Board of County Commissioners - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

We're going to go ahead and get started. I want to first of all welcome everybody to our June 16th commission meeting and we have a full house of staff and of our residents over here. So looking forward to hearing from all of you and in our presentations, proclamations, and citizens to be heard. We will start with the invocation led by Commissioner Latvala and followed by the pledge led by Commissioner Peters.

Dear Lord, thank you for gathering us all here safely. I pray that we will have a productive meeting today and I pray that you will give everyone here wisdom and I pray that you'll give the County Commission wisdom as we ponder important decisions before our county today. and in the coming weeks and months. I want to pray especially for our president and our federal leaders in Washington, DC, as they have very important decisions in keeping our country safe and prosperous. And I want to also pray for our governor and state leaders, as well as our local leaders in the Tampa Bay area. And I also want to pray especially for everyone as they leave this meeting and travel home. And I pray that you will get everyone home safe to their families. In your name I pray. Amen.

And before we start with our proclamations, I wanted to thank Deputy Kevin McSweeney, Deputy Jeff Atkinson, and Corporal Clyde Thornton for being here today. Sergeant, you as well. Thank you for being here, for taking care of us, and for all the service you do for the residents of this county every single day. So God bless you and thank you for being here. All right. This first proclamation, obviously an important year for this country as we celebrate 250 years of being the most amazing country in the world. And so today we're going to do a proclamation for Independence Day, and I'd like to welcome and ask the following folks to join me up here. Joan Russell, Regent Lori Coffey, Past Regent Barbara Backus, come on up, as I mentioned your name, Member Sue Simmerman, Member Irma Anderson. Let's see, did I get everybody? No, I did not get everybody. Come up here, please. I wanted to make sure I knew how to pronounce her name, and it wasn't on this list. So it's also good to have Charlene Dzosky here, all of you ladies. It's great to have you here. They're all daughters of the American Revolution, Kaladesi chapter, and it's great to have you here this morning. I'm going to read the proclamation, and then if one of you would like to make a few comments, that would be great, and then we'll take some pictures, okay? Okay. On July 4, 1776, a Declaration of Independence was adopted establishing the United States of America and affirming the principles of liberty, equality, and self-government. The year 2026 marks the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States of America, a historic milestone known as the semi-quincentennial And for two and a half centuries, the United States has stood as a symbol of freedom, democracy and opportunity, shaped by the courage, innovation and dedication of its people. This anniversary provides an opportunity for all Americans to reflect on the nation's history, honor the contributions of those who came before us, and inspire future generations to continue the work of building a more perfect union. Communities across the nation will commemorate the historic anniversary through educational programs, community events, historical recognition, and celebrations that highlight the nation's heritage and shared values. The Daughters of the American Revolution, Kaladesi Chapter, encourage civic pride, community engagement, and appreciation for the freedoms and responsibilities of citizenship about this shared history. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners that July 4th, 2026 be celebrated here as the 250th anniversary of the United States.

Thank you very much. We're so excited, obviously. 250th birthday of America. And yes. And we all can be Americans no matter where we were born. I was born in Japan. I'm an American. How exciting is that? That's the beautiful thing about being an American. And one of the things that you may not know is that I have 30 ancestors who fought in the Revolutionary War. And if all of our members did, that means we would have at least two regiments. Just for one more. But the thing is, anybody in here could have an ancestor that fought in the war. You just may not know it. We're lucky because we know it. We love researching our families and we are able to find all of them. If you're interested in finding your families, I have some forms that I'm going to hand out. I wasn't going to and I thought I was late. And also I have a gift for you as well, for all of you guys. So anyway, thank you very much for this honor. And I probably won't be around for the 300th, but it's exciting to be here for this one. And we want to remember it. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Our second proclamation is a Juneteenth proclamation, and I'd like to invite David Baldwin to come on up. And we've got some family members that would like to join you. They're more than welcome. I don't have all their names here, but you're more than welcome to come up here and support David as we give him this proclamation today. All right, David, this young man right here, is the grandson of Mr. Dan Henry, who played a pivotal role in establishing a tight-knit, self-sufficient community in Pinellas County, referred to as the Dansville area. Thank you for being here today, my friend, and accepting this proclamation. Each year, June 19th commemorates the emancipation of being enslaved people in the United States and is commonly referred to as Juneteenth, recognizing a pivotal turning point in American history. On January 1st, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation warning Confederate states that he would declare enslaved people free forever. On June 19th, 1865, the Union troops marched throughout Galveston reading to the people of Galveston that all slaves were free and the formerly enslaved citizens rejoiced in the streets with jubilant celebrations. On December 6, 1865, the 13th Amendment was passed, which formally abolished slavery in the United States of America. Enforcement of the Emancipation Proclamation occurred only in the Confederate States. They were under Union Army control, and Texas was the last of the Confederate States to receive orders requiring the end of slavery. Juneteenth is an occasion to remember and reflect upon the struggle to gain equality of African Americans during slavery and after emancipation. Juneteenth is a day to honor and reflect on the significant ways that African Americans have enriched society through their steadfast commitment and loyalty to the American ideal of freedom and justice for all. We recognize the significance of residents such as Dan Henry, who in 1946 purchased two 40-acre tracks in Pinellas County, built a home for his family, encouraged other African-American families to settle in the area, and subdivided the land into smaller home sites by informally stepping off parcels from the original tract. Dan Henry played a pivotal role in establishing a tight-knit, self-sufficient community In store, excuse me, in store and Mount, excuse me, in Pinellas County, which grew to include about 80 homes, a store and Mount Olive Baptist Church. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners that June 19th, 2026 be recognized as Juneteenth right here in Pinellas County.

Good morning. On behalf of my granddad, Dan Henry, I would like to accept this award for him. I know if he was here, he'd be overexcited, just as I am. And I want to thank the county commissioners and all they had a part in this, making this possible. I appreciate it and I'm not going to be long because my daughter and I'm always telling them I'm too long. So but I just want to say thank you and it's a great honor for us for the Dan Henry's family. Thank you.

Good morning. I'm Wanda McCausland, the president of Friends of Ridgecrest, and it is an honor to be here this morning to witness Stan Henry and grandson and family to be honored with this proclamation. Yes, Juneteenth is a celebration that we do in the greater Ridgecrest community. We've been doing it for about 15 years now, and we are proud to be an American and be an African American in the greater Ridgecrest community in Pinellas County. We are celebrating Juneteenth on Friday night at the Y. with the groove night and we're looking for all our young adults to come out and groove with us on Friday night. And we're also celebrating on Saturday with our graduates. We honor our graduates on Juneteenth celebration and we honor the past and we serve the present and we inspire the future. So we're having a program at the YMCA to honor our graduates, to tell them about the past and serve the present inspire them for the future starts at 10 o'clock a.m on saturday morning come on out and be with us and we have the fan finale of our great fish fry in the community so we invite you to come and be with us thank you for this honor thank you for letting us be here this morning god bless you

Thank you.

Okay, our third proclamation goes to our Waste and Recycling Workers Week proclamation. And I'd like to ask Paul Saka, who is the director of the Pinellas County Solid Waste, William Joseph, Sanitation Director, City of St. Petersburg, and Tracy Meehan, Corporate Communications Director, Waste Pro USA, to come on up here. The nation celebrates the week of June 15th to the 19th as Waste and Recycling Workers Week. Effective garbage disposal leads to the higher standards of public sanitation, which promotes health, prevents environmental contamination, and reduces the risk of disease. Proper collection, transportation, and processing of garbage and recyclables are vital to preventing litter and illegal dumping. The county's integrated solid waste management system is comprised of garbage and recycling collection and transportation performed by municipal and private haulers, nonprofit organization, and disposal facilities managed and operated by county staff and contracted entities. The actions of residents and visitors and businesses to recycle responsibility, along with the collection, transportation, and processing of recyclable materials, helped to lessen the burden of county's waste-to-energy facility and prolong the life of the landfill. The people serving in the garbage and recycling industry perform an essential service by making significant contributions to the safety, health, and welfare of residents. Garbage and recycling collection is documented by the federal government as being in the top 10 most dangerous jobs, and the safety of waste and recycling workers is important to Pinellas County. Pinellas County values and celebrates the garbage and recycling collectors recycling processors, and all others employed in the garbage and recycling industry to serve residents and local businesses and recognizes the importance of their safety as they perform these essential services. And now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners that June 15th to the 19th, 2026, be recognized as National Waste and Recycling Workers Week. Congratulations and thank you for all your work.

Thank you so much for having us here today. It's an honor to receive this on behalf of all of the solid waste workers, waste and recycling workers in Pinellas County and beyond. We appreciate the acknowledgement and the hardworking men and women behind this that make curbside magic happen with collections, transport, and disposal. Thank you.

Thank you. On behalf of solid waste and the passionate staff that we have out there, Your contractor for FCC environmental that operates the waste energy facility. We have waste management that operates your landfill. All the garbage that's generated comes to us, and we dispose of that. It's an integrated system. We couldn't do what we do without the private haulers and also our municipal partners. So we appreciate that and the recognition. We appreciate the board's opportunity for us to do that safe. I can tell you at Solid Waste, we're six and a half years without a lost time injury. We're proud of that, and we want to continue to do that as safely as we can. So thank you all very much.

Good morning. Just to kind of piggyback on my colleagues, I want to thank the Board of County Commissioners for recognizing June 15th through the 19th as Waste and Recycling Workers Week. And also I like to thank the men and women that dedicate their lives to the residents and the businesses to make sure that the streets and businesses are all clean and safe. Thank you.

All right, we'll move on to our citizens to be heard. We do have a few speakers this morning and I will call you up one at a time and you'll have three minutes to speak and we have one group speaker here at the end of the group. All right, we're gonna start off with Joey Krasnoselski, and you're gonna say your name for me when you get up here because I just did a terrible job. Yeah, I did. I tried not to, but Krasnoselski, Krasnoselski. Joey, welcome, and you'll have three minutes. Introduce yourself and your address and... My name...

I'm doing this for an autism-certified program. I know this thing.

Could you lift that microphone up a little higher for him?

Can you hear me now?

Yes, sir. Okay. Okay.

All right. My name is Joey Cresselski. I'm an autistic individual, a college student and an advocate for autism. I'd like to propose an autism certified officer program for security and law enforcement in Pinellas County. I'm an autistic individual. I don't always know whether they're the officers or security officers I'm speaking with understand autism or know how autistic people communicate. Many people do not know I am autistic unless I tell them. And they can sometimes lead to misunderstanding. Autism is a spectrum. Not everyone autistic person is the same. I like to compare autism as puzzle piece. One puzzle piece did not fit every puzzle. Every autistic person is unique. It has different. Communication style and support needs. This is why I believe officers and security personnel should have received. Aware and autism awareness training. Thank you, sir. I'm sorry, sir. And be aware, be able to wear a visible patch or showing they have completed the training. This would help autistic individuals recognize trained personnel and feel more comfortable asking for help. I believe the program would improve communication, build trust, and help make our communities safer for everyone.

And continue on to nursing.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you, Joey.

Thank you, Joey.

Commissioner.

Yeah.

So Joey, you did a really great job. But I do want you to know that in Florida, they do give extra training to law enforcement. I don't know about security officers, but law enforcement. And then there's a blue envelope program that you can keep your driver's license in, and then an officer will know. So there are some things that Florida does that are good, and maybe we just need to do a better job. They, right. Yeah, I understand. Like an officer wears a CIT pin when they're trained in behavioral health. Yeah. So, well, that's good to know, but thank you.

Thank you. Hey, Joey. Joey, could maybe, would you, could you mind leaving your comments here? Because we'd like to be able to get back with you and chat with you. Do you mind leaving your comments with one of the, yeah, the officer will take that from. Thank you. Thank you, really appreciate your being here this morning. Okay, thank you, sir, appreciate that. All right, Diane Daldi. Yes, Dald, excuse me. Well, that's two names and two people that I've messed up. Come on up and you've got to please introduce yourself. And he'll remind you of that always.

My notes are on my phone. Diane Dold. And I want to say thank you. Good morning to everyone for allowing me to be here and speak. My topic is on Lake Seminole management. Before I begin, I want to extend a sincere thanks to the Public Works Department, specifically Matt, and I'm not going to attempt to pronounce his last name. I'll leave that to you. As we speak, he's out on Lake Seminole right now taking care of some clippings and Things that have been problematic on our lake and I happen to live on the lake as many other residents who are here do I recently reached out regarding an issue with over extended cattails and Matt's team or Public Works proactively sent a crew out to spray and manage them our neighborhood deeply appreciates that swift response and An excellent communication, may I say. I'm here today to build on that success by proposing a long-term proactive solution to a problem with the massive overgrowth of the weeds that choke out our shorelines. Communication with the county at this point is reactive. And because residents can't get their boats out of where they are next to the sea walls who live on the lake like I do, Because of the weeds, they're taking desperate measures. Some are spending out of pocket dollars, hiring private divers to clear paths so they can get the weeds out of the water. Their boats engines are becoming entangled. Also, others are taking matters into their own hands by buying chemicals and spraying along the shoreline, which we shouldn't have to do. I haven't, but I know there's other people that are doing it. That toxic spraying is a disaster for our ecosystem, and we shouldn't have to choose between a poisoned lake and unusable boat docks. I want the board to authorize on proposing that a formal Lake Seminole resident public works liaison position or committee be established. We partner with the Environmental Management Division to achieve two goals, a coordinated mechanical harvesting schedule, Instead of relying on individual chemical spraying, the county and residents can coordinate a predictable timeline to deploy perhaps floating mechanical harvesters, which cut and remove weed biomass entirely, clearing navigation paths without toxic chemical runoff. And streamlined communications, a single volunteer liaison can, non-emergency report to Public Works that can save our county tax dollars.

I think that's all the time. Diane, if you haven't already, could you send that to my office? Just email it to me and we'll pass it around.

Certainly, will do. Thanks again, everyone, for listening.

Thank you. Okay. Next up is Greg. Greg, it starts with an F-R-O, I think, Frockle, but I'm sure that's a third one. Now, third name, third person I messed up, so my apologies. Greg, come on up.

Thank you. My name is Greg Stoeckel. I live also on Lake Seminole on one of the channels. We've got a tremendous problem with The sewers are all draining into a pond and then into the lake and the sand and cans and garbage. It's like a giant retention pond. It really is. And we can't get any help. There's a section, I live right on the water. It's all weeds and sand. We're also, right now, getting our sewer lines redone. They're almost finished. And they've pumped so much silt into that lake just to keep the water table down. It's not their problem, but some of the silt bags exploded when they were pumping. Took them three, four days just to get one box in. because the water was so overwhelming. But anyway, it all starts at 104th Street going into Lake Seminole, a drainage canal. And the amount of stuff that's coming through there is unbelievable. It's like I said, it's like a giant retention pond. I've called several different agencies in the county and everybody seems to want to pass it off on somebody else. And so anyways, sure like to see something done about it all.

Thank you. Okay. Appreciate it. Thank you, Greg. Laura? Laura wants to speak about data centers and last name is Mones or Mores? Well, I think it's Laura. Lauren, I can't tell at the end. You wanna speak about data centers? Yes, go ahead.

