vote on this or not?

5:12:01Uh

5:12:03I don't think you do because it's not increasing residential density.

5:12:07That's what I thought.

5:12:07And it's

5:12:10And why am I

5:12:11I don't think you do, no.

5:12:12Okay, thank you.

5:12:15Unless it's attack. Yeah, unless it's a tie. That's

5:12:19a time.

5:12:20Okay. If just it's a quick question. So we're gonna continue this. They cannot move on it. They cannot do

5:12:27anything. We can't do anything until we the county's not gonna issue permits until this is all resolved. So

5:12:33there's still the possibility that we can go back and ask for this to go through the conditional pro.

5:12:41Well, I mean I I guess that's possible, but but I'm recommending that you approve this approval, this c this alternative relief with this set of conditions. And again, part of the reason I'm recommending that is because If it did go through the conditional use process, I think we'd end up with the same or similar conditions. And so to me. It's the conditions that matter. It's the conditions that protect the public. And so we gotta get them right. I agree with Mr. Lincoln, they're not right yet. I think even the applicant agrees that

5:13:11we're not there yet. But We gotta get 'em right to protect the residents and so I think we need thirty days to do that.

5:13:19Okay. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carried.