CAPTIONING OCTOBER 15, 2009 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMISSION ***This is not an official, verbatim transcript of the ***following meeting. It should be used for informational ***purposes only. This document has not been edited; ***therefore, there may be additions, deletions, or words ***that did not translate. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: GOOD MORNING, AND WELCOME TO THE GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO THE -- GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO THE. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: GOOD MORNING, AND WELCOME TO THE OCTOBER 15th MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMISSION. WOULD YOU -- WOULD YOU PLEASE -- WE'VE GOT A FEEDBACK HERE. WE'RE PAUSING FOR A COMMERCIAL BREAK. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WOULD YOU PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE AND INVOCATION. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] FATHER, WE THANK YOU FOR THIS DAY AND THOSE WHO'VE ASSEMBLED TO SHARE CONCERNS AND THOUGHTS ABOUT THE PRECIOUS RESOURCE, OUR ENVIRONMENT, WHICH YOU HAVE PROVIDED FOR US. WE ASK THAT YOU HELP US OVERLOOK THESE RESOURCES IN A WAY THAT IS MINDFUL AND RESPECTFUL AND THAT WE CONDUCT OURSELVES IN A MANNER SIMILAR. THANK YOU. AMEN. >> AMEN. >>JIM NORMAN: [INAUDIBLE] >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: VERY GOOD. DR. GARRITY, ARE THERE ANY CHANGES TO THE AGENDA OR REMOVAL OF CONSENT ITEMS? >>RICK GARRITY: GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. RICK GARRITY. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF CHANGES, AND WE HAD SENT AN ADDENDUM AROUND EARLIER IN THE WEEK THAT. IS GOING TO BE UNDER THE CONSENT ITEM, ITEM "G." IT'S A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN EPC AND THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION FOR SOME RESTORATION PROJECTS ON COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY NEAR COCKROACH BAY. AND WE'RE ASKING -- COMMISSIONER HAGAN HAD ASKED IF WE COULD MOVE ITEM 8-A, THE POLLUTION RECOVERY FUND PROJECTS, TO THE END OF THE AGENDA. AND THERE'S ACTUALLY NO ITEM 7. IN CASE YOU WERE WONDERING, 7 IS OMITTED ON THE AGENDA SHEET, SO IT DOES NOT EXIST. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: YES, WE WERE ALL WONDERING THAT. >>RICK GARRITY: THAT'S IT. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'M SURE EVERYONE PICKED IT UP. ALL RIGHT. AND ALSO I HAVE A NOTE HERE FROM COMMISSIONER FERLITA. DUE TO A PERSONAL CONFLICT, I WILL NOT BE IN ATTENDANCE AT TODAY'S EPC MEETING. AND SHE ALSO HAS SOMETHING SHE WANTS READ INTO THE RECORD, WHICH I'LL READ IN AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME DURING THE MEETING. NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CHANGES. >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>JIM NORMAN: SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES. WE HAVE SEVERAL WHO HAVE SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: EXCUSE ME. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. WE WILL BE HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING LATER IN THE MEETING. IT SHOULD BE NOTED IN ABOUT 15 MINUTES WE'LL HOLD THAT PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENTS TO THE FEE SCHEDULE RULE, CHAPTER 1-6. WE REQUEST THAT YOU RESERVE YOUR COMMENTS DURING THIS PUBLIC HEARING RATHER THAN DURING -- PUBLIC HEARING -- RATHER THAN DURING PUBLIC COMMENTS. THERE WILL BE A SEPARATE SIGN-UP CARD FOR THE FEE SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING, AND YOU NEED TO FILL THAT OUT PRIOR TO SPEAKING. THANK YOU. WE HAVE THIS MORNING TWO WHO HAVE SIGNED UP. THE FIRST IS HUNG MAI. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, MR. MAI. AND THEN PHIL COMPTON. THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. MY NAME IS HUNG MAI, 14031 NORTH DALE MABRY, TAMPA 33618. WITH ME IS JASON LESLIE FROM THE LAKE MAGDALENE SPECIAL DEPENDENT DISTRICT. I AM REPRESENTING THE LAKE MAGDALENE SPECIAL DEPENDENT DISTRICT. I COME HERE TODAY TO -- BEGGING YOU ON THE ITEM, YOU KNOW, 8-A. NUMBER ONE IS THE LAKE MAGDALENE RECEIVED UNTREATED WATER RUNOFF FROM AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, 12 LOCATIONS, VARIOUS SITES FROM 18 INCH TO VERY BIG, YOU KNOW, [INCOMPREHENSIBLE] FROM HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY ROADWAY AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, FROM THE OLD SUBDIVISION WHERE THEY BUILT BEFORE THE SWFWMD STORMWATER REGULATION IN PLACE. THE -- THE WATER QUALITY IS DEGRADED OVER THE YEARS WITH THE NUTRIENT LEVEL UP VERY HIGH. THE TOTAL, YOU KNOW, PHOSPHOROUS IN THE MESOTROPHIC, YOU KNOW, CONDITION AND THE TOTAL NITROGEN EUTROPHIC, YOU KNOW, CONDITION. THAT ACCORDING TO THE FLORIDA LAKEWATCH DATA. LAKE MAGDALENE FLOW INTO BRUSHY CREEK AND SWEETWATER CREEK, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY IT GOES INTO TAMPA BAY. THEREFORE, UNTREATED NUTRIENT WILL BE EVENTUALLY INTO OUR TAMPA BAY. THE SECTION 3.03-D OF THE 1972 FEDERAL CLEAN WATER ACT REQUIRE DEP TO SUBMIT TO EPA A LIST OF WATER BODY THAT DON'T MEET THE WATER QUALITY STANDARD. A DRAFT REPORT IMPOSE A TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD, TMDL, IS IN THE FINAL STAGE AND ALREADY IDENTIFY BRUSHY CREEK AND SWEETWATER CREEK AS AN IMPAIRED WATER BODY. THE DRAFT REPORT ALSO IDENTIFY THE ALLOWABLE NUTRIENT LOADING TO THESE TWO CREEKS. THEREFORE, IMPROVING THE WATER QUALITY OF THE LAKE MAGDALENE WILL HELP HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TO MEET THE STATE AND FEDERAL MANDATE TMDL. IN ADDITION TO THAT, FDEP ALREADY ISSUED A FINAL ORDER ESTABLISHING THE HILLSBOROUGH RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN ON SEPTEMBER 18 OF 2009. IN THERE THEY STATING THE ORDER -- THE HILLSBOROUGH RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN HAS BEEN DEVELOPED AS PART OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TMDL PROGRAM, AS AUTHORIZED UNDER THE FLORIDA WATERSHED RESTORATION ACT. THIS IS A CLASS III, YOU KNOW, WATER, AND ACCORDING WITH THE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE MUST -- MUST HAVE SUITABLE WATER QUALITY FOR RECREATIONAL USE AND FOR THE PROPAGATION AND MAINTENANCE OF A HEALTHY, WELL-BALANCED POPULATION OF THE FISH AND WILDLIFE. THE PROJECT, IF YOU APPROVE TODAY, WILL INSTALL A CDS, YOU KNOW, UNIT AT EACH INFLOW LOCATION OF THE UNTREATED WATER GOING INTO THE LAKE. NOW, IF FUNDING AVAILABLE AROUND -- I MEAN DURING THE YEAR WE WILL, YOU KNOW, INSTALL MORE AND MORE. NOW, THIS TECHNIQUE IS APPROVED IN THE CITY OF TEMPLE TERRACE AND APPROVED BY DEP, SO WE WOULD LIKE TO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU APPROVE THE FUNDING FOR THIS PROJECT. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MR. COMPTON. >> GOOD MORNING. PHIL COMPTON, 1430 PARK CIRCLE HERE IN TAMPA. I'M REPRESENTING NOT ONLY THE SIERRA CLUB BUT THE DOZENS OF SMALL BUSINESSES, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, AND NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE ASKING YOU TODAY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A VERY SENSIBLE APPROACH TO SOLVING THE KIND OF PROBLEM YOU JUST HEARD ABOUT AND THE PROBLEM WE HAVE ALL OVER TAMPA BAY. WE'RE PASSING OUT A LETTER TO YOU THAT'S SIGNED BY A NUMBER OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS, NOT ONLY HERE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BUT ALL OVER THE TAMPA BAY REGION. SINCE WE LAST SPOKE ABOUT THIS -- THIS IS THE SAME LETTER YOU'VE SEEN A COUPLE TIMES, BUT THERE ARE SOME NEW SIGNATURES ADDED TO IT, INCLUDING JUST THIS WEEK THE SOUTH SEMINOLE HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. SINCE WE LAST SPOKE ABOUT THIS, A COUPLE THINGS HAVE HAPPENED. YOU HEARD ABOUT THIS PROBLEM AT ONE OF OUR LAKES. TAMPA BAY THIS YEAR HAD ITS SECOND YEAR IN A ROW OF HAVING A HARMFUL ALGAE BLOOM. LAST YEAR'S THREE MILES, THIS YEAR'S 14 MILES, SO WE HAVE SOME PROBLEMS THAT WE NEED TO FIX, AND THE FEDERAL EPA HAS TOLD THE STATE OF FLORIDA THAT THEY WERE TIRED OF WAITING FOR TEN YEARS FOR FLORIDA TO SET NUMERIC NUTRIENT STANDARDS, SO A YEAR FROM NOW, OCTOBER 1st, 2010, THERE WILL BE NUMERIC NUTRIENT STANDARDS IN EFFECT FOR ALL INLAND WATERWAYS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA SET BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT YOU'LL HAVE TO THEN COME UP WITH A WAY OF MEETING. WE BELIEVE THAT SENSIBLE FERTILIZER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCES ARE A VERY EFFECTIVE, VERY COST-EFFECTIVE TOOL TO HAVE IN YOUR TOOLBOX TO MEET THEM. YOU JUST HEARD ABOUT A -- A CDS UNIT. I HAPPEN TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THOSE. THEY'RE NOT FREE. YOU MIGHT HAVE TO PUT SOME OF THOSE IN, BUT IF YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH A VERY SENSIBLE, CLEARLY STATED FERTILIZER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE THAT ASKS CITIZENS TO DO THEIR PART, ASKS PEOPLE TO USE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, INSTEAD OF RAISING TAXES, INSTEAD OF INSTALLING ALL THIS CAPITAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO SOLVE EVERY PROBLEM BUT TO ASK PEOPLE TO DO THEIR PART. AS MUCH AS 80% OF THE NITROGEN THAT'S GETTING INTO OUR LAKES COMES FROM FERTILIZER RUNNING OFF OUR LAWNS. WE'RE NOT ASKING ANYBODY TO DO ANYTHING DIFFERENTLY YET, BUT DOWN THE COAST THEY HAVE HAD THIS APPROACH IN EFFECT FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, IN SARASOTA IN THE LAST YEAR, AND A LOT OF COMMUNITIES, LEE COUNTY, NAPLES, UP AND DOWN THE COAST OF FLORIDA, AND WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR A WHILE. YOU'VE HAD OTHER THINGS ON YOUR PLATE, WE KNOW, BUT IT'S TIME TO GET BACK TO THIS, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU, AS WE HAVE IN THE PAST, TO IMPLEMENT THIS APPROACH THAT REALLY ASKS PEOPLE TO USE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND SAVE OUR TAXPAYERS MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN MEETING THIS CHALLENGE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. SEEING THERE ARE NO OTHER CARDS, WE WILL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT -- EXCUSE ME. I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT. >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. AND WE HAVE DAVE JELLERSON FROM CEAC. >> DR. ECHELBERGER IS PRESENT TODAY, THE VICE CHAIRMAN. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: VERY GOOD. WELCOME, SIR. >> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS WAYNE ECHELBERGER, AND I'M PROFESSOR EMERITUS AND FORMER CHAIR OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA. I LIVE IN UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND SERVE AS THE VICE CHAIR OF THE CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND I'M ONE OF COMMISSIONER HAGAN'S APPOINTEES TO THAT COMMITTEE. OUR MEETING, WHICH WAS HELD ON OCTOBER 5 OF THIS MONTH, WAS A INTERESTING MEETING, FULL OF LOTS OF QUALITY INFORMATION PRESENTED TO US AND ACTIONS THAT THE COMMITTEE TOOK. ONE ITEM THAT WE RECEIVED WAS THE REVIEW OF THE PAST EPC MEETING THAT WAS HELD ON SEPTEMBER 17th AND THEN THE PREVIEW OF THE MEETING THAT IS BEING HELD CURRENTLY TODAY. THE HYBRID WETLANDS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION AGAIN IN AN UPDATE FASHION, AND THE COMMITTEE WAS VERY IMPRESSED BY THE FACT THAT MOST OF THE MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES AND ASPECTS OF THIS PROGRAM NOW ARE ON-LINE AND THERE IS ALSO AN ON-LINE APPLICANTS MANUAL, AND THE APPLICATION FORMS AND PROCEDURES ARE ALL INDICATED ON-LINE AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME. WE DID REVIEW -- HAVE A REVIEW PRESENTED TO US ON THE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 1-6 CONCERNING THE SERVICE FEES THAT ARE CHARGED BY THE AGENCY FOR APPLICATION REVIEW AND APPROVALS. THE GREENWAYS AND PARKS COMMISSION PROGRAM THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDERWAY IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY WAS PRESENTED IN A PRELIMINARY FASHION TO US, AND THEN WE STARTED A REVIEW OF OUR OWN OPERATING BYLAWS, AND THAT WILL CONTINUE ON AS WE HAVE FUTURE MEETINGS. