On the agenda

1. 1Call to Order - Roll Call▶ 0:00
2. 2

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “Crystal” — transcript expanded below

   Discussion Regarding Proposed Legislative Bills

   discussed

   Council held a work session to review proposed 2023 Florida legislative bills, with the City Manager and councilmembers identifying priority bills to oppose, including financial disclosure (Form 6) requirements for local officials, communication services tax changes, municipal utilities rate caps, sovereign immunity tort liability increases, partisan municipal elections, and solid waste hauler bills. Council agreed to make individual calls to legislators and staff will arrange one-on-one meetings with Senator Hooper and Representative Yeager during Florida League of Cities action days April 3-5.

   • consensus:Council agreed to individually contact legislators to oppose the financial disclosure (Form 6) bill and email committee members beyond their legislative areas. (none)
   • direction:Council directed to prioritize opposition to municipal utilities rate-cap bill and to explore renegotiating the long-standing service agreement with Pasco County. (none)
   • consensus:Council agreed to oppose the solid waste bill affecting commercial hauler contracts. (none)
   • consensus:Council agreed to oppose the sovereign immunity bill that would raise tort liability limits and drive up insurance premiums. (none)
   • consensus:Council agreed to oppose making municipal elections partisan. (none)

   📍Gulf Harbors🏢Florida League of Cities🏢Florida Public Service Commission🏢Florida Redevelopment Association🏢Pasco County👤Cabrera Brichetta👤Crystal👤Debbie👤Hooper👤Judy Myers👤Mike👤Ngolia👤Pete👤Rivera👤Robert👤Yeager#2023 Florida Legislative Session#Communication Services Tax#Florida League of Cities Legislative Action Days April 3-5#Form 6 financial disclosure#Greywater line main#Land and Water Management (Dirty Water Act)#Municipal utilities preemption bill#Political advertising for nonpartisan office / prohibition on open primaries#Residential building permits bill (90-day issuance)#Solid waste hauler bill#Sovereign immunity / tort liability bill

   ▶ Jump to 0:22 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:22] Sure, I'd be glad to Mr. Mayor. [00:00:24] The 2023 legislative session is open, as you know, [00:00:32] and legislative action days for the Florida League of Cities are scheduled to be conducted, [00:00:41] commencing on April 3rd and spanning through April 5th. [00:00:47] The session bills, some summaries were sent to you earlier this week, [00:00:57] so that you could take a look at those. [00:01:00] There are a good number of them. [00:01:02] As we suspect it might be the case that preempt local authority in a couple of different ways [00:01:11] and impose additional financial challenges to local units of government, [00:01:18] either by way of reducing some of our traditional sources of revenue [00:01:23] or by increasing some costs and or liabilities to the city. [00:01:31] I did have a conversation with Representative Yeager earlier today [00:01:37] related to the financial disclosure bill and expressed opposition to that bill. [00:01:47] And Judy Myers, right prior to this meeting, did check. [00:01:57] Although there was a hearing on the matter, there wasn't any update available at the time, [00:02:05] so we don't know what happened in the House related to that matter. [00:02:13] As it relates to the Florida League of Cities meeting in early April, [00:02:24] I have made arrangements to spend time with both Senator Hooper and with Representative Yeager [00:02:30] so that we have an opportunity to speak with them one-on-one [00:02:34] and advise them more directly about some of our thinking on the various bills that impact us most directly. [00:02:44] In that regard, in the legislative bill summaries that have been provided to you, [00:02:50] there's a good number of highlights that mark some bills that should be opposed [00:03:01] based on recommendations from the Florida League of Cities. [00:03:05] And I know we haven't given you a good amount of time to review all of them, [00:03:10] and it's a pretty lengthy submittal, but the purpose of this work session this evening [00:03:17] is for you to have discussion about those and to strategize on how you might want to go forward [00:03:25] in our discussions with our legislators. [00:03:32] We can go through these straight through, but since you mentioned the financial disclosure, [00:03:38] I looked at Form 6 this afternoon, and Pete's an accountant, so he may have a different read on this, [00:03:49] but my guess is there's not a CPA in the county who would touch one of these for less than four figures in fees. [00:04:00] And so for somebody that's getting a few thousand dollars a year to be a council person, [00:04:08] this could be a significant part of their total compensation going to a CPA just to fill out the stinkin' form. [00:04:19] It is incredibly onerous to come up with. [00:04:25] Isn't it for committees, too? Volunteer committees, too, right? [00:04:28] Yeah. [00:04:29] Who's going to volunteer if they have to? [00:04:31] You're going to have to spend $1,500 or $2,000 to get a CPA to fill out Form 6 for a volunteer position. [00:04:37] So you can volunteer? [00:04:39] Then no way in hell. [00:04:40] No, we're not going to get volunteers. [00:04:42] You will not have volunteers for those. [00:04:47] Did anybody have an opportunity to listen to the Florida League of Cities call yesterday morning? [00:04:53] Yes, I did. [00:04:54] Well, you know, they talked about that a little bit, that particular bill, [00:04:58] and they didn't seem to indicate there was not a lot of sympathy with the legislature about easing up on that. [00:05:11] Well, they get to. They have to fill the thing out. [00:05:14] Yeah, they do. [00:05:15] They're making significantly more than most council people. [00:05:21] But as a percentage of their income, it's a fraction. [00:05:25] Well, and so, granted, and not everybody who runs for public office runs for the income part of it, right? [00:05:35] But many do, and they gladly take it. [00:05:38] I mean, they spend a lot of time and energy, particularly in county, and I'm sure some larger cities as well. [00:05:49] But it's just you take cities of our size, and some that are smaller, some that are a little bigger, [00:06:00] how many of you are ready to give up your day job just to work on this full time, right? [00:06:05] So we're volunteering our spare time. [00:06:09] We're taking away from our businesses to perform the task. [00:06:14] And, yes, we've elected to do that, and we've agreed to do that. [00:06:17] But at some point in time, you've got to say enough's enough, right? [00:06:21] And I think that the other part of this bill is that because it becomes somewhat onerous to do that, [00:06:32] and some people, you know, I don't need the headache. [00:06:34] And so you might have well-qualified, highly qualified individuals who just say it's too much of a hassle. [00:06:41] I'd like to do it, but you can only do so much. [00:06:44] So it's just, you know, I think it's one we need to fight. [00:06:54] And the indication was from the lobbyist that's following this bill for League of Cities says, [00:07:02] this is going to take some really heart-to-heart contacts with legislators you've got relationships with. [00:07:11] And so, you know, I think something on this bill, you know, I think we strategize. [00:07:16] What do you do? [00:07:17] Well, we're going to send an email. [00:07:18] We need to call. [00:07:20] And we need to tell our own story when we make it and say, you know, [00:07:24] and I can't help but think that many of these bills, as I review the whole packet, there's got to be someone's had an issue. [00:07:34] Some city's done something crazy or, you know, that's gotten somebody's attention. [00:07:40] And so we all get painted with the same brush. [00:07:43] And, you know, there ought to be ways to tackle those difficult situations without, you know, [00:07:51] throwing a wet blanket over the entire League of Cities. [00:07:56] So I think that is one that we need to put as one of our major. [00:08:03] I would think that that's one of the ones we want to majorly try to have contacts with and so forth. [00:08:10] So I would suggest each one of us make a phone call to each of our representatives, [00:08:17] as well as the other I'll do is even, let's see, [00:08:23] is we've got to follow that bill in the committees as it goes through. [00:08:26] Maybe an email to the committee members that's even outside of our legislative areas is what I would recommend. [00:08:35] Thoughts? [00:08:38] No, I agree. I agree with