Hi, good morning. I'm Lauren Mones, I live in St. Pete Beach. I'm also the president of the Florida Coalition for Safe Technology. We are a grassroots organization made up of Floridians from across the state who are advocating for safe and responsible technology on the local and state levels. For the past year and a half, we have fought cell towers being placed in our neighborhoods in the right of way. They're only 10 to 20 feet from our homes. This is extremely dangerous and it plummets our property values. This placement is irresponsible and it's egregious. I want to encourage all of you to work with our state officials to amend 337.401. It's the Advanced Deployment Act. Amend it so that we as Floridians can have some protection so that these cell towers don't go right in front of our homes. We are also asking you to ban data centers, hyperscale data centers. We don't want them here. No one wants them in Florida. No one wants them in the United States. They're unnecessary, and they're for mass surveillance, and no one wants mass surveillance. So I'm here to ask you to ban them or at least put a 12-month moratorium on them. About 10 other counties have done that so far in Florida. So I think Pinellas County can follow suit. And I understand that Senate Bill 180 preempts new restrictions on land use, but also Senate Bill 484 preserves local authority over large scale data centers. So local communities and counties can regulate these data centers. So we can't use Senate Bill 180 as an excuse to not do anything about this. And I know Kathleen Peters, I've read an article, you are against this. So I really encourage you. I'm happy to work with you as my entire coalition. We're statewide and we're happy to work with you and get this done because I really think like no one wants these here. So please follow suit with the other counties that are also doing this. Thank you.

Thank you. Laura Lee Hanson.

Good morning. Thank you for having me. Being a Florida native in Largo, Florida, I know how much Florida has changed just in the time that Trump has been president. Not only will AI data centers change the outlook of Florida, it is also to spy on your people. The destruction of the land, the erosion of the ground cover, the water coolant is not only bad for the environment, the erosion, the water is harmful to the fish, animals, and the people. A study done at MIT has said, pardon me, I'm nervous. I haven't spoke since high school.

Now, here we go.

Over 144 companies in China, if we are supposedly to compete with China, out of 144 AI data centers that they've done in China, only 10% are still functioning. So that is only 10% that they're even generating revenue. And most of the time, the land that they're using, once it has been built up for AI data centers, it cannot be used for anything else due to the coolant runoff and the harmful contaminants that they've done. Excuse me. Some data centers would rather sit empty rather than pay to use for the electrical and the water usage that it would take to even run these data centers. And as I stated, once these are built, you cannot go back and raise the ramifications that you've done to the environment. And a lot of times also they're saying that the kickback and the write-offs that the government is giving to these companies is a large portion of why they are even building these data centers. They're not even using them and they're destroying Florida. And if you look around, a lot of the changes that are happening to Florida are not for the better. Being a native, you can see the cell towers, the concrete structures going up around town, a lot of the new apartment homes, town homes. We don't need any more buildup and just destruction of beautiful Florida. And not to mention, if it's all about greed, which this administration is totally about greed, once that is built and you get your kickback, There's nothing, nowhere left to go. And if you build up Florida, too much is gonna be like another place. And then you're not gonna have the people coming to Florida to visit another place with all the town homes, et cetera. So you're, how is it you say? You're biting off your nose and bite your face. So please, no data centers. Being a Florida native, keep it beautiful. Thank you.

Thank you, Laura Lee. David Ballard Geddes, Jr.

Hi, good morning, Commissioners David Ballard, Geddes, Jr. I live on Georgia Avenue in Palm Harbor. Let's say for instance that I went door to door in every neighborhood in the county and I deceived all the residents into signing the reclaimed water variance application which in effect grants me development rights throughout the residents entire parcel of property. It permits me the right to replumb all the residential homes with reclaimed water for and toilet use, the variance quarters the consent of the homeowner into forfeiting their Third Amendment rights, allowing me the right to enter the homeowner's property day or night, as based on Pinellas County Resolution 95286, Section 3K, and to levy an annual indoor water inspection charge for water use privileges as written in chapter 1 section 13 of maloney's water code published in 1972 the variance affirms my reasoning to take hold of civilian fourth amendment rights in my doing of things in statute 15320 and allows my seizure of civilian-owned property claiming eminent domain of both personal and real property of the residents in Statute 153.03, Section 5, tapping title to the residential homes in Pinellas County Ordinance 97.103, Section 126.509, taking hold of their religion, too, in my development rights as I have contrived, as I have invoked. And let's say that I want to sell all of these development rights to a third-party developer. Transferring such development rights in order to limit my liability and the legislation and the judges, we're all in on this scam. using third-party mercenaries as written in the Declaration of Independence, using bashoas as referenced in Federalist Paper Number 30. We've got a problem when it comes to water and the 14th Amendment in this country and trying to limit political liabilities. And this conversation is on the table. Thank you. Greg Pound.

Yes, Greg Palin, Largo, Florida. I just want to bring up St. Petersburg, Florida's largest LGBTP is this month. And thanks to the county commissioners, they granted $40,000 for advertisement for this kind of activity. The number one, this is out of the newspaper, number one thing destroying people from Genesis to Revelations, all through history, has been one sin, and the sin is called fornication. and that is premarital sex and sex outside of marriage. The Bible says run from it. It tells the young people to run from it. Instead of us running from it, we're teaching it to the children, we're pushing it on the people, and it's destroying us. This county, last week I went to the public library, they had... And they had a suicide crisis seminar saying that this county has a suicide crisis with white males between the age of 50 and 60 years old and it's out of control. Then we have the highest suicide rate in the state of Florida among young people and the highest drug problem in the state of Florida among young people. So as I've been working with the county now, trying to get into position, I started with AFA, American Family Association, defending families. And since I've started that, I've been under attack by the courthouse, the sheriff's department, police's department, harassing me. And it all has to do with, and it's all documented. What's so amazing, they document it themselves by the activities they do. So I ran for sheriff, and this is a statement out of our constitution. It says, Florida Bar was unified with and became part of the Supreme Court and made every state bar member, lawyer, a person belonging to the judiciary branch of government. So I ran against three attorneys. Robert Guattari was one of them, and he comes in uniform in violation of our election code. And so what happens is we have a major problem in this county with corruption. And all the perverts, if you were to see all the people that are at the top as being child molesters in this county, this county has, I mean, this county has literally destroyed the family and gone after the children. I can show you one article after another. I mean, I've been keeping them now for like 20 years and documenting this stuff, and we have a major problem in this county, and it's being covered up. Robert Guattieri is a cover-up. for what the court system's doing. He's working with the court system. I mean, how can I have someone smash into my car? How can you beat me up for running for sheriff? And we go to trial. I win the trial, but no one's charged for all the crimes they committed against me. I've been arrested for standing on corners with signs that says, rescue my family, or documents out in front of the sheriff's department. How can I be hit in a car, smash total out my car, blow out my neck and back, and then I'm fined seven, a final judgment against me for $18,000 in this Pinellas County court system. I mean, how does this stuff happen? And the list goes on and on and on. I don't have enough time to explain it, but it's wild.

Okay, thank you.

You guys got to clean up your corruption.

Thank you.

Clean it up.

Aiden Barnes. Welcome.

Hello, thank you. Hi, my name is Aiden Barnes. I was born and raised here in Pinellas County. I have been a homeowner in Largo for about 20 years now. I serve on the Largo Library Advocacy Board. A lot of great things happening in Largo. There's a few things I'd like to talk about that tie into each other. First, the proposed county budget. Second, the homestead exemption increase on November's ballot. And third, a quick reminder that we'd have a lot more money freed up for roads, parks, and infrastructure if that $165 million in Pennyford Pinellas money wasn't going to things like housing development projects. And I know another speaker touched on all the development. I just can't believe Pinellas County taxpayers are like voluntarily giving extra money for development on top of all the taxes we already pay. So I'm hoping in 2030, when Penny for Pinellas is over, I hope it stays over because I don't want extra sales tax going to, you know, more development. you know being born and raised here this county has changed a lot and i just think we're just building over every square inch of land here and like the other speaker said we're about to the point where you know what made this county so great it's going to be gone because it'll all be developed over with town homes and condos but Anyways, data centers, I agree with the other speaker. I would love to see a ban on data centers in this county. I'd love for everyone on this board to get behind that because this is what the citizens want. We do not want any more data centers. There are 130 data centers across the state already and county. And we don't want one here. So I'd like to address the proposed millage rate for next year's budget. I know the rollback rates are back to 90s levels. Let's do it even farther. We can do this because property taxes, the values have gone up so high. So um i think we can have a larger millage rollback rate to offset this burden i just feel really bad for people a lot of people are struggling in this economy right here in pinellas county i work in the public school system i see these families they can barely afford anything for their children so not only are they paying in sales tax to penny for pinellas they're also you know a lot of people want to stay in their homes some people like me bought years ago when the property tax values were a lot lower Um, so if people want to move, you know, it's just, it's impossible now for a lot of families. And I, I want this board to know so many people are struggling right now. Um, so let's go back to the table. I'm sure cuts can be made. I saw the budget. It is huge. Um, one thing I was really surprised about is, um, the sheriff's department, 476 million, a $20 million increase support the police, but that's a huge budget.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you.

Thanks, Aiden. Katelyn Newk.

I'm here today to address the grievances of the people of Pinellas County. I am here on behalf of my office administrator who had to leave Pinellas County for Hernando County because she had an $18,000 annual tax bill in Tarpon Springs. I'm here because for some reason the county budget has doubled but yet the population of the county has decreased. The county commission has grown fat on the backs of the citizens of Pinellas County. I'm here because common sense would be to pour money into beach nourishment projects. Common sense calls for protecting the people from invasion of privacy. Instead, Sheriff Goltieri embraced the deployment of flock cameras, which will no doubt be weaponized against the people to track and mine data, a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment. Common sense calls for the elimination of property taxes on an allegedly conservative dominated board. But yet there's been an outcry from the majority of this board against DeSantis' initiative of property tax elimination. If this body really worked on behalf of the people, none of my friends presence today would be necessary. Yet here we are losing out on income and productivity to enforce oversight of your egregious violations against the people of Pinellas. What's baffling is that the people seem to get more interactions and responses on Facebook than they can when they enter this building, which is the people's building. What's even more baffling is that when I, a citizen of Pinellas County, interacts on a Facebook post of Chris Shearer, who was promoting his trip to the UK as a trade mission, the post gets deleted and I'm gaslit by the commissioner's wife as being hateful and unappreciative of his creativity. All this ironically on the same day you had specific training on the parameters of the Sunshine Laws, blocking me from your public page and unblocking me all in the same day. And then Brian Scott comes to my page, likely because you are all discussing county business outside of the Sunshine. And this isn't the first example. LaValla on a trip to Philly years ago, Egers on a trip to Ireland, Kathleen Peters on a trip to British Columbia. And these are just the ones we are aware of. All on the back of Pinellas County taxpayer. Allegedly, there are rules of conduct when speaking from the dais, but yet the rules of holding public office seem not to be applicable to this governing body. There's been no oversight for how this body acted spending COVID care money. There's been no accountability for how bed tax has been spent, which may I remind you is still the people's money and not your personal piggy bank. There's been no accountability for the struggle The people of Pinellas had to wait for months, if not years, for rebuild permits post-hurricane. As I look around this room of elected officials who aren't even really participating in this meeting and are preoccupied with their phones and businesses on your computers, I'm extremely disappointed. Barry Burton just had a card game up on one of his tabs. Do you think we can't see what's going on? Don't we pay you enough to do your work outside of the meeting time? On behalf of your lack of common sense and flagrant abuse of taxpayer money, I feel...

Okay, we have one, oh, Linda Marcellino. Is Linda here? And then David Happy has four folks that are here for him. Christine Kluwer, is she here? Okay, thank you, Christine. Kelly Poppel. Kelly, thank you. Karen Panarelli. And Gina Casa, thank you. Good morning, you'll have 10 minutes. David, go ahead.

Good morning, my name is David Happy. I have the distinct honor of having been named Florida politics biggest loser in the 2024 election, which is amazing because I never ran for office. So apparently I'm uniquely qualified to talk about losers. And under this county commission's tax record, the biggest losers appear to be the property taxpayers of Pinellas County. Today I want to talk about one government term that taxpayers need to understand, which is ad valorem. When you hear these commissioners talk about ad valorem, Ad Valorem, they're talking about property taxes. They're talking about the taxes based on the assessed value of the property. When this county talks about that, when they talk about lowering the millage rate, taxpayers just need to ask one question. How much money did you actually collect? Because taxpayers don't pay talking points. In 2018, Ad Valorem property tax collections were 410 million. Under this county commission, in 2025, that number had swelled to 620 million. That's roughly 210 million more per year than the county was collecting in 2018, a 51% increase in property tax collections. So when these commissioners say, we lowered the millage rate, my answer is simple. Who cares? Who cares that you lowered the rate if the rate went down but collections went up by 51%? That's not restraint. That's not conservative government. That's a shell game. Pinellas County's total budget, total spending in 2022 was 2.9 billion. That includes capital expenses, all the special projects. 2.9 billion in 2022. 4.8 billion in 2026. That's not modest growth. That's explosive local government. While county government was growing, Pinellas County's population was decreasing. Do you all know that our population in Pinellas County right now is less than it was in 2018? So we're paying more You guys are spending obscenely and we have less people living in the county. Taxes are rising and the population's falling. Something's wrong here, commissioners. That's why Pinellas County has become the poster child for why Governor DeSantis needs to step in and intercede. You are the poster child for why property tax reform is needed in Florida. local government can raise, can collect $210 million more per year in property taxes, grow the budget by $2 billion in just a few years, watch a population decline and still call it fiscally responsible, then local government is not capable of policing itself. Thank you, Governor DeSantis. Some of you are warning about the dangers of property tax decreases. Commissioner Peters said this is going to bring unintended consequences if we cut your taxes. Commissioner Scott called this an unbridled power grab. Commissioner Eggers said the government's the best that's the closest to the people. You're not wrong. You're just not the government that's the closest to the people. When government raises collections while the population is falling, grows a budget by $2 billion, and hides behind millage rate theater, that's not local governance. The unbridled power grab is not in Tallahassee, Commissioner Scott.

It's right here on my tax bill.

So let's talk about the dais. Let's talk about our county commissioners. Commissioner Peters, you were a huge talker when the Democrats controlled this commission. Now you've supported record spending before this commission. And many of the things that we've spent money on, you introduced. Commissioner LaValla, you're on video campaigning that you would vote against every tax increase. Every single budget you've voted for since you've been here has been a record beating the last one. Commissioner Eggers, I hope you enjoyed your trip to Ireland last month. You at least had faked that you were gonna do millage rollbacks before you voted for the budget last year, the record-breaking spending budget. Commissioner Scott, you said one of the first things you were gonna do, the first thing you were gonna do when I was on your campaign bus, you said, first thing I'm gonna do is put in term limits. I'm gonna raise it for a vote. Remember what the first thing you did was? You voted to put Janet Long as the chairperson. We're still waiting, Commissioner, for that promise of the first thing you said you were going to do. Meanwhile, you voted for every record spending bill that's been before you. That's not what you said you were gonna do. Commissioner Flowers, I didn't vote for you. At least you're honest. You tell the people you're gonna tax them and then you tax them for your special projects. You're the honest one. Commissioner Nowicki is the only one here that voted against this record spending bill last year. Commissioner Scherer, champagne and caviar in Europe while taxpayers are staring at rising bills? That's a terrible optic. I didn't vote for you because I didn't think we needed a developer on the county commission. And I was right. But the people got exactly what they voted for. And that's the bigger point. Taxpayers were told that Republican control of this commission meant restraint, accountability, smaller government. I donated to more than one of your campaigns, as did hundreds of other taxpayers, because we believed you. when you promise these things. When Charlie Crist is running to the right of all of you people, Charlie Crist is running saying, hey, we need to lower property taxes.

Commissioner Scott is saying that's an unbridled power grab.

