Pasco County hikes tree-mitigation fee, restricts fund uses and limits administrator spending

Pasco County commissioners voted July 15 to raise the rates paid into the county's tree mitigation fund, expand where mitigation money may be used and add new controls on how the county administrator may spend the money. The board approved the measure after several hours of presentation and debate by planning staff and commissioners.

County planning officials said the fund, which was established decades ago and last adjusted by resolution in 2005 and 2008, has not kept pace with current planting costs and canopy needs. Planning and Economic Development Director David Engel told the board the resolution is one phase of a two-part effort; staff will return with a tree preservation ordinance this fall. Principal planner Amanda Hill summarized the staff proposal to remove several project-type discounts and raise the base contribution.

Under the adopted resolution, the standard contribution rate rises from $50 per inch of trunk diameter to $75 per inch for most trees. A new higher rate of $150 per inch will apply to trees designated as "heritage" trees: the resolution defines heritage trees as live oaks 34 inches or larger and southern magnolias 24 inches or larger with a condition rating of "good or better" using the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) rating system. Staff said heritage designations and the ISA rating will be used to determine eligibility.

The resolution also specifies how mitigation dollars may be spent: on tree plantings on land owned or controlled by the county; on homeowner and affordable-housing projects that serve households at or below 80% area median income (AMI); on the county's commercial landscape and economic growth landscaping program; on school-board plantings; and to support county tree-management planning such as inventories and canopy studies. Staff emphasized that reimbursements authorized by the resolution are limited to the vegetative materials themselves (for example drought-tolerant trees and plants) and "is not to be construed" to include irrigation, mulch, hardscape, design, or labor costs.

Commissioners debated how much unilateral spending authority to give the county administrator. The draft resolution initially delegated authority to the county administrator or designee to release up to $200,000 per request from the fund without board approval. Commissioner Waitman raised concerns that repeated $200,000 disbursements could deplete the fund without board oversight; he asked whether the board should instead create budgeted programs and appropriate specific amounts. County Administrator Mike Carballa told commissioners such program-level appropriations could be set in the annual budget process so the board would retain a spending ceiling for each program. County staff reported the tree mitigation fund balance at about $9,400,000.

County Attorney's office staff told the board the code includes fee caps set elsewhere in the land development code, and that changing those caps likely requires an amendment to the land development code (an ordinance change). The board adopted the resolution with three specific conditions requested on the record: (1) the newly raised fee schedule will not become effective until any necessary amendment to the land development code has been completed (county attorney to confirm and implement), (2) funds will be restricted to canopy trees (oaks, magnolias and similar shade/canopy species; commissioners added general allowance for palms but excluded certain species called out on the record), and (3) staff will provide quarterly progress reports to the board on fund disbursements and projects. With those conditions in place the motion passed.

Commissioners and staff repeatedly framed the change as a way to replace lost canopy that had been removed over past decades and to prioritize large canopy species rather than shrubs. Commissioner Oakley and others said they want the money used quickly for county-owned rights of way, parks and other public property where trees were previously removed. Commissioner Mariano asked staff to allow the tree fund to be applied to county projects to avoid drawing down general road and bridge dollars when work could be supported by mitigation funds.

What the action does not change: staff emphasized that the resolution itself expands authorized uses and sets the new rates but that fee increases will not take effect until the county's code review confirms the appropriate ordinance changes. Staff also said the tree-preservation ordinance (phase two) is planned for a September public hearing and will address preservation rules separate from the mitigation fund rate.

The measure repealed prior 2005 and 2008 resolutions that set earlier administration rules for the fund. Staff said the county has already used mitigation money for a commercial landscaping grant program that delivered about $1.8 million in landscape grants in recent years primarily in the West Market area.

The board's action sets an administrative path for faster plantings on county-owned property while preserving board-level budget oversight for larger or non-routine projects.