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE ACCOMPLISHED AT OUR LAST MEETING, AND THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. SEEING THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS, WE'LL MOVE INTO PUBLIC HEARING. AT THIS TIME WE WILL OPEN FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 1-6, THE SERVICES FEE SCHEDULE RULE. MR. TSCHANTZ WILL EXPLAIN THE PROCESS. MR. TSCHANTZ, HAS THIS HEARING BEEN PROPERLY NOTICED? >>RICK TSCHANTZ: YES, COMMISSIONERS. ON OCTOBER 1st WE ADVERTISED THE MEETING ACCORDING TO OUR RULE IN THE TAMPA TRIBUNE, AND THAT HAS ALSO BEEN RUNNING ON THEIR WEB SITE FOR TWO WEEKS, ALSO ON THE COUNTY WEB SITE, AND WE HAD A PUBLIC WORKSHOP ON SEPTEMBER 29th, 2009, SO THE HEARING TODAY THEN WILL BE FOR THE COMMISSION CONSIDERATION AND VOTE FOR THE FEE SERVICE RULE TO BE AMENDED TO CHAPTER 1-6 CONCERNING THE PORT AUTHORITY FEES, AND THE PROCEDURE I WOULD SUGGEST, THAT WE WOULD HEAR THE PROPOSED RULE LAID OUT FOR THE COMMISSION BY BOB STETLER, DIRECTOR OF THE WETLANDS AND WATER -- WATERSHED MANAGEMENT DIVISION, FOLLOWED BY A STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT HE WILL GIVE, AND THEN WE WOULD TAKE THE CEAC AND PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT -- THAT MIGHT BE ANYBODY WHO FILLED OUT A CARD, AND THEN A BOARD DISCUSSION AND VOTE. SO IF -- IF THAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD, WE'LL HAVE BOB STETLER DELIVER AN INTRODUCTION TO THE RULE. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SEEING NO QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, MR. STETLER, WELCOME. >>BOB STETLER: GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. BOB STETLER WITH EPC STAFF. I'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU THIS BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION FOR THE RULE FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING, AND I'D LIKE TO ADD ONE THING THAT RICK TSCHANTZ STATED WAS THAT WE ALSO HAVE KATHY DAVEY HERE, ASSISTANT COUNSEL FOR THE PORT AUTHORITY, IN CASE SOME QUESTIONS AT THE END COME UP THAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO DIRECT TO THE PORT STAFF THEMSELVES. THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS OUR HOPE TO BE THE LAST STEP IN THE DELEGATION PROCESS OF US RECEIVING THE DELEGATION FOR THE MINOR WORK PERMITS FROM THE PORT AUTHORITY. WE ARE CURRENTLY ALREADY DOING THAT WORK. THIS STEP IS THE -- WOULD PROVIDE THE STEP TO BRING THE FEES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH WHAT THE PORT'S PART OF THIS PROJECT -- OF THESE WORK -- OF THESE PERMITS USED TO BE, BRING THEIR FEES INTO OUR FEE SCHEDULE, AND ALLOW US TO CHARGE THOSE FEES FOR THEIR PART OF THE WORK THAT WE'VE ADOPTED NOW. JUST A LITTLE QUICK BACKGROUND ON THIS. THERE ARE -- THE MINOR WORK PERMITS ARE A TWO-STEP PROCESS. THERE IS A LANDS REVIEW. THIS IS THE PART OF THE PROCESS THAT THE PORT HAS ALWAYS CONDUCTED. SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO BUILD SOMETHING ON LAND THAT IS IN PUBLIC OWNERSHIP IS REQUIRED TO HAVE THIS LAND REVIEW BY THE PORT. IT'S A FAIRLY INTENSIVE REVIEW PROCESS. AND THE SECOND PART OF THE PERMIT IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW THAT EPC HAS HISTORICALLY PROVIDED. THOSE TWO REVIEWS COME TOGETHER AND ARE CONSOLIDATED BY THE PORT PREVIOUSLY, AND THE PORT WOULD ISSUE THE PERMIT FOR THE MINOR WORK. WITH THE DELEGATION, EPC NOW REVIEWS NEARLY ALL THE MINOR WORK PERMITS. THESE ARE THINGS LIKE DOCKS, SEAWALLS, RIPRAP, SHORELINE STABILIZATION, AND CERTAIN KINDS OF DREDGING PROJECTS. SO RIGHT NOW FOR MOST OF THOSE KINDS OF APPLICATIONS, THE EPC IS REVIEWING AND APPROVING THOSE PROJECTS. THEY ARE SIGNED IN THE END BY DR. GARRITY, EITHER SIGNED OR DENIED. I JUST WANTED TO REMIND YOU THAT THIS WAS ANOTHER STEP IN - - THAT WAS ESTABLISHED IN OUR HYBRID PROCESS THAT ULTIMATELY THIS -- FOLLOWING THIS STEP WE WILL CONTINUE TO PURSUE -- THIS STEP WAS NECESSARY IN ORDER FOR US TO PURSUE THE DELEGATION FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE. SO RIGHT NOW, PRIOR TO THIS DELEGATION, AN APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO GET THE PERMIT FROM THE PORT AUTHORITY, THE EPC, THE STATE DEP, AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. WHEN WE'RE FINISHED, ALL FOUR OF THOSE WOULD BE CONSOLIDATED INTO A SINGLE ONE-STOP PERMIT PROCESS. THESE ARE JUST SOME PICTURES OF SOME OF THE KINDS OF PROJECTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THIS IS NOT ALL OF THEM, BUT THIS IS A PRETTY GOOD REPRESENTATION OF THE SHORELINE PROJECTS. OF INTERESTING TO NOTE, THINGS LIKE DOCKS, RIPRAP, DREDGING, THOSE ARE PARTS OF THE PROJECT THAT YOU MIGHT BE THE RIPARIAN PROPERTY OWNER OWNING THE UPLANDS, BUT A GOOD DEAL OF THIS PROJECT IS ACTUALLY TAKING PLACE ON PUBLIC LANDS, PUBLIC LANDS THAT THE PORT AUTHORITY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO PROTECT IN THE PUBLIC TRUST. THAT'S WHY THAT LAND REVIEW IS SO IMPORTANT. THE PORT AUTHORITY PUT A LOT OF EMPHASIS ON THIS DELEGATION AND REALLY SPEARHEADED IT, AND IN RECOGNITION OF THAT, THEY FUNDED -- FULLY FUNDED A FULL-TIME-EQUIVALENT POSITION AT THE DEP -- AT EPC, EXCUSE ME, FOR A YEAR AND A HALF AS A TRAINING PROCESS TO GET THAT -- THIS DELEGATION TRANSITION UNDERWAY AND SMOOTH. THE DELEGATION DID OCCUR IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR. WE'VE HOSTED SOME PUBLIC -- TECHNICAL WORKSHOPS, AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT THEY -- THE IDEA OF THE DELEGATION WAS EXTREMELY WELL RECEIVED BY THE PUBLIC. THEY WERE ATTENDED MOSTLY BY THE MARINE CONTRACTORS, THE PEOPLE WHO PULL THESE PERMITS. THEY LIKED THE IDEA OF A ONE-STOP PERMIT, AND SINCE THE EPC HAS A LARGER STAFF, WE CAN ACTUALLY IN MANY CASES GET THESE PERMITS OUT THE DOOR OR REVIEWED MORE QUICKLY THAN PREVIOUSLY. AS A RESULT OF ALL THIS, THOUGH, THE EPC NEEDS TO COLLECT THE FEES FOR BOTH REVIEWS AT ONE SINGLE LOCATION, AND THAT'S WHAT TODAY'S PUBLIC HEARING'S ABOUT. IN ORDER TO GET THERE, WE DID A COST RECOVERY ANALYSIS. THIS WAS ESTABLISHED AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE 18-MONTH PERIOD, THAT BOTH TPA AND EPC WOULD REVIEW THE PERMITS TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT IT COST TO DO -- TO PROCESS THESE APPLICATIONS. EPC REVIEWED 79 TOTAL PERMITS THAT WERE FINISHED, AND OUR PREVIOUS FEE FOR DOING THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS WAS $150. WE WERE ABLE TO DETERMINE OUR $150 IS STILL AN APPROPRIATE FEE FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL PART OF THE REVIEW. THE PORT AUTHORITY STAFF REVIEWED 45 FULL PERMITS, AND IN - - IN LOOKING AT THAT AND ACCOUNTING FOR THE TIME THAT IT TAKES TO DO THOSE PROJECTS, THEIR CURRENT FEE OF $100 WOULD HAVE TO BE INCREASED TO $440 TO ACCOMMODATE A COST RECOVERY FOR THE WORK THAT IS DONE ON THAT PART OF THE REVIEW. THAT WOULD RESULT IN A COMBINED FEE OF $590 FOR THE DELEGATED PROJECTS TO BE REVIEWED BY EPC FOR BOTH REVIEW PROCESSES. OF NOTE, THE TAMPA PORT AUTHORITY'S FEE HAS BEEN UNCHANGED SINCE THE '90s; WHEREAS, THE EPC FEE WAS REVIEWED IN 2003 AND AGAIN CURRENTLY AND ESTABLISHED IN THAT MANNER, SO THE PORT AUTHORITY'S FEE HAS NOT BEEN REVIEWED FOR A LONG TIME, AND THE PORT AUTHORITY -- AND KATHY COULD SPEAK TO THIS IF YOU'D LIKE -- WILL, FOLLOWING OUR ACTIONS, INITIATE A PROCESS THAT WILL THEY SAY PURSUE PUTTING AN EQUIVALENT FEE FOR THESE PROJECTS INTO THEIR REQUIREMENTS AND INTO THEIR RULES. SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT YOU WOULD ADOPT THE MODIFIED FEE FOR THE TAMPA MINOR WORK PERMITS THAT ARE DELEGATED TO EPC, WHICH IS A COMBINATION OF THE PORT AUTHORITY LANDS REVIEW OF $440, THE EPC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF $150, WHICH IS AN UNCHANGED FEE IN TERMS OF AMOUNT, FOR A TOTAL FEE OF $590. AND I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE CEAC PERHAPS OR QUESTIONS. >>RICK TSCHANTZ: IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS NOW, WE WOULD HAVE THE CEAC AND ANY OTHER COMMENTS. >> AT OUR MEETING, THE CEAC MEETING ON OCTOBER 5, WE ALSO HEARD THE SAME DETAILED PRESENTATION ABOUT THESE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED, AND AT THE END OF THAT THE CEAC COMMITTEE STRONGLY SUPPORTED THESE AMENDMENTS WITH A MAJORITY VOTE IN FAVOR. THANK YOU. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I NEED YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. >> AGAIN, IT'S WAYNE ECHELBERGER, VICE CHAIR OF THE CEAC GROUP. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU, DOCTOR. ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE HERE THAT WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS ISSUE IN BOARD MEMBERS. IS THERE A MOTION? >>MARK SHARPE: I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: COUNSELOR, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT? >>RICK TSCHANTZ: NO. NO, JUST BOARD DISCUSSION AND VOTE. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THERE'S A MOTION BY MR. SHARPE AND A SECOND BY MR. WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 5-0. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS A REPORT FROM OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. I GUESS THAT WOULD BE YOU, DR. GARRITY. >>RICK GARRITY: THANK YOU, SIR. GOOD MORNING AGAIN. I JUST WANTED TO UPDATE YOU ON A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE IS OUR EFFORTS TO DATE ON THE STERLING MANAGEMENT REVIEW PROCESS. AND I'VE TOLD YOU THAT THAT PROCESS IS UNDERWAY. WE HAVE A CONSULTANT ONBOARD WHO'S HELPING US WITH IT, AND WE HAVE PUT A COMMITTEE TOGETHER OF STAFF MEMBERS CONSISTING OF ABOUT 16 STAFF RANGING FROM THE DIVISION DIRECTORS TO ENGINEERS AND OTHER CATEGORY STAFF THROUGHOUT THE AGENCY, AND WE'VE ALSO NAMED TWO EMPLOYEES TO BE SENT TO BE TRAINED AS STERLING EXAMINERS, WHICH IS A VERY INTENSIVE PROCESS, BUT AFTER THEY'VE GONE THROUGH THAT PROCESS, THEY WILL ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO REVIEW OTHER GOVERNMENTS AND COMPANIES TO SEE HOW THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THE STERLING PROCESS AND ACTUALLY EVALUATE THEM, SO THEY'LL BECOME VERY AWARE OF WHAT THE WHOLE STERLING PROCESS IS ALL ABOUT. WE CONDUCTED IN EARLY SEPTEMBER AN INTENSIVE TWO-DAY SELF- ASSESSMENT. WE LOOKED AT THINGS LIKE LEADERSHIP, STRATEGIC PLANNING, CUSTOMERS' FOCUS, MEASUREMENT ANALYSIS AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, WHICH IS HOW WE SELECT, GATHER, ANALYZE, AND MANAGE OUR DATA AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY. WE LOOKED AT WORKFORCE FOCUS, WHICH IS THE STAFF THAT WORKS AT THE AGENCY, HOW WE DEVELOP, ENGAGE, AND MANAGE THAT WORKFORCE TO UTILIZE ITS FULL POTENTIAL. WE LOOKED AT PROCESS MANAGEMENT, HOW WE DESIGN, MANAGE, AND IMPROVE OUR WORK SYSTEMS TO DELIVER CUSTOMER VALUE AND ACHIEVE SUCCESS AND SUSTAINABILITY. AND WE LOOKED AT THE RESULTS. WE IDENTIFIED STRENGTHS, OPPORTUNITIES -- THEY USE A DIFFERENT TERM THAN WEAKNESSES -- OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENTS, AND THIS NEW ACRONYM THAT I LEARNED, WHICH IS AN OFI, O-F-I, WHICH IS OPPORTUNITY FOR IMPROVEMENT. THAT'S USE EXTENSIVELY IN THE STERLING PROCESS, AND ONE THING WE DID COME AWAY WITH FROM THAT TWO-DAY SELF- ASSESSMENT IS THAT WE HAVE LOTS OF WORK TO DO, WE HAVE LOTS OF MEASURES TO LOOK AT IN HOW WE DO THINGS, AND I THINK IT CAN'T HELP BUT LEAD TOWARDS IMPROVEMENT. WE SELECTED FROM ALL A OF THAT THE -- THINGS THAT WE IDENTIFIED AS OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT. WE SELECTED FOUR CATEGORIES AS PRIORITIES. ONE IS TO CLARIFY THE MISSION, THE VISION, AND THE VALUES OF THE AGENCY AND IMPROVE THE COMMUNICATION OF THOSE THREE THINGS THROUGHOUT THE AGENCY. SECOND IS TO CONDUCT AN EMPLOYEE SURVEY SO THAT WE CAN GET A BETTER IDEA OF HOW THE STAFF THINKS ABOUT THE AGENCY AND IMPROVE THEIR PRODUCTIVITY AND -- AND THE WORKING CONDITIONS AT THE AGENCY. THE THIRD IS TO REALLY DO THE SAME THING FOR OUR CUSTOMERS, TO DO A CUSTOMER SURVEY. AND THE LAST IS TO PUT TOGETHER A STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT PLAN SPECIFICALLY FOCUSED TO WORK WITH THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THE