Pasco County planning commissioners debated several proposed coastal resilience policies on the ADAPT chapter, focusing on how prescriptive the comprehensive plan should be about weatherproofing public assets, floodproofing sanitary systems and the role of the county after a major disaster.

The discussion matters because the language in the comprehensive plan can shape future capital improvement priorities, grant eligibility and public expectations about what the county must do following storms.

Commissioners questioned a draft policy that would have required Pasco County to "incorporate weatherproofing and retrofitting upgrades for critical assets into the capital improvement plan and local mitigation strategy." A planning commissioner said the provision could be read as a commitment to spend county funds and asked whether the county should instead use weaker phrasing. Amanda Hill, Planning, Development and Economic Growth, said the policy supports the board's intent and the newly created Office of Strategy and Sustainability will help secure grants and implement resilience projects. "A lot of these NOFOs that come out for grants, they want to see that sort of commitment," Hill said.

On utilities, commissioners debated a policy directing the county to "evaluate and update its utility standards to require all new sanitary sewer facilities in the Coastal High Hazard Area be flood proofed or designed to reduce leakage of raw sewage during flood events to the maximum extent practicable and new septic tanks shall be fitted with backflow preventers." Several commissioners objected to the clause on septic tanks because Pasco County does not permit or regulate septic systems; that authority rests with the state agencies. One commissioner said, "Pasco County does not regulate nor permit septic tanks. That's a power that the state has, DEP, and it's delegated that authority to the Florida Department of Health." The commission directed staff to stop the sentence after "to the maximum extent practicable" and delete the clause about new septic tanks.

Commissioners also discussed a pair of policies encouraging floodproofing for nonresidential and vertical mixed-use buildings in flood-prone areas, especially the Coastal High Hazard Area. Staff and commissioners noted federal rules limit floodproofing residential spaces under the National Flood Insurance Program. One planner summarized the practical limits: "If you're at Elevation 4 and the base flood elevation is 13, well, that doesn't promote a shop at store level where somebody can walk on the ground and look through the windows and shop." Participants suggested the policy should specify the type of spaces intended (for example, "nonresidential" or "non-occupiable" ground floors) and acknowledged that elevating ground-floor commercial space can be financially impractical in high surge zones.

On post-disaster planning, commissioners reviewed a draft policy that had said the county would "reduce and eliminate the impacts of natural hazards" via a post-disaster redevelopment plan. Several commissioners objected to the word "eliminate" as unrealistically broad. After discussion the commission agreed to replace or remove the term and to label the county's post-disaster redevelopment plan as nonregulatory in the comprehensive plan language, so it would guide recovery without, by itself, imposing land-development rules. Staff said an update to the existing post-disaster redevelopment plan (most recently revised in 2016) is already in progress and that the task order for the update will consider state law changes.

Commissioners also recommended moving some policy content into other parts of the comprehensive plan where it fits better. For example, density/intensity rules for coastal land uses were described as functioning like a floor‑area‑ratio (FAR) or a density cap and participants suggested placing that language in the Coastal Lands Future Land Use description (GROWS/CLFlu) rather than in the ADAPT chapter. Similarly, staff and commissioners agreed that a sanitary sewer floodproofing policy that would apply countywide might be better located in the public facilities element.

The commission asked staff to reword several policies for clarity, remove regulatory-sounding mandates where the county lacks authority, and to return with revised text. No formal board vote was recorded on ordinances or regulatory changes during this workshop.

The conversation included frequent references to FEMA and the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), state law limits on local septic regulation and grant funding processes that favor jurisdictions demonstrating resilience planning. Commissioners asked staff to consider practical thresholds for floodproofing, to use FEMA's terminology for habitable versus non-occupiable spaces where applicable, and to clarify where new requirements would be regulatory versus advisory.