Hillsborough County Blows Through All Its Skyrocketing Growth Revenues, Increases County Bureaucracy by 61%

Guest post by Dr. Jim Davison 

Hillsborough County citizens are well acquainted with this time of year as being the start of hurricane season in Florida. It starts every year on June the 1st. We are given estimates of how many and how intense the storms will be. We are urged to get our homes ready and to prepare in case one of these natural disasters hits the area. All good advice.

Beginning about one month before hurricane season there is another season that starts every year. One that can be costly and deadly to taxpayers and it is man-made. 

It is the “Budget Season” for local municipalities and the County. 

The "Budget Season" is a closely choreographed period-of-time. Like clockwork, the Hillsborough County Administrator Bonnie Wise kicked off the Fiscal Year 2024 season at a BOCC workshop on May 10, 2023. No public comment was allowed.

"Just Trust Us": AFT 2.0 Rail Tax Throws Billions At Rudderless Transit Agency in Chaos

Transit agency HART currently has no leadership at the helm and is in a state of at least semi-chaos due to some poor judgement by its own governing board. But the Hillsborough County Commission keeps pursuing forcing taxpayers to simply "hand" the chaotic transit agency Billions of new AFT transit tax proceeds.

After the November 2018 election, newly elected Democrat County Commissioners Kimberly Overman and Mariella Smith replaced Republican Commissioners Sandy Murman and Stacy White on the governing Board of HART.

The new HART Board felt compelled to continue pursuing a new CEO….even after a lawsuit was filed in December 2018 legally challenging the All for Transportation (AFT) $16B transit tax.

AFT Tax Hike Scam Puts County Between a Rock and a Hard Place

The All For Transportation (AFT) tax hike may turn into one of the biggest scams ever perpetrated on Hillsborough County voters and taxpayers.

We predicted the AFT would create a big mess and more evidence of that played out at a Hillsborough County BOCC workshop held February 21, 2019.

The workshop to discuss how the county could spend $110 million of new AFT tax proceeds quickly turned into a debacle. The commissioners darted in all directions when confronted with the reality the $16 Billion AFT tax hike does not fund new road capacity in Hillsborough County for 30 years.

Fund Transportation and No Tax Hike Is Needed!

Transportation planning and progress has been dysfunctional and elusive in Hillsborough County for over 20 years. After three failed sales tax initiatives, from the committee of 99 to to Moving Hillsborough Forward to GO Hillsborough, and multiple unfunded Long Range Transportation Plans from the Hillsborough MPO, the “Powers” that be may have finally faced reality and the future.

On Wednesday, June 6th the Hillsborough BOCC voted to send a future transportation revenue plan presented to them earlier this year to the county Citizen Advisory Committee for their consideration and advisement. The plan was initially presented by Dr James Davison to the Board on April 4, 2018.

Davison's plan consists of 5 separate revenue sources totaling $8.468 Billion, yes billion with a “B”, over the next 25 years. About $6.2 billion goes towards transportation, but the unique thing about this plan is that for its last 20 years there is no increase in your property tax millage or sales tax rate. There is a small increase of 1/4 percent in the sales tax for the first 6 years until 2026 and then the sales tax returns to its current 7%. There are “No New Taxes” for Hillsborough residents in the plan. 

Not only are there no new taxes, but more money is available for transportation/transit than in the recent GO Hillsborough plan

The entire plan revenues are shown below:

1. Mobility Fees on new development passed 2016: 2021-2045 - $600 Million 

2. Restructure current 10 year property tax BOCC Transportation Policy to 25 year program: 2020-2045 - $1.15 Billion 

3. Value Capture (tax increment financing, development rights, etc) along any premium transit line to leverage state and federal money: 2021-2045 - $1.0 Billion

4. County Transportation Sales Tax @ 1/4 percent: 20121-2045 - $3.01 Billion total

• $ 1.054 billion to HART
• $ 1.37 billion to HillsboroughCo
• $ 499 million to Tampa
• $ 41.1 million to Plant City
• $ 27.4 million to Temple Terrace

5. Renew CIT @ 1/4 percent instead of 1/2 cent currently levied:  2027-2046 - $2.708 Billion total **

• $ 894 Million to School Board
• $ 190 Million Affordable House
• $ 1.137 Billion Hillsborough Co.
• $ 414.3 Million to Tampa
• $ 34 Million to Plant City
• $ 22.8 Million to Temple Terrace

**Note: The CIT tax is a local infrastructure sales surtax enabled by FL 212.055. The statute currently only accommodates a 1/2 percent or 1 percent tax. The state legislature will need to amend the statute to support 1/4 percent or make it similar to the transportation sales surtax that can be any percentage up to one percent. We believe the state will accommodate when the county (or counties) request the change.