that. We should all talk to them. [00:08:42] You know, it's almost, I don't know, I just do it for spite sometimes I feel like, but, you know. [00:08:50] I think sometimes they do. [00:08:52] There are a couple of others here at the start. [00:08:56] The chief of police thing, that's getting into contract, employment contract stuff. [00:09:06] Communication service tax, basically freezing the local tax rate, [00:09:14] freezing the state rate. [00:09:24] This strikes me as a giveaway to the phone companies or the cable companies. [00:09:33] Find out who got campaign contributions and I think we'll know where this came from. [00:09:41] Constitutional amendment, they love giving away our tax revenues instead of their own. [00:09:48] And that's what that one might reduce. [00:09:53] There's not too many overall here that are not opposed. [00:09:57] There's a few of them that are monitoring, a few that they agree with, but very few. [00:10:01] Very few that agree for sure. [00:10:04] The land and water management one. [00:10:06] Somebody, far quicker witted than I am, suggested this was the Dirty Water Act. [00:10:19] Basically, doesn't let you do anything to protect your water supply. [00:10:28] Mayor, may I suggest something that we may do? [00:10:32] I don't know if everybody's had a chance to read through these yet. [00:10:36] There's a couple that have been highlighted. [00:10:38] I guess, city manager, you highlighted some here that you thought was of particular need. [00:10:43] What were they? [00:10:45] Okay, from? [00:10:46] The league. [00:10:47] The league, okay. [00:10:48] So, I'm assuming that they're highlighted by them because they thought that they were of particular importance and or were moving. [00:10:57] Yeah. [00:10:58] And we can't tackle them all. [00:11:01] No. [00:11:02] So, let's go through and try to prioritize them, right? [00:11:06] Right. [00:11:07] The next one that's highlighted is the municipal utilities one. [00:11:15] Which has a potential effect on us because our municipal utility boundaries are larger than the city. [00:11:26] So, let me jump in on that because that was a big focus in the finance department. [00:11:33] And there are reasons, and I know Robert is here to hear it, but there are reasons that the Maynham Chamber service area, [00:11:42] which is bigger than, has a larger area, [00:11:49] within it the rights of us to follow our 25% increase, I think, on the rates. [00:11:57] And this bill would propose to limit it to 10%. [00:12:00] So, that would cut in half the additional revenue that we would get from our water and sewer bills. [00:12:09] But there's also a provision in the current agreement that says that we can't charge more than the county does. [00:12:16] And I think that we have come, we were, at the start, very much more efficient than the county [00:12:22] because of the way in which the county grew and the cost became expensive to them. [00:12:28] But as we learned last meeting with the group that was in here that we approved, [00:12:34] giving us a main for the Greywater line, [00:12:43] the county has grown through this community development district. [00:12:46] There must be 30 or 40 of them in the county now. [00:12:50] And all of those communities built that infrastructure and gave it to the county. [00:12:54] So, bottom line is I believe the county's rate structure is very similar to ours [00:13:00] and that the current agreement with the county, and I'm sure they're not listening and nobody should tell them, [00:13:08] but it provides that we can't charge more than the county charges on its utilities. [00:13:16] At the time the agreement was written, we were much more efficient. [00:13:20] Well, we're still efficient, but we were much cheaper than they were. [00:13:23] Now, we're pushing up the limit on that. [00:13:26] And so, most important to me in the utility is that we identify a long-term strategy with the county [00:13:33] that allows us to continue to charge as we have. [00:13:38] In particular, there are some issues where they took some of our territory at Gulf Harbors. [00:13:43] I never did find the actual agreement that was made when it was made, but they now have, [00:13:50] and Bill, I believe, the city manager at her house for county water and sewer in our city limits. [00:13:58] And so, I tried three years ago without success to get us to look at these service agreements that we have [00:14:07] because the state statutes do provide that cities have the ability to more efficiently deliver services [00:14:13] and when we have those services, we should give them. [00:14:18] And so, there are a lot of discussions that are not in the statute here that relate to our relationship with Pasco County [00:14:25] that really before somebody brings them up, we should try to strategize. [00:14:32] So, I would throw that back to you, Debbie, that that, as Robert told us before, if we don't lay a line, the county will. [00:14:43] And it's sort of like the wolves up in Alaska. [00:14:46] If they pee in a circle, then they have created their territory. [00:14:50] So, we're like wolves. [00:14:51] We just lay sewer pipes in a circle, and then we declare all the space within it as ours. [00:15:00] scheme of things and the way in which we deal with each other by marking our [00:15:05] territory but for us it's what laying lines versus the more crude approach of [00:15:12] the wolf. That being said, we also have areas and I think Crystal can attest to [00:15:21] this in the finance department too, where we have to get the billing or they have [00:15:28] to get the billing for us because we have the sewer and they have the water [00:15:32] and so our utility services could really use a good review here. We certainly [00:15:40] would be opposing this as I'm sure most every city is and so the last thing I [00:15:45] want to say Mayor is that in this list what we don't see is the bill sponsors [00:15:51] partisan or political party and I would just say that anything that's being [00:15:56] presented by a Democrat in this particular legislative session is not [00:16:00] going anywhere because there's a super majority. There's no expectation that a [00:16:07] bill that's sponsored by a Democrat, maybe there's some jointly sponsored [00:16:11] bills, but if you see a bill that says we're going to reverse something and it's [00:16:16] being sponsored by a Democrat and the League of Cities supports it and you're [00:16:22] going to go up there and talk to all of our... I don't see the reason to expect [00:16:27] that as Mike as you've said before there are some things that are open for our [00:16:33] effort and there's some that are beyond our expectation of being able to make a [00:16:39] difference I think. Mike you follow this more than I do and I'm not going to this [00:16:45] thing as you guys are partly because I'm I've well used past my stipend and we're [00:16:51] going to need a budget amendment because I'm doing these quarterly [00:16:54] meetings with the Florida Redevelopment Association and conferences and I mean [00:17:02] more on and so you guys can perhaps more effective than I would anyway. I think we [00:17:09] can summarize this one as we're opposed to it but we probably do need to get the [00:17:14] county to sit down with us and see if we can even out some of those utility [00:17:20] overlaps. I know a sleeping dog lie is a good process and so I don't think that [00:17:27] this meeting here is going to wake that up but I want to make sure that you guys [00:17:32] recognize that things have changed since that original agreement was made and [00:17:36] instead of focusing on that one element it might be a good idea to try to revise [00:17:42] and rebuild that agreement with the county. Two things one you know obviously we need [00:17:49] maybe review our agreements with the utilities in the county obviously that's [00:17:52] a longer thing we need to probably work on but also on this one the fact that [00:17:57] the other thing I picked on this and I don't know if Mr. Rivera's had a chance [00:18:01] to review this bill it also would subject us to regulation by the [00:18:08] Public Service Commission what what would that do we have Robert you have [00:18:12] anything that you could add to that what might mean to us because that seemed [00:18:16] pretty weird. Yes that's the nonprofit the non-public are managed under that so [00:18:23] they would treat us as a private provider almost. Correct so I think that [00:18:27] our process now that we use where we hire a consultant and we present the [00:18:33] cost allocation studies and that's what we base our rates on revenue studies [00:18:37] that probably would be subject to their approval as well which right now we [00:18:42] don't have to have so it might put an extra step in what we're doing currently [00:18:48] and they would have the authority to to turn it down and deny it. [00:18:55] To answer your other question that is a bill that has been submitted by a [00:19:01] Republican Cabrera Brichetta out of Miami so you just want to pay attention [00:19:13] to. And a lot of even the CRA objections came from Miami even though the city [00:19:18] itself is now in a much more collegial relationship with their county but some [00:19:24] of those old differences are still. Residential building permits this looks [00:19:32] like a solution in search of a problem. 