Charlie Crist is running to the right of this county commission. A Republican county commission should not need Ron DeSantis to force it to act like taxpayers matter. But here we are. So let's talk about oversight. We got our unelected county administrator. Barry Burton is our county administrator. We pay him an annual salary and package that approaches $400,000. Did you know that we recruited Barry Burton from Lake County, Illinois when there was an investigation as to financial oversight and management in the county that we pulled him from? Did you guys know that Lake County, Illinois is in the top 10 spending counties out of 3,500 counties in America. How'd we get this guy? So I got one question for you, because he's bringing you yet another record budget. He's going to probably propose a millage increase. At a minimum, our taxes are going through the roof and your spending is going through the roof. He's going to bring you a higher spend budget. So do you work for him or does he work for you? Because it sure seems like you county commissioners work for Barry Burton. It's time to correct the oversight problem we have in this community and with this county commission. Who's watching the spending? Who's watching the watcher? Who's telling the county administrator no when he brings these absurd budgets before you? I watched some of your budget meetings. By the way, the public wasn't allowed to speak at those meetings because the staff that gets incentivized to raise the prices proposes an increase. The county administrator oversees all that. And these people don't get to say anything at your meetings. That's part of the problem. So what do we need to do? What do we need to do? We need to stop hiding behind a millage rate and publish a plain English year by year explanation for what's happened between 2018 to 2025. We need to direct the county staff to propose a rollback budget. And we need to support real property tax reform like both commissioners are doing all across the country. It's not going to have unintended consequences to let the taxpayers keep more of their money. Pinellas County is not your piggy bank. You are the poster child for why Governor DeSantis needs to step in and protect our interests.

Okay, thank you all. Appreciate your being here today. Yeah, I know. All right, we're going to move on. We have a couple public hearings this morning. Item five.

I just want to advise that when we get to item number 42, I will have to recuse myself because I did check with Jewel. I serve on the board for Area Agency on Aging, and under item number 42, they're being recommended for funding from the social action funding pot. So they're supposed to have the documents I need to sign today, but I just wanted to make sure I got that out so that when we get to that item, it wouldn't upset the flow of your meeting.

Gotcha, okay. All right, first up, public hearing. Flume 26.01. Go ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Agenda items number five and six are companion items, so I'm going to read them into the record together, but they will need separate votes. Agenda item number five is case number FLU 2601. This is a request for a future land use map amendment from residential rural to institutional on approximately 2.69 acres located at 2577 Keystone Road in East Lake Tarpon. And item number six is a case number ZON2603. This is a request by Al Rahman Incorporated for a zoning change from RA, residential agriculture, to LICO, limited institutional to conditional overlay, on approximately 2.69 acres located at 2577 Keystone Road in East Lake Tarpon. Since this is a quasi-judicial hearing, all those individuals who plan to speak on this item must be sworn in. For those wishing to speak, whether you are attending in person or virtually, if able, please raise your right hand. Do you swear a firm testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Signify by saying I do. The public hearings were properly advertised. Affidavits of publication have been received for filing. No correspondence has been received by the clerk, and it matters properly before the board to be heard.

Thank you. Commissioners, any questions for this morning? You want to move forward with the presentation? Are we comfortable with what we have in front of us? Commissioner Flowers, did you have anything?

No, sir. I was going to move approval.

Go ahead.

Move approval.

A motion and a second by Commissioner Peters, and this is on item five. Any other comments? Can we pull up the board, please? I can't see the board up. Yeah, there we go. All right. Okay, that passes unanimously. Item six is the companion item. That's the zoning case. Second. Motion by Commissioner Scott, second by Commissioner Flowers. Any question by the commissioners? Comments? Pull up the board, please. Motion carries unanimously. On to item seven, please.

AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 7 IS A PROPOSED RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AND AUTHORIZING ACTIONS RELATED TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT, HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS, AND EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT PROGRAMS. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS PROBABLY ADVERTISED AND AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED FOR FILING. NO CORRESPONSE HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE CLERK AND THE MATTER IS PROBABLY BEFORE THE BOARD TO BE HEARD.

OKAY. QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? Yes, Commissioner Flowers.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So after the passage of this, do these new dollar allocations take effect immediately, or is it the October 1 funding year?

Chair's on its way up.

Rental, housing, and community development. Yes, ma'am, they do go into effect October 1 at that time of this year. Okay, thank you.

Any other questions? Motion by Commissioner Flowers. Second by Commissioner Scott. You can pull up the board. Thank you. A few more. One more. Oh, there we go. Motion carries unanimously. Okay, we're on to the consent agenda. And in our workshop the other day, we discussed item 27. So I'm gonna go ahead and pull that and put it up first under the regular agenda. Does anybody else have anything to pull? Do you have any questions on the rest of the consent? Chair? Yes.

Yeah, I just had a question under item 28. 28? Correct. Okay. So that's the detailed log for the administrator. So I guess 20, item number 20 on that was a $115,000 loan to Arc Tampa Bay under resolution 21-22. And I couldn't find that resolution. So I just didn't know if we could just have a little bit more detail on that.

All right, let's go ahead. You said that was item 28. We'll pull that one. Anybody else have anything to be pulled? Okay, do I have a motion for approval of the rest of the consent? Second. Commissioner Flowers? Second. Second by Commissioner Nowicki. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, we'll move on to item 28. 20 on 28. Yeah, 20, yeah.

Greg, do you have an answer on that? This is affordable housing funds for the Arc of Tampa Bay for the renovation of Ankle Group Home. It's a loan amount of 115,000.

I need somebody to come up and speak into the microphone.

Well, we also don't have Bruce here who oversees the housing. So since I didn't know, I didn't ask them to attend. What we can do is just postpone this item and we'll just put it on the next agenda. All right. That's fine. We're going to get some answers. Is that the only item? Yeah. That was it? Or maybe we can wait and I can get you an answer before the end of the meeting. That's fine. We can revisit it either later or next meeting. Either way. We'll have it by the time we get to the county administrator report. How about that? All right. What is it? I know. I haven't read it.

Well, I guess my granicus, it doesn't pop up in the, you know, it's not attached in the granicus.

Well, I'm just looking at delegated log.

Okay, let's go ahead. Barry, we're going to go ahead. We'll come back to that. We'll come back to that item. Okay. We'll move on to the regular agenda, and the first item is the one I pulled from item, from the consent item 27, a ranking of the firm's agreement with Fleshman Garcia Architects. FOR PROFESSIONAL DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE EAST LAKE COMMUNITY LIBRARY EXPANSION.

AND TOM, WHO'S GOING TO ADDRESS THIS?

TOM ARMONTE, ASSISTANT COMMUNITY ADMINISTRATOR. FOLLOWING OUR LAST REVIEW OF THAT AGENDA ITEM, I MET WITH THE SECRETARY DIRECTOR AND MARY, AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED WITH THE PROJECT. The deputy director is here and he can answer any questions related to.

Okay. It really was in the context of, it wasn't so much the context of the work, it's the context of- Can they operate? Of if we pass the item and it moves forward, are we going to be in a position of funding? And so the question was, do we want to move forward with the design? And thinking that, you know, we'll have to wait for the outcome of the election. That was the election outcome of the correct item.

And they assure me that they can maintain the facility, but, you know, can answer that question.

Go ahead. Yes. Even, uh, excuse me, even with, um, budget cuts for our ad valorem taxes, we would still be able to, um, function as a library and retain our core services. The biggest thing that we have discussed in renovating and expanding the library is better utilizing the space, reducing the amount of service points, and creating space for patrons to be able to utilize the library. That's our biggest issue with our current building. So utilizing the space better is really what we're looking to.

Okay. So, Barry, this was, and this project is in the penny?

Yes.

And it's cash, right? I mean, we're paying it through the penny dollars, no debt. That's correct, yes.

And they have $2 million that go towards the project that they've raised.

$2 million towards, what's the estimated cost? $7.5, so $2 million towards $7.5. Okay, so the balance of that's in the penny. Correct. And we're not... they're not concerned about staffing. Yeah, I don't want to speak for him. Hold on. They're not concerned about staffing reductions if the budget is, you know, the reduction in ad valorem taxes for our homes is passed. Yes, that's correct. We will still be able to staff the building properly. Okay. All right. Just wanted that on the record. Now open up for conversation. Thank you, appreciate it. Appreciate your being here today. Any comments, thoughts about moving forward with the design of the expansion of the East Lake Library? Okay. What's the will of the commission? Motion by Commissioner Nowicki to pass that. Second by Commissioner Scott. Any other comments, questions? Pull up the board, please, number 27. Do you have that? Yeah, perfect, thank you. Passes unanimously, thank you. All right, moving on to item 32.

It's ranking of four firms for St. Pete Clearwater International Airport. This is Professional Engineering Services.

Motion by Commissioner Nowicki, second by Commissioner Latvala. Any questions on this item? Pull up the board, please. That passes unanimously. Item 33.

The first amendment term extension would train for the central energy plant maintenance and services.

Motion by Commissioner Scott. Second. Second by Commissioner Nowicki. Any questions, comments? Pull up the board, please.

Motion passes unanimously. Item 34. These are the next four, just small slivers of land that we're getting rid of that followed construction projects. So the first one. 34, 35, 36, and 37.

That's correct. We can do that, right? Yeah, okay.

Second.

A motion by Commissioner Nowicki, second by Commissioner Natvala for approval of 34, 35, 36, and 37. Are there any questions or comments by the commission? You go ahead and pull up the voting board, please. That motion carries unanimously, thank you.

Item 38. This resolution is approving a substantial amendment to the annual action plan for additional homeless prevention funding, item 1.6 man.

Okay, anybody? Motion by Commissioner Flowers, second by Commissioner Peters. Any comments or questions on item 38? Pull up the voting card please.

Motion carries unanimously. Number 39. This agreement is for the coordinated access model for the IT platform development with a night group. This will bring that in-house $1.3 million that will be paid for out of opioid abatement settlement funds.

Motion by Commissioner Peters. Second. Second by Commissioner Flowers. Any comments or questions? Pull up the voting card, please.

Commission passes unanimously. Item 40. This is our Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistant Grant Funds, $190,000. Motion by Commissioner Nowicki.

Second by Commissioner Peters. Any questions, comments? Pull up the voting card, please. Motion passes unanimously.

Item 41. The opioid abatement priority list recommendations from the commissioners to the Florida Department of Children and Families.

Motion by Commissioner Peters, second by Commissioner Nowicki. On item 41, any comments, questions? Voting card, please.

Motion passes unanimously.

Item 42.

These are our funding recommendations for the fiscal year 2027 Human Services Social Action Grant Program. $1.7 million. Okay. Chair.

I think we have some questions on this one. Okay. So whoever's handling this one needs to be at the mic and ready for conversation. One up, Jennifer.

Good morning. Jennifer Arteaga with Human Services.

Say your name again, please. I'm sorry. Jennifer Arteaga with Human Services.

Okay. Thank you. Welcome, Jennifer. We have a couple questions. Sure. Commissioner Scheer.

Yes. Thank you, Chair. Jennifer, are any of these contracts time sensitive? Yes.

So the nature of the social action funding process is it is an annual application period. So each year we do an annual application cycle. And the awards that are recommended today would run October 1st. through 930. So it is limited to FY27.

I just, I feel, I think, you know, I haven't had a chance to go through this, the budget for this department, you know, in detail. And this is proposed contracts for the 2027 fiscal year. So I just don't understand why we would

Could you speak a little closer? Oh, I'm sorry. No, it's okay.

I just want to make sure. These contracts are for the 27-year, and I haven't had a chance to go through this whole department to see. I mean, I'm just wondering why we're approving things that for a budget we haven't approved yet.

I guess because we've had the selection.

I mean, it doesn't have to happen. I'm just saying. They've had the selection. They just bring it forward.

But there's nothing that says we can't. wait and look at things more and bring it back next month if we have some questions. Commissioner Scott, excuse me. Did you have anything else, Commissioner?

No, that was my concern.

Commissioner Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've got some concerns with this because I'm afraid that if we approve this, we're creating an expectation of funding. And we have not decided on our 27-year budget yet. And I think that all funding, discretionary funding, it needs to be really looked at very, very closely, which is what this is. And I don't want to put something on the table and then have to take it off. I'd rather we just defer this until we get down the road with our 27 budget. Or maybe even just wait until November. And if we want to do this, then we can come back and to do a budget amendment, but I kind of feel this is a little premature.

I agree. So we can change it, you know, it's obviously at your discretion. The way we, and this is how we've done it in the past several years, it's so they can get all the contracts in place and have those ready to where the funding can start on October 1 for the new programs. The contracts and stuff are subject to your approval of the budget, though. Correct. So if in the budget process you would eliminate that or change that, well, then you're under no obligation to move forward. But, again, that's how we've set those up because otherwise then it takes like two or three months to get all the contracts in place and everything based upon that. So the nonprofits are then waiting until January to get their funding.

So that is the impact. Thank you, Barry. It's accurate in terms of the approval, whether it's now or next month, really is allowing us to ready the contracts for execution pending approval of the budget.

I think there's two things. One, maybe a little more time to look things over, which we could take this in July and have that discussion then. And if we're comfortable moving forward with the understanding that these groups are subject to final approval of our budget and all of the things that we're going to be talking about really in... Over there, please. that we have time to take a look at it under the scope of our budget discussion. And so as long as they understand that, because we really have obviously a tight budget coming up and those discussions are going to get a little heated, discussed, and we're going to have some time to do that. So we'll be doing that mostly in August. So, but to the point about time, I think that's a good point. So we could have that. I think we can move this comfortably to July and that still gives everybody two and a half months to do if we decide to move forward with it subject to the final budget being approved. It gives people time to do what they need to do. Is that okay with everybody to just kind of refer?

Yeah, that's fine.

Fair enough. I mean, I have some questions too about, you know, the scoring system and how close some got and got nothing and how close the same people asked for a whole bunch and got everything. And to me, it's more spreading it a little bit and letting some of our other groups like CASA, like FEAST, like HEP, All of those, they got nothing. Most of those were close. They were right up there, the same scoring that a couple of others had. I'd like to have that kind of discussion in July as well. Anything else that we want to bring forward for thoughts to Jennifer in preparation for the July discussion?

Chair? Yes.

On that thought, I'd be okay with scaling back some of the HLA funding and giving it towards some of those organizations you just mentioned. Okay. we'll have that discussion.

Yeah, Commissioner Scott, did you have anything?

Yeah, and just, I think I might have mentioned this last week in one of our budget sessions, but when we're talking about potentially deferring raises for staff, I'm just uncomfortable approving dollars to go, we need to take care of our own first.

Yeah, I understand. Well, again, we're gonna move forward or not in July with the understanding that it may not make it through the budget process.

If we have the discussion in July, just understand we've pushed back my budget recommendation to August the 11th.

Yeah, right. So we're not having the detailed budget discussion in July. It's going to happen the first meeting in August.

Okay.

All right.

So we'll put it on the July, and you can make a decision at that point if you want to delay or act.

We just need a motion on this to move it to a date certain, or does it?

On something like this, you can just simply defer it. It's not a public hearing type item that needed to be advertised. And I will mention, too, most of your contracts, and I'm assuming these do have fiscal non-funding clauses that you can exercise if you do not fund something. And that's the whole point of a fiscal non-funding clause is to say this contract is contingent on budget actually being provided for it. But again, you could create an expectation.

Yeah, I appreciate that, and we will make sure that those folks out there, they probably understand that, but just want to make sure that's clear. and we'll have this discussion. So we'll have a motion. Do we have a second to defer it to July? Second? Yeah.

Second?

Yeah, okay. Motion and second to defer this item to the July meeting. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, thank you. Appreciate it, Jennifer.

