Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mosquito Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables mosquito‑spraying decision after Garden Group raises pollinator and health concerns
Summary
After a petition from the Seminole Community Garden Group and public questions about pollinators and health, the council discussed alternatives to pesticide spraying (bat boxes, BTI, drainage cleanup). The matter was tabled for presentations; the city’s current spraying schedule will continue until the council acts.
The Seminole City Council discussed community concerns about scheduled mosquito pesticide spraying after members of the Seminole Community Garden Group raised questions about impacts on pollinators and the local ecosystem.
A councilmember said the group had requested a re‑examination of spraying and asked for presentations from the Garden Group and the county health department. Staff noted that earlier presentations had described possible alternatives such as bat boxes, purple martin houses, surveillance and targeted spraying, and larvicide treatments (BTI) for standing water. Miranda Cotton previously presented alternatives at a council meeting and was asked to return with the Garden Group to provide specifics.
Council comments ranged from noting the low cost of bat boxes and community distribution ideas to urging a combination of targeted spraying in persistent wet areas plus investment in long‑term alternatives. Staff described the city’s mosquito program as intermittent, typically spraying two to three times a year (noting a schedule around mid‑May, before July 4, and again in the fall), and said last year’s pesticide expenditures were roughly $2,500; a transcript comment also referenced ordering “about 5,000 a year” though units were not specified in the meeting text.
A motion to cease spraying until the council voted on a plan was made but did not receive a second. Another motion to table the item — which, by procedure, leaves the current spraying practice in place — was made and seconded. The council agreed to return the item to the July 14 agenda for presentations from the Garden Group and the county health department; the transcript records that, pending weather and wind conditions, staff might be able to spray before that meeting if suitable conditions occur.
The council did not adopt a ban or suspension of spraying at the meeting; the discussion produced a clear directive to gather more information and to allow public testimony and department responses at the next meeting.