90 days to issue a permit. And let somebody [00:19:42] retain a private provider. Yeah I don't I mean I don't necessarily agree with that one [00:19:51] either I mean to lower it 75% making the city of the county and lower their [00:19:56] fees. We do it all the time now we don't mind paying the extra because we get it [00:20:02] done a lot faster. So I don't see why we need to you know hurt the municipalities or [00:20:08] counties because we're gonna do it anyways. [00:20:13] Solid waste and this affects us because you know we're looking at trying to [00:20:19] reduce the the number of trucks that are rolling around our city twice a week. [00:20:26] Right. [00:20:35] So yeah I was trying to figure this out this was this bill is filed by Senator [00:20:44] Ngolia out of Hernando County. I haven't haven't noticed Senator and he is by [00:20:53] trade a home contractor right so he's a builder and you know my experience in [00:21:02] visiting with him in the past know that he's very pro-business and and and he [00:21:09] wants business to operate fairly and competitively. So I was trying to [00:21:15] understand why he might have have filed this bill so you know I'm thinking he's [00:21:21] just trying to make things competitive for you know the waste haulers. They've [00:21:27] got a pretty strong lobby from what I've learned and that's just trying to [00:21:31] renegotiate our contract we can't takes us three years to do that right. Yeah. And [00:21:38] so it's already pretty strong and while this seems to only pertain to commercial [00:21:47] dumpsters and or you know commercial multifamily I think those are some of [00:21:52] the most you know lucrative parts of the business right. Yeah. And so if we're [00:21:59] going to you know I'm thinking our own how it would affect us if we're going to [00:22:03] go to one hauler and we we package all that together that could ultimately mean [00:22:12] that majority of our citizens would pay a lower fee because if they don't you [00:22:19] know if the hauler is not making the money on the commercial they've got to [00:22:22] get it they got to make it up on our residentials. So and of course as the [00:22:28] mayor said we're trying to cut down we're trying to prove the quality of [00:22:31] life the noise the wear and tear on our roads and expenses that it causes with [00:22:37] multiple carriers inside the city. So I agree that this would be one we want to [00:22:43] try to emphasize. [00:22:48] Sovereign immunity one is similar to one that came up last year that got shot [00:22:53] down. It's one that we should definitely watch this year though because it has [00:22:58] great implications for the cost of our insurance coverages. If you'll notice as [00:23:06] it relates to torts and also other liabilities in both the Senate and in [00:23:15] the House the limits on liability have increased not by hundreds of thousands [00:23:23] but by millions. This would blow up the insurance premiums statewide for cities [00:23:31] and counties. So interesting enough on this bill it was I think it was set to [00:23:43] be heard that today and it got postponed. Is that what I'm thinking of? Yes. Okay so [00:23:50] it was postponed but it was interesting enough that yesterday there was a [00:23:55] amendment filed that if what you're talking about it's not already bad [00:24:00] enough it adds the fact that insurance policy may not condition the payment of [00:24:09] benefits in whole or in part on the enactment of a claim bill. That was added [00:24:14] and also that when determining liability limits on the claim the [00:24:20] limitation of liability in effect the date of acts will apply the consumer [00:24:30] price index from the time the claim happened to the time the payment has. So [00:24:36] if inflation takes place it's five years to pay the claim they're gonna you're [00:24:40] gonna pay that much more for it because we're gonna apply an index to it. So right [00:24:46] now if somebody is injured beyond the two thousand or two hundred thousand three [00:24:49] hundred thousand it has to go through a claim bill with the state this would [00:24:54] basically give free reign to open season on governmental agencies. I suspect [00:25:06] they're going to increase the cost somewhat I don't I really I can't [00:25:10] fathom that they would increase it up to the limits of proposed here. I think [00:25:14] that's the first bow across the first shot across the bow and to try to [00:25:18] negotiate it but I think it's something we it is one that we need to probably [00:25:23] make a point to talk about. Did um I think we were past that one but the [00:25:37] political advertising for nonpartisan office and prohibition on open primaries [00:25:42] and nonpartisan elections. Actually does anyone want to open it up? No. It'd be [00:25:49] nonpartisan you got to be partisan. Well which one is that? Constitutional [00:25:53] amendment would have to occur for that part but they're trying to allow people [00:25:58] to put on their advertisements what party they're at you know and that's [00:26:05] being has always been done continues to be done behind the scenes. Oh no this [00:26:08] one's actually saying no no nonpartisan elections. That would be a constitutional [00:26:14] amendment that would propose so I'll be working to put an opposite one on the [00:26:18] Constitution at the same time that that no municipal officers should be [00:26:24] partisan because we do a lot better the way we operate. I'd rather keep it that way. [00:26:30] Partisan divide that it seems to be popular when whoever's in charge is in [00:26:35] charge because they may not be in charge forever which is usually the pendulum [00:26:40] does swing because as humans we all tend to take a little bit more than we have [00:26:47] and when we win. And the other the other piece of this is voter suppression [00:26:53] because if you're in an area that is significantly one party or the other and [00:27:02] PASCO is getting close you basically disenfranchise everybody that's not a [00:27:10] member of that party and quite frankly we've got enough voter disenfranchisement [00:27:18] this year because of the change in the mail-in ballots and I'm willing to bet [00:27:27] that my sailor is not going to be able to vote in the municipal elections [00:27:33] because he's on deployment and the odds of getting a ballot to him at this point [00:27:38] are somewhere between slim and none and even my wife didn't realize well why [00:27:43] didn't I get my absentee ballot once because she depending on that little [00:27:47] checkmark yeah that doesn't have any more courtesy of the legislature and [00:27:51] this is they are disenfranchising people wholesale. My understanding is last time [00:27:59] out there were about 1,200 people in the city that were on the the list to get an [00:28:06] absentee ballot and this year it's something on the order of 200. They are [00:28:12] wholesale disenfranchisement. It is an active effort to keep people from voting. This is just another [00:28:21] another part of it because again if you're not a member of whatever party [00:28:27] happens to be the most organized it goes to a primary you don't have a choice. [00:28:36] There's also references in some of these bills to August primaries than that bill [00:28:42] particularly like August municipal partisan primaries we don't have them [00:28:48] as closed primaries. It would force the elections into the November cycle with [00:28:54] everybody else. So listen I hear what you guys are saying and I think that [00:29:02] understand whoever you talk to about there you can be talking to somebody [00:29:05] that's going to be a partisan politic. They got elected to that way. They may not be so. I think the [00:29:12] approach on that bill because frankly we're nonpartisan but it seems like we [00:29:18] say we're nonpartisan when it comes down to it, it is partisan, but I would be opposed to this bill just [00:29:28] because the expense of running another election you know running a primary and [00:29:35] then having to run a general election