Okay, item 43. It's a first amendment to approaching authorization with Home Depot. I think staff sent you some additional information requested since last Thursday.

Any questions on this item? Did we get what we needed?

I'll move approval. Is there any way, Barry, we could get like a list of other, I don't know if there's other contracts that have been like approved under the 250 threshold that have been going on for like multiple years. I don't know if we can get a list of all of those contracts sent to everybody for review.

Chris is shaking his head yes. Okay, yeah, move approval.

Okay, motion by Commissioner Nowicki. Do I have a second? He made a motion. We need a second. A motion to approve item 43. Commissioner Nowicki at... Okay, second by Commissioner Shearer. Commissioner Nowicki asked for a list of contracts that have been signed under the 250 threshold, and we can get that, so. Sure. No problem. Okay, so we have a motion and a second. Any other comments, questions? Okay, the voting card please, thank you. Motion carries unanimously. On to item 44.

Emergency watershed protection grant program agreement with the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation Services.

Motion by Commissioner Nowicki. Second by Commissioner Peters. Could somebody just briefly tell us what this grant – I mean, I can read it. I'm just saying – Yeah, no, I think it's a huge grant, so – It's a big number, so I'd just like to have a – you know, it's got a big project ahead of us. So, Kelly, thank you for coming forward. Appreciate it.

Kelly Hammerlevy, Public Works Director. So when we were – when we had all the channel flooding during Hurricane Milton – To restore those channels, you have to go through a federal process to get approval for that work, but also to get funding for that work. So instead of going to FEMA, they require that you first go to NRCS to request that funding. If they have funding available, then they will oversee that process, not FEMA. So that's what we've been doing. It's taken quite a long time to get here, but they do pay 100% of the construction, and they also pay for the construction oversight services. So while it's taken a long time, it's a great benefit to the county.

And so these four creeks that you've identified, four or five creeks you've identified, that's going to get the primary...

Yes, everywhere where... where erosion or Vegetation destroyed the bank where we had slumping so we had to basically go out there with NRCS staff and they walked the channels Identifying each location and the scope of the work necessary to do those repairs Mostly bank issues mostly bank issues, correct Great because I know there's a lot of problem areas. Yes, there are and

Yeah, and they're all under kind of an overlaying easement?

These are all sections where we do have rights. So there are, you know, I know there are some areas where it's private, and that's on the private property owner to handle, but everywhere here we have rights or we have an easement that allows us to do this work.

Yeah, and so it would be nice to know. I mean, I'm not talking about voting on the voting issue here, but it would be nice to know. the issues that those creeks have that are outside the scope of the work that we're gonna be doing? Do we have other problems there? Because I mean, I'm envisioning this channel and we're working on the areas that we can do, the rest of that probably may or may not need work, I don't know, but not necessarily under our purview.

Correct.

Yeah, we don't typically inspect private sections of the channel, so I can't speak to... We're supposed to be inspecting for movement and making sure that it's clear for movement, so we don't have eyes on those areas at all?

There are areas that are completely, I mean, they're completely fenced in. They're completely private. There would be no way for us to get in, but basically we go from the upstream into the downstream, and we can see water moving in between there. Then we know it's flowing freely. But yeah, there's a lot of areas where we have no rights whatsoever, not even a flow easement that is just for- Excuse me, that last part? We don't even have what we call a flow easement in out. So there's a lot of areas of major drainage channels that are wholly private where we don't have any type of rights at all.

So we have to go to the homeowners and- Correct, yes. When we had to do that- They have the responsibility to maintain the banks. And the flow there?

Yeah, we had an area on Alligator Creek where a private property owner had a tree across the channel and it was blocking flow and they were responsible for it. So yeah, it's a challenge.

What can we do in case of emergency? What happens?

Well, we can't touch private property in an emergency. You'll remember a number of years ago there was a case that came up and that happened during an emergency. And so the very firm county policy that we don't touch private property, even in the state of emergency, unless we have the rights in place. And that, you know, if it is absolutely necessary and a property owner will allow us to do it, we can get a temporary construction easement or a temporary right of entry. But we cannot go onto private property and clear anything without the proper rights.

Seems strange. I don't mean that we can't go into private property. I'm talking about in the case of emergency for all the other public damage that it could cause from backing up. But again, a discussion for another day. Appreciate it. Any other comments or questions for Kelly? Thank you. Okay, we had a motion and a second. Any other thoughts? Okay, pull up the card, please. Two more. Commissioner Peters is the, oh, motion carries unanimously.

Item 45. It's a grant agreement with U.S. Department of Transportation. This was also a question last Thursday. I think staff sent you additional information clarifying what it's used for.

Yeah, I think we brought that forward during the meeting, during the workshop. Any questions or comments on this item? Motion by Commissioner Scott. Second. Second by Commissioner Nowicki. Bring up the card, please. Motion carries unanimously. 46.

The Resilient Florida Grant Agreement with Florida Department of Environmental Protection for the 98th to 100th Way Drainage Improvement Project.

More drainage work. More? Yeah. Motion by Commissioner Peters, second by Commissioner Shearer. Any comments, questions on item 46? Bring up the card, please.

Motion carries unanimously. Item 47. Resilient Florida grant agreement with Florida Department of Environmental Protection. This is for the Crystal Beach drainage and roadway improvement projects. This is the companion to item 29, and this is for the actual improvements.

Motion by Commissioner Peters, second by Commissioner Nowicki. Any comments or questions on item 47? Bring up the card, please.

Motion carries unanimously. Item 48. This resolution is supporting the honorary designation of County Road 1 from State Road 586, Curley Road to Tampa Road as Sergeant Nicholas A. Flowers, Memorial Road.

A motion by Commissioner Nowicki, second by Commissioner Peters. And that, assuming this passes, that will be scheduled for when? June, July 30th? The end of July, we'll be having an actual ceremony out on County Road 1. Staff will give us all the details at the appropriate time. Any questions or comments? And this will be a section from Tampa Road to Curlew. There'll be a sign at both ends that will designate that road as Sergeant Nicholas A. Flowers Memorial Road. His mom will be at the ceremony, and his widowed wife and son, I think, will be at the ceremony. I know the wife will be, and the son may be as well. So they are looking forward to that on the 30th, I believe, 31st. Bring up the card. Yes, did you have a question? 31st. 31st? Okay, thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. Bring up the card, please. One more. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, everybody, for your patience on this item. We'll move on to item 49.

This is a second amendment to the Cooperative Funding Agreement with Florida, Southwest Florida Water Management District. This is for grant funding, amount of $119,000, county match in the same amount.

Motion by Commissioner Nowicki. Second by Commissioner Scott. Any questions, comments on item 49? Bring up the card please. Motion carries unanimously. Item 50.

This is a sixth amendment to an agreement with ImageTrend for safety and emergency services or emergency medical services records management system.

Motion by Commissioner Scott. Second. Second by Commissioner Nowicki. Any questions, comments? Bring up the card.

This motion carries unanimously. Number 51. This is the third amendment with an agreement with U.S. Emergent Technologies for grip removal services at utilities.

Motion by Commissioner Flowers, second by Commissioner Peters. Any questions on item 51? Bring up the card, please.

Motion carries unanimously, 52. Third amendment with Unify for voice over IP, internet protocol for telephone equipment and maintenance services, a little over a million dollars.

Motion by Commissioner Flowers. Second by Commissioner Scott. Any questions or comments on 52? Bring up the card, please.

Motion carries unanimously. Number 53. The issuance of 17 certificates of public convenience and necessity for non-medical wheelchair transport and stretcher van providers.

Second. Motion by Commissioner Flowers, second by Commissioner Peters. Any comments or questions on item 53? Bring up the card, please. Motion carries unanimously. Number 54.

Under item number 54, I recommend that you ratify the chair's approval to file a petition after an animal was seized by Pinellas County Animal Services.

Motion by Commissioner Scott, second by Commissioner Nowicki. Any comments? We'll go ahead and take that recommendation. Bring up the card, please. Item passes unanimously, number 54, 55.

In item number 55, I recommend you approve staff's recommendation on the proposed settlement and the reference case. that was outlined in the confidential memo.

Item 50, motion by Commissioner Peters.

Second.

Second by Commissioner Nowicki. Any questions, comments? Bring up the card, please. Motion carries unanimously. Anything else, Jewel?

No reports today.

All right, county administrators report. We have three or four items to at least update us on what's going on.

Well, we have several items. First, if we can go back to the delegated log, item number 28, and Joe can come up and give an explanation to Commissioner Nowicki's question.

Yes, sir. That $115,000 was for renovations at the Ankle Group Home for the Arc of Tampa Bay. It provided HVAC replacement, generator installation, three bathroom renovations, and flooring and door replacement. To your point for the resolution, that was our authorizing resolution giving authorization for the SHIP grant. This was SHIP funds, our State Housing Initiative Partnership funds, and that was our resolution that provided authorization to spend those funds.

Yeah, thank you for that clarification. I appreciate it. Mr. Amante sent me the copy of that resolution. You know, it talks about in the resolution there's a local housing assistance plan. I guess I was just more interested in, like, how does that one organization, was there like an open grant that multiple people could apply to?

Yes, sir. This is part of the affordable housing funds. That application is open continuously, and they made application through there. The list that you're talking about there is the state housing initiative partnership annual action plan. It is the state plan of how we use our SHIP funds. So it's just like the action plan except for the SHIP funds.

Perfect. Thank you, sir. Yes, sir. Move approval. Motion by Commissioner Nowicki.

Second.

Second by Commissioner Peters. Any questions, comments? Bring up the card, please, for item 28. That's really item for item 28, but that motion carries five to zero unanimously.

That's okay.

All right. Next, commissioners, we discussed this last Thursday as a result of House Bill 803. over in Building and Development Services, the fee modification, that recommendation and resolution is in your packet. We'd need to add this to the agenda and act on it.

You're looking for approval to move to, or to send the letter?

Asking for this be added to the agenda and the approval of this modified fee structure.

Okay, so we need a motion to bring it to the agenda. Yes. Motion to bring it on. Second by Commissioner Peters to put it on the agenda. Okay.

And Kevin briefed you on it. If you're comfortable, act on that. So it's about sending this letter. No, that's a second one. So this is on the fees for Kevin McAndrew's shop.

Say that again.

This is the fee modification over in building development review services. Oh, okay, okay. So if we can act on that first.

Yeah, okay. Do I have a motion for approval of that? Okay, yeah. No, we brought it onto the agenda for discussion. Okay, no, it's okay. Motion by Commissioner Peters, second by Commissioner Flowers. Did we actually get a copy of it?

Yes, we have copies, but did we actually? I never received like a hard copy or a digital copy of it.

Oh, okay. We passed it out on Thursday.

Is that the desk you mean?

Yeah. Well, it was on Thursday, yes. Oh, okay.

Mr. Chairman, I stepped out for a moment. Just remind me what we're voting on here. This is the piece for Kevin McAndrew's show.

All right, thank you.

The adjustments.

The adjustments.

Okay, we had a motion and a second. Any comments, questions other than Commissioner Nowicki hadn't really looked at it yet, so. Bring up the card, please.

Oh, mine says towing update, voting on.

No, this is not for that. We're just bringing it up one item at a time, same thing. That's okay. We're talking about the fee adjustments to our building department. That's what this is approval for. Okay.

You may want to just do a voice vote on this since it's in addition to the agenda.

If it's easier, the board can take a voice vote on this item because it's towing up the access reading what's on the agenda and it's free and put it in there already.

Since we added it. That's fine. We've added it all under these items 57. So that's why it's coming up that same thing. But we'll do the rest of these if we need other votes. Okay. We'll do them. So do we need one more person in this? And this, yeah, one more, come on. Okay, motion carries unanimously. All right, now the rest, if we have any other votes on this item, we will do it vocally.

And then the second item that we've asked is authorizing the chair to send a letter on the Sankey erosion control line.

Motion by Commissioner Peters, second by Commissioner Flowers. Any questions or items on that? This is about sending a letter regarding opposition to petition for rescission of the erosion control line in Bel Air Shores, Bel Air Shore, Florida. Okay. All in favor say yes. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously.

Third item I need to do is to read this for a future meeting. So there will be a TEFRA hearing on July 21st. St. Paul School of Florida Nonprofit Corporation has requested that the Pinellas County Educational Facilities Authority restructure and reissue the Pinellas County EFA series 2015 bonds. For the series 2015 bonds to be reissued as tax exempt bonds, the school must receive TEFRA approval by conducting a TEFRA hearing. The school has requested that this occur at the commission's July 21st meeting. The county would not be the issuer of the bonds and the bonds would not be a debt liability or obligation of the county. So I just need to put that on the record. That concludes that item. The next item we have is a CDBG-DR update, and I would invite Erica Henry, our program manager, to come to the podium to give you a short presentation.

Good morning, Chair, Commissioners. Erica Henry, disaster recovery program manager for Pinellas Recovers, CDBG-DR funding. I'm excited to be here today to give you some updates on how our program has been progressing since we opened applications in October of 2025. And to present to you some policy recommendations that we have to cast a wider net for applicant eligibility. To date, we have received over 8,689 applications. which shows that our community is listening. We've had a great response from them. We are oversubscribed in our homeowner reimbursement and homebuyer assistance program and continue to seek applications for our homeowner rehab, local landlord, and disaster relief recovery payments. We've started increasing outreach efforts through attending hurricane expos, social media plugs, and radio live streaming, sending out mailers to those that were in our FEMA IA database to increase awareness and application. Our team continues to monitor program progress, application trends, service gaps, and area needs. And we'll be discussing some of those policy recommendations later today. We have approved a total of 464 applications with a total award amount of $29.4 million to date. And applications are being approved and moving through that process daily.

Just a quick question. What's the stream look like a stream of applications, is it a trickle is it a babbling brook or do we have a flood stream going through of applications, how would you kind of describe it in your own mind.

Sure so initially when we opened applications, obviously, we had done a lot of outreach and really encourage the the Community to be active and apply, and so we had. A really great turnout in the beginning. And we have tried to continue that outreach effort by doing city-by-city outreach efforts, connecting with the mayors and other representatives of those cities and getting the word out to everybody in those communities, doing community events and whatnot. So our application stream has slowed some. But we are continuing those application outreach efforts to continue the submissions of applications.

Yeah, it's interesting that the very next slide that you have to present, because it's perspective. So trying to get some perspective on, I mean, I feel like there's a lot of folks out there that are missing opportunities here. And that's the messaging. And yet it seems like on the next slide, that looks like relative to others, we're not doing badly. So go ahead.

So yes, here's the next slide. So this is a depiction of our other first time grantees and our neighbors and neighboring counties and the progress that they have made as well thus far with using the CDBGDR funding. So historically, it takes about a year to a year and a half to get programs up and running. And Pinellas County has far exceeded that general time frame as we opened applications in October. So as you can see, our expenditures, we've drawn $8.6 million from HUD, and our county alone accounts for 66.5% of the total draws of these nine different grantees. So we are leading the pack and proud to be leading the pack. The map on the right shows the total awards locations where applications have been approved and people have received assistance. So you can see that our awards are pretty well spread throughout the county. Our top three cities continue to be Clearwater, Largo, and unincorporated Pinellas. This next slide outlines some factors that are impacting eligibility. So we've had about 5,240 cases that have gone inactive or closed for a range of different reasons. And so when we drill down to those, these are our top four standout reasons. So the first at the very bottom, the 1942 is not eligible. And just for reference, 749 of those are not eligible due to being located within the city of St. Pete, who has their own separate CDBGDR allocation. So that is why the majority of those are not eligible.