STERLING PROCESS. SO THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY ABOUT THE STERLING. IT'S -- IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF WORK BUT HOPEFULLY WILL LEAD TO GOOD RESULTS. NEXT THING I WANTED TO MENTION, COMMISSIONERS, WAS THE -- AND ACTUALLY, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS MENTIONED IT UNDER PUBLIC COMMENT -- WAS THAT THE BASIN MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN FOR THE HILLSBOROUGH RIVER TRIBUTARIES -- THAT HAS TO DO WITH FECAL COLIFORM CONTAMINATION AND IMPAIRMENT OF WATER BODIES -- YOU PASSED THAT PLAN SEVERAL MONTHS BACK AND ALSO YOU DID THE SAME THING AS THE BOCC. THAT HAS BEEN SIGNED INTO ORDER BY SECRETARY SOLE OF DEP ON SEPTEMBER 18th, SO NOW IT'S AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT, AND IT'S THE FIRST IN THIS REGION. IT'S THE FIRST BASIN MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN IN THIS REGION TO ACTUALLY BE FULFILLED, BRINGING TOGETHER ALL OF THE PARTNERS TO TRY TO ACHIEVE GOOD THINGS, AND -- AS FAR AS WORKING WITH IMPAIRED WATERS. AND THEN FINALLY I JUST WANTED TO READ YOU A COUPLE OF KUDOS. ONE IS TO SEAN McGINNIS, WHO WORKED IN OUR WASTE MANAGEMENT SECTION. HE'S NOW IN OUR AIR SECTION. THIS IS FROM THE NORTH AMERICAN HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, AND THESE ARE NICE ADJECTIVES THAT WERE SAID ABOUT HIM. THE WRITER SAID, I'VE NOTICED THAT YOU ARE MOTIVATING, PERSISTENT, KNOWLEDGEABLE, AFFABLE, INSPIRING, AND DAUNTLESS, AND HAVE BEEN AN INVALUABLE ASSET TO THIS CHAPTER OF THE NORTH AMERICAN HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIALS ASSOCIATION, SIGNED BY THE PAST PRESIDENT OF THAT CHAPTER, SO CONGRATULATIONS TO SEAN FOR THAT. A SECOND LETTER IS FROM CATHY VALDES, WHO'S THE CHIEF FACILITIES OFFICER FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD, AND SHE WROTE RECENTLY THAT THEY HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTING A NEW HIGH SCHOOL, STRAWBERRY CREST, YOU'VE SEEN THAT, ALONG I-4, AND A NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, THE DAVID BAILEY JR. SCHOOL ON THE SAME SITE, AND TO DO THAT -- WHICH IT WENT UP REALLY FAST IF YOU NOTICED THAT CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. THEY WERE ALSO REQUIRED TO CONDUCT SIGNIFICANT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS. SHE SAID, AS WE PROCEEDED WITH CONSTRUCTION, WE WERE FACED WITH SEVERAL WETLAND ISSUES, ANY ONE OF WHICH COULD HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY DELAYED THE OPENING OF THESE SCHOOLS; HOWEVER, THANKS TO THE COOPERATIVE ATTITUDE AND EFFORTS OF THE EPC WETLANDS AND LEGAL DEPARTMENTS, WE WERE ABLE TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES QUICKLY AND EFFICIENTLY. IN PARTICULAR, OUR WETLANDS REVIEWER, MARK HOWARD, WAS HELPFUL AND A REAL PROBLEM SOLVER ON THIS PROJECT, AND SHE GOES ON TO ALSO THANK RICK TSCHANTZ, ANDY ZODROW, AND JEANNETTE FIGARI, SO CONGRATULATIONS TO THEM. AND THE LAST THING I WANTED TO MENTION IS TO GIVE SOME PRAISE TO SHARON SUBADAN. SHE HAS HAD THREE OF HER FLEET YARDS NAMED TO BECOME QUALIFIED AS GREEN STAR PROGRAMS WITH EPC. THAT MEANS THAT THEY'RE DOING ALL OF THE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES THAT THEY HAVE TO DO TO HAVE AS LITTLE EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AS POSSIBLE, AND THIS IS FOR FLEET CENTRAL, FLEET UNIT 2, AND FLEET UNIT 3. DEWITT BRUCE ORGANIZES THAT PROGRAM FOR US, AND SO CONGRATULATIONS TO SHARON FOR THAT ACHIEVEMENT. AND THAT'S ALL I HAD, COMMISSIONERS. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU, DR. GARRITY. SEEING NO QUESTIONS, WE'LL MOVE ON TO WASTE MANAGEMENT REPORT. >>HOOSHANG BOOSTANI: GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. I'M HOOSHANG BOOSTANI, EPC STAFF. THE FIRST ITEM IS JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, AND NO ACTION IS BEING REQUESTED. THE FLORIDA BROWNFIELDS ASSOCIATION IS A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO THE ADVANCEMENT OF BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, PRIMARILY IN FLORIDA. THE ASSOCIATION IS HOLDING ITS 12th ANNUAL CONFERENCE HERE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY THIS YEAR, SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 1st THROUGH NOVEMBER 4th. THEY INVITED OUR CHAIRPERSON, COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, TO DELIVER THE WELCOMING AND OPENING REMARKS ON MONDAY, NOVEMBER THE 2nd. COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM HAS ACCEPTED TO DO THAT. IN ADDITION, HE WILL TAKE A PROCLAMATION WITH HIM ON BEHALF OF THIS BOARD DESIGNATING THE FIRST WEEK IN NOVEMBER AS THE "BROWNFIELDS WEEK" IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. WE WILL -- THE PROCLAMATION IS TO SHOW OUR SUPPORT, THIS BOARD'S SUPPORT, FOR THE BROWNFIELDS REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: NO COMMENTS. >>HOOSHANG BOOSTANI: WE WILL BE BRINGING THE PROCLAMATION AROUND TO YOU FOR YOUR SIGNATURE. IF YOU HAVE NO QUESTIONS, I WILL MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM. COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS AN UPDATE REPORT ON THE STATUS OF A GUIDANCE DOCUMENT THAT STAFF OF EPC AND SEVERAL OTHER AGENCIES HAVE BEEN WORKING ON DEVELOPING TO DEAL WITH THE REGULATION AND GUIDELINES FOR LAND APPLICATION OF MULCH, WHICH WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON SINCE ABOUT A YEAR AGO. A YEAR AGO YOU ASKED US TO START LOOKING AT PERHAPS MODIFYING, CLARIFYING THE EXISTING REGULATIONS DEALING WITH THE LAND APPLICATION OF MULCH, AND THAT REVIEW WAS PROMPTED FOLLOWING A CASE IN SOUTH COUNTY WHERE A LANDOWNER HAD DEPOSITED LARGE AMOUNTS OF MULCH ON A LARGE PIECE OF PROPERTY CLAIMING THAT HE HAD DONE IT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ONLY POLICY, WHICH WAS A DEP POLICY. AT THE TIME, THE POLICY HAD TWO PROVISIONS IN IT, ONE THAT LAND APPLICATION OF MULCH UP TO HEIGHTS OF 24 INCHES WAS PRESUMED TO BE BENEFICIAL REUSE OF MULCH, REQUIRED NO PRIOR APPROVAL, BUT ANYTHING HIGHER THAN THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED DISPOSAL AND WAS NOT AUTHORIZED; HOWEVER, IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, PROVIDING CERTAIN DOCUMENTATION, HEIGHTS HIGHER THAN 24 INCHES COULD BE AUTHORIZED. AS WE INVESTIGATED THAT CASE, WE FOUND OUT THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY INVOLVING SEVERAL JURISDICTIONS. PGMD, WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT HAD BEEN ASKED TO INVESTIGATE FOR POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS OF THEIR REGULATIONS. SOME CITIZENS CAME BEFORE YOU SEVERAL TIMES EXPRESSING FRUSTRATION WITH REGULATIONS BEING TOO CONFUSING, TOO HARD TO UNDERSTAND, AND THAT PROMPTED THE BOARD TO ASK STAFF AND -- TO ASK STAFF TO LOOK INTO POSSIBLY CHANGING THE REGULATIONS AND CLARIFYING THEM FURTHER. WE SCHEDULED A WORKSHOP FOR MARCH 5th OF THIS YEAR TO DO EXACTLY THAT, AND THE WORKSHOP WAS WELL ATTENDED, BUT SHORTLY BEFORE THE WORKSHOP WE HEARD FROM DEP, WHICH IS ONE OF THE AGENCIES THAT HAD -- WE HAD INVITED TO THE WORKSHOP, THAT THEY DECLINED TO ATTEND THE WORKSHOP, AND FURTHERMORE, THEY WOULD NO LONGER REGULATE LAND APPLICATION OF MULCH. IT WAS A LOCAL ISSUE IN THEIR OPINION, AND THERE WOULD BE NO -- THERE WOULD BE NO INVOLVEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEM, WHICH SOLIDIFIED A BELIEF THAT WE NEEDED TO HAVE A LOCAL POLICY, ONE AT LEAST FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. WE HELD A WORKSHOP. WE RECEIVED A GREAT DEAL OF INFORMATION FROM THE PARTICIPANTS. SEVERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES PARTOOK IN THE WORKSHOP. WHAT WE CAME OUT OF FROM THE WORKSHOP WAS A COUPLE OF THINGS. WE NEEDED TO HAVE SOME POLICY ON THE LOCAL LEVEL. THE POLICY NEEDED TO ADDRESS MULTIJURISDICTIONS. IT WASN'T JUST AN EPC ISSUE, IT DEALT FURTHER WITH PGMD REGULATIONS, WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT REGULATION, AND THAT ANYTHING UP TO TWO FEET HAD A STRONG SUPPORT FROM PARTICIPANTS, AND EVERYTHING ABOVE TWO FEET IN HEIGHT WAS BASICALLY NOT SEEN AS BENEFICIAL USE IN ANY CASE. WE REACHED OUT -- FOLLOWING THE WORKSHOP, WE REACHED OUT TO THE AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY BECAUSE THEY WOULD PROBABLY BE THE BIGGER USERS OF -- OF THIS POLICY. WE MET WITH THE AGRICULTURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL AS WELL AS WITH THE FARM BUREAU AND RECEIVED STRONG SUPPORT FOR A POLICY THAT WOULD DO JUST THAT. THE ONE THING THEY REQUESTED IS THAT THEY BE ALLOWED TO USE THE TWO FEET WITHOUT HAVING TO GET ANY PRIOR APPROVALS, WHICH WAS SOMETHING THAT DEP HAD ALREADY ESTABLISHED. SO WE CAME BACK TO YOU AND REPORTED TO YOU AND RECEIVED THE GO AHEAD TO WORK ON A DOCUMENT. FOLLOWING THAT WE FORMED A WORK GROUP, MULTIAGENCY WORK GROUP. AGENCIES INVOLVED EPC, WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, PGMD, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY STORMWATER, USDA, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, NRCS, AND IFAS. THAT GROUP HAS BEEN WORKING ON DEVELOPING THIS DOCUMENT FOR THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS, AND I'M PLEASED TO TELL YOU THAT THEY HAVE COMPLETED THEIR DOCUMENT, DOCUMENT THAT WILL BE RESPONSIVE TO THE THINGS THAT WE HEARD FROM FOLKS IN THE -- IN THE WORKSHOP AND THINGS THAT YOU HAVE HEARD FROM THE CITIZENS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE YOU. IT WILL ALLOW THOSE WHO WISH TO LAND APPLY MULCH UP TO TWO FEET TO DO THAT WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL, CONSIDERING THAT CERTAIN SAFEGUARDS ARE OBSERVED. ANYTHING ABOVE TWO FEET IN HEIGHT WILL GO THROUGH PRIOR AUTHORIZATION OR PERMITTING AS HAS BEEN THE CASE BEFORE. IN ORDER TO TAKE THIS TO THE NEXT STEP, WE HAVE SCHEDULED A WORKSHOP FOR NOVEMBER 18th FROM 6:00 TO 8:00 P.M. AT THE EPC HEADQUARTERS, AND WE'VE SENT INVITATION TO THOSE WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE WORK -- FIRST WORKSHOP, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO COMING BACK TO YOU PERHAPS SOMETIME IN JANUARY WITH A FINAL DOCUMENT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE GLAD TO TRY TO ANSWER. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: BOARD MEMBERS. SEEING NO QUESTIONS, YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD. >>HOOSHANG BOOSTANI: THANK YOU. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MR. TSCHANTZ. >>RICK TSCHANTZ: [INAUDIBLE] >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THAT BEING PART OF 8, DID WE NOT MOVE THAT, OR JUST "A." >>RICK TSCHANTZ: [INAUDIBLE] >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: WE CAN HOLD THAT. WE CAN GO TO FERTILIZER UPDATE NOW. >>RICK TSCHANTZ: [INAUDIBLE] >>RECORDING SECRETARY: EXCUSE ME, IS YOUR -- >>RICHARD TSCHANTZ: [INAUDIBLE] >>RECORDING SECRETARY: IS HIS MIKE ON? I'M NOT PICKING HIM UP. >>RICK TSCHANTZ: COMMISSIONER HAGAN IS HERE, SO -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING IN THE MOTION THAT WE'D MOVE BOTH ITEMS, BUT IF IT'S JUST "A," THEN WE CAN GO IN TO FERTILIZER UPDATE. THAT'S FINE WITH ME. >>RICK TSCHANTZ: OKAY. SORRY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: OKAY. >>BOB STETLER: GOOD MORNING AGAIN, COMMISSIONERS. BOB STETLER, EPC STAFF. WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS ON -- ON -- THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE, THE FERTILIZER AND LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT ISSUE. I'D LIKE TO BREAK IT -- THIS PRESENTATION UP IN THREE BRIEF PIECES. I'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU A QUICK CATCH-UP OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE INFORMATION WE BROUGHT TO YOU EARLIER IN THE YEAR AND THEN BRING YOU UP-TO-DATE WITH SOME OF THE EVENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED SINCE THEN, AND THEN BECAUSE EPC HAS BEEN SO INVOLVED IN A NUMBER OF WORKSHOPS, I'D LIKE TO BRING SCOTT EMERY UP, WHO'S HELPED US RUN THOSE WORKSHOPS, AND GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT SORT OF DISCUSSIONS HAVE REVOLVED AROUND THE SCIENCE OF THIS ISSUE AND SOME OF THE CONSENSUS AND NONCONSENSUS THAT HAS -- HAVE BEEN DERIVED FROM THOSE WORKSHOPS. AND THEN I'D LIKE TO WRAP IT UP JUST BY GIVING YOU SOME THOUGHTS ON RECOMMENDATIONS AND PERHAPS GET SOME GUIDANCE FROM YOU AS TO WHAT OUR NEXT STEPS MIGHT BE AS A STAFF TO MOVE FORWARD. SO -- WHEN WE SPOKE TO YOU EARLIER IN THE YEAR, THE TOP THREE SUBJECTS HERE HAD ALREADY TAKEN PLACE. IN 2007 THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE HAD DEVELOPED NEW PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS FOR FERTILIZERS, WARNING LABELS, APPLICATION RATES, AND A VARIETY OF OTHER THINGS THAT HELPED IMPROVE THE PROCESS OF THE PUBLIC KNOWING WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THE FERTILIZER. AT THE SAME TIME, THERE WERE SOME REDUCTIONS IN PHOSPHOROUS LEVELS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ALSO OCCURRED. AND THEN IN NOVEMBER OF 2008 THE TAMPA BAY ESTUARY PROGRAM POLICY BOARD ADOPTED A MODEL ORDINANCE REGULATING NONAGRICULTURAL FERTILIZER IN THE UPPER TAMPA BAY REGION. THIS WAS AN IMPORTANT MODEL. IT'S BEEN THE ONE THAT HAS BEEN DEBATED EXTENSIVELY AND UTILIZED BY SOME LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND -- AND HAS BEEN KIND OF THE CORNERSTONE OF PERHAPS HOW ORDINANCES OR RULES COULD BE DEVELOPED TO ADDRESS THE FERTILIZER ISSUE. AND THEN IN JANUARY 2009 DEP AND UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA PUBLISHED A FLORIDA-FRIENDLY LANDSCAPE GUIDANCE MODELS FOR ORDINANCES, COVENANTS, AND RESTRICTIONS. VERY LARGE DOCUMENT, LOTS OF INFORMATION, LOTS OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE SCIENCE OF THESE ISSUES, AND AGAIN PROVIDED MORE MODELS FOR WHAT KIND OF APPROACHES SHOULD BE TAKEN IN THE ORDINANCES SHOULD LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ADOPT ORDINANCES. THEN? JUNE OF THIS YEAR, 2009, THE SENATE BILL 294 AMENDED FLORIDA STATUTE 403, AND IT'S ENTITLED THE MODEL ORDINANCE FOR FLORIDA-FRIENDLY FERTILIZER USE IN URBAN LANDSCAPES, AND IT ADOPTS A DEP FERTILIZER MODEL CODE. THAT HAS BEEN -- IT'S -- IMPLEMENTING THE MODEL CODE FOR THE ORDINANCE FOR FLORIDA-FRIENDLY FERTILIZER WILL HELP PROTECT THE WATER QUALITY AND SURFACE WATER AS STATED IN THE STATUTE. THE LOCAL WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS ALONG WITH OTHER FACTORS MAY CALL FOR MORE STRICT STANDARDS AT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, DEPENDING ON THE CONDITIONS AT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL. AND THAT'S -- WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A SECOND. THE NEW LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO APPLICATIONS OF FERTILIZER ON AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS. THOSE ARE DEALT WITH THROUGH THE BMPs THAT ARE ESTABLISHED THROUGH OTHER STATUTES, AND SO THEY WOULD NOT BE AFFECTED. THE NEW LAW DOES ADOPT -- MAKES LOCAL ADOPTION OF A -- OF THE DEP MODEL ORDINANCE VOLUNTARY UNLESS THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT HAS A NUTRIENT-IMPAIRED WATER BODY WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WITH NUTRIENT-IMPAIRED WATERS SUCH AS HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND EACH OF OUR MUNICIPALITIES WHO HAVE THESE IMPAIRED WATERS ARE REQUIRED TO ADOPT AT LEAST A MINIMUM DEP MODEL ORDINANCE. IF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CHOOSES TO DEVELOP MORE STRINGENT CRITERIA, THE GUIDANCE IN THE STATUTE SAYS THAT THOSE -- THOSE RULES NEED -- OR ORDINANCES NEED TO BE -- HAVE DEFENSIBLE SCIENCE BEHIND THEM TO ESTABLISH WHAT THE ORDINANCE WOULD HAVE AND WOULD BE OPEN TO INPUT FROM DEP, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, IFAS IN THE REVIEW OF THOSE -- THE CRITERIA THAT MIGHT BE PLACED IN THOSE ORDINANCES. THE NEW LAW PROVIDES FOR TRAINING AND TESTING PROGRAMS UNDER DEP AND IFAS TO BECOME CERTIFIED. THAT CERTIFICATION PROCESS ALREADY EXISTS. I WENT THROUGH THAT PROCESS MYSELF, AND I FOUND IT TO BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL. IT'S ACTUALLY VERY HELPFUL EVEN FOR A HOMEOWNER TO GO THROUGH AND GET THAT CERTIFICATION. BUT BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2014 ANY PERSON APPLYING COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER WOULD BE REQUIRED TO GET THAT CERTIFICATION. YOU'VE SEEN THIS MAP BEFORE, BUT IT'S JUST A REVISIT OF THE FACT THAT WE DO HAVE THE IMPAIRED WATERS IN OUR COUNTY IN THE HILLSBOROUGH WATERSHED, COASTAL TAMPA BAY WATERSHED, PALM RIVER, ALAFIA RIVER, CROSSES BOUNDARIES ACROSS OUR COUNTY AS WELL AS OUR MUNICIPALITIES. WE ALL HAVE THOSE IMPAIRED WATERS. KICKS US BACK TO THAT REQUIREMENT TO ADOPT A LOCAL ORDINANCE. THIS IS JUST AN UPDATE ON SOME OF THE REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS THAT HAVE ESTABLISHED AN ORDINANCE THUS FAR OR ARE CONSIDERING ORDINANCES, AND THESE ORDINANCES ARE KIND OF ALL OVER THE BOARD. SOME OF THEM ARE RESTRICTIVE, SOME OF THEM ARE LESS -- MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE MODEL, BUT THEY'RE -- THEY VARY A GREAT DEAL. AS I HAD SAID EARLIER, WE AT EPC TAKE AN AGGRESSIVE ROLE IN TRYING TO TAKE A LEAD INTO THIS SUBJECT MATTER, AND WE'VE PARTICIPATED IN ESTUARY PROGRAM DISCUSSIONS, AND WE'VE STAYED -- TRIED TO STAY ON TOP OF ANY ACTIVITIES THAT ARE OCCURRING AT THE STATE AND REGIONAL LEVELS IN TERMS OF ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES, ET CETERA. BUT AT THIS POINT, I'D LIKE TO LET SCOTT TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SOME OF THE CONSENSUS ISSUES AND OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED IN THE VARIOUS WORKSHOPS THAT HAVE BEEN USED. THANKS. >> THANKS, BOB. SCOTT EMERY. I'M YOUR CONSULTANT AND FACILITATOR FOR THIS PROCESS. THE LARGEST FACILITATED MEETING THAT WE'VE HELD TO DATE, PUBLIC WORKSHOP, WAS ON APRIL 23rd. WE HAD IN EXCESS OF 50 -- SOMEWHERE AROUND 50 OR 60 FOLKS. WE -- THE WAY WE DESIGNED IT WAS TO HAVE UP AT A PANEL, AN INFORMAL PANEL, WE HAD SIX OR SEVEN AGENCIES WITH -- OR ORGANIZATIONS -- MR. COMPTON WAS UP THERE REPRESENTING SIERRA CLUB -- AND MAYBE SOME OTHER FOLKS AT THE TIME, AND THEN WE HAD -- WE HAD 40, 50 OF US IN THE AUDIENCE, BUT THE WAY IT TURNED OUT, IT WAS A VERY LIVELY -- LIVELY CREW, SO WE WERE ABLE TO ACTUALLY MAKE IT SO -- WE HAD SO MUCH EXPERTISE IN THAT ROOM, BOTH ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL, ON THE APPLICATOR SIDE, ON THE LEGAL SIDE, THAT WE -- WE HAD THREE, THREE AND A HALF HOURS OF -- OF ACTIVE DISCUSSION ON CONSENSUS AND NONCONSENSUS ASPECTS OF TRYING TO DEVELOP POLICIES, RULES, REGULATIONS, ORDINANCE, HOWEVER YOU MIGHT WANT TO GO ON THIS THING, WITH RESPECT TO MINIMIZING EXCESS NUTRIENT INPUT INTO THE WATER BODIES, IMPAIRED WATER BODIES, ESPECIALLY WITHIN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. AND AGAIN, BECAUSE WE HAVE IMPAIRED WATER BODIES IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, WE ARE UNDER THE U.S. EPA CLEAN WATER ACT 3.03-D REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS STATE REQUIREMENTS. NOW, THE WAY WE HAVE SET THIS WHOLE PROCESS UP -- AND THIS WAS JUST -- THE LAST APRIL MEETING WAS JUST THE LARGEST OF THE WHOLE SERIES OF MEETINGS. I THINK WE'VE HAD NINE OR TEN OF THEM WHERE WE START OUT WITH THE SMALL CIRCLES OF JUST THE EPC FOLKS AND MYSELF, THEN WE MOVE TO A SERIES OF WHAT WE CALL SECOND CIRCLE MEETINGS WHERE WE GOT INVOLVED WITH THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND THEN WE ACTUALLY BROUGHT IN CITY OF TAMPA, CITY OF TEMPLE TERRACE, AND CITY OF PLANT CITY TO FIND OUT WHAT THEIR ISSUES AND CONCERNS AND THOUGHTS WERE, AND THEN THIS APRIL 23rd MEETING REPRESENTED OUR -- WHAT WE CALL OUR THIRD CIRCLE, WHICH WE'RE PROPOSING TO KEEP AS A PERMANENT PARTICIPANTS TEAM. AND THEN EVENTUALLY IF -- IF YOU ALLOW EPC TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS, WE WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE AT SOME POINT A LARGER -- THE FOURTH CIRCLE, WHICH WOULD BE PUBLIC, LANDSCAPE INDUSTRY, GENERAL PUBLIC WHERE WE WOULD LET AS MANY FOLKS AS POSSIBLE KNOW ABOUT THE ISSUE. WE HAD A LOT OF AREAS OF CONSENSUS, ACTUALLY SURPRISINGLY A NUMBER OF AREAS OF CONSENSUS THAT WE QUICKLY WERE ABLE TO COME UP WITH. AGAIN, AGRICULTURAL BMPs ARE GOING TO REMAIN STATUS QUO, SO THE AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY WHATEVER IS DONE BY -- BY THIS GROUP WITH RESPECT TO RULES, REGULATIONS, ORDINANCES. WE ALL AGREED THAT TO A GREAT EXTENT IT WAS THE IMPROPER USE OF RESIDENTIAL FERTILIZER THAT IS CONTRIBUTING TO THE NUTRIENT IMPAIRMENTS THAT WE'RE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO BE DEALING WITH UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS. WE ALL AGREED THAT THE PROPER USE OF FERTILIZER IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT'S A -- IT'S A MAJOR POTENTIAL NUTRIENT SOURCE. WE ALSO ALL REALIZE -- AND I THINK MR. COMPTON SUMMARIZED THIS VERY WELL FOR YOU IN HIS COMMENTS EARLIER -- THAT EDUCATION OF -- OF THE PUBLIC CAN BE VERY COST-EFFECTIVE FOR US ON THIS. IT'S A LOT MORE COST-EFFECTIVE TO HAVE EVERYBODY DO THEIR PART RATHER THAN HAVE TO PUT IN A BUNCH OF EXTRA INFRASTRUCTURE ON STORMWATER SYSTEMS, FOR EXAMPLE. TRAINING, WE ALL AGREED -- EVEN THE LANDSCAPE FOLKS AGREED -- THAT TRAINING WAS A KEY POINT OF THIS. WE ALL AGREED THAT HAVING A LOW MAINTENANCE ZONE AREA, ALMOST LIKE A SETBACK TO YOUR WATER BODIES, WAS VERY IMPORTANT IN MINIMIZING THE AMOUNT OF EXCESS NUTRIENTS YOU'RE GOING TO GET INTO IT AND A THREE-FOOT MANDATORY SETBACK, AGAIN, APPLYING ANY KIND OF FERTILIZER NEAR WATER WE THOUGHT WAS A VERY EFFECTIVE APPROACH. HERE ARE THE AREAS THAT WE STILL NEED TO WORK ON. ONE IS THE ISSUE OF A BAN ON APPLICATION DURING THE SO- CALLED FOUR-MONTH RAINY SEASON. THERE ARE COGENT ARGUMENTS TO BE MADE IN -- FOR BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE, AND THERE ARE PROBABLY SOME MIDDLE-GROUND AREAS THAT CAN BE REACHED WITH A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA EFFORT. SECOND NONCONSENSUS ITEM SO FAR IS WHETHER YOU SHOULD BAN THE ACTUAL SALE OF FERTILIZERS CONTAINING NITROGEN DURING THIS FOUR-MONTH SUMMER RAINY SEASON PERIOD. SOME OF THE ORDINANCES THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED BY OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS DO THIS, SOME DO NOT. NOW, IF THERE IS A BAN, CAN THERE BE A VARIANCE PROCEDURE? IF THERE IS A PARTICULAR YARD OR LANDSCAPE THAT IS SHOWING SIGNS OF STRESS, CAN THERE BE A VARIANCE PROCEDURE PUT IN THAT CAN BE EFFECTIVELY USED AND NOT ABUSED? AND THEN ALSO THE ASPECTS OF ENFORCING WHATEVER TYPE OF RULE, REGULATION, OR ORDINANCE MIGHT BE PUT IN PLACE. WE HAD A VERY LIVELY GENERAL DISCUSSION ABOUT SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AND WOULD THERE BE A TYPE OF A GRACE PERIOD AND HOW LONG WOULD A GRACE PERIOD BE AS AN EDUCATIONAL COMPONENT WENT -- WENT FORWARD. SO AT THIS POINT, I BELIEVE THAT -- AND I'VE FACILITATED A LOT OF -- OF VARIOUS TYPES OF OPERATIONS FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. I'D HAVE TO SAY THIS WAS ONE OF THE MORE LIVELY ONES, AND YOUR STAFF DID A GREAT JOB OF ORGANIZING THIS AND PUTTING IT IN A WAY THAT EVERYONE FELT COMFORTABLE. I THINK JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE GOT UP AND ACTUALLY MADE SOME POINTS DURING THE THREE, THREE AND A HALF HOURS WE WERE THERE. BOB. >>BOB STETLER: THANK YOU, SCOTT. WE HOPE THAT FROM WHAT YOU'VE HEARD SO FAR THAT YOU WOULD RECOGNIZE AT THIS POINT THAT EPC'S PROBABLY IN A UNIQUE POSITION AND HOPEFULLY HAS DONE A GOOD JOB IN LEADING -- IN LEADING THIS PROCESS. THIS PROCESS IN SOME OTHER COUNTIES IS BEING LED BY COUNTY GOVERNMENTS OR CITY GOVERNMENTS. WE THINK EPC'S UNIQUE RELATIONSHIP AND ROLE HERE IN THIS COUNTY PROBABLY PUTS US IN A GOOD POSITION TO TAKE THE LEAD ON THIS. IF YOU AGREE WITH THAT, WE WOULD LIKE TO BE THE ONES TO CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE PROGRESS OF THE OTHER LOCAL ORDINANCES SURROUNDING OUR -- OUR REGION, STAY ON TOP OF THAT, AND IN PARTICULAR STAY ON TOP OF THE SCIENCE. THE SCIENCE -- SOME EXISTING SCIENCE IS CERTAINLY THERE. THERE'S NEW SCIENCE, IN FACT, JUST BEING DEVELOPED. IT MAY HELP US MORE CLEARLY DECIDE WHETHER SOME OF THE BANNED ISSUES OR THINGS LIKE THAT ARE NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE. AND IN THE STATUTE, WHILE EPC AS -- AS AN ENTITY WOULD NOT TYPICALLY BE THE -- THE -- THE GROUP THAT WOULD ADOPT A LOCAL ORDINANCE, WE THINK AGAIN WE'RE IN A UNIQUE ROLE HERE WHEREAS IF WE DO DEVELOP AN EPC RULE, IT CAN BE BROAD -- BROADLY APPLIED THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY THROUGH ALL THE JURISDICTIONS AND WOULD BRING CONSISTENCY AND UNIFORMITY AND -- ON ALL FRONTS, AND SO WE HOPE THAT YOU WOULD AGREE THAT YOU THINK THAT THAT'S A GOOD PLACE FOR US TO BE. SO OUR RECOMMENDATION TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION WOULD BE THAT YOU WOULD TASK US WITH DRAFTING THE COMPONENTS OF THAT RULE THAT WOULD COMPLY WITH THE SENATE BILL AND STATUTE AND THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE TO REACH -- SEEK CONSENSUS OF ALL THE INTERESTED PARTIES AND STAY ON TOP OF THE SCIENCE AS IT'S DEVELOPED TO MAKE US AND ALLOW US TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT RULE. AND AT SOME POINT WE WOULD BRING BACK TO YOU DRAFT -- A DRAFT CONTENT OF A RULE THAT WE WOULD HOPE THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE AND THAT YOU WOULD ADOPT. AND THAT'S THE END OF THE PRESENTATION. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. MR. SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: IT'S A VERY -- VERY GOOD PRESENTATION, AND I HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET SEVERAL BRIEFINGS ON THIS ISSUE, AND I WOULD SUPPORT AND MAKE A MOTION THAT WE -- THAT WE DO TASK EPC WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH -- WITH AN ORDINANCE. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE CERTAINLY PARTICIPATING. IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAJOR COUNTIES THAT ARE PARTICIPATING, WE'RE NOT THERE, AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY QUESTION BUT THAT -- THAT THE RUNOFF FROM FERTILIZER AND THE -- PARTICULARLY THE NITROGEN HAS AN IMPACT ON WATER BODIES, SO -- AND SOME OF THE ISSUES WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH SEAGRASS RESTORATION AND OTHER ISSUES ARE IMPACTED AS WELL BY THE NITROGEN, SO I WOULD MAKE THAT MOTION. I WOULD ALSO ASK, THOUGH, REGARDING -- BECAUSE I KNOW THE ISSUES WHICH SEEM TO BE REALLY THE -- THE CHALLENGING ONES WAS THIS ISSUE OF A BAN AND ALSO WHETHER YOU BAN THE APPLICATION, BAN THE SALE, AND THEN THE QUESTION BECOMES ENFORCEMENT, AND AT A TIME WHEN WE'RE DOWNSIZING, DO WE HAVE THE -- THE -- THE -- THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE TO -- TO ENFORCE -- AND I KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME HESITANCY ABOUT GOING FORWARD WITH A -- WITH AN ORDINANCE THAT WE CAN ENFORCE, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE CAN ENFORCE WHATEVER WE DO. OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF THIS IS GOING TO REQUIRE PUBLIC EDUCATION AND GETTING COMMITMENT FROM THE PUBLIC TO PARTICIPATE. IT'S A NO-BRAINER. IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, FOR THOSE OF US WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE PUTTING ON OUR LAWNS, WE SEE THEM GO BROWN AT TIMES AND WE PUT IT ON, HOW -- I'D LIKE TO GO WITH A MORE STRINGENT ORDINANCE. I'D LIKE TO BE AS STRICT AS WE CAN BE, BUT I WANT IT TO BE ENFORCEABLE. I DON'T WANT US TO PASS SOMETHING THAT FOLKS LATER COME BACK AND SAY, WELL, THERE'S NO WAY YOU CAN ENFORCE THAT, THERE'S VIOLATIONS, AND THEN HOW DO YOU ENFORCE THE -- AND THEN WHO DO YOU GO AFTER BECAUSE THEN IT'S JUST -- YOU'RE PICKING ON -- SOMEBODY'S GOING TO SAY, WELL, I'M JUST BEING PICKED ON. MY NEIGHBOR'S OVER HERE DOING IT. SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I JUST WANT US TO THINK THROUGH IT, BUT I DON'T WANT TO USE THAT AS AN EXCUSE FOR DOING NOTHING AND/OR -- I MEAN, MAYBE WE HAVE A VOLUNTARY BAN. >> [INAUDIBLE] VOLUNTARY BAN. >>MARK SHARPE: SOME VOLUNTARY EFFORT WHERE WE REALLY WORK ON EDUCATING OUR COMMUNITY ABOUT NOT USING THIS TYPE OF FERTILIZER THAT HAS NITROGEN IN IT DURING THE SUMMER. IS THAT ONE OF THE ISSUES, USING IT IN THE SUMMER MONTHS? >>BOB STETLER: YES, IT IS. >>MARK SHARPE: AND THERE'S DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU EVEN NEED TO DO IT. SOME SAY YOU DON'T, SOME SAY YOU -- >>BOB STETLER: THAT'S RIGHT. SOME SAY THAT IF YOU DON'T HAVE A HEALTHY LAWN, WHICH TAKES A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FERTILIZER, THEN THAT LAWN DOESN'T DO A GOOD JOB OF TAKING UP THE NUTRIENTS BEFORE THEY RUN OFF, AND THEN THERE'S THE OTHER -- >>MARK SHARPE: AND HOW WOULD YOU APPLY -- HOW WOULD YOU ENFORCE A BAN LIKE WITH HOME DEPOT AND ALL THE FOLKS THAT SELL THIS STUFF? I MEAN, DO THEY PARTICIPATE IN -- I MEAN, WILL THEY NOT SELL IT? >>BOB STETLER: WELL, THAT'S A LOT -- THERE'S A LOT THERE TO LOOK AT. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF -- ACTUALLY, YOU -- THE STATEMENTS THAT YOU MADE REMINDED ME OF SOMETHING THAT WAS IN THE PRESENTATION. I THINK I ACTUALLY SKIPPED OVER IT. WE THINK THAT ONE OF THE MAJOR COMPONENTS OF MAKING SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS, AND AT ONE TIME, IF YOU REMEMBER, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT KIOSKS AND THINGS PERHAPS IN THE HOME DEPOT. SOME HAVE TRIED SOME OF THOSE KIND OF THINGS, BUT IF WE CAN GET THE INFORMATION, I THINK PEOPLE WILL MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION IF GIVEN THE RIGHT INFORMATION TO MAKE THAT RIGHT DECISION, AND SO I THINK BOTTOM LINE THERE IS WE WOULD HOPE THAT THE ENFORCEMENT WOULD BE DIMINISHED BY OUR REALLY ROBUST EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM OF SOME SORT. >>MARK SHARPE: WHAT IF WE WENT FORWARD WITH THAT, A REALLY ROBUST EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM AS WELL AS -- I MEAN, I COULD IMAGINE WITH ALL THE TALK ABOUT GREEN AND THE PEOPLE WANTING TO PARTICIPATE, IF WE WERE TO HAVE A FLORIDA- FRIENDLY FERTILIZER PROGRAM WHERE WE ENCOURAGED THOSE WHO SELL IT TO -- TO HAVE AVAILABLE FERTILIZERS WHICH DON'T HAVE INSIDE OF THEM THAT TYPE OF A NUTRIENT, WHICH IS -- WHICH IS NOT NECESSARY -- I MEAN, I GUESS -- ALTHOUGH -- I'M NOT SURE, SCOTT, IF THE SCIENCE SAYS IT IS OR ISN'T NECESSARY. AND CONFIRM, THIS HAS -- THIS WILL NOT IMPACT OUR AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY. IS THAT CORRECT? >>BOB STETLER: THAT'S CORRECT. >>MARK SHARPE: SO THIS IS JUST FOR THE RESIDENTIAL? >>BOB STETLER: THAT'S RIGHT, RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION. >>MARK SHARPE: I WANT TO MOVE FORWARD, AND I'D LIKE TO BE AS AGGRESSIVE AS POSSIBLE. I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD ASK YOUR -- ALL THE CITIZENS THAT ARE PARTICIPATING TO REALLY HELP US COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY INNOVATIVE. I DON'T WANT US TO PASS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T ENFORCE. THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT I'M A LITTLE RETICENT ABOUT RIGHT NOW. >>BOB STETLER: AND AS IMPORTANT AS I THINK WE THINK EDUCATION IS, WE ARE A DOWNSIZED AGENCY NOW, AS A LOT OF GOVERNMENT IS. WE NEED TO LOOK AT INNOVATIVE WAYS TO TRY TO GET THE FUNDING AND ASSISTANCE FROM MAYBE OTHER PARTIES TO HELP US DEVELOP THOSE EDUCATIONAL TOOLS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, SO -- >>MARK SHARPE: BUT MY LAST POINT IS THIS, THOUGH. WHILE -- WHILE I DON'T WANT US TO PUSH SOMETHING WE CAN'T ENFORCE, ON THE OTHER HAND, THERE'S A COST TO DOING THINGS THE WAY WE'VE BEEN DOING IT. >>BOB STETLER: YES. >>MARK SHARPE: AND SO I AM PREPARED PERSONALLY TO SUPPORT A MEASURE WHICH WOULD HELP US OVER TIME REDUCE WHAT WE'RE PUTTING INTO OUR WATER BODIES BECAUSE WE EITHER PAY NOW WITH AN ORDINANCE OR WE PAY LATER WITH THE COST OF GOING BACK AND REPAIRING THE DAMAGE DONE TO OUR ENVIRONMENT, SO I WOULD PROBABLY BE STILL LEANING MORE TOWARDS A MORE RESTRICTIVE ORDINANCE THAN PERHAPS SOME OF YOUR -- YOUR TASK FORCE WOULD -- WOULD SUPPORT. >>BOB STETLER: OKAY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MR. BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND I WOULD SECOND YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER SHARPE, BECAUSE I WOULD ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT OBVIOUSLY AN ORDINANCE IS NEEDED. WE -- IN THIS COMMUNITY, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO BALANCE THE NEEDS FOR OUR ENVIRONMENT AND OBVIOUSLY THE IMPACT ON OUR - - ON OUR PERSONAL SITUATION. I'VE HEARD ARGUMENTS ON BOTH SIDES OF WHY WE SHOULD HAVE SOMETHING MORE RESTRICTIVE, LESS RESTRICTIVE. WHAT I WOULD ASK, PERHAPS, COMMISSIONER SHARPE, THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL, IF YOU CONSIDER THIS VALID TO BE PART OF A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO YOUR MOTION, IS I THINK IT WOULD BE HEALTHY THAT -- IF WE WERE ABLE TO HEAR IN A WORKSHOP -- IN A BOARD WORKSHOP DEDICATED TO THIS ITEM THE PROS AND THE CONS OF HAVING A MORE RESTRICTIVE ORDINANCE VERSUS HAVING SOMETHING THAT WOULD MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS, AND THEN THAT WAY I THINK AS A COMMUNITY WE CAN DISCUSS AND AS A BOARD WE CAN DISCUSS WHICH ELEMENTS WOULD BE THE BEST FOR -- TO PUT FORWARD INTO AN ORDINANCE. WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE OF ENFORCEMENT. AND I'M GOING TO TALK WITH STAFF RIGHT NOW, THE WAY WE DEAL WITH NOISE ISSUES IS ON A COMPLAINT BASIS, SO I DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT WHATEVER WE PASS WE WOULD NECESSARILY HAVE A FERTILIZER POLICE OUT THERE THAT WOULD BE ACTIVE BUT CAN PATROL, IT WOULD BE BASICALLY BASED ON COMPLAINTS. YOU KNOW, THAT'S A POSSIBILITY, BUT I THINK WE HAVE A GREAT MINDSHARE OUT IN THE PUBLIC ON BOTH SIDES THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO WEIGH WITH THEIR INPUT, AND SO I WOULD JUST ASK THAT PART OF THAT IS PERHAPS THAT STAFF ORGANIZE A PUBLIC WORKSHOP, BRING TOGETHER AGAIN A COUPLE DIFFERENT DRAFT VERSIONS, AND HAVE OUR CITIZENS BE ABLE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS INPUT DURING THE WORKSHOP. >>MARK SHARPE: ABSOLUTELY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: GOOD. I HAVE SOME COMMENTS TOO. AND -- I'VE ALWAYS BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AND AM AWARE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH THE NITROGEN ISSUE IN THE BAY, AND A COUPLE QUESTIONS. ON THE TEN GOVERNING BODIES NOW HERE THAT HAVE PASSED IT, YOU MENTIONED THAT THEY HAVE -- THEY HAVE ADHERED TO THE ESTUARY ORDINANCE AS A CORNERSTONE? I THINK THE WORD I -- YOU USED WAS THEY USED THE MODEL AS A CORNERSTONE. HOW -- HAVE THEY ALL USED THAT? HOW -- ON THIS STRICTER ORDINANCE? >>BOB STETLER: THERE'S THE BASIC MODEL THAT CAME OUT OF THE STATUTE THAT DOESN'T HAVE THE BANS AND SOME OF THOSE OTHER ITEMS IN IT, ALLOWS FOR THE STRICTER ORDINANCE. THE TAMPA BAY ESTUARY PROGRAM'S MODEL ORDINANCE IS -- WOULD BE STRICTER THAN THAT MODEL, AND IT DOES HAVE -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND THEY'VE ALL GONE -- >>BOB STETLER: -- SOME OF THE BAN ISSUES. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ALL TEN OF THEM HAVE GONE WITH THE ESTUARY'S PROPOSAL? >>BOB STETLER: I DON'T THINK SO. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: NO. OKAY. >>BOB STETLER: SEVERAL -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MY NEXT QUESTION THEN -- AND YOU'VE MENTIONED THE WORD "ORDINANCE" AND YOU MENTIONED THE WORD "RULE." NOW, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT AN EPC RULE OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT AN ORDINANCE? >>RICK GARRITY: IT WOULD BE A RULE, COMMISSIONER. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I THINK THAT WAS -- >>BOB STETLER: SEMANTICS. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SEMANTICS. THANK YOU. HOW MANY OF THESE TEN ARE ORDINANCES AND HOW MANY OF THEM ARE LOCAL RULES? >>BOB STETLER: I BELIEVE THESE ARE ALL JUST LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, SO THOSE WOULD ALL BE ORDINANCES. AND THIS IS JUST A SMALL SNAPSHOT TOO. THERE ARE MANY MORE GOVERNMENTS THAT HAVE ADOPTED -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND I KNOW ORANGE COUNTY JUST PASSED ONE THIS PAST WEEK -- >>BOB STETLER: YES. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: -- AND THERE WAS A LOT OF SUPPORT FOR THAT, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M WANTING. I DON'T -- I HAVE NO INTEREST IN PASSING AN ORDINANCE THAT CAN'T BE ENFORCED AND THEN LET'S JUST WASH OUR HANDS AND SAY, LOOK WHAT WE'VE DONE, WE'VE PROTECTED THE ENVIRONMENT. AND THAT'S NOT WHAT MARK WANTS AND THAT'S NOT WHAT KEVIN -- THAT'S NOT WHAT ANYBODY HERE -- MR. COMPTON BACK THERE WITH THE SIERRA CLUB. NOBODY WANTS THAT. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO HAVE THE RESULT, AND I DON'T KNOW IF I NEED TO PASS THE GAVEL TO ADD IN HERE, BUT I JUST WANT TO TALK AND MAYBE ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS CAN PICK UP THE SUGGESTION. I WANT -- WHEN WE COME BACK TO THE WORKSHOP WITH THESE SUGGESTIONS THAT THERE BE A HEAVY EDUCATIONAL COMPONENT. I'M NOT KEEN ON THE BAN BECAUSE I THINK WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT BAN IS ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY SAY, OH, THEY'RE ENVIRONMENTALISTS, OR THE EPC, THEY'RE DOING IT TO US AGAIN. LET'S BRING THEM IN TO THE PROCESS THROUGH EDUCATION. LET'S BRING THEM IN TO HOW WE'RE ALL MORE CONCERNED TODAY ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT AND WANTING TO AVOID THAT, SO I'M GOING TO ASK -- RATHER THAN -- I CAN PASS THE GAVEL BUT THAT WE GET A HEAVY EDUCATIONAL COMPONENT IN THIS AND THAT WE DO THE WORKSHOP. I KIND OF FELT LIKE IN THE FIRST ONE WE HAD THAT -- WHERE WE HAD THE SCIENTIST WHO DISAGREED, IF I HADN'T SOUNDED OFF, THIS BOARD WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE HEARD -- TO HEAR FROM THEM, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE OPPOSING VIEWS -- SO THAT WE HAVE THE BUY-IN FROM THE COMMUNITY AND THEY LOOK AND SAY, WELL, BY GOLLY, YOU KNOW, THEY GOT IT RIGHT IN HILLSBOROUGH, AND IF WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH A -- AN ORDINANCE THAT'S TOUGH AND STRONG, THEN I'M GOING TO COME BACK AND I'M GOING TO WANT TO KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO ENFORCE, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DO IT? I WANT TO KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE. RIGHT NOW WE'RE COMPLAINT GENERATED, AND I WANT TO KNOW HOW WE'RE GOING TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINTS. I'M GOING TO BE DIFFICULT IF WE DON'T HAVE THIS EDUCATION. I THINK -- AND THAT'S WHERE EVERYBODY'S HEADED, BUT -- ENOUGH SAID AT THIS POINT, BUT I WANT TO -- I WANT SEE IF WE CAN GET IN THIS MOTION A HEAVY EDUCATION COMPONENT. DR. GARRITY. >>RICK GARRITY: YES. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? >>RICK GARRITY: I JUST -- YES, MR. CHAIRMAN. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, COMMISSIONER SHARPE SAID RESIDENTIAL. ACTUALLY THE -- THE ORDINANCE THAT THE ESTUARY PROGRAM HAS BEEN LOOKING AT AND MOST OF THE OTHER GROUPS HERE, IT WOULD APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, LIKE BUILDINGS LIKE THIS, BUSINESSES. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND YOU MENTIONED 2014. WHY IS IT TAKE -- WHY WOULD WE HAVE TO WAIT SO LONG TO GO '14 BEFORE WE GOT THE IMPROVEMENT AND THE EDUCATION AND THE LICENSING SIDE? I DON'T -- >>RICK GARRITY: WELL, THAT'S WHAT THE STATE -- THAT'S THE STATE'S GOAL. WE COULD DO SOMETHING FASTER. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: OKAY. BECAUSE I THINK INDUSTRY'S WITH US ON THAT. >>RICK GARRITY: I'D ALSO LIKE TO MENTION GOLF COURSES ALONG WITH AGRICULTURE COME UNDER THEIR OWN BMP PROCESS AND WOULD NOT BE IMPACTED BY THIS. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, OKAY. I NEED SOME CLARIFICATION AS WELL BECAUSE I WAS CONSIDERING THAT WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE FOR OUR COUNTY SIMILAR TO THE ORDINANCES THAT HAVE BEEN PASSED BY OTHER COUNTIES, SO MY FIRST QUESTION IS DO WE NEED AN ORDINANCE OR DO WE NEED A RULE CHANGE? >>RICK TSCHANTZ: THE STATUTE ONLY SPEAKS IN TERMS OF ORDINANCES. EPC IS PRETTY UNIQUE AROUND THE STATE, SO THEY'RE THINKING IN TERMS OF EVERY COUNTY PASSING AN ORDINANCE BECAUSE NOT MANY PEOPLE HAVE AN EPC. >>MARK SHARPE: HAVE AN EPC. >>RICK TSCHANTZ: BUT THERE REALLY ISN'T ANY LEGAL BAR TO HAVE IT BE AN EPC RULE, AS YOU'RE ACCOMPLISHING THE SAME THING, AND THE ADVANTAGE TO THAT IS TAMPA, TEMPLE TERRACE, AND PLANT CITY WILL NOT HAVE TO DO SOMETHING SEPARATE. THEY'VE BEEN ASKING US TO TAKE THE LEAD SO WE CAN ALL BE CONSISTENT WITHIN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND WE DON'T HAVE FOUR DIFFERENT ORDINANCES. IF YOU WENT TO THE BOCC AND MADE IT AN ORDINANCE, IT WOULDN'T APPLY IN THE CITIES. >>MARK SHARPE: OKAY. >>RICK TSCHANTZ: SO THE CITIES ARE HOPING IT'S GOING TO BE AN EPC LEAD. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND THAT'S BEEN A CONCERN I'VE HAD. HAVING SEPARATE ORDINANCES AS WE STEP FROM ONE BOUNDARY TO THE OTHER, LET'S SEE IF WE CAN'T GET IT RIGHT IN THE BEGINNING. >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, DURING THE WORKSHOP I'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AS WELL ABOUT WHAT'S THE BEST MECHANISM FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, AND IT SOUND FROM WHAT I'M HEARING LIKE IT'S A RULE. I'M NOT COMPLETELY CONVINCED OTHER THAN JUST -- I NEED MORE TIME TO DIGEST THE INFORMATION, BUT A RULE OR ORDINANCE, I WANT WHAT'S MOST EFFECTIVE. I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE A VERY LARGE EDUCATION COMPONENT BECAUSE I AM CONCERNED AS WELL ABOUT OUR ABILITY TO ENFORCE WHATEVER IT IS THAT WE PASS. ON THE OTHER HAND, I DON'T THINK THERE'S -- IF DONE PROPERLY, FOR US TO HAVE A -- I THINK YOU CAN HAVE A -- A - - AN ORDINANCE WHICH PUSHES THE ENVELOPE ON THE -- ON THE REDUCTION OF UNNECESSARY TYPES OF FERTILIZERS AT TIMES WHEN IT CAN DO THE MOST HARM TO OUR WATERWAYS AND IN A WAY THAT CAN BE DONE THROUGH THE EDUCATION, VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE, BASED ON, YOU KNOW -- IF WE ENFORCE, IT'S BASED ON COMPLAINTS, BUT IF WE GO OUT THERE AND WE SET THE BAR HIGH -- I DON'T -- I DON'T WANT TO SET THE BAR HIGH AND THEN WE JUST KIND OF IGNORE IT AND THEN -- BECAUSE THAT HAS AN IMPACT ON ALL OF OUR RULES. PEOPLE JUST THINK, THESE GUYS DON'T ENFORCE THEIR RULES. THEY PASS THESE RULES AND THEY HAVE NO BASIS WITH WHICH TO ENFORCE IT. WE CAN'T DO THAT. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, I LIKE SETTING A HIGH BAR AND SAYING THAT WE WANT TO DO AS MUCH AS WE CAN DO BECAUSE WE ARE A VERY LARGE COUNTY AND WE -- AND -- AND I THINK WE'VE GOT A LONG WAY TO GO, SO HELP US GET -- HELP -- HELP US GET THERE. MAYBE IT'S THROUGH THE EDUCATION COMPONENT. I DON'T KNOW. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND MR. TSCHANTZ, JUST FOR A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, LEGALLY THE EPC, WE DO OR DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO PASS AN ORDINANCE? >>RICK TSCHANTZ: NO, WE HAVE RULES. >>KEVIN BECKNER: OKAY. SO WE HAVE RULES, SO IF WE WANTED TO PASS AN ORDINANCE, THEN THAT WOULD GO BACK TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS? >>RICK TSCHANTZ: YES, BUT THERE'S REALLY NO LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN THE TWO. >>KEVIN BECKNER: OKAY. BUT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, IF WE WERE -- IF IT WENT TO AN ORDINANCE IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THEN THAT MEANS THAT ALL THE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES WOULD HAVE TO PASS THEIR OWN ORDINANCES TO HAVE THIS EFFECTIVE; IS THAT CORRECT? >>RICK TSCHANTZ: THAT'S CORRECT. >>KEVIN BECKNER: SO THE EPC AS A RULE WOULD HAVE BROADER AUTHORITY AND IT WOULD COVER ALL OF OUR MUNICIPALITIES? >>RICK TSCHANTZ: CORRECT. >>KEVIN BECKNER: OKAY. AND JUST A POINT ON YOUR -- WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. I THINK IT'S ABSOLUTELY EDUCATION IS A KEY TO THIS. THE QUESTION IS IS THAT, YES, WE NEED TO EDUCATE, BUT THEN ALSO THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME ESTABLISHMENT OF PERHAPS STANDARDS THAT WE WANT TO HAVE SEEN AS AN EPC. I MEAN, IT'S GREAT THAT WE CAN EDUCATE PEOPLE ON THINGS, BUT IF WE'RE DIRECTING THEM OR ASKING THEM NOT TO DO SOMETHING, THEN WE MAY WANT TO HAVE SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT STRONGER IN PLACE. BUT AGAIN, I THINK THE WORKSHOP WE CAN HAVE DEBATE AND DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE NECESSARILY APPROPRIATE OR NOT APPROPRIATE AS PART OF A RULE. BUT THEN ON THAT BASIS, I THINK A RULE -- HAVING THIS AS AN EPC RULE WILL PROBABLY BE MORE APPROPRIATE. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MR. NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: I DON'T WANT TO DISAGREE WITH THE ATTORNEY, BUT I GUESS SITTING THROUGH A LOT OF THIS STUFF BEFORE, THESE ORDINANCES AND RULES AND WHATEVER, I BELIEVE A COUNTY COMMISSION CAN PASS AN ORDINANCE THAT ALL CITIES ARE INVOLVED WITH AND THEY HAVE TO OPT OUT, NOT PASS THEIR OWN -- THEY CAN PASS THEIR OWN, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO OPT OUT OF AN ORDINANCE THAT WE PASS. THAT'S THE LAW. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THAT COULD BE A COMPONENT OF THIS WORKSHOP FOR CLARIFICATION. >>JIM NORMAN: THAT GOES BACK TO -- YOU-ALL RECALL THE NUDIE PLACES AND ALL THAT KIND OF -- THEY HAVE TO OPT OUT OF OUR ORDINANCE, IF I RECALL, SO -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. WOULD YOU RESTATE YOUR MOTION. AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU WERE INCLUDING THE EDUCATIONAL COMPONENT OR NOT. >>MARK SHARPE: YES. I MEAN, I WOULD -- I WOULD JUST ASK THAT THIS BOARD OR THAT THE EP -- THE -- THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMISSION SCHEDULE A WORKSHOP IN WHICH WE WOULD DISCUSS THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A RULE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF FERTILIZERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SENATE BILL AND -- THAT WAS SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR BUT ALSO WOULD CONSIDER OTHER ISSUES THAT ARE BEING DISCUSSED BY THE COMMITTEE THAT MR. EMERY AND OTHERS ARE WORKING ON, THAT IT WOULD HAVE A STRONG EDUCATION COMPONENT, AND I WASN'T SURE, MR. BECKNER, IF THERE WAS ANYTHING -- >>KEVIN BECKNER: YEAH, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS ISN'T JUST A COMMUNITY WORKSHOP, THAT THIS IS THE EPC WHERE WE'RE SITTING ON THIS SO WE CAN HEAR ALL THE TESTIMONY. >>MARK SHARPE: EXACTLY, YES. THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION'S BEEN CLARIFIED AND SECONDED. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBERS. ALL RIGHT. WE'D LIKE TO MOVE TO COUNSELOR NOW. >>RICK TSCHANTZ: YES. COMMISSIONERS, THIS TOPIC IS THE EVALUATION OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF EPC. THE EVALUATION FORMS WERE DISTRIBUTED TO THE BOARD, TO THE COMMISSION, ON SEPTEMBER 17th, AND AS OF OCTOBER 7th, THREE EVALUATION FORMS WERE TURNED IN TO THE CHAIR. THE FORMS EVALUATED 13 DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS IN TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES, EIGHT CATEGORIES IN BEHAVIOR AND FIVE CATEGORIES IN GOALS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS. IT WAS RATED ON A SCALE OF ONE TO FIVE, FIVE BEING THE HIGHEST, AND IN THE EIGHT BEHAVIOR CATEGORIES, THE AVERAGE SCORE WAS 4.59, AND IN THE GOALS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS CATEGORY, THE AVERAGE SCORE WAS 4.60. OUR FY 10 BUDGET HAS NO MERIT OR MARKET EQUITY INCREASE, SO THERE'S NO FINANCIAL IMPACT OR RAISE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS EVALUATION. SO I WOULD RECOMMEND A VOTE FOR THE BOARD TO ACCEPT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S EVALUATION AND ANY OTHER COMMENTS THAT THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO MAKE. >>MARK SHARPE: [INAUDIBLE] >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >>RICK TSCHANTZ: IT IS ALL INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MR. SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT, AND I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HAS DONE. THERE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY ARE -- YOU'RE IN A VERY CHALLENGING SPOT. PROCESSES AND RULES OBVIOUSLY ARE INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CONTINUE TO -- TO LISTEN TO THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN CRITICAL AT TIMES FROM THE PUBLIC AS WELL AS FROM THIS BOARD AND TAKE THAT TO HEART, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK THAT THE WAY THAT YOU'VE MANAGED THIS BOARD IS EXEMPLARY, AND THE EFFORT THAT YOU PUT INTO AT LEAST HEARING OUT ALL SIDES AND THEN TRYING TO FORGE A CONSENSUS WHERE POSSIBLE BUT ALSO SOMETIMES DOING WHAT YOU BELIEVE TO BE THE RIGHT THING TO DO I JUST THINK IS ADMIRAL, AND I ENJOY WORKING WITH YOU AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU IN THE FUTURE. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND AGAIN, DR. GARRITY, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND I WANT DO THANK THE EPC STAFF AGAIN FOR THE HARD WORK THAT YOU ALL DO, AND I KNOW SOMETIMES IT GETS VERY DIFFICULT WHEN WE'RE IN THESE CHALLENGING ECONOMIC TIMES TO CONTINUE TO BALANCE WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO OUR ENVIRONMENT VERSUS ALSO CREATING EFFICIENCIES, AND I THINK YOU'VE CREATED EFFICIENCY WITHIN YOUR DEPARTMENT, YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT, AND AGAIN, IT'S BEEN A JOY AND PLEASURE OVER THE LAST YEAR TO WORK WITH YOU AND YOUR STAFF, AND AGAIN, I COMMEND YOU ALSO ON YOUR HIGH ETHICAL STANDARDS, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES -- YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES TO BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF -- OF COMPENSATION AND OTHER BENEFITS AND YOU -- YOU DECLINED THAT, SO I THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR -- FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP, FOR YOUR ETHICS, AND THE WAY -- THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU HAVE SET FORWARD FOR THIS ORGANIZATION. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SEEING NO OTHER COMMENTS, THERE'S A MOTION TO ACCEPT -- >> SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: DR. GARRITY. >>RICK GARRITY: COMMISSIONERS, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS AND THE -- YOU KNOW, BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY IT ANYWAY. YOU HAVE JUST A WONDERFUL STAFF AT THIS AGENCY, 141 DEDICATED EMPLOYEES WHO -- EVERY ONE OF THEM DOING ALL THEY CAN TO WORK HARD FOR YOU AND THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND I'D LIKE TO THANK EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MR. SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: AND I JUST WANTED -- I WAS DIRECTING MY COMMENTS TOWARDS YOU, BUT I DO WANT TO DIRECT THEM AS WELL TOWARDS YOUR STAFF. I THINK THAT HONESTLY THEY'RE THE UNSUNG HEROES WHO ARE DOING INCREDIBLE WORK THAT IS SO VALUABLE TO OUR COMMUNITY, AND I JUST WANT TO SAY WE DEEPLY APPRECIATE -- WE DEEPLY APPRECIATE, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, THE PEOPLE WHO REALLY ARE GOING TO APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU'RE DOING AREN'T EVEN BORN YET. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE OUT THERE WHO ARE NOT HERE TODAY WHO ARE GOING TO BENEFIT FROM THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT, AND THAT'S REALLY WHO WE'VE GOT TO LOOK TO, SO I APPRECIATE -- AND I ALSO WANT TO SAY TO RICK, I THINK THAT YOU'RE A -- A GREAT ASSET TO THIS ORGANIZATION, AND YOUR LEGAL ADVICE AND THE WAY THAT YOU CONDUCT YOURSELF AS WELL I THINK IS VERY PROFESSIONAL AND JUST APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE BOARD -- ON THE FLOOR. >> SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: VERY GOOD. SEEING THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE ONE ITEM LEFT, AND THAT'S DISCUSSION OF THE POLLUTION RECOVERY FUND PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS. AND I'D LIKE TO READ INTO THE RECORD HERE FROM COMMISSIONER FERLITA, ALTHOUGH I WILL NOT BE PRESENT, I'D LIKE TO ASK THE BOARD TO GIVE DUE CONSIDERATION TO ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA UNDER WETLANDS AND WATERSHED. THERE'S A DISCUSSION REGARDING APPLICATION OF POLLUTION RECOVERY FUNDS THAT REQUIRES BOARD APPROVAL WHEN PROJECT IS A JOINT APPLICATION FROM THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND EPC STAFF TO FUND GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GOVERNMENT. THIS IS AN INITIATIVE OF THE WORK GROUP FOR ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY THAT I CHAIR AND HOPE YOU WILL SUPPORT IT. I APOLOGIZE FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE MY ABSENCE MAY CAUSE. PLEASE READ THIS REASON OF ABSENCE INTO THE RECORD AS WELL. THANK YOU. >>MARK SHARPE: HAVE WE TAKEN THAT ACTION? DID WE TAKE THE ACTION -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: NO. SHE WANTED THIS READ IN PRIOR TO SO SHE WOULD KNOW -- >>MARK SHARPE: OKAY. >>TOM ASH: GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. TOM ASH, EPC STAFF. I WANTED TO RUN YOU THROUGH -- IT'S THAT TIME OF YEAR AGAIN TO DO THE POLLUTION RECOVERY FUND REVIEWS OBVIOUSLY, AND I WANTED TO RUN YOU THROUGH THIS GRAPH QUICKLY. STARTING IN THE UPPER RIGHT WITH THE TIME FRAME OF FEBRUARY THROUGH MAY, EACH YEAR FEBRUARY 1st WE ADVERTISE THE POLLUTION RECOVERY FUND APPLICATIONS ARE BEING ACCEPTED AND THAT THERE ARE "X" NUMBER OF DOLLARS AVAILABLE IN THE FUND FOR FUNDING FUTURE PROJECTS. WE CLOSE OUT THE ACCEPTANCE OF THOSE APPLICATIONS IN MAY, AND THEN THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE YEAR, CULMINATING IN TODAY'S MEETING, WE DO A LEGAL REVIEW OF THE PROJECTS. WE DO A STAFF TECHNICAL REVIEW. CEAC ALSO DOES THEIR INDIVIDUAL REVIEW OF THE PROJECTS, AND THEN STAFF AND CEAC SIT DOWN IN THEIR -- IN THE CEAC MEETING AND DETERMINE -- WE GIVE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS TO CEAC, CEAC PLAYS OFF OF THOSE, AND THEN COMES TO THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY BOTH THE APPLICANTS AND BY STAFF, AND THEN FINALLY WE COME HERE TODAY TO GIVE YOU THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS. THIS YEAR WE HAVE -- WE'VE RECEIVED TEN APPLICATIONS, AND THEY ARE -- OF THOSE TEN APPLICATIONS, THEY ARE REQUESTING A TOTAL OF $637,659, AND THESE ARE -- THESE MAY BE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT NUMBERS THAN YOU HAVE. THESE ARE NOW NUMBERS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30th, '09. I BELIEVE YOU MAY HAVE SOME AUGUST 30th NUMBERS IN FRONT OF YOU IN YOUR BACKUP PACKETS. THE -- THE FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR PROJECTS, HOWEVER, IS ONLY $389,686, SO CLEARLY IF WE WERE TO FUND ALL TEN OF THE PROJECTS, THERE WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT SHORTFALL IN THE FUNDING. IF YOU ARE TO APPROVE TODAY THE -- THE PROJECTS WHICH STAFF WILL BE RECOMMENDING FOR APPROVAL, YOU WOULD BE FUNDING A TOTAL OF $279,000 IN PROJECTS, AND YOU WOULD LEAVE A BALANCE IN THE FUND OF $110,645. IF YOU WERE TO FUND PROJECTS RECOMMENDED BY CEAC, YOU WOULD BE FUNDING $204,000, AND THERE WOULD BE A REMAINDER OF $185,000 IN THE FUND. AND TO SUMMARIZE, WE HAVE FOUR PROJECTS THAT ARE RECOMMENDED BY BOTH EPC STAFF AND CEAC, WE HAVE FIVE PROJECTS RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL BY BOTH EPC STAFF AND CEAC, AND WE HAVE ONE -- ONE PROJECT WHERE WE HAD A SPLIT VOTE, AND I'LL ASK YOU TO VOTE ON THAT SEPARATELY IN JUST A MOMENT. SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING THE -- STAFF IS RECOMMENDING AND CEAC THE APPROVAL OF THESE FOUR PROJECTS THAT ARE BEFORE YOU, AND AGAIN, THIS IS ALL IN YOUR BACKUP AGENDA ITEM -- PACKETS. THE STAFF AND CEAC ARE RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THESE FIVE PROJECTS, WHICH ARE -- ARE THERE ON THE SCREEN, AND THEN, AGAIN, WE WILL TAKE AN INDIVIDUAL VOTE, I WOULD ASSUME THAT WOULD BE THE MOST CONVENIENT WAY TO DO IT, ON THE -- THE FINAL PROJECT WHERE CEAC AND STAFF HAVE A -- A DIFFERING OPINION. SO THE RECOMMENDATION FOR YOU TODAY IS TO CONCUR WITH STAFF AND CEAC ON THOSE FOUR PROJECTS, TO CONCUR WITH STAFF AND CEAC TO DENY THE -- THE FIVE PROJECTS, AND TO -- AND THIS IS ONE LITTLE HOUSEKEEPING ARTICLE -- TO CONTINUE TO AUTHORIZE THE EPC CHAIR TO EXECUTE GRANT AGREEMENTS AND NONMATERIAL CHANGES AND EXTENSIONS. WE -- WE RENEW THAT EVERY YEAR SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO COME TO A BOARD MEETING EVERY TIME WE NEED TO MAKE MINOR TWEAKS AND CHANGES IN ANY OF THE -- ANY OF THE GRANT AGREEMENTS OR THE PROJECTS. SO THAT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. STAFF IS ALSO RECOMMENDING FOR THAT FINAL SPLIT VOTE PROJECT THE -- THE APPROVAL OF THAT FINAL PROJECT. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: COMMISSIONER HAGAN. >>KEN HAGAN: I WANT TO, FIRST OF ALL, THANK CEAC AND EPC STAFF FOR ALL THEIR HARD WORK. I APPRECIATE THEIR EFFORTS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS; HOWEVER, I DO SHARE THE CONCERNS OF ONE INDIVIDUAL THAT SPOKE THIS MORNING WITH RESPECT TO THE LAKE MAGDALENE PROJECT. IF YOU RECALL, A COUPLE YEARS AGO THIS EPC BOARD APPROVED THIS -- THIS GRANT, AND IT IS NEEDED TO KEEP THE LAKE MAGDALENE PLAN MOVING FORWARD. THERE IS UP TREATED WATER RUNOFF AT 12 LOCATIONS. THE WATER QUALITY HAS BEEN DEGRADED, AND AS WAS STATED EARLIER, THIS PROJECT HELPS TO REDUCE NUTRIENTS THAT ULTIMATELY GO INTO THE BAY, SO I DON'T KNOW THE THOUGHTS OF THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR IT TO BE INCLUDED, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WANT TO ADDRESS THE -- COMMISSIONER FERLITA'S ITEM AS WELL, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT INCLUDED IN THE LIST. SO -- >>RICK TSCHANTZ: WE COULD TAKE A SEPARATE VOTE ON THAT, SEPARATE IT OUT FROM THE GROUP, JUST AS WE'RE DOING WITH THE OTHER ONE IF YOU'D LIKE. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. >> I WOULD BE HAPPY, COMMISSIONERS, TO EXPLAIN THE REASONING OF STAFF FOR THAT DETERMINATION. >> SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THERE'S A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAGAN AND A SECOND. I WAS GOING TO PASS THE GAVEL AND MAKE A SECOND IF NECESSARY, BUT WE'VE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND TO INCLUDE THE LAKE MAGDALENE. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: AND THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE PERHAPS I MISSED IT. WHAT WOULD BE -- ADDING THAT, THE FINANCIAL IMPACT WOULD BE, I'M SORRY, HOW MUCH AGAIN? >> WE WOULD BE ADDING $92,000, WHICH IS THE REQUESTED FUNDING FOR THAT PROJECT. >>KEVIN BECKNER: FOR THE LAKE MAGDALENE PROJECT? >> THE LAKE MAGDALENE PROJECT, YES. SO IF WE DID NOT ADD IT, WE WOULD BE FUNDING A -- $279,000 IN PROJECTS. IF WE DID ADD THAT PROJECT, WE WOULD BE FUNDING $371,000, AND THAT WOULD LEAVE A BALANCE IN THE FUND FOR FUTURE PROJECTS OF ONLY $18,645. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND ON THOSE -- >>KEVIN BECKNER: I'M SORRY. WOULD IT BE THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO GO AHEAD AND FUND THE LAKE MAGDALENE PROJECT? >> IT WOULD NOT, SIR. AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS NOT THAT -- AS MR. HUNG MAI HAD PRESENTED EARLIER, YES, THERE ARE ISSUES IN LAKE MAGDALENE. THERE ARE STORMWATER ISSUES. THAT LAKE DOES DRAIN OVER 2,000 ACRES OF WATERSHED. IT IS THE THIRD OR FOURTH LARGEST LAKE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. AND WE DID APPROVE FUNDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR LAKE MANAGEMENT PLAN, SO THE PLAN THAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED HAS BEEN FUNDED BY THE POLLUTION RECOVERY FUND. WE ALSO HAD APPROVED EARLIER THE REMOVAL OF THE EXOTIC VEGETATION IN THE LAKE AS WELL AS SOME OF THE REPLANTINGS. THE ISSUE BEFORE US AS STAFF IS THAT WE HAVE AN EXISTING PROJECT ONGOING. THE PROJECT THAT THEY ARE DOING NOW IN DEVELOPING THAT PLAN IS STILL ONGOING. WE TYPICALLY DO NOT TRY TO FUND PROJECTS FOR ANOTHER PHASE OR FOR ANOTHER PART UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT THE RESULT OF THE FIRST PHASE WAS. SO UNTIL JANUARY OF 2010 WE WILL NOT HAVE A FINAL REPORT ON THE PROJECT. THE HARVESTING OF THE EXOTICS, THE FLOATING VEGETATION, HYDRILLA, IN PARTICULAR, IS STILL ONGOING; THE EDUCATIONAL COMPONENT WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY FUNDED IS STILL ONGOING; AND THE CARP, WHICH STAFF HAD RECOMMENDED NOT BE FUNDED THE FIRST TIME BUT IT WAS APPROVED FULLY THE FIRST TIME BY THIS BOARD -- THE CARP -- THE HYBRID CARP THAT ARE TO EAT THE HYDRILLA BASICALLY, THERE -- THERE'S BEEN SOME QUESTION AS TO WHETHER NEARLY HALF OF THOSE FISH NO LONGER ARE IN THE LAKE. THEY HAVE EITHER DIED OR HAVE PRESUMABLY DIED FROM ALTITUDE SICKNESS BECAUSE OSPREYS COME DOWN, SWOOP THEM UP, AND CARRY THEM OFF. [LAUGHTER] SO -- AND THAT IS -- UNFORTUNATELY FOR THE FUND, THAT'S WATCHING $9 -- EVERY TIME AN OSPREY HAS A GOOD MEAL, IT'S A $9 MEAL FLYING OFF TO GOD KNOWS WHERE, SO THAT IS -- THAT IS PART OF IT. THERE'S ANOTHER ASPECT OF THIS THAT IS NOT A COMPONENT OF THE FIRST PROJECT, WHICH IS THE INSTALLATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE. THE -- THE STORMWATER CDS UNIT IS BEING ASKED TO BE INSTALLED, IS BEING ASKED TO BE INSTALLED IN A COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY. THERE WAS NO CLEAR INDICATION, EITHER IN THE APPLICATION OR IN THE PRESENTATION FROM THE APPLICANTS, THAT THERE IS PERMISSION TO USE THAT COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO INSTALL THAT INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT -- THAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS AN ISSUE, OF COURSE, FOR US AND FOR THE COUNTY, BUT IT ALSO LEADS TO MAINTENANCE ISSUES. THE -- THE INDEPENDENT DISTRICT OR THE SPECIAL DEPENDENT DISTRICT HAS COMMITTED TO DO MAINTENANCE OF THOSE UNITS. THAT MAY POSE A PROBLEM. THAT MAY BE PROBLEMATIC FOR THE COUNTY STAFF IN THAT NOW YOU HAVE PRIVATE CITIZENS GOING INTO A COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO MAINTAIN A DEVICE WHICH COULD OPEN US UP TO SOME LIABILITY IF SOMEONE WERE HURT OR OTHERWISE INJURED DOING THAT. >>KEVIN BECKNER: DO YOU FEEL THAT THIS IS A PROJECT THAT EVENTUALLY NEEDS TO BE FUNDED, AND IF SO, IS THE AMOUNT THAT'S SUGGESTED FOR FUNDING, 92,000, WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT? >> I THINK THAT THE -- THE PROJECT IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE, AND I DON'T BELIEVE STAFF -- THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION -- I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE THAT THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE FUNDING SOURCE TO DO THAT. THERE WAS A LOT OF TALK EARLIER OF TMDLs AND OF STATE RULES AND STATE FUNDING ADDRESSING THESE KIND OF -- THESE STORMWATER ISSUES AND THESE IMPAIRED WATERS ISSUES. PERHAPS THAT WOULD BE A BETTER VENUE TO ADDRESS SUCH A LARGE -- A LARGE ISSUE AS THIS. AS THE PRESENTER HAD MENTIONED, THERE ARE A TOTAL OF 12 STORMWATER INLETS ON LAKE MAGDALENE. THIS $92,000 WOULD FUND ONE OF THOSE. THE PRESUMPTION WOULD BE -- AND IT HAS BEEN STATED BY THE APPLICANT -- THAT WE WOULD EVENTUALLY LIKE TO DO THEM ALL, SO THE QUESTION FOR STAFF IS, ARE WE GOING TO BE BACK HERE YEAR? ARE WE GOING TO BE BACK HERE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, 11 YEARS RUNNING? AT WHAT POINT DO WE INVEST SO MUCH SPECIAL ATTENTION AND TIME TO A SINGLE LAKE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY? I THINK EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT THOSE NEWSPAPER ARTICLES LOOK LIKE. >>KEVIN BECKNER: SO WE'RE OPENING UP PERHAPS ISSUES OF THE PAST THAT WE'VE HAD ABOUT PERHAPS CERTAIN FUNDING GOING TOWARDS THE BENEFIT OF ONE PARTICULAR LAKE IN AN AREA VERSUS ANOTHER PARTICULAR LAKE IN AN AREA THEN, COULD BE A CONCERN, AND OBVIOUSLY YOU SAID THERE ARE STORMWATER ISSUES, THERE'S LIABILITY ISSUES, SO THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF ISSUES THAT WE PERHAPS NEED TO DISCUSS BEFORE WE ACTUALLY GO IN TO ADDRESSING THIS PROJECT IS YOUR CONSENSUS? >> YES. THE -- THE POINTS THAT THE APPLICANTS HAVE MADE AS FAR AS THE STORMWATER INLETS, THE DRAINAGE, THOSE WATER QUALITY ISSUES ARE VERY REAL ISSUES. HOW THEY GET ADDRESSED, BOTH NOW AND IN THE FUTURE, IS WHAT STAFF HAS TREPIDATION ABOUT. >>KEVIN BECKNER: OKAY. WELL, BASED ON THE -- AND JUST -- I KNOW SOME OTHER PEOPLE WANT TO SPEAK, AND I'LL MAKE IT REALLY BRIEF, BUT ARE THERE ANY -- ARE THERE ANY COMPONENTS OF THAT THAT YOU FEEL IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL TO THEIR PUBLIC SAFETY OR THINGS THAT ABSOLUTELY WOULD ADDRESS ANY OF THEIR CONCERNS RIGHT NOW THAT COULD BE PART OF SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD RECOMMEND FUNDING, OR YOU'RE JUST SAYING WE SHOULD NOT ADDRESS THIS IMMEDIATELY, LET'S FURTHER STUDY THE ISSUE, AND THEN COME BACK AND ADDRESS COMPREHENSIVELY THE -- THE ISSUE AS A WHOLE? >> I THINK THE ISSUE ON THIS LAKE IN PARTICULAR, AT LEAST AS IT HAS BEEN PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANTS AND -- AND OUR UNDERSTANDING OF IT AT A STAFF LEVEL. I DON'T RECALL PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES EVER BEING PART OF THE DISCUSSION. IT WAS A DISCUSSION OF -- OF NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT, OF EUTROPHICATION IN THE LAKE, AND SO THOSE WERE THE ISSUES THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING, NOT NECESSARILY PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES. I WOULD -- AS STAFF IS RECOMMENDING -- THE REASON WE'RE RECOMMENDING DENIAL IS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE EXISTING PROJECT COME TO FRUITION AND LET'S FIND OUT IF WHAT WE FUNDED THE FIRST TIME ACTUALLY WORKED AND IF WE'RE BEING EFFECTIVE. >>KEVIN BECKNER: OKAY. WELL, I'LL LET MY OTHER COLLEAGUES, BUT BASED ON WHAT YOU HAVE STATED AND BASED ON THE STAFF'S CONCERNS THAT WE -- NUMBER ONE CONCERNING RIGHT-OF-WAYS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT WE MIGHT HAVE, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A LOT MORE STUDYING THAT WE NEED TO BE DONE, AND BASED ON THE CONTROVERSY THAT WAS CAUSED IN THE PAST, I WON'T SUPPORT THE PARTICULAR FUNDING OF THIS PROJECT AT THIS TIME. I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE IN LAKE MAGDALENE. THEY'RE PART OF MY CONSTITUENCY, BUT AGAIN, I THINK WE COMPREHENSIVELY NEED TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: JUST VOTE. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ALL RIGHT. I'LL SAY THAT -- YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT THIS -- IT'S KIND OF LIKE WHEN YOU'VE GOT SOMEONE WHO'S IN TREATMENT AND YOU SAY, WELL, I SEE SOME IMPROVEMENT BUT I'M NOT REAL SURE, LET'S JUST PULL THE PLUG OUT, LET 'EM DIE, AND I WAS KIND OF TRYING TO -- I WAS PUTTING TWO AND TWO TOGETHER. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS REALLY GOOD TO TAKE A SWIPE AT THE NEWS ARTICLES. YOU KNOW, I TAKE EXCEPTION TO THAT BECAUSE I'M UP HERE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING, AND I LOOK AT THESE REPORTS, SO I DON'T KNOW IF I SHOULD CALL THAT A LOW BLOW, BUT I DIDN'T LIKE IT. IT WAS A REAL LOW BLOW, BUT I -- I FEEL STRONGLY THAT -- >>MARK SHARPE: [INAUDIBLE] >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: -- WHEN WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S GOING, DON'T PULL THE PLUG BECAUSE I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, AND SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION, AND I SEE WE HAVE ANOTHER LIGHT ON, BUT I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE MOTION TO INCLUDE IT IN THE PROJECTS. MR. SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: I -- MY -- MY CONCERN IS JUST THE PROCESS, AND I'M NOT -- AND I -- AND I -- EACH -- WHICHEVER WAY -- WE'VE GOT ALL THESE VOTES WHERE YOU'RE JUST NOT QUITE SURE WHAT'S THE CORRECT DIRECTION. LET ME ASK YOU THIS, THOUGH. IF THIS PROJECT WERE NOT SUPPORTED NOW, WOULD THERE BE AN OPPORTUNITY ONCE THE PROJECT WAS COMPLETED -- THIS IS, YOU KNOW, STAFF'S CONCERN, SO LET'S SAY IF IT WASN'T SUPPORTED AND STAFF'S -- AND STAFF IS ABLE TO GO BACK AND EVALUATE PHASE ONE, WOULD THERE BE RESOURCES AND THE ABILITY THEN TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT? HOW WOULD THAT -- HOW WOULD THAT TAKE PLACE, OR IF WE VOTED NO, IS IT JUST LOST IN A -- IN A LONG MYRIAD OF OTHER PROJECTS? HOW DOES THAT WORK? >>RICK GARRITY: COMMISSIONER, A POSSIBILITY MIGHT BE TO GO ALONG WITH THE CONCEPT OF LET'S LET THE MANAGEMENT PLAN GET COMPLETED -- AND I THINK TOM SAID IT WOULD BE COMPLETED EARLY NEXT YEAR -- AND MAYBE HOLD THIS -- HOLD THE FUNDS OUT IN ABEYANCE, AND ONCE THAT'S COMPLETED, WE COULD BRING IT BACK TO YOU AND ALSO GET INPUT FROM COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS REGARDING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ISSUES. >>MARK SHARPE: THAT'S IF -- THAT'S IF THE -- WELL, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, BUT IF THE MOTION WERE NOT TO PASS, THEN THERE WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE FUTURE; IS THAT CORRECT? >>RICK GARRITY: YES. >> YES. THE APPLICANT -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'M GOING TO SUGGEST -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MR. HAGAN. >>KEN HAGAN: I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE TWO MOTIONS BECAUSE APPARENTLY THERE'S SOME CONCERN. WHY DON'T WE -- THE FIRST MOTION I'LL PUT ON THE TABLE IS FOR APPROVAL OF BOTH EPC AND CEAC RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THEN AFTER THIS MOTION, THEN I'LL MAKE A SECOND MOTION TO ADD IN THE LAKE MAGDALENE PROJECT, SO WE'LL KEEP IT CLEAN. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE ONE MOTION AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THE SECOND. SO THE FIRST MOTION. AND IS THERE A SECOND TO APPROVE -- >>KEN HAGAN: YES. >>JIM NORMAN: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: I WAS GOING TO VOTE ON THAT ONE. >>JIM NORMAN: NO, NO, THERE WAS TWO. THE GAS -- THE GREENHOUSE GAS, YOU'RE ADDING THAT TO THE -- >> RIGHT. >>KEN HAGAN: I WAS GOING TO DO THAT ONE EVEN AFTER -- >>JIM NORMAN: OKAY. SO THERE'S THREE MOTIONS. >>KEN HAGAN: THERE WILL BE THREE ULTIMATELY. >>JIM NORMAN: OKAY. OKAY. >>KEN HAGAN: THE FIRST ONE IS THE CEAC AND STAFF RECOMMENDED PROJECTS. >> SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ALL RIGHT. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES, BOARD MEMBERS. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: THE NEXT MOTION WILL BE TO APPROVE THE LAKE MAGDALENE PROJECT. >> SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 4-2. COMMISSIONER BECKNER AND SHARPE VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: AND THEN I'LL MAKE A THIRD MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE EPC RECOMMENDED PROJECT FOR THE GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: IS THERE A MOTION -- A SECOND? >>MARK SHARPE: I'LL SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBERS. MR. BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: MR. CHAIR, JUST FOR A POINT OF ORDER, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THIS, MR. TSCHANTZ, DO WE NEED A MOTION TO REJECT THE PROJECTS, OR DID WE IN ONE MOTION ACCEPT -- MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT AND REJECT THE RECOMMENDED PROJECTS IN YOUR OPINION? >>RICK TSCHANTZ: WE DO NEED A SEPARATE MOTION TO -- I DON'T THINK THE FIRST MOTION COVERED THE DENIAL OF THE FIVE -- OF THE FOUR PROJECTS MINUS LAKE MAGDALENE. TOM, DID YOU THINK THAT IT DID? >> YEAH, THAT WAS NOT MY UNDERSTANDING. I -- I THINK WE APPROVED THE PROJECTS THAT BOTH CEAC AND STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE WE VOTED ON THE ONES THAT BOTH CEAC AND STAFF ARE RECOMMENDING FOR DENIAL. >>MARK SHARPE: SO WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION -- >>RICK TSCHANTZ: JUST TO BE SAFE, I THINK IF -- IF WE COULD HAVE A MOTION ON THE -- ON THE GROUP OF DENIALS WHERE BOTH CEAC AND -- >>MARK SHARPE: SO MOVE. >>RICK TSCHANTZ: THAT WOULD BE MINUS THE LAKE MAGDALENE PROJECT. >>MARK SHARPE: RIGHT. THE LAKE MAGDALENE PROJECT HAS NOW BEEN APPROVED. >>RICK TSCHANTZ: WHICH HAS BEEN APPROVED. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: VERY GOOD. IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS? >>MARK SHARPE: GOOD JOB. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SEEING NONE, WE'RE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. 1