or a second election. It's going to be a trouble to do that and the fact is of the [00:29:42] turnout we have already now we're going to ask our voters to come out twice you [00:29:48] know for an office seems like we're asking for a lot and for cities of our [00:29:53] size and so forth doesn't it just doesn't make sense. [00:29:56] One third of the population would only come out once because they would have to [00:30:00] wait to see who the other parties have chosen so they can choose from [00:30:03] or what someone else wants them to vote for. [00:30:06] They would vote in their primary and then they would vote in their majority. [00:30:09] There's no primary if there's no party. [00:30:12] The independent or non-party people, they don't get one. [00:30:18] And that's really, I think, the logical fault with the idea to close primaries. [00:30:23] The second largest group in Pasco County are MPOs. [00:30:27] Are the independents, yeah, more than the Democrats. [00:30:29] So you're potentially disenfranchised. [00:30:34] Good point, and I think the real question is, [00:30:36] is this just something to rile us up because I can't imagine this passing? [00:30:42] Well, so Pete, here's what bothers me about that, [00:30:48] is that for us or for San Antonio or for Dade City, [00:30:57] for New Port Richey, you know, it's like that. [00:31:00] But now you talk about Miami or Tampa or Orlando. [00:31:07] It's a bigger deal, so we have to keep that in mind [00:31:13] in what people are considering, right? [00:31:16] I think they are partisan in those particular cities, though. [00:31:19] I mean, all cities are not nonpartisan, [00:31:21] so there's already a sort of a separation within the state of how they work. [00:31:26] Yeah, well, I think that's the key, is let the municipalities figure out how they want to run their cities. [00:31:32] That is a strong argument there. [00:31:34] Give us a little control of our life. [00:31:39] I don't know. [00:31:41] Maybe, Debbie, if the league has identified, [00:31:44] and you talked before, the yellow ones they think we should go for, [00:31:47] it would be nice to get some briefing before they go up there to say, you know, [00:31:53] we don't see that happening on a lot of legs. [00:31:55] Or maybe you'll know by then if it has legs or not. [00:31:57] We didn't bother bringing that up. [00:32:00] I think their updates or they're trying to hit some of the bills they think that would impact us the most [00:32:06] and that are also being active. [00:32:08] So you're right. [00:32:10] The two questions are, one, is this one just up there or has it really got it? [00:32:16] But the problem is you don't always know until you get to the end. [00:32:20] You throw them out there, it's a bargaining chip, right? [00:32:22] Because somebody's filed a bill, they want it passed, and then it might not be anybody else. [00:32:27] They throw something else in. [00:32:29] It's just the politics. [00:32:30] Hooper is Mr. Home Rule. [00:32:32] He's been given awards, I believe, from the League of Cities. [00:32:37] And so he was the man. [00:32:39] So you've got your best chance there to play the home rule thing, [00:32:43] and he was a fireman, right, or a local person, and he's a good guy. [00:32:49] So I think at least you guys have somebody good to talk to who can maybe give you the straight skinny. [00:33:02] Let's see, where are we? [00:33:05] Are we going through the list? [00:33:07] Yeah. [00:33:09] There's a bunch on building construction. [00:33:13] I don't know that that stuff is dangerous or anything. [00:33:19] I know there's one bill that they listed under building that was requiring a certain limitation of allowing the permit. [00:33:29] If it wasn't approved in a certain period of time, it automatically gets approved? [00:33:32] That's the one we just talked about. [00:33:34] Well, that's a different one. [00:33:37] It gives actually a time period, which I say they, with the provider money, [00:33:44] the extra money they're getting out through inspections, [00:33:46] and they can hire more people in planning to get the permits through faster. [00:33:51] Yeah, so they get deemed as approved if they fail to meet the time frames. [00:33:54] Correct, yeah. [00:33:56] So this is interesting. [00:33:57] We have our representatives involved in this one bill, Maggard and Hooper. [00:34:01] Saw that. [00:34:03] That prohibits local government from making substantive changes to building plans after a permit has been issued. [00:34:10] Have we ever been involved in that? [00:34:12] Yeah. [00:34:14] Yeah, it can get – I mean, I don't think it ever gets changed where it's not up to life safety code or something like that. [00:34:23] It just has to be reviewed again. [00:34:25] But I don't necessarily understand. [00:34:27] I don't understand. [00:34:28] Like, they get away with something. [00:34:29] It still has to comply with, you know, all the rules. [00:34:32] So I don't really think that's – I don't know where they're getting at there. [00:34:41] You know, and I can understand that. [00:34:44] If I were a developer and I got approval to do a project and the plans are all signed, sealed, delivered, [00:34:55] and they say go forth and build, to have them come in after the fact and say, oops, we need to redo this. [00:35:04] It happens. [00:35:05] Unless it's – you know, unless it is a serious life safety issue, I just – I'm sort of inclined to think they ought to get a pass on it. [00:35:16] Well, I mean, they can – you know, you can make revisions or changes, but they still have to comply with those things. [00:35:22] Only if there are, like, changes that warrant some additional review. [00:35:27] It would have to be something, I would think, significant. [00:35:33] So I'm not sure why you would even bother with the bill. [00:35:39] Maybe if we all have any favorites. [00:35:41] There's a few I'd like to make sure we discuss if I can think and just get them out now. [00:35:45] One of them is, you know, the one about the exemption – the continued exemptions of the temporary kitchens or whatever you call it. [00:35:58] It's expanding behind the food trucks into allowing anything that's done outside to be a temporary kitchen or something like that. [00:36:08] It's worth trying to understand, I think. [00:36:11] The other one has to do with the use of the funds for opioid addictions, and there's a few that are in there that one says monitor, one says oppose. [00:36:30] And I thought maybe, Kelly, you had some thoughts on that, which is – relates to the zoning districts where homes and places can do it. [00:36:39] And again, it's another preemption of the local community to identify. [00:36:45] But it established – and then there's these establishments of these other committees that are being appointed [00:36:53] and haven't had the greatest confidence in the appointment of committees and who gets put on them right lately and for what purpose. [00:37:05] But we were always kind of, you know, the afterthought of that big opioid – [00:37:13] Well, yeah, and that's when the cities need to be able to make those decisions themselves, because every city is so different. [00:37:19] And there's not enough treatment facilities, and sometimes the treatment facility needs to go where it needs to go, [00:37:24] and based on each city's going to have differences on where that is. [00:37:28] We definitely are struggling not having enough treatment – mental health treatment facilities. [00:37:33] Is there a bill there on that, Pete? [00:37:35] Yeah, it's on the – it's in the public now where it works. [00:37:39] The Act for the Sovereign Immunity. [00:37:42] It's passed the preemptions of motor vehicles, tobacco, floodplain management. [00:37:51] The comprehensive plan, when there's another one, I just wanted to hit. [00:37:57] But those were the three that I think we've had discussions about earlier. [00:38:02] If you go to personnel and go backwards a couple of pages, one says Parks and Recreation on it, [00:38:11] and so it's kind of before Parks and Recreation on the bottom and after Department of Business and Professional Regulation. [00:38:21] I've got the substance abuse. [00:38:24] So it's after the Chief of Policemen, five pages, and before – four pages, and before – one page before Parks and Recreation. [00:38:34] It's the substance abuse one. [00:38:36] I'll try to find the other ones. [00:38:40] Sorry to bump around, but those were the three. [00:38:46] Well, maybe – can we work through it? [00:38:48] And we'll come to those, and we'll maybe quickly go through that way we don't miss something. [00:38:52] Okay, well, what page are you on? [00:38:53] I'm on Ethics and Elections. [00:38:55] I'm on – you know, I guess