What would you say the reason, the other maybe one or two key reasons for eligibility, because that might be driving some of the folks that don't want to apply, they're like, well, I've heard that these are the reasons that maybe it might be unique to an area or a group and they shouldn't necessarily rely on what they're hearing, but rather apply. So if you don't mind, maybe two or three things that jump out at you.

Yeah. So there are many different factors that can come into play for not being eligible, whether it be geographic location. whether it's not your primary residence or even some people are voluntarily withdrawing because they don't like some of the aspects that our programs are offering.

We didn't have a program that fit them or they just didn't like the requirements of the program or?

Not necessarily. So, you know, we're constantly evaluating these programs and identifying service gaps in areas where we could open up and cast a wider application net. And so some of these policy recommendations that we discuss, that I discuss a little later in this presentation, will address some of these that were already determined not eligible to being eligible. So we're trying to... open it up as wide as we can while still maintaining HUD regulations and guidelines. The next most frequent closure is for non-cooperative or non-responsive. So these are applicants that we have tried to reach out to that are not responding to our efforts to communicate or where we have requested documentation that is required for the program and they are not willing or unable to provide that documentation. The next one is where an applicant will voluntarily withdraw, and that can be for a number of reasons. Maybe they just aren't interested in the program anymore, their issues have been resolved, or their need just isn't there anymore. The other one that we have on there is for suspected irregularities, and that is primarily focused in our disaster relief payments for renters. And that is where we are seeing activity that is concerning or potentially fraudulent. So we are partnering with our local Office of Inspector General as well as HUD's Office of Inspector General and referring those cases for additional investigation.

Yes, Commissioner Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A quick question. So on the non-cooperative and non-responsive, how does that kind of break down? Is it mostly people that cannot provide the documentation that's required, or is it people that file an application and then just forgot about it and just decided not to follow through, or what?

I think it's a pretty good mix of both. They're pretty evenly distributed in that number. It really, it just depends. So I'll bring up Ryan Flannery for BDO if he can shed some more light on the drill down of that non-cooperative, non-responsive.

Good morning, Chair, Commissioners. So we could get you those numbers. I don't have them off the top of my head. I don't really have much more to add other than it's fairly evenly distributed. I mean, oftentimes it's a situation where applicants either don't want to provide certain documentation. Citizenship documentation has been a big one for us recently. They don't want to give their passports up or their birth certificates. Other times they just may not have certain documentation. But the process works. We give them multiple opportunities. We work with them very closely. In fact, oftentimes we'll help them actually, for example, access the IRS website to be able to get the documentation we need for income purposes. So we do hold hands as much as we can, but sometimes applicants just either choose not to provide or cannot for whatever reason. But if there's more information that you'd like for us to compile, we can get that to you.

The main reason I ask that question is that my office has been contacted, and I assume all of us probably have, by a number of people that said, hey, you know, I submitted my documentation back in October. I've submitted it three and four times. I was told I qualified, and then I get an email or a phone call or whatever a couple weeks ago that says, yeah, you don't qualify, sorry. So, you know, it's just that there's a level of frustration out there with that.

understand and take that very seriously. So we want to make sure the process is as least burdensome as possible for applicants. We're always balancing that with our compliance requirements and the fact that these programs fundamentally do require a lot of documentation. And so there have been scenarios, we're talking a bit about we'll be talking about policy changes. We've made some minor policy tweaks, process tweaks, different documentation that we believe can help streamline, which actually I think sometimes applicants will see as, well, now you're requesting something else from us, but ultimately it really is us streamlining that program. So I think what we've found is there is a general frustration with the number of documents required, and I think that that does come out when when the documentation is requested. And sometimes applicants think they're giving us a certain document, but it's not the right document. For example, tax returns, we need the tax transcript. They may not understand what a tax transcript is relative to a basic 1040 document or some other document they have. So some of it's educational. We have to talk to them, work through some of those things with them in order to be compliant with the HUD requirements.

There's a lot of strings attached with federal money.

There are. We are doing a lot to try to reduce those burdens on our applicants.

Thank you.

Commissioners, also just know that we set up the contract with them where they only get paid as a contractor when they get an approved application. So it's incentivizing them to help our residents get through this process as much as possible, but it has to be HUD compliant.

We had the... this may be as much for Kevin, an after the fact permitting process that we said you didn't ask for the permit up front. We're allowed a pathway to get a permit after the fact. At the same time, those folks that obviously they did it without a permit, they can't then seek reimbursement. So is there a way to tie that together? Is there an opportunity on the after the fact permitting and advertising in addition to making your house more marketable and saleable later by getting this after the fact permit in place, you also could be reimbursed for some expenses. We have several programs that might fit you. I don't know how that works, Kevin. Maybe you could comment on that as it relates to this.

Good morning, Mr. Chair, Commissioners. BDRS actually has partnered with the recovery team on all of our outreach events for after the fact permitting where there is the ability to become eligible for reimbursement with an after the fact permit obtained. So this has been one of our approaches to incentivize our residents to come in to become compliant with an after-the-fact permit and at the same time become eligible.

How are we doing on that after-the-fact permitting process?

We've had some surges of good activity, typically following mailings that we've sent out. In fact, we just sent out last week a postcard reminder regarding after the fact permitting. At the end of June, the waiving of the two times a normal permit fee will sunset. So this was the timing of getting that in place again was to to bring as many residents forward as we can. We've made that process as straightforward in almost every case. It's a homeowner. that is obtaining this because if a contractor was pursuing it would have in effect have been a violation of doing work without a permit. So these are permits that we're able to almost in every case issue on the spot either across the street or in the case of our mobile home parks we're able to also do that on site.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Go ahead.

And now to talk about some program accomplishments. We're really excited to share this information with you. So we do have applications that are running through our review and approval process every day. And so some highlights for our homeowner rehabilitation program are that we currently have 20 homes that are assigned to 10 general contractors for construction, five of which have already started construction, and two have already been completed. Our local landlord program as well has three homes that are assigned to three different general contractors, and they are also in the pre-construction phase. So we're very excited that This program is ramping up and ready to roll. Our homeowner reimbursement program continues to do well with over 81 approved applications and 25 grant agreements that have been signed to date. 23 actual payments have gone out to applicants as a result of a final review and payment by the clerk's office. Our home buyer assistance program continues to do well with 41 closings to date and people moving into their new homes and 44 applicants who have already been approved that are searching for the home of their dreams. Our disaster relief payment program has over 200 applications approved, 166 grant agreements signed to date, and those payments are made directly to the applicant as well after a final review and approval by the clerk's office for payment. So I did want to take a second to thank the clerk of court for all the work that they're doing and the positive partnership that we have together. So now, as I've said, we've been evaluating program progress applications, some service gaps and areas of need that are still needed. So I did want to talk about some policy recommendations that we have to cast a wider net to be able to serve more people, get money out the door quicker to people that are truly in need. Our first is regarding our multi-family structures, so think condominiums, town homes. This request is clarifying how condo owners can be served, that we would serve them through the homeowner reimbursement program versus the homeowner rehabilitation or local landlord program for repairs that have already been completed up to $50,000. The second topic for a policy recommendation is regarding the homeowner rehabilitation and local landlord program and the homeowner insurance requirement that we currently have for this program. This is not a HUD requirement. So we are requesting to update the guidelines to encourage homeowner insurance after construction rather than require it. This would help to lower the financial burden to entry for most of our vulnerable applicants. The third topic is mobile home unit elevation. So originally we selected five feet and we would like to increase that to eight feet elevation. This would be able to assist more mobile home units to elevate them and approximately 72% of our total mobile home applicants may be able to be served with a change in this policy. The next one is regarding our reimbursement award thresholds. We are looking to put a cap on the amount of assistance for our mobile home unit reimbursement to $15,000. And we're requesting this change to align with the federal cost principles and cost reasonableness, as well as to make it equitable with our HRRP program, our homeowner rehab program.

Oh, sorry about that.

The next topic is regarding our homeowner reimbursement program and the minimum property standards. We would like to modify the requirement for these standards to allow applicants to receive awards for even if their home still has minor quality issues like peeling paint, a cracked window, a smoke detector that is not installed. So these homes are fundamentally safe to occupy and are livable and so modifying the minimum property standards in this case would allow more applicants to be served.

So, commissioners, these are minor tweaks to the program. If you have any concerns about them, then we can discuss those. If not, it doesn't necessarily require a vote. They can just incorporate these, but these are policy changes that they want to incorporate into the program to help speed up these areas.

And they're our policy, our policy.

Well, they would be modifications to our policies. These do not require HUD approval, so it's below that threshold.

I understand. Any questions from the commissioners? I would like to see a vote on this by the commission. Commissioner Scott, did you have a question? Oh, Commissioner Flowers, I'm sorry.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So for the viewing audience, what does HRRP stand for?

Homeowner Rehabilitation Reconstruction Program.

What does LLP stand for?

The Local Landlord Program.

Thank you. Sometimes persons don't know what you're talking about, and we use those acronyms frequently. Number one, I do support the update guidelines to encourage homeowners insurance after construction rather than require, because we know that has, well, the concerns I've gotten has been a major barrier with individuals that are applying. That's number one. Number two, I want to make sure I am understanding. So under your HRRP LLP eligible structure types, you're asking to remove multifamily structures. would essentially be condominiums. And in exchange, it would be reimbursement structure types to add condos as a component. I just wanna make sure that people who are watching now or later will understand that should they live in a condominium that may have suffered damage, they still are eligible to apply. Okay, the different category.

Under reimbursement.

Right, under a different category. For your, this is a question, for those persons who we've been able to assist with their home, owner purchasing. Congratulations and thank you. Can you give me an average amount that we have provided someone with that assistance?

So our awards are up to $80,000 and most of our awards thus far have been for our low to moderate income population to get them into homes. So it is generally around $70,000 to $80,000 range. That is

Again, good to hear for the viewing audience because a lot of persons think they don't qualify potentially for that program. Yes. The other is the very last one, reimbursement minimum property standards. You'll slide over, Mr. Thank you. That's okay. Modify requirement for minimum property standards for reimbursement to allow applicant to receive awards with minor requirements. Quality issues. Can you give maybe one example? So that persons will know What might fall under that court category where maybe they would qualify?

Absolutely. So we're looking at homes that are livable That are that are fundamentally safe to occupy they may just have minor repairs that are needed such as a fire alarm to be installed or a smoke detector to be installed a Cracked window Or peeling paint is another minimum property standard that we're looking to lessen the strictness of.

And that will be all, again, as a result of your home or condo having received damage as a result of Hurricane Helene or Milton.

Or Idalia, yes.

Just want to make sure because, again, some persons still don't quite get it. Thank you so much, Mr.

Chair. And that's just getting the message out to people. So not only getting it to them, but that they can clearly understand. And then to trudge through the process. And that's a lot of hand-holding, I'm sure.

Yes, and we are happy to walk them through the process.

I'm sure. Yep.

I wanted to clarify something real quick when you talk about approval. So these together, these policy recommendations could help roughly 300 of the applicants that are just out there waiting right now, depending on other qualifications. Some of these two of these would require an action plan update that would require your formal approval. The policy items we've talked about before, we've been in front of you several times and had policy discussions, and those are not required to be approved, the policy per HUD, but we are required to have this type of discussion with you. So you can vote on them, but you would see two of these back before you at an action plan stage, which we would need a formal approval from HUD. Which of those? I've got it, yeah. Okay.

So it would be for the reimbursement structure type because we are opening up eligibility.

It would also be for the minimum. Oh, I'm sorry.

That's incorrect. The next policy is on the next slide that I'll be discussing, and it will be a substantial amendment to the action plan.

So the only one on this page then is the second one?

Correct.

So if we wanted to just approve the other ones, we can approve that list except that one.

We can incorporate it into our program guidelines. Okay.

And the purpose of that through HUD is just speed. So we all talk about speed of these applicants are waiting. They may have applied in November. And so just to get them in the pipeline.

I understand.

Perfect. Commissioner Scott, did you have a question? I did. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This may be on a... page to come up here, but you mentioned earlier in the presentation that there was one program, I forget which one, that was oversubscribed?

Yes.

So is this designed to sort of even that out, or is that a further policy recommendation?

So this is designed to really cast a wider net across all programs, even if we are oversubscribed, because there are applications that people have applied for that they may not be eligible or meet those basic requirements.

Are we at a point where we need to be moving money from one program to another at this point, or we're still?

No, we're not there yet. We are continuing to evaluate. I mean, we evaluate on a consistent and ongoing basis as far as do we need to pause applications for certain programs that are oversubscribed? What additional outreach is needed? What kind of policy recommendations can we make to widen that net of availability? So it is a continuous and ongoing process.

Yeah, I know, we'll get to that one. That's really the tough part. And I certainly don't have the answers on where to get the word out to an audience that actually might be interested in listening to it at that time. So I don't know.

We've tried to get really creative with our communications department as far as the different outreach opportunities that we can do. And they've been really great and responsive in trying to get the word out to as many people as they can.

Go ahead.

I did want to add that the reimbursement threshold for mobile home units for 15,000 would also be a substantial amendment.

So that one, we were going to pull that off as well?

It would be a substantial amendment for the action plan, yes. So those three.

Okay, so we'll pull those three off and vote on the rest of them.

And then I do have one more policy recommendation to discuss, and it gets its own slide because it's a lot of information. So this would be a substantial amendment to the action plan as well, and it is to create a pathway within our homeowner rehabilitation program for our mobile home or modular home unit owners where replacement or reconstruction on the site that they're currently on is not feasible or safe. So these are your low to moderate income populations that don't own the land, that are living in a mobile home park, that they don't have a mortgage on their mobile home, and they have a substantially damaged or SD determination. This opportunity would be offered to eligible applicants, which is a new path to purchase an existing housing unit outside of the floodplain versus replacing their mobile home unit since it's not able to be completed. This is a population just for awareness that we can't currently serve. And this policy update or a substantial amendment to the action plan, we would be able to serve these individuals.

So I was a little confused. I thought we already had a program that looked for a house, of buying a house. In fact, we'd done... Homebuyer assistance. Is that what we're talking?

This is a different program. This is this is a pathway within our home owner Rehabilitation program. So if they have a mobile home unit that is substantially damaged that we can't replace safely They would be given the opportunity to be relocated. We would demolish that structure And then they would be able to relocate outside of the floodplain with another mobile home with up to three hundred and seventy five thousand dollars and

For another mobile home unit. It could be another mobile outside the floodplain.

Yes. Any kind of existing housing unit outside the floodplain.

So this one we're going to wait on because it needs to come back. Matt, I want to pull off the ones that... We need to separate, and the rest of them I want to get the commission to go ahead and approve.

Chair, understood. So we can pull off those three if the commission's fine. There's three that will have to come back before you in a different setting for approval. So that's this one. And can you go back to the slide? And so if the commission's fine with the remaining policy recommendations... The motion could be to approve those minus the three that have to come back before action plan and those will be back before you.

And again, Claire, just name the three that are of those that looks like we have seven, including that one on the second page.

Yes. So it would be the multifamily structure type, adding it for reimbursement.

That's what we're going to pull off.

Yes. For a substantial amendment. the cap on the mobile home unit for $15,000, and then the relocation pathway under our homeowner rehabilitation program.

So the remaining four, we need a motion for approval. We don't need it, but we're going to do it. So do we have a motion on the other four items that we can move, just agree with? Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner Nowicki. Second by Commissioner Shearer. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Okay, so those four we've taken care of, this board has, and we have those other three to bring back. Go ahead.