where I've gone – and that's one page too far, I think. [00:39:01] Yeah, well, that's already – [00:39:02] Public Construction Opposed, Residential Permits. [00:39:04] Right. [00:39:06] Okay. [00:39:07] We talked about the nonpartisan economic development. [00:39:14] We talked about communication tax, and that is a big revenue for us and one that's been dwindling as people stop using the local. [00:39:25] Okay, so – [00:39:33] We'll pass the general government one. [00:39:38] All right, so are you two Ethics and Elections yet? [00:39:42] I figured that's already off the table. [00:39:45] Well, right, I'm just trying to follow the pages here. [00:39:47] So we have that one, Elected Officials. [00:39:49] We have that one Opposed, and that's the Partisan Office. [00:39:52] We talked about that. [00:39:59] I'm getting into Finance and Taxation, which is near and dear to my heart. [00:40:03] Right after Communications Tax, we talked about it. [00:40:05] So there's one, a bill. [00:40:07] I don't know if this one has any legs. [00:40:08] It would be interesting. [00:40:12] Homestead Exemptions for Persons Age 65 and Older. [00:40:16] Don't mess with that one. [00:40:18] No, I'm just kidding. [00:40:20] But, yeah, I don't know if that will get any legs or not. [00:40:22] It could. [00:40:23] But the one right below it, evidently, could be very significant to us. [00:40:27] Revised Limitation of Increase in Homestead Property Tax Assessments from 3% to 2%. [00:40:31] That's the big one. [00:40:32] So that one, I think, is one we need to talk about. [00:40:36] I don't know that. [00:40:40] Particularly with inflation where it is right now. [00:40:42] Yeah. [00:40:45] Because that actually would put it on. [00:40:47] It has to be a Constitution amendment. [00:40:49] But if they pass a bill, it can go on the Constitution, right, for the vote. [00:40:54] And if it gets on the Constitution, how is it going to be voted? [00:41:00] Well, the tricky part of that bill is the fact that for those people that live and stay in their home, [00:41:06] they get that deflection from those increases. [00:41:11] And the net result of that is going to be completely in the CRA because it's part of our tax growth. [00:41:20] Right. [00:41:21] But it does give a 2% interest. [00:41:23] And so the flip side of it is in the long term, [00:41:26] as long as the values are so much higher than the taxable amounts, [00:41:29] if the values drop, it's really not going to affect our revenue because we're still, you know, [00:41:36] I'm saying we're still going to get that 2%. [00:41:38] But it limits the increase to the assessed value. [00:41:45] So even though the value increases, it wouldn't. [00:41:48] It's going to hurt people that are in rental properties because they're going to get slammed. [00:41:54] It's going to limit the increase, Mike, of the tax assessments, not the assessed value. [00:42:01] So the assessed value will still be the assessed value. [00:42:04] The tax assessment can only go up by 2% a year. [00:42:08] So you're always going to see what your house is valued at by the property appraiser. [00:42:12] Yeah, so the cap limits. [00:42:13] It's a cap as well. [00:42:16] And it's worth opposing because it's giving a tax break to people that are not in the government that they're in. [00:42:29] And so they can declare that they've lowered taxes for everybody [00:42:32] while they make it harder for local governments. [00:42:35] I don't think it's going to be so hard for us because we've experienced such a great turnover of houses [00:42:41] and new property owners and new assessments that we've set. [00:42:47] Yeah, I don't. [00:42:48] But I don't think it's one that we, I don't know that we influence it very much, but. [00:42:55] So, Pete, you know, and of course I know you worked as finance director for the city, [00:43:01] but so you don't think this would affect our budget too much? [00:43:04] It will affect our budget in the CRA. [00:43:07] It won't affect our budget in the general fund [00:43:10] because we are dealing with the difference between the base tax and the, the base tax year was set. [00:43:17] And so our general fund always gets what's in that base tax [00:43:21] and always pays over to the CRA all the additional growth of the city. [00:43:27] So it would cut down our CRA budget at the base, the bottom line is. [00:43:32] If you delay it, it would be the argument, right? [00:43:34] Because it would keep the tax assessment at a level that would almost insulate it from what happened before, [00:43:42] which was we got way out and then our tax values dropped by 50 percent in the city [00:43:47] and the CRA went to nothing. [00:43:52] It's the cream on the top that falls. [00:43:55] Well, based on our current and projected economic conditions, [00:44:00] it would be painful for us because, you know, I understand that once it gets rolled over [00:44:05] and now we're getting the money in the general fund as far as the CRA, [00:44:08] but right now as we're trying to redevelop our city, we'd like to have that money in the CRA. [00:44:12] Yeah, yeah, there's no doubt. [00:44:13] I mean, we oppose it. [00:44:14] I'm just saying it's not going to affect the policemen, the firemen, or the general government [00:44:18] as much as a city that really relies on that [00:44:22] because our growth is hopefully building our sales tax revenues [00:44:26] and some of our other non-property tax revenues. [00:44:29] I've got to tell you, I'm generally opposed to Homestead exemptions. [00:44:35] They've got several here listed, some to monitor and oppose. [00:44:41] There's always been a belief that Homestead exemption ought to be not the first $50,000, [00:44:47] it ought to be the second $50,000, right, that everybody pays something for their services, right, [00:44:54] you know, if you're going to get exempted. [00:44:56] So I don't, I can't personally. [00:45:00] It wouldn't hurt me for you to tell the elected body, you know, why don't you think about that, you know, and particularly if you're going to keep cutting our knee, you know, chomping us at the ankles. [00:45:17] There's, and they don't say anything one way or the other here, there was, there's a Senate Bill 170 that imposes new requirements for municipalities for adopting new and enforcing ordinances. There's not a... [00:45:33] That's a repeat of one they did last year, tried to do, or similar. Having the city to have to do a study to determine the financial impact of any ordinance that it does, but they provided a few exemptions, I think, trying to get it through this year, I'm not sure. There was major opposition to it initially. [00:46:03] We talked about the chief of police, that now we're into other, that's okay. [00:46:07] Amy Burgess signed on for that. [00:46:12] This one, okay, this one says, prohibits a municipality from determining a police chief without providing written notice, including just cause, and defend himself. [00:46:27] Where are we? [00:46:30] Without providing written notice, I'm not making you too nervous here. [00:46:33] Yeah, you just got here. [00:46:36] Okay, I'm sorry. [00:46:38] Yeah, and that was earlier. Part of the problem with this thing is we keep repeating some of these same words. [00:46:44] Yeah. [00:46:46] We have multiple areas. [00:46:54] Not to the comprehensive plans yet? Land use and comprehensive planning? [00:46:59] No. [00:47:01] Well, that's right, yeah, right where we are. [00:47:04] That's what we jumped over. [00:47:06] Yeah. [00:47:07] Chief of police one. [00:47:15] So, there is a bill there by McLean and another one by Anglogia that would, bills must comply with special magistrate decisions when land use decisions were challenged. [00:47:42] It looks like it gives petitioners extra ability to challenge decisions, so they're asking us to pose that. [00:47:50] I don't know, we'll have to, I don't know, maybe. [00:47:53] I don't have that situation, so. [00:48:11] Okay. [00:48:42] There's an entry bill, municipal boundaries. [00:48:53] This could apply to us, that before starting an annexation procedure, the local government shall prepare a feasibility study for proposed areas, need clarification of process, and get permission of at least 50% of the owners in the area to be de-annexed, de-annexed. [00:49:10] Yeah, that's a de-annexation thing, we don't want to talk about that, but it gives the vacant landowners or the corporations an opportunity to weigh in so that the residents don't spoil an unbuilt, a vacant landowner from having a say in it because he's not a voter. [00:49:30] So the current annexation laws are to the voters that live there, so you'd be, the renter would vote, which was our strategy over on Trouble Creek, was like we had a lot of renters and we were talking, would we want to annex them, and maybe the renters would say yes because we could get them sewer, but the owners would say no. [00:49:51] No. [00:49:52] The owners couldn't vote. [00:49:53] Pay taxes. [00:49:55] Oh. [00:49:56] So they're asking to support. [00:49:57] But I kind of like it the way it is that way, but it doesn't matter. [00:50:04] But because it's a de-annexation, that's why we support it. [00:50:13] If it was an annexation agreement, then we would oppose it. [00:50:16] Right. [00:50:17] Thank you. [00:50:19] This is finally to the, what, the public, the substance abuse issues we talked about already, right? [00:50:25] Right. [00:50:26] Task force. [00:50:31] The next page is the temporary commercial kitchens, Mr. Mayor, I know. [00:50:38] Yeah, I've read through that half a dozen times, and I'm still not sure if that has any applicability here. [00:50:47] The owner of the ice cream shop would be able to have a temporary business if he had a temporary business. [00:50:58] The owner of the ice cream shop would be able to have a temporary business if he had a license and put up his hamburger stand. [00:51:11] If that would work on the hamburger thing. [00:51:14] Because it's not a food truck. [00:51:17] Yeah. [00:51:19] But, again, it works against the benefit of our restaurants if we don't. [00:51:33] The problem is not the local governments. [00:51:37] The problem is the State Department of whatever regulates them has been the issue. [00:51:48] That has not been a, that particular instance we all said, hey, have a good time. [00:51:59] But it was the state hotel and restaurant officer, whatever it was, down in Tampa. [00:52:06] I think, yeah, the bill is just trying to prevent cities and rural communities to regulate that. [00:52:17] Kind of like, you know, to a certain degree we lost regulation of the food trucks, right? [00:52:23] It just mimics that same thing. [00:52:25] Basically it's telling the temporary kitchens, can we get the same deal? [00:52:28] Yeah. [00:52:29] And if they also gave them the same benefits that the food trucks have, as far as the state regulation is concerned, [00:52:40] we might actually be interested in it, but it doesn't go that far. [00:52:44] It seems like it's saying a temporary commercial kitchen is when it's operated on the same premises [00:52:50] and by a separately licensed public food service establishment may operate during the same hours and operations [00:52:56] as a separately licensed public food service establishment. [00:52:59] They do not affect local government's authority to regulate the operation of a temporary commercial kitchen [00:53:04] other than what is proposed in the bills. [00:53:07] So I don't think it's a big deal. [00:53:09] We're not going to do anything other than what we're going to do. [00:53:11] Yeah. [00:53:12] Yeah. [00:53:13] I'm not sure about that. [00:53:14] Well, it's talking in a circle there. [00:53:17] Well, it's just saying monitor it, so I guess we don't have to pay too much attention to it. [00:53:24] Can we move over a couple of pages to the next one that's highlighted under personnel? [00:53:28] Oh, yeah. [00:53:30] Official's employment contract. [00:53:38] I didn't know we had an August primary. [00:53:40] We don't. [00:53:43] So it does apply to us, right? [00:53:45] Yeah. [00:53:50] And that's just bizarre. [00:53:53] Why they would want to prohibit us from renewing, extending, or renegotiating employment contracts [00:54:03] with presumably the city manager or a municipal attorney within 12 months before a primary for the mayor. [00:54:14] That's just bizarre. [00:54:17] Well, that's renewing, extending, or renegotiating, but it doesn't relate to hiring. [00:54:21] So it wouldn't be just the mayor. [00:54:24] We have elections every year. [00:54:28] You would literally never be able to renew, extend, or renegotiate employment contracts. [00:54:35] That's bizarre. [00:54:37] Well, there's a good argument to make there. [00:54:39] Yeah. [00:54:40] Because you could never do it. [00:54:42] I think we need to clarify that a little bit and talk about that. [00:54:45] I mean, if he's one of ours, that's just strange. [00:54:49] Well, you know, what's happened somewhere along the line, some city is, you know, you've got an outgoing mayor [00:54:55] and maybe a strong mayor, right? [00:54:58] And then so they go in and make a good contract. [00:55:04] All the contracts and all their butts in working within the city, and then the new mayor is stuck with it. [00:55:09] Yeah. [00:55:11] And that may well be the case, but in a strong city manager form of government. [00:55:17] Right. [00:55:18] Again, you can't apply that to everyone because it makes no sense for us. [00:55:21] Yeah. [00:55:22] It makes no sense. [00:55:23] So this is an example of somebody in Tallahassee having a. . . [00:55:28] If that's what they're trying to do, they need to amend the bill or change it because that just doesn't work. [00:55:33] That's going to die in committee, that one. [00:55:35] Yeah, that won't go anywhere. [00:55:45] Really getting down into the weeds of how cities operate to continue to make these kinds of laws. [00:55:55] They have a constitutional amendment. [00:55:57] I don't know when we'll ever, as a group of cities, decide to try to, you know, enforce it. [00:56:06] It says that they can't do unfunded mandates or they can't have a home rule. [00:56:20] So how about this? [00:56:23] The next one is highlighted. [00:56:25] Interesting. [00:56:30] Senate Bill 842 provides for public records exemption for the personal identifying information of a person reporting a potential code violation. [00:56:40] So that's trying to reverse the last change they made, right? [00:56:44] They made last year. [00:56:45] And they support that. [00:56:46] So it would be interesting. [00:56:47] I would be in support of that. [00:56:49] I know that our general population would as well, I believe, from what I hear folks saying. [00:56:56] And we'd want to support that. [00:57:00] Or Harold and Tiger. [00:57:03] You know? [00:57:05] No. [00:57:06] No. [00:57:12] I don't want to go down with a single shift. [00:57:14] Not all bills are passed and completely unparsed in line. [00:57:19] I understand. [00:57:29] Tiger just said. [00:57:43] When we had at the Florida Redevelopment Association, we had this lobbyist for that organization talking to us. [00:57:49] And there was just quite a discussion that it is a veto-proof legislature. [00:57:55] It's a super majority. [00:57:57] And that's the only point is that there's no need to defer to the point if they don't want to or to compromise. [00:58:15] I don't care what party is in control. [00:58:19] I kind of like it when they have to do. [00:58:38] It reminds me of an old saying. [00:58:39] When power corrupts, absolute power is kind of neat. [00:58:44] It seems to be the legislature's model this year. [00:58:50] It doesn't seem to get much. [00:58:53] I don't think it's even assigned to committee yet. [00:58:56] Hearing so. [00:58:57] It probably won't go anywhere then if it hasn't been assigned to committee at this point. [00:59:04] He's got his office right next to the closet in the back corner. [00:59:20] There's some vacation rentals. [00:59:22] I don't know that there's anything for there. [00:59:27] And then there's our sovereign immunity bill that we've already talked about. [00:59:56] Thank you. [01:00:00] I know we haven't all had a chance to read [01:00:16] through all of these, and I'm not sure which ones we need to spend our time on. [01:00:36] Senator Stewart. [01:00:37] Who's that? [01:00:38] Senator Stewart Congratulations. [01:00:44] Missing these are going nowhere even though there were supporting [01:00:54] this bill, 498 and S. [01:00:59] Bill S. [01:01:00] B. [01:01:01] eight eighty six. [01:01:02] The first one removes the state preemption of local laws related to auxiliary [01:01:08] containers, wrappings, or disposable plastic bags and removes the state [01:01:13] preemption on local government laws relating to the use or sale of polystyrene. [01:01:17] Senator Stewart, she's Democrat out of our out of our land, Orange County. [01:01:22] And the second one repeals the state preemption on local government [01:01:27] regulations. [01:01:30] And I'm guessing none of them, neither of those are going to go anywhere. [01:01:34] Senator Stewart and O'Hara. [01:01:41] They'll go the same as the glass straw. [01:01:47] So we have that one done. [01:01:52] Districts. [01:01:53] Pete, would you see that one? [01:01:54] HB 1147 Buchanan. [01:01:59] What's the topic, Mayor? [01:02:01] Resilience commit districts. [01:02:05] It establishes exclusive and uniform method for establishing