And then we have some good news stories to end our presentation. So the lovely lady on the left is our first homeowner rehabilitation construction. She was very grateful and was part of our social media campaign to encourage more applications for this program. She was overjoyed that her home was repaired after the hurricanes. The remaining two in the middle and on the right are two of our homebuyer assistance applicants who moved into their new homes in the last few months.

Anything else?

Nope, that's it. Does anybody have any questions or need more information?

Commissioner Flowers.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a compliment. First of all, I was very grateful to be able to present a check, like so many of my colleagues as well, to be able to present a check to someone who received support from our program. So thank you so very much because... I got over 3,000 hits on people saying, I didn't know that this was a part of, so thank you for that. Number one, and thank the comms for that. Number two, you all probably are going to do this, but hopefully there will be some type of media rollout as it relates to the changes. So people will now know that maybe I didn't qualify before, but I qualify now. Because while we've done over 400 or so persons that we've impacted with a couple of million dollars, we still have more people that we could help. And so to get this out as soon as possible, I think would be absolutely lovely. Not saying you guys aren't doing that, but just making a very strong suggestion.

Yes, absolutely.

That we do that so they'll know.

We are planning an update on the status of the program for social media, and we're also working with communications regarding these changes.

Abeloso. Thank you.

I think letting people know how much you're actually granting gives people like, I'm not going to bother. And then you hear, oh, it's $62,000. Or you hear, and it's like, well, that might grab people's attention a little bit.

Absolutely. We try to get as many good news stories as we can.

Good. Thank you. All right, thank you very much. Appreciate the update.

Very much.

Okay, Barry. Okay, the next item we had, you asked that we provide an update and actually put on for your consideration a towing update. Doug is unable to be with us, but his boss, Tim Burns, is on his way up and will provide you an overview around the towing. Hello, Tim.

Good morning, Commissioner.

Welcome.

Tim Burns with Pinellas County Human Services. I'm going to be providing a brief update on our towing rate discussions that we've had recently. Our previous ordinance updates, kind of the origin of the ordinance. Administrative lien release fee that came up in recent years. The current rates that can be updated by resolution. The towing industry recommendations that we have received. Our staff ordinance recommendations that would need to be brought back for public hearing as well. And then just a little bit of information related to the complaint summaries that we've been receiving. So our towing ordinance was established in 2000. It was intended to help guide local towing regulation and help set our towing rates. From 2000 through 2019, our ordinance did not see any updates to our rates. So there was a gap in time for those rates to be updated. In 2019, Consumer Protection brought back updates to the rates. Those updates increased the typical tow by approximately 20%. Again, in 2023, after having conversations with the towing industry, we brought back towing industry recommendations that we were in alignment with and increased the current rates by an additional 18%. When you look at the base rate of a typical toe, it went from approximately $100, which was set in 2000, to $147, which is our current rate for our typical base toe. That's been increased 100 to 147 since 2019, including the increases to the base, increases to mileage, increases to storage. There was approximately a 51% total increase since 2019 on a typical tow. During our meeting in 2023, yes, sir.

It was an increase, a significant increase from 2019 on those three areas that you talked about, the base, mileage, and storage. but what was done from 2000 to 2019 on all three fronts?

There were no rate increases during that time. That was a gap in time.

Significant increase in the last three years, but nothing for a 20-year, almost 20-year period.

That is correct.

Go ahead.

During our meeting in 2023, we were asked to return to have conversations with the towing industry to explore other recommendations and bring back additional recommendations to the board. We held a series of different conversations with the towing industry. We had five meetings following that 2023 August meeting. And we were very close to consensus. And in July 2024, there was legislation that came forward which pushed forward a $250 administrative lien fee. We immediately saw that lien fee being implemented and charged in Pinellas County and started seeing a spike in complaints from consumers. So at that time, in order to explore and assess what that impact was, we did pause the moving forward on additional recommendations that we were discussing. And we started exploring. what that impact was for consumers. We did send a memo to brief the board about that pause and have been looking at our rates since. We received updates to our rates, our two rate recommendations from the towing industry in 2025. And then again, in May of 2026, we reached out again for any additional updates from the industry. I do want to note that consumer protection very much agrees with having competitive rates for our towing industry. One of the things we're trying to do is just figure out what that balance is between those competitive rates and the impact to our consumers.

Question for you.

Yes, sir.

When you go to a parking lot and you see a... handicap spot that says handicap only, and below the handicap sign, there's a little number there that tells people it's just not right to do it, but if you do it, it's a $250 charge minimum. It kind of gets your attention, like if you're not gonna do the right thing, you're gonna also pay $250 if you don't have the ticket. Has there ever been any talk about bringing that same picture to residents like, say, average towing charge, because there's no specific because it's all over the place, but an average towing charge might be $450, maybe $500. I suppose the bad actors are still going to be bad actors, but there may be an opportunity to let folks know, our consumer, you're talking about that balance, letting them know this is a $450 average charge if you park here, which is even, it's double. Again, I think it's dramatic. Not that I want to raise my hand and say that I'm guilty of doing that, like just for a second, you know, and I've so far lucked out, but there was never, oh, it's just a towing charge, well. The towing charges have changed, but I don't think people really get it until they go down there to pick their car up. So I think maybe we need to think about that dramatic statement. However you phrase it, maybe it's average towing, whatever it is, I think that might be something to help with this balancing thing. Because we're all sensitive to our residents. But we're also saying, hey, it's almost like, Buyer beware. You take that spot. Go ahead. I didn't mean to interrupt too much, but I think that's something we need to look at.

Absolutely, sir. We do post the rates on our website, and then we do prescribe very specific signage for the towing areas. But to your point, I think certainly we can be looking at how do we enhance public awareness on the rates as well.

When they go find that parking place, they're not going to our website first.

Absolutely.

We need that dramatic statement when they go into that parking spot and then go across the street to some other place. Go ahead.

We can explore that. Absolutely. So expanding briefly on the administrative lien fee. The administrative lien fee is an allowable lien release fee under Florida Statute 71378. So it's allowable. It is a rate that is set outside of our typical rate setting authority at the county. So it came about with the statutory changes. We saw it being applied more often in the community. And again, as I mentioned, saw some spikes in complaints. This $250 fee did immediately, for some of the complaints, almost double the cost of the tow. So that's where we paused. When we started looking... And it's also important to note that this lien fee is in addition to a $60 administrative fee that can be charged after the first 24 hours and a $40 filing lien notice fee that are both existing currently within our ordinance.

Yeah, Commissioner Scott has a question.

Yes, sir. So that administrative lien fee, the $250 fee, can that be charged on every non-consensual or police-directed tow?

My understanding is that it can. It falls within statute. It is not part of our ordinance. So we have been monitoring a case in Hillsboro. Hillsboro has language in their ordinance that does restrict lien fees within the first 48 hours of a tow. They have a current lawsuit related to this restriction, related to the timing, and Hillsborough initially prevailed in their ordinance language in November of 2025. That case is currently under appeal. It's elevated to the second DCA, and we don't have timing for when that case will be resolved. But that is something we've been monitoring as a potential language option related to our ordinance. The application of the $250 fee really does seem to vary across the state in terms of folks seeing complaints. With Pinellas, as I mentioned, we saw an immediate charging of the fee. Our complaints started to increase. We have seen 318 complaints specific to the $250 fee since its inception in July 2024. For the lien, the complaints make up 83% of all towing-related complaints we've received in 2025 and in 2026 to date. And for just 2026 to date, 183 of the 200 complaints we've received related to towing are related to this lien fee. Those are the things we've been trying to sort through.

Related to what?

This administrative lien fee increase on the cost of a tow. This slide shows a brief comparison of our current rates and several other counties.

Mr. Scott had a question again. A quick question on the last slide. So the last bullet point in the last slide says that in other counties, the $250 is assessed in few instances or allowed under ordinance. So why is the difference between, it appears that it's being applied a lot more in Pinellas than other counties based on that statement there. So can you explain that?

I think we're seeing a varied implementation depending on the counties. Different counties have different ordinances in place, and they have different tow operators. We see that Hillsborough has been, they had 48-hour lien language in their ordinance at the beginning. And while that is in court, I don't think that they have seen as many complaints coming into Hillsborough.

So do we have the ability to control that $250 fee by updating our ordinance?

That's what we're exploring in our discussions with legal. They believe that that is potentially sound language. But as I mentioned, it is currently under appeal with the second district court of appeals. And they did prevail and originally in November of 2025. But it is under appeal. So on this slide, this shows our current rates for some of the basic rates that can be addressed that are currently in our ordinance that can be raised by resolution. So we can see that we're currently at 147 and we're a little bit below Hillsborough and Pasco. We're a little bit above Manatee and Polk. It's important to note that each of the counties, they look at their rates at different times. I will note that Hillsborough has been looking at theirs as well. We don't have any timeframe or anything like that on when they're looking at their rates. But that's just an important note. This slide also shows what the average cost of that tow related to base tow rate, the mileage at 10 miles max, which is $5 per mile, and then storage of $30 after six hours. And it shows that the cost typically would be about $227 for the consumer. When we saw the lien fee really start getting implemented quite a bit in Pinellas County, we started seeing complaints where the individuals are paying up to $477 for the same tow. Just as a note, several other fees that can be changed by resolution include Adding additional time on scene, which is currently at $30 per 15 minutes. A TARP fee of $35 can also be changed by resolution. And existing administration fees, which I referenced previously, that are in our ordinance at $60 after 24 hours and $40 for the mailing of lien. Those can all be adjusted because they're existing fees within our ordinance. As mentioned, we've been reaching out and meeting with the towing operators. We've had a lot of great conversations. We're absolutely in concurrence of trying to ensure that we have competitive rates in Pinellas County. From our meetings and from reaching back out, we received a lot of different recommendations from tow operators. This slide shows just a brief consolidation of some of those recommendations. When asked for feedback, the tow operators advised that they would like to see the base trespass tow be at between 210 to $250. The mileage up to 10 miles from eight $10 per mile. The daily storage go from $30 to $45 to $55. The administrative, the county administrative fee and lien notice fees would go, the recommendation would be to $130 to $150 combined. And then also a raise of the tarp fee from $35 to $50. So looking at these, a typical tow based on those rates would increase by approximately $108 to $178 for a typical Type A or Class A vehicle tow. In addition to those rates, these are the other adjustments that were sent in from the towing operators. And so these are additional lists of new rates. They don't exist in the current ordinance. These are items that the tow operators are looking to have put into the ordinance. They involve new equipment fees, EV-related fees, and other specialty types of fees.

Do we know how... What other counties do on these fronts?

A majority of these are not currently in other ordinances that we've explored, but we would have to do more review for some of these. We just recently got more of these updates in May from the towing industry. Moving on to our recommendations. So for Pinellas Consumer Protection, we've been looking at this for a while. We are trying to figure out how to balance a competitive rate with impacts to consumers. We are looking to explore inclusion of the Hillsborough language, restricting lien fees to after 48 hours prior to establishing new base rates. We think that that is an important safeguard to avoid immediate high-cost totals. We're also exploring adding a new emergency fuel surcharge that would be $1 a mile when diesel is triggered, when diesel is over $5.50. We'd be looking at implementing a CPI-based adjustment to base tow rates that would happen annually. We are looking at that being capped at 3%, but never below zero. And you can see the January 2024, 2025, and 2026 rates. They were 1.7, 1.9, and then negative 3.3. So obviously in 2026, we would not do the negative. But that is something to allow for till rates to adjust in between years whenever we don't have all of the review coming back to the board. So it's a more proactive approach. One of the things we talked quite a bit with the toe industry about was the need for gate after hours gate fees, we believe you on all of our discussions that this is a very important fee to ensure we include. You know the two operators talked about having to pull individuals off the road in order to come back open up their location. They have to respond within a very specific period of time in order to release the vehicle. And so there's definitely an impact to operators that this fee would assist with. And then finally, it's looking at recommendations for ordinance clarifications. So requiring photo or video documentation of violations. Updating the drop fee language that clarifies that there's no more than half of the base tow rate before arriving at the storage location. So if it's dropped before going to the storage site, then it would be half the fee. Clarifying that failure to provide required records to an investigating officer would constitute a violation. Providing updates from recent statutory changes on acceptable payment types. Those were other clarifications we felt were important for the ordinance. And looking at our recommendations for the actual rates themselves. So this, again, is a Class A trespass rate comparison. I will show all the classes shortly as well. But in this one, what we are looking at is raising our base rate from 147 to 175 as a base tow rate. We'd be looking at increasing the mileage from $5 per mile to $6 per mile. You can see the top is the current rates. The bottom shows what our proposed recommended rates would be. The storage would go up by $5 to $35. And what you can see there is that does put us in line with a majority of the counties that are in the region or should put us in line with the counties in the region. What this also shows is what, so we added in what the lien release fee adds to that base tow. And again, currently, a base tow with a lien release fee would be $477. With our recommended adjustments to the rates, it would be $520.

That's what your recommendation is?

Our recommendation, and we're making it contingent upon looking at the 48-hour language that Hillsboro has in their ordinance, but our recommendations would be to go to $175 for a typical base and then adjust the mileage and storage. Again, we want to try to keep pace with a competitive environment, but we also want to make sure we're balancing consumers.

So the Red, the Hillsboro's currently what they're charging

Hillsboro currently is at 160. They have discussed that they've been exploring rates. They have not advised on any time frame or any next steps on their rate review.

Yeah, because that red thing says recently proposed to Hillsboro. Is that from the industry? Or is that what the Hillsboro folks are thinking about?

It's the numbers that they received when reviewing their towing. I'm not positive whether that came from the industry specifically or whether that is more of an internal. Those are the numbers that they shared that they were reviewing.

Do we know if Pasco, Manatee, and Polk are all looking at them too?

I am not sure of their current status in terms of actively looking, but, you know, Everybody has a slightly different timeframe on looking at their rates.

Commissioner Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So the average tow fee with the addition of the state lien admin fee increased the average tow by 110%.

With the lien fee when it was included, yes. And all the complaints that I've referenced, we've seen that lien fee in those complaints.

I'm sure we don't have any idea when the court case is gonna be decided, but I'm just, to me, that's just, it's kind of shocking, so I can understand why the complaints have gone up quite significantly because of that. I'm kind of a little hesitant to move forward with anything until we kind of find out the outcome of that. That 110% is just, that's just massive. It's just massive. So I'll see if there's any other questions here.

So I'm asking just for clarity. So the 110% increase, is that an increase that would flow from 2000 to 2019 or is that a one year increase?

No, I believe the increase, um, Commissioner Scott's referring to is the administrative lien fee that was pushed forward with some with some legislative changes in July of 2024. So we were looking at bringing forward recommendations for increasing our rates and in line with this. And at the time when that lien fee started getting charged, we paused. And that's when we briefed the commission and advised that we needed to understand what the impact was to consumers. Because our typical tow, what you can see there is our typical tow at $227 with the lien fee added onto it becomes $477. And we did see a series of complaints related to that.

So that's two years, essentially, Dan, from 2024 till now.

Yeah, that lien fee is ongoing.

Yeah, but I'm saying as far as the 110% increase, because you're saying we paused it. So I was just trying to see if it was like, you know, just right now or, okay.

Well, the recommended above the current is about 10%.

The difference is whether you're including the lien fee as an automatic or not. That's correct. I'm sorry. I said the difference is whether you're including the lien fee as an automatic or not. And that's what's being appealed over in Hillsborough.

Correct.

So we have a couple of slides in your packet for reference, but I'm going to move to the overall recommendations.

One of the difference commissioners is what they're saying is that administrative fee shouldn't be applied until after 48 hours. And so is that your record? Yeah. So that's a difference. Staff's looking and saying, okay, the administrative fee kicks in at 48 hours. So it's whether or not you agree with the 48-hour rule or not on when that now, again, subject to the outcome of the court case. But that's how they've looked at it. And then you can see the impact pre or post 48 hours on a consumer.