a special district [01:02:10] to address infrastructure through a petition from taxpayers who own real property within [01:02:15] the district, an infrastructure resilience district. [01:02:19] It also establishes exclusive and uniform method for establishing a special district [01:02:25] by petition for residents and taxpayers who are unit owners of condominiums or groups [01:02:31] within the proposed district. [01:02:41] It doesn't have much about how the petition would work and what it would do. [01:02:48] But it does relate to CDDs, community development districts. [01:02:54] And which was my world for 14 years. [01:03:00] And basically in the chapter 190. [01:03:15] I'll have to see what it is. [01:03:18] If the local government denies the petition, that working for an alternative will be responsible [01:03:25] for implementing the project, paying all the costs and commencing the project. [01:03:29] So this goes back to CDDs building the sewer lines and water lines. [01:03:34] They really were formed in order to build drainage systems because in Florida, [01:03:40] like in Spring Hill and other places where they found pipes that weren't connected [01:03:44] and builders that built drainage and then homeowners associations or individual property [01:03:50] owners had title to those wetland mitigation or stormwater ponds or whatever. [01:03:58] There was no one to hold accountable. [01:04:00] So the CDDs have taxing power and they're supposed to manage the stormwater systems [01:04:06] in the community development districts. [01:04:09] So if the residents want to do something for resilience and the CDD wants to do it, [01:04:16] the county has to allow them to have that extra assessment. [01:04:21] And if they don't allow them, then the county finds itself having to pay for it, I guess. [01:04:28] I don't understand it. [01:04:30] But that's what I read in five minutes and that's my best guess. [01:04:38] The whole CDD starts with the finding of a boundary and identifying a district [01:04:42] and assessing the people within it for the capital improvements. [01:04:47] And they use that method to build the stormwater ponds. [01:04:50] And since they built them in low-lying areas, maybe there's some concern that those [01:04:54] resilience efforts are going to need to be shorn up. [01:05:00] I don't know. [01:05:01] I'll try to find out more about that. [01:05:03] Yeah, that might be interesting. [01:05:07] I think on the next page there's an interesting bill about mitigation credits, [01:05:11] and I know that's something that we've utilized in some of our development projects. [01:05:16] I've read it and reread it, and I'm still not sure what it says. [01:05:21] It's the bottom of the page, mitigation credits, House Bill 1167. [01:05:25] I think it is a Republican bill, but I don't know how that would affect us. [01:05:31] I know that we do have a bank, mitigation bank, [01:05:35] and we might check with the league about that. [01:05:44] We might check with our building official to see how this would impact us. [01:05:52] The League of Cities has it as the monitor, but I don't know. [01:05:57] It's something we need to worry about or not. [01:05:59] I don't know enough about it, quite honestly. [01:06:08] Ruining tree trimming and removal, you mentioned too. [01:06:11] I'm trying to find your – oh, there it is. [01:06:28] I don't think either of those are going to go anywhere. [01:06:32] They've got a recycling of covered electronic devices. [01:06:35] We're monitoring HB 691, Senate Bill 1030. [01:06:44] Requiring a permit at reclamation facilities. [01:07:01] I think the concept is probably not bad, but it's a solution in search of a problem. [01:07:09] There are recycling companies now that if you've got old computers, for instance, [01:07:20] they will come and pick them up and properly dispose of them, [01:07:25] shredding the hard drives as part of the process and everything. [01:07:31] They do it at no cost to you. [01:07:36] It's talking about establishing a whole bunch of recycling of covered electronic devices. [01:07:51] I think it may be a solution in search of a problem. [01:08:00] I don't know what the New Port Richey's been doing with the old stuff, [01:08:04] but my company, we actually collect the stuff from our clients. [01:08:11] When we get a truck full, we call and somebody comes and picks it up and takes it away, [01:08:18] and then a week or two later we get a disposal certificate saying how the stuff was taken care of. [01:08:28] Thank you. [01:08:29] It's painless. It really is. [01:08:33] We drill out the hard drives. [01:08:37] Yeah, we drill ours as well. [01:08:40] But if you drill them and then they're shredded, there's nobody going to get anything off of them. [01:08:46] What did you hide? [01:08:50] Mayor, if I may, I tried to make a list here as we went through ones that it seemed we were in consensus of [01:08:57] that we wanted to maybe closely monitor and actually communicate our stories to. [01:09:06] The financial disclosure, House Bill 37. [01:09:10] Municipal utilities, House Bill 1331. [01:09:13] Solid waste management, Senate Bill 798 in Guglia. [01:09:18] House Bill 401, the Sovereign Immunity Bill. [01:09:24] It's actually called an SJR 122. [01:09:27] That is the constitutional amendment from 3% to 2%, homestead exemption or homestead cap. [01:09:38] Senate Bill 696, not being able to make contracts with the local officials. [01:09:46] And then Senate Bill 842, code enforcement. [01:09:52] We don't have to report on the code enforcement. [01:09:55] Those are the ones. [01:09:57] Yeah, I had that House Bill 1331. [01:10:00] That was the second one, yeah, municipal utilities. [01:10:02] So maybe if we could, you know, if we're going to agree we can monitor those [01:10:12] and maybe if everybody would commit to call or write, you know, each one of us. [01:10:22] City manager can send out one on behalf of us as well. [01:10:26] But, you know, the ones that you folks, you know, sometimes you can't talk to them. [01:10:30] But I called and it's about this and I've got a pose and I've got a story, whatever. [01:10:35] And then we just, and then we have a list there as we monitor. [01:10:39] If there's something else that comes of interest, maybe we can communicate it to the city manager [01:10:46] and she can pass it around to us so that we can stay on top of it [01:10:51] until we see where these things are going. [01:10:54] And I'm really impressed with the League of Cities monitoring the bills. [01:10:59] You know, I've been involved before and we've had like one lobbyist [01:11:05] or maybe two lobbyists monitoring insurance bills. [01:11:08] And, but they've got four or five up there. [01:11:10] Of course they've got a wider range. [01:11:12] I would have guessed seven or eight. [01:11:14] They just kept going on that Monday conference call with different people. [01:11:18] So, I don't know what we pay, what our dues are, but it's probably worth it. [01:11:25] They're looking out. [01:11:27] Just quickly, there are some of these that are, when we protect our rights, that are their rights. [01:11:34] So, there's nothing wrong when you're up there with deferring to them to say, you know, [01:11:41] these statewide issues like the mitigation credits you mentioned really doesn't mean much to us. [01:11:47] But I did look at it and it sounds like what they're doing is they're going to allow a developer [01:11:52] to go ahead and develop if there's a study that says that even though the mitigation credits [01:11:59] haven't been formed or released or something, but that they think they can do it. [01:12:05] So, it's pro-development allowing a little bit of leeway [01:12:11] because those mitigation banks have to have a physical place where something is working and it passed. [01:12:20] So, like if it's looking good, we'll still let you, you know, take out some more wetlands, [01:12:25] which is what mitigation is all about, right, is to destroy wetlands and pay money to have somebody [01:12:31] build new ones somewhere else where they won't be moving for another five years. [01:12:36] Let me toss one out that was not on this list, but actually I have communicated with Senator Hooper, [01:12:43] who happens to be the Senate sponsor. [01:12:46] There is a bill, and I'd have to look up the number, but it's a thousand something, [01:12:52] on registration charges for electric vehicles and basically putting a $200 surcharge on EVs [01:13:05] and $100 surcharge on plug-ins. [01:13:08] I told the Senator, you're right idea, wrong implementation, and let me just share this with you [01:13:17] because you guys are going to be on here for long after I'm off. [01:13:23] The gas tax is going to go away. [01:13:30] It's not a matter of if, it's when. [01:13:33] It's going away because, well, since the 90s, people have started buying hybrids [01:13:40] that get 50 miles per gallon instead of 12 like my old Silverado got. [01:13:45] And so they don't use much gas, and as a result, our collections of gas tax revenues [01:13:52] have tended to start sliding as plug-ins, either plug-in electrics or full electrics, [01:14:00] become more common, and they're a little percentage now. [01:14:04] It's growing rapidly. [01:14:07] They're not paying any gas tax much or at all, and it's a basic fairness thing. [01:14:17] As an EV driver, I have no objection to paying my share of what it takes to keep our roads in condition, [01:14:24] but the gas tax isn't going to cut it. [01:14:27] And it may not be a problem today or even five years ago, [01:14:33] but I'd be willing to bet by 10 years from now it's going to be a big problem. [01:14:37] And the state needs to figure out how to replace the gas tax [01:14:44] and some sort of mileage-based registration surcharge may be what happens. [01:14:50] And Hooper's bill did reference the fact that some of the money would be sent back to the local level to cover [01:15:00] road construction. So, he's, he's sort of got the right idea. [01:15:05] But I think he's, he's looking at it too narrowly right now. [01:15:08] Well, it's just kind of a stopgap, I think, what you're saying is right. [01:15:10] And that's Senate Bill 1070. [01:15:13] Yeah. [01:15:14] And, and, till we get there, so it'll, you're right. [01:15:18] That's, that's the same thing about, we're talking about the, the other, [01:15:25] we can't charge the water, we can't charge, you know, it doesn't, [01:15:29] just because we reduce the income doesn't mean the cost of government is [01:15:33] reduction, so it just means we're going to have to go somewhere else to find [01:15:36] that revenue, and that's what you're talking about. [01:15:38] And that's what I'm saying. [01:15:39] We, we probably need to look at it, not just picking out, because the, [01:15:45] the figures that he has in the bill would have me paying twice as much in [01:15:52] a registration surcharge as I would have paid in a typical gas car, gas taxes. [01:15:58] So there's an equity issue with the bill as written. [01:16:01] Depending on how much you drive. [01:16:03] Depending on how much you drive. [01:16:05] But typical driver, typical gas mileage, it, I'd be paying twice that. [01:16:12] But the long term issue has got to be addressed. [01:16:16] And so he's got the right idea, it just needs, I, I think some, some tweaking. [01:16:20] You'd be paying more taxes, but you'd be saving money on gas still. [01:16:25] Yeah. [01:16:26] So how much do you want to get over on the rest of it? [01:16:28] Well, I think the gas. [01:16:30] As much as possible. [01:16:31] I, I, I, I, I would like to put my share on gas for the, for the road maintenance. [01:16:37] But the, the point being, it's going to go away. [01:16:42] That'll become a big issue. [01:16:44] It's becoming, it's becoming a huge issue. [01:16:47] Something like a, a quarter of the the vehicles in the UK in February had a plug. [01:16:53] 40% were hybrids of one type or another. [01:16:58] So all of a sudden, and we're, we're going to catch up. [01:17:02] So it's just, tuck it away for reference, so you, you sort of keep it on your, [01:17:07] your radar, because as that, as that picks up, we're going to see gas tax [01:17:13] receipts for city of New Port Richey go, go away, and it will. [01:17:18] I think it's going to happen rather dramatically. [01:17:20] But, you know, it, it can go a number of ways. [01:17:22] You know, Florida really has one of the lowest vehicle registration fees. [01:17:29] In, in many states, it's based upon the value of the vehicle. [01:17:32] And it's not uncommon to have a vehicle registration that [01:17:35] costs $700, $800 a year to renew. [01:17:38] So. [01:17:42] Hard to get the state legislature to increase any taxes on their own. [01:17:46] They've, whatever pledges or secret societies they belong to. [01:17:50] So, they have to find a way to collect it locally. [01:17:54] What I, what I suggested to the Senator is if you, if you cut, [01:17:58] if you eliminate gas tax and you set the registration surcharge however it's [01:18:03] figured out for all vehicles to cover what that expense is of the, [01:18:10] the road maintenance that's being paid for by gas taxes. [01:18:13] You can say, well, we're not actually raising taxes. [01:18:15] We're simply shifting the way it's being done. [01:18:19] And then they've got to enforce the registration of vehicles. [01:18:22] Yes. [01:18:23] Yeah. [01:18:23] And if they, if they do that, as poorly as they do enforcement. [01:18:29] Still won't have the money. [01:18:30] That's a, that's a whole nother issue. [01:18:35] But. [01:18:36] So, Mayor, I have to ask the question. [01:18:37] Someone asked me, I, I learned a new term the other day. [01:18:39] And I was supposed to ask you, or ask vehicle drivers, [01:18:43] do you ever suffer from premature electrification? [01:18:47] That was actually a, an advertisement that Dodge. [01:18:53] Was that a Super Bowl ad or something? [01:18:54] On the Super Bowl. [01:18:55] That's where that, that's where that came from. [01:18:59] And they're running scared because they realize they're behind the eight ball now. [01:19:03] And their lunch is about to be eaten by both Ford and GM. [01:19:08] That, well, Ford's got their F-150 that they, they can't build fast enough. [01:19:15] And GM's Silverado and some of their other big EVs are going to be hitting this [01:19:20] year and next, and Dodge is going to lose market share if they don't get their. [01:19:25] Act in gear. [01:19:27] Lucky for us, we've got some really beautiful new roads that have been laid [01:19:30] down, and it's really nice to see our city start to become one where you can [01:19:35] drive around, except for the speed humps. [01:19:38] But other than that, it's pretty smooth, right? [01:19:40] Our, our, in, in all the things that we've done in the, [01:19:47] the time I've been on city council, agreeing to do that pavement management [01:19:52] plan was right up there in one of the most brilliant things that the council [01:19:58] agreed to do, because it has made a huge difference. [01:20:02] It's made a, a huge difference on our arterials and our collectors. [01:20:07] And it's about to make a huge difference in the, the residential areas. [01:20:13] As these roads get fixed up, it, it's going to add market value to [01:20:20] every one of the homes on those streets that get fixed. [01:20:21] I can't wait for them to fix that stop sign by my house. [01:20:24] It was this close, this close to being a wreck today. [01:20:27] Tues, Tuesday. [01:20:27] Because they're going through that stop sign still. [01:20:29] And I've watched three people this morning blow through it and never even slowed down. [01:20:33] Tuesday, Kelly. [01:20:34] Tuesday, we're, it's on our agenda. [01:20:38] So this afternoon, this big truck came barreling through there, never slowed down, [01:20:41] and was this close to hitting the car that came through the other side. [01:20:44] And I thought, oh my God, I'm standing here. [01:20:47] I don't want him to hit, crash and, you know, come in over here. [01:20:52] Robert will be giving us the whole lowdown on that Tuesday night, so. [01:20:57] Now, let's see, who else is going to tell us that you're going to be able to go up? [01:21:02] He's the only one who's unable to attend. [01:21:04] Okay, great, okay. [01:21:06] I mean, not great you can't, but I'm great that everybody else can. [01:21:08] Oh, I think you're good. [01:21:09] No, I'm, I'm, I'm doing my fair share of traveling, so I figured I'd pull off on that. [01:21:15] All right, so, all right, you have to, that means you have to run an extra email. [01:21:17] Well guys, I think we've got a, a pretty good list. [01:21:26] Deputy Mayor, thank you for writing those down so [01:21:29] that we kept a record of which ones we need to, to concentrate. [01:21:34] If, if you could get us a, a list out to everybody of the, [01:21:40] the key ones we want to concentrate on. [01:21:43] I'll, I'll certainly do my part to, to monitor those extra close to and send out. [01:21:50] And hopefully we can get some of the good ones passed and [01:21:53] keep the really bad ones from not being passed, so. [01:21:59] Anything else for the good of the group? [01:22:00] In that case, we will declare this meeting closed. [01:22:06] Thank you, Mayor. [01:22:09] Thank you. [01:22:09] Thank you.

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

3. 3Communications
4. 4Adjournment