So when we... Go ahead.

I'm sorry. Go ahead. So for the state lien release, the fee that is being proposed, the fee that's charged, is that for the paperwork that is required to be completed and filed when they are towing a car and for the release of the car and all of that? And if so, what is the actual fee that the state charges the tow company? For the release of lien. Just like if, you know, we go pay a ticket or whatever. In that ticket, it's a fee because it goes through the court system and they're charging that fee, which is essentially a clerk's office fee because they're having to do that paperwork. Do you know what that is?

I don't have that exact fee here. That $250 is for administrative fees that the tow operators incur for their tow. In our ordinance, we also have a $60 fee, administrative fee, and a $40 mailing fee in our ordinance as well. That would be in addition to. You're welcome. So in terms of the 48-hour language, that is something that Barry is mentioning. We are recommending looking at rate increases to maintain a competitive environment. But we are mentioning that we're looking at this contingent upon that language to help prevent an immediate impact to consumers that pick up their vehicles within two hours. And so that's what we did when we were looking at our recommended rates. You do see a, you know, in terms of Class A trespass tow or police-directed tow, you see the rates that we're recommending, the mileage, the storage, and then you see what that approximate cost range would be with 48-hour language included in our ordinance, and then post-48 hours what that cost would be for the consumer. So we tried to take a look at it as if we were able to put 48-hour language in our ordinance, if Hillsborough prevails with that, then we would be able to avoid immediate impacts for consumers within the first 48 hours, but still allow for that fee to occur after 48 hours.

Do we have any sense of how many vehicles are picked up after 48 hours or within and after 48 hours?

I don't have that number, but we certainly can get that, and I'm sure that the industry would be happy to share that as well.

I'd be kind of curious to know that.

Okay. So in terms of our increases, this chart shows our percentage increase for each of the different categories for tow. So our recommendations on Class A would be for trespass tows, our rate would be 175. That's approximately a 19% increase. For police directed, it would be 31% increase to $200. The mileage would be a 20% increase from $5 to $6 per mile, up to 10 miles. And then storage would go up $5, and that's roughly 17%. You can see for Class B, the increase is 19%. For a trespass, 26% for police-directed. For Class C, the increase would be 19%. For trespass, 21% for police-directed. And for Class D, it would be 19% for trespass and 22% for self-directed or police-directed, sorry. So this just shows the percentages of increase for these rates, and these would be our rate recommendations based on a 48-hour provision added to our ordinance.

Could you explain the 48-hour provision one more time as it relates to the $250 charge that the state's doing? I just want to make sure I'm clear on that.

So Hillsborough has a provision in their ordinance that restricts liens within the first 48 hours of the tow. They have enforced that provision, but it has been taken to court. They prevailed in their initial hearings in court. in November of 2025, but it is currently being appealed with the second DCA. So we don't know what the outcome of that ordinance language is for that 48-hour restriction. But it basically would prevent an individual that picks up their vehicle immediately after the tow from being assessed additional lien fees.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. If we update our ordinance with all your recommendations, including the increases, the 48-hour language, the annual cost of living increase, and then the Hillsborough lawsuit turns out to get shot down where they can charge a $250 fee, how do we unring the bell?

We would have to reconsider the ordinance if that's the case, if folks would want to review the rates.

That's the reason they initially didn't bring forth recommendations.

That's my main concern, is we put all these increases in place, and then the court says, no, you can charge a $250 fee, and then our consumers are getting hammered.

So that lean piece there that essentially would have to go away if the $250 is reinstated.

At that point, you add $250 to each one of those. Correct.

Is that what you mean? I have a question.

Mr. Peters.

So do you know why the state agreed to put that in? What was the argument that the legislature debated on the floor as to why it was important for the towers to have $250?

Originally, they were looking at that as a cap or limitation on predatory towing.

So it had nothing to do with what it costs for the certified letters that have to be sent out. Because I know in my business that I had previously, Just being in a storage business, the cost to me on just having to do the certified letters when someone didn't pay and the arduous process that we had to do to take ownership of that property was very expensive and every single year it's gone up in expense. So if I'm not mistaken, I believe that administrative fee had more to do with the cost of certified letters and the costs associated with that same kind of process, not necessarily predator towing, was my understanding. So we haven't talked at all about those kind of costs. They wanted money on electric vehicles, but we haven't talked at all about the cost of the new technologies, the new equipment, and what it costs to tow an electric vehicle versus what it costs to tow a non-electric vehicle. And so, you know, the fact that you just went over that and dismissed that kind of concerns me because there's real costs there. And so I know there's concerns about what a state law went by, but that state law was put in by the state, and I don't think it's our discretionary purpose to judge that. When Hillsborough County does that, I think they can, but those questions, we've never even discussed. Even when you had our one-on-ones, they just weren't even discussed. And so I think there's a lot more to this, and I'm looking forward to hearing from the Towers to hear what they have to say about this, because I think there's a whole lot more involved in their stuff. And I have seen all the conversations between Doug and the Towers. And you said that you met with them often. There was no conversation for almost a year until I alerted them that you had a presentation for us. So I didn't feel like a whole year going by was real communication. So that's for a later discussion. But that administrative fee that we're talking about, there's more to it and the law, the state chose to put that in for a reason. And I have not heard, and I'm sure the towers can give us a better explanation, as to why it was so critically important that that law was passed. And I don't think it was predatory towing. My gut tells me that's not the real reason.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We already have in our ordinance the ability to charge fees for that purpose.

Yes, there's currently a $60 administrative fee after 24 hours within ordinance and a $40 fee for mailing notices as well. In our ordinance. So I wanted to just finally and quickly just address what I mentioned about complaints. So this just represents our towing complaints that we receive. You can see that the number of towing complaints we received in 2022, 130, 2023, 102. In 2024, we had 103. 17 of those were specific to the 250. We started seeing those occur. In 2025, we've received 168 towing-related complaints. 112 of those were specific to the $250 additional lien fee being assessed. And then in 2026 to date, we've had 200 complaints so far, and 189 of those complaints have been related to the $250 additional lien fee. So, and then one final thing, we did put a couple case examples in your packet. You know, I do think it's important just to note, you know, in this example, this is a lawful tow. The person should have been towed. The vehicle was picked up within two hours. The individual paid $463.21 for the vehicle. With the towing industry recommendations on rates, it would potentially be about $559 to $621 for that tow. Pre-July 2024, before the lien fee was prevalent, it would have been approximately $204 for that exact same tow. And with our new recommendations, it would be, if we are under the 48 hours, since it was picked up within two hours, it would be approximately $242 for that specific tow. So just an example of some differences in the rates, but this is one of the complaints we received. They picked it up within two hours, and the cost was $463.

I'm just so glad this is clear as mud for me. Commissioner Nowicki.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you so far for the presentation. I'm not really sure how I feel about it all yet, but going back to the towing complaints, how many of them resulted in an actual fine or a penalty against the operators?

I can... So a lot of those complaints did not result in a fine or citation with the towing operators because they were lawful tows. And so at that point, it was really, it was a complaint that we tried to mediate with the towing operators, but it was not a citable offense. I can get you information about the numbers of citations and warnings that we have issued over the last several years.

Yeah, because, you know, just trying to look back in the ordinance and maybe, you know, you can, maybe you would know better, but the penalty of like $500, I think that's like the maximum fine. I mean, that hasn't been increased since like 07, 05, something like that. Is that right?

That's a typical, I mean, our citations that we have in Pinellas County are set across for all of our different ordinances. I'm not sure when the last time that that range was updated. I would have to get with the county attorney's office on that.

Yeah, because it's been like 07. I mean, I, you know, if we're increasing rates, you know, for people to charge more, you know, I think that should come with increased penalties as well. So that's something I would be, you know, in favor of looking at, but just thank you.

Go ahead. Any, I mean, these are just examples of

This is just an example of it within a two-hour till, what the cost was for that consumer. That's correct.

On these years where we have the number of complaints, the number of 250, is there a column that you could put together? I know we're going to come back with this. The number of toes we actually had? I mean, I'd just like to have a sense of... Is it 200 complaints out of 200 tows, or is it 200 complaints out of 20,000 tows? I mean, I know it's not the first. I just have no clue. We can explore. I know kind of what we're looking at. It's still an increase. We can see that dramatically. I'm not sure why the big increase from 25 to 26 to date. That seems to be a big jump. I know the 24 to 25 is that $250 charge, probably. Anyway. Okay. Although it doesn't seem as high as I would have imagined on the number of 250 complaints.

Any other questions? Just Karen saying we don't have the data on the total number of tows.

Yeah.

We only have work complaint driven. I understand.

Yeah, relative year to year versus the number of tows that we're getting. Okay. Any other questions?

That is it.

Anybody? I mean, are you finished?

I'm finished. Absolutely.

We did have one person who wanted to speak Justin Heller. You want to come forward?

Morning commissioners. Um, so I wanted to thank you guys all for considering the update to the county's towing rates. As you know, the towing industry has faced substantial increase in labor, insurance, fuel, equipment, training, and compliance costs. These adjustments are necessary to ensure that we can continue to provide safe, professional, and timely service to the residents and the visitors of Pinellas. I do respectfully ask that the board consider the towing rate adjustments separately from the proposed restrictions and the rate increases recommendations from county staff relating to the Florida lien release administrative fee. The need for a rate increase exists regardless of anyone's position on the lien release fee. Florida Statute 713.78 governs that fee. It applies only to a limited subset of vehicles that process through the lien process and is separate from the standard towing and storage rates being considered today. Additionally, similar issues currently are the subject of ongoing litigation neighboring Hillsborough County. Rather than tie these two separate matters together, I believe the most prudent approach is to move forward with the rate adjustments the industry needs today and address any concerns regarding the lien release fee through a separate discussion at a later date with the local stakeholders. On behalf of the towing operator services community 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, I respectfully ask your support of the rate adjustments at your consideration in keeping the lien fees issue separate from today's vote. My colleagues and I are here to answer any questions that you may have. And the last question you guys asked, I don't know why the number of tows isn't available because it's public record. But to answer the ongoing question, the amount that was presented here of complaints last I checked when we started this in May was just about under 3% of the total volume of tows that took place in Pinellas County.

That gives a little perspective. Any questions for the gentleman? Yeah.

So just, I know that it seems like a big increase, right? And I still get worked up because you guys went 20 years. So I've been more on your side than not because you went 20 years without increases. So, and then I was upset that we promised you something in 23 and then we just, Never produced what we promised. So that's an exception with the county that I have an issue with. But we talk about this being a high increase. But tell me what your increase in insurance has been, both for the industry and for your employees.

Absolutely. So since that fee went into place, just for example, we'll go from July of 24 through current day. We've seen over, our company alone has seen a 45% annual increase every year in insurance. We've seen some towing operators have a higher increase than 40 to 45%. We've seen some that just didn't get an increase in folded because they just couldn't take the burden off.

And then tell me about, because I brought up the electric vehicles, and I know that there's a big, just with fire departments and the expense that they've had to go through to deal with electric vehicles. Tell me the increased cost, because we aren't considering a fee for electric vehicles in this proposal. Tell me the cost that's different from an electric vehicle than a gas vehicle.

Absolutely. If you're looking at this traditional electric vehicle, like we'll say a Tesla, you're going to be, as a tow company, it's going to cost you anywhere between $100 to $150 between your time, between, you know, the employee going slower, using the additional equipment that you have to use. Then you're factoring in that that vehicle has to be parked X amount of feet away from any other vehicle. You can't just butt them up like you do every other car because if it, ignites eight hours later it's got to have room for fire department to get around so not only are you paying your employee more you're using more expensive equipment than you would with let's say a toyota corolla that's front-wheel drive you're also losing two additional storage spaces in your tow yard to allow that that vehicle to have a little bit of extra space so if it does erupt in flames the cars next to it aren't going to be charged

Okay. So how many companies in the last five years have folded in Pinellas County?

Outside of what I know with professional record operators of Florida, just in Pinellas County, we've seen, I want to say it was eight closed, three sold out to bigger competitors that could afford to take on the burden, and then a few just did early retirement.

So what about state? Because I do have the state numbers. I'm just curious.

That I don't honestly know. I'm only the chair over the local area.

I'm not familiar with the area. The state numbers are in the last two years, 37 tow companies went out of business and 10 of them had a fleet of 40 cars. And that's a big issue because to me, who's going to do this business? Who's going to do it? Is the sheriff going to start towing cars when there's an accident?

If I may, to that point, all the local jurisdictions will use our neighboring Hillsborough County. Guess who, a few years ago, got rid of their tow company and gave it to the private sector? Tampa Police Department.

That's all stuff we have to consider, but thank you for answering my questions.

So let me ask a question. I brought up the idea, again, with the current rates or even the proposed rates or whatever, It's a lot of money for a resident. I'm not talking about what it means to the industry and the towers. What are your thoughts about, and what do you think the cost would be to put an average tow sign, on every tow sign that there is, an average dollar, an average tow cost?

That I wouldn't be able to say the actual cost because we would have to have discussions on is that going to be additional lettering below the current tow sign that the tow company can. get a run of however many signs go out and add it on to their current signs or are we talking an additional sign which then, yes, that can become quite costly.

I don't want to amend the big sign because that becomes more costly. I'm talking about the little sign.

Right. Putting a new little sign like when you referenced earlier underneath the handicapped, that it would probably cost, if I had to guess, $50 per sign.

So if we put in average cost is $500 and it changed.

It would be $50 probably.

And the owner of the property would be required, if we made that a requirement, the owner of the property would be paying for that.

Correct. The owner of the property would be the one having to pay for it.

Again, they're trying to protect their property by keeping people away from using it.

And it's just like, you know, and I've met it with a few of you guys, a lot of people forget that these property owners are using tow companies to protect themselves from fair housing litigation, from all code enforcement violations, fire code violations. I mean, the list goes on and on. It can be very costly for a multifamily property owner who does not utilize a towing service, or if they're losing their towing service, it can get quite costly quite quick, which then in turn is passed on to the renters of that community or the renters of that strip mall or whatever the case may be.

I'm not worried about the strip mall. Those guys, I am concerned about the apartment folks, but I just, what I'm saying is we're trying to, you know, there's discussion here about trying to bring some balance to the equation so that at the same time, ways to make the impact reasonable you know, more obvious to the resident that's making a bad choice. Right. What that's going to cost. To me, that makes me feel better that we've at least done what we can to say, hey, you park here, it's going to be an average $500. Understandable, yes. Minimum average, you know, that's all we're talking about. So to me, that helps me at least, because it's tough. You know, it's tough for you guys and it's tough for residents.

It's tough for everybody. The ultimate part is we have to do what we have to do in order to protect everybody from mitigating what their rental increases are.

It's not a critique. I'm just making a statement. Any other comments? Chair? Commissioner Shearer? Did you have a question for the gentleman?

I don't really know. I just want to say what... No, I don't have a question. I'm thinking. We're done. It's okay. You can sit down. It seems to me that everyone wants to, or the attempt is to try to separate the increase in the fees and the administration fee for $250. I can't do that. They are what they are. If we approve the fees and they win their suit, then we're doubling fees. I don't like that. My question to our attorney is, is it possible to approve an increase to the fees, to standard fees, that would revert back to the original fee should they prevail and the $250 admin fee be determined valid and enforceable.

I would recommend against that just simply because I think it's better to take action by this board. I would recommend that you just bring it back to the board and change it. And I don't know what the thought process is on how this may come forward as far as changing fees, but I mean you can change the fees. Sometimes court rulings can be waffly and I'd rather have something very black and white to trigger a change.

Is it possible or impossible to make a deal with the local towed companies to maybe they hedge their bets? They would agree to a smaller admin fee. Should we? I don't know. I could make a deal. Could I make a deal on the admin fee?

Mr. Scott?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think we all got this letter at one point. I don't know who wrote it or where it came from, but it was a letter from the towing industry, and it starts out, as I'm here today, asking this board to become better stewards of the towing industry. And I've got to be honest, this really irritated me, because that's not our job. Our job is to protect the consumer, and it's not any more the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's job to make sure they're a good steward of my industry. It's just not their job, right? It's our job to protect the consumer. And the industry conditions that have been described to us are the same things that happen in my industry. That's an industry adapting to change. That's innovation. That's what happens, okay? It's not our job to direct that or to prevent that or to encourage that. That's just the free market at work. I'm not suggesting that the towers don't need an increase, but it's not our job to ensure that they have a thriving industry. That is just not our role, period. We do regulate. Well, we do, but there's another side to the industry that we don't, and that's the retail side. If your car breaks down and you don't have AAA or an arrangement with some other emergency service, you're being charged a market rate.

But you're not being charged a 250, I don't think, for that.

Well, I don't know. You may be.

I don't know. No.

Well, no. That's only if it goes to the guard.

That's a trespass charge, I believe.

But the market rate I'm saying is that these other rates here don't apply. If they want to charge $10 a mile to your car, they can charge that. One of my buses breaks down, I'm being charged a market rate. Trust me, I'm being charged a market rate. So all I'm saying here is that it's not our job to prevent what's happening in that industry. I'm not saying they don't need an increase, but it's our job to protect the consumer and make sure that our consumers don't get hammered. I'm gonna lean on the side of the consumer on this one. That's just my position.

It seems like the base rate mileage of storage And just in comparing to others, it might need some adjustment.

Right. Yeah, I'm not saying adjustments don't need to be made, and that an annual increase based on CPI is not the right way to go. I mean, I'm probably okay with that.

Certainly, it would have been nice in 19 years to have had a standard increase.

But what really concerns me is there is a predatory nature to this industry that is designed to nickel and dime people to death. Yeah. And some of the examples that have been cited here, if you're a single family or if you're a young family, some of these fines, some of these fees to get your car back could be two weeks worth of groceries.

That's all. It's a tough thing. It's almost like, well, you can do the, I almost, in my industry, call it the triple net rate, which is just your base rate, and then all the other add-ons which makes it different for every violator, right? But it's also more confusing and complicated. Or you could charge a more full service rate that everybody pays the same rate. There's none of these other charges, and you end up some people paying more than they should have. And so it's a real catch-22. You're either paying that triple net or the full service, and both have, you know, you know, some positive things behind it. So, because it is, I'm just listening to this conversation. I'm like, I'm like ready for a break. This is like, this is complicated stuff and it all plays together. I'm not saying, anyway, Barry what's the, what's the staff target as far as like advertising a public hearing and doing all of that?

So any of these current rates that you have, we've listed here, so you could make any adjustments to the current fees if you so choose. If you want to, so at the last meeting, you discussed a surcharge. That is currently not within our ordinance. If you would like to do a surcharge, we would then need to advertise it. We could have it available for your consideration at the July 21st meeting. Or any of the other, fees that are not currently part of our ordinance.

So we can make some adjustments today if we choose to do that. I'm still hot on this sign thing and maybe nobody else shares that with me, but if I'm going to park in a parking place and I know it's going to be $500 minimum, I think I'm going to think twice about it. Now, there may be some that just blow it off and they don't care and they're going to pay the fee. But to me, that just yells to buyer beware. You're about to, you know, so I don't know. But if nobody else is interested in looking at that, I would like to make that a part of it.

I like your sign idea.

I like the sign idea. I'm all for it. I thought this was a given.

I like the penalty, to look at the penalty idea that Vince DeWayne had. But I do have a lot of comments, but when you're done.

Okay, what's that?

Yeah, go ahead. So I would like to move forward with not only the fuel surcharge, but the electric vehicle charge. because those are getting more and more common, and they are more expensive to deal with, whether it's firefighting or towing, they're just more expensive to deal with. They're heavier. I got hit by one. I can tell you they're much heavier. It's like getting hit by a pickup truck or a big truck, and so there's more work to do. I mean, electric cars, there's just more cost to having an electric car on our road to take care of the fire to tow them. And because we failed to come back and keep our promise in 2003, and we're now in 2006, that's part of my issue. Had we done the CPI like we promised, had we done what we had promised, we wouldn't be here today. But these are my thoughts. And they're different. They're different than my business. They're different than everybody else's business because they're regulated. When gas went up, they couldn't raise their price because they're regulated. when their cost to do an electric vehicle went up, they can't raise the rate because they're regulated. So it's different, it's not free market for them. So you can't compare them to a free market business when they're regulated the way they are. They're not free market, they're not true free market. So, I mean, really true, the holdup, and I knew, I know one company personally that has to pay $600,000 in insurance Plus, I think they had a 15,000, I mentioned it last month, weekly fuel bill because gas was now, gas is coming down, but we've done nothing to assist them and help them. My concern, there's a couple concerns I have. Not only the apartment buildings that really keep the homeless people from sleeping in the cars in there, so it keeps crime down low, it keeps vagrants from sleeping in their, you know, and if there's other issues, I think the safety they provide in some business communities and the apartment communities is very important. My big fear is that these go out of business because we're seeing a trend of these things going out of business and who's gonna do it? I don't think we wanna be paying the sheriff to be doing it. Are we gonna have fire departments doing that now? Is that what they're gonna be doing? Because we're regulating this and we're putting them out of business by not keeping up with the market rates. And so that to me is problematic and it certainly has, it's been happening, 37 in the state, just 10 of them with 40 vehicles in their fleet, that's 400 vehicles in the state that we have lost due towing. So there could really be at one point a big problem. So I think that we should, not push this can down the road. I don't think we should wait till the lawsuit. If Hillsborough County prevails, we can come back, we can change our policy, we could do whatever, you know, then if Hillsborough County prevails, then every county's gonna go and change their policies. But the only counties in this state are Hillsborough and Pinellas that are taking that 250 out after the legislature implemented saying that they're supposed to have it. And so I have a problem with that too. So I think that we should give them the rate increase. I don't know that I agree with what they asked for. We certainly didn't get close to some of the stuff that they're asking for. Quite frankly, Hillsboro isn't even as close as to what they've asked for with their ones in red that they're asking for. But I mean, I would be more inclined, not that I want to be the highest paid county, just like the sheriff doesn't want to have people to be the highest paid, I would like to go with the recommendations. I would like to add the electric vehicles. I would like to add the fuel surcharge. And I would like to move forward on this and not kick this can down the road for years. And because right now it's three years. Well, we kicked the can down the road for 20 years. Then it was the, you know, we had the recession. And whatever the reasons were for how many years this regulated industry struggled and flailed, because we didn't do anything, and then we made a promise. We gave them the 20%. I mean, we bailed out EMS when they couldn't keep up with staffing rates. We've increased deputies year after year after year. We increased our staff year after year after year, but yet we won't do it for this regulated industry. And so I think that we should move forward and give them the rates that are recommended. Honestly, I think they should be closer to Hillsboro, but just to get us moving and keep that CPI going the way that it's recommended, and give them the fuel suit charge, and give them the electric vehicle charge. I'd even go into the Dolly issue, that that's important, but at a minimum, the fuel, the electric cars, and the recommended rates, so that they can move on, move forward, and keep their business sustainable. And that's my recommendation. And the signs that Commissioner Eggers mentioned, and I think looking into the penalties is a very good idea. But if it's only 3% of those complaints are only 3%, that's not a very high percentage of people that are, that's not predatory when it's only 3%. So those are my thoughts. Thank you.

Yeah, Commissioner Flowers.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I'm gonna give you two examples and I'm sorry I didn't call you back. I was ripping and running, Mr. Heller, and I wanted to... Yeah, I apologize. So I shared with you all one experience that was personal for me where I got my car towed because I parked in the wrong spot. I really did not see it, but I paid the towing because I saw it after it was pointed out to me. I also shared that there was another experience that my family member had, and that's not that all people do, but I have a niece and a nephew who live in an apartment complex. They live there, they pay rent, they have a current lease agreement. The apartment complex was supposed to pass out the stickers for the new year. They were doing it based on whatever grouping. They didn't have their sticker yet because the apartment complex didn't get it to them. Their car got towed. They went to the apartment place and said, hey, my car got towed, but we live here. Can you do something about it? Apartment complex didn't do anything about it. We tried to talk to the tow person. I'm not gonna say their business publicly. We tried to talk to the tow person and say, here's the lease agreement, here's the number you can call for the office staff to say this was not an accurate tow. Of course they were towing because no sticker was on it, no current sticker. They would not come off of anything. They wouldn't release the car until we paid the toll. They wouldn't come off of the toll amount. Even when the staff at the office said, yes, they live here, it's an appropriate car, we hadn't passed out the stickers yet. We paid to get the car out of toll. So I've experienced both sides where you can sit and try to negotiate with the person or try to share with them, this is why I shouldn't be told. And then I've, because I was wrong where I got told. So I just wanted to share that publicly because there are both sides of the coin when it comes to towing. I can support the electric vehicle tow fee amount. I can even support the fuel charge. Supposedly gas prices are about to come down. We'll believe it when we see it. Diesel seems not to be the one coming down though, just regular gas. So I can support that. I support the signs because I think it does make a difference when people see that blue handicap sign and then underneath it, it says $250. I think it does make a difference to people when they see that. First of all, it's wrong. Someone who's disabled should be parking there. But it also highlights to people, park here at your own risk because you're going to get it. So I do support that idea. Some of the other things... You know, and this is not to sound mean, but even us here at the county, we have to pay for the increased costs for these things, for our vehicles that we use for service. It is the cost of doing business. I have my own business, I'm paying increased costs. So for some of the other things I'd like for us to have maybe some more dialogue and conversation about, but I can support the electric fee and I can support the fuel charge. I can support that going forward. Some of these others, I would need to have a little bit more information, just like Mr. Heller provided me with an education on when I shared with him about why are you charging this administrative fee, this administrative fee. So I thank them for providing me the education about we have to file this with so-and-so, and this is what it costs us. So that helped me, and I really appreciate that. But those are the two things that I could go with right now. And then if you all want to come back and communicate a little bit more about some of the others at another point in time, I'm happy to do that. But just wanted to share where I am right now today.

Well. Trying to. to corral all of our thoughts into action today. It's, again, I'm certainly not, because I'm still working through it myself, so I'm certainly not going to put words in everybody else's mouth. But it seems like an adjustment of some kind of a base tow rate you know, just comparing with Hillsborough and Pasco, maybe it's not 175 as recommended, maybe it's $160. The mileage, we're currently at 50. It seems like, well, Hillsborough's 60, Pasco's 50. If you wanna move to 55 or 60 as recommended. Storage seems to be 30, 35, 35, maybe go to 35 on the storage. Those are three adjustments that are, Again, in the scheme of things, they're minor. It adds to an overall cost. Then you talked about electric vehicles. I'm not sure how we monitor the gas price thing, if it's 551 or it's 549 or how we monitor that. If you want to do something on the electric vehicles, I don't know if there's appetite for CPI or we just revisit every two or three years and not deal with the CPI automatic increase. But the 20 years of not having any increase is kind of odd. I mean, we're looking for that kind of thing in our own gas tax increase, you know, to protect our gas tax. Give us 3%, give us cost of living to keep up with it. So I don't know if we want to look at that piece. and then kind of let the rest of it settle. Let's let the thing in Hillsborough settle, the court case settle, and then come back and address other things. Otherwise, I really don't have an appetite to do everything, to change everything over. So, I mean, that's just me. Commissioner Scott?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm very similar to where Commissioner Flowers is right now. I don't have a problem with the fuel And staff monitors that at the Department of Energy's website. And diesel is coming down. My wholesale delivered prices dropped quite significantly in the last 10 days, which is good to see. It's down to about $4.25 a gallon, which is finally there. And I'm fine with the electric car fee. The rest of it, though, for me, I can't separate that $250 from the rest of all of these fees. I just really want to see where that's going to shake out. Because if that lawsuit fails and they can charge that, I mean, that changes the trajectory of all of these things. So to me, I just really want to wait on that piece to see where that lands. That's just kind of where I'm at today.

On this sign thing, do we have to have a, to do the sign thing, do we have to have a hearing on that to implement that? That would be a significant change.

If you're going to make it a requirement of the ordinance, then the ordinance needs to be changed.

Okay. So we, that, any kind of electric fee, since we do not have a fee on that right now, or a fuel surcharge, if you're proposing any of those. Those would have to come under. We would need to advertise those tomorrow for the July meeting. Okay.

Okay. CPI, same thing on CPI. Okay.

So does the- So no rate increases at all?

No, we're talking about these four items. They would have to come back in July, because you would advertise it, and then we could bring it back. That doesn't answer Commissioner Scott's concern about the- And Mr.

Chair, to give some clarity, you could make a rate change with a resolution.

Yes, right.

And I understand there's a resolution that's been drafted. Simply a rate change. No fuel surcharge, no automatic CPI, no signage, no, I mean, I don't really think we could go with electric cars. I feel like somebody needs to look at what an appropriate rate would be rather than just shooting in the dark. So I think some things need to come back in an ordinance, but a simple rate change you could do.

Okay. Now, for any of the current rates, you can make adjustments here today. If it's something that's not in the ordinance, then we have to advertise it and bring it back to you in July.

So I would support the recommended, staff recommended rate changes for today. and then come back with the other. But the signs and then looking at that. All of that has to wait.

That has to wait. Signs have to wait.

Well, as she just said, if it's a rate change, a recommended rate change. The base rate.

We're talking about the signs on the minimum tow fee.

A sign, an electric vehicle fee.

That would all have to come back.

Or a fuel surcharge. Those would have to come back.

Those would have to come back. But the rate fee would not. Right? So we can at least move forward. Because if we're at three years now and we have to wait for this lawsuit, we're going to be at five years. And there we are on track for 20 years again. And I just don't think it's good form. We made a promise and we have to keep our promise. And so I recommend we take the rate change that the staff recommended and then work on the others, come back and do the others. That's what I recommend. Because again, we promised three years ago And there we are doing exactly what we did for 20 years.

I think the mileage is kind of in line, the recommendation. I think the storage is in line with the, I'm talking about Hillsboro and Pasco, but I think the base tow rate's a little bit high. If we could do something a little bit more in line with Pasco and Hillsboro, 165 or something like that, I think at least we have some, You know, we're not going right now to the highest number. And again, I think this is all in the talk of trying to do something today versus bringing it back again. Or we could just bring it all back again.

And Hillsborough's going to 185.

That's what they're proposing.

That's what they're proposing, so.

I understand. Yes, yeah, yeah.

Recommendation from staff is the base toll rate 175, mileage 60, storage 35. We're not going to take up the state lien release admin fee because that's another conversation.

So it would be those three fees.

So those three. So I would make a motion that we move forward today with the base toll rate of 175, the mileage rate of 60, the storage rate of 35.

And can we bring this back in July to discuss those other items?

Okay.

And the CPI. Those four items.

Commissioner Wiecki. Thank you, Chair. Does that include the 48-hour, 250? No, I'm only doing those. I mean, because I think- The staff recommendation was tying the 250 to 48 hours.

The staff recommendation was tying the 250 to 48 hours. necessitate the need for the Hillsborough County case to be resolved.