Dr Davison stated that over $2 billion would go to transit or almost 3 times what was being allocated with GO Hillsborough. Plus over $4 billion dollars to the county and cities to pay for repaving, bridge repair, sidewalks bicycle paths, increased road capacity and new technology. All within a shorter period of time and with no new taxes. At 1/4 percent, the renewed CIT will raise more money in 20 years then the present CIT did at 1/2 percent in its last 20 years and over $1 billion dollars more then in its first 20 years.

After Dr. Davison made the presentation to the BOCC on April 4th , Commissioner White requested that the plan be forwarded to the county Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC). County Administrator Mike Merrill requested that the administration “vet” the numbers before taking them to the CAC. 

Last month Dr Davison and Commissioner White met with Hillsborough County's Director of Finance, Bonnie Wise, Director of the Budget Tom Fesler and Chief County Economist Kevin Brickley in separate meetings. It was confirmed that the numbers and future estimates in the plan are accurate. Of course they were the county's own numbers to begin with.

Wednesday June 6th the BOCC unanimously voted 6-0 to send the plan on to the County CAC. Conspicuously, Commissioner Ken Hagan and County Administrator Mike Merrill, who keep pushing tax hike referendums, got up and left the room right before Dr. Davison was to speak Wednesday. Commissioner Hagan has a consistent behavior of rudely walking out of meetings when he does want not his vote recorded. Since Hagan is running again, he should be asked by voters/constituents if he supports the county seriously looking at this alternative funding plan. 

Davison stated there is still a lot of work to be done, but he is confident that this plan can be accomplished. “There is no reason to raise taxes when we have growth in our revenue streams going on like we are have in Hillsborough County”, he said. The key is funding priorities.

In addition, Davison could not explain why the MPO has not included “Value Capture” to pay for transit capital costs in the LRTPs like it did prior to 2000. Value capture includes recovering some of the property value gains to finance the transit project. The Trump Administration has stated they want to make federal transit grants conditional on value capture.

The Hillsborough County Citizens Advisory Committee meetings are held the 4^th Friday of every month at County Center. We anticipate numerous different groups will be there to weigh in on the matter and we will also be keeping an EYE on it.

We have often asked here at the EYE the same questions. Why has it taken so long to come up with a plan that together with revenues already committed over the next 25 years, will provide Hillsborough county over $17 billion dollars to improve roads, transit and mobility. All without increasing taxes. 

The county commissioners must seriously consider this plan and throw out any plans that would needlessly raise taxes. 

To be continued!

The Day Hagan Became Candidate Hagan, R - District Rays

Commissioner Ken Hagan is now Candidate Hagan, R-District Rays. How did that happen? Thru a baseball stadium escapade that began years ago. 

Candidate Ken Hagan, R-District Rays

Commissioner Hagan, a Hillsborough county commissioner since 2002, has spent at least half his time in office pursuing a new Rays baseball stadium. 

ABC (A Baseball Community) Coalition was formed in 2008 to study new sites for a new Rays stadium and according to this August 2009 article:

People can drive quickly to downtown Tampa or to the West Shore area. And Tampa's business base could support luxury suites, season tickets and corporate sponsorships. Hillsborough might explore the Rays moving to Tampa if the area is at risk of losing them to another city, County Commissioner Ken Hagan says.

The ABC Coalition provided a report and recommendation in January 2010.

It was assumed that any potential site would have a major public transportation hub when and if the system is constructed. The impact that changes in mass transportation could have on the evaluation of potential sites could be very significant.

Generally, and as a rule, private contributions to stadium construction have averaged 20 to 30% of construction costs, though wide variations exist from virtually all costs financed publicly to virtually all costs financed privately. To the extent that private funding is limited, the remaining funds must be identified through federal, state or local sources

Suddenly in February 2010, Hagan signed a letter as BOCC Chair, without informing his board colleagues, asking the ABC Coalition to present at a BOCC meeting. Some board members were not happy Hagan unilaterally did that without informing them.

This was the same time Hillsborough county commissioners were considering putting the 1% rail tax on the 2010 ballot. It was the Transportation Task Force, then led by Ken Hagan, that recommended putting the rail tax referendum on the ballot. On May 13, 2010, Hagan voted with 4 other commissioners at a public hearing to put the tax on the ballot.

Days later the ABC Coalition presented to the BOCC on May 19, 2010, the transcript is found here. Some takeaways from the presentation about a new stadium:

• Air conditioned with a retractable roof, seating capacity of 37-40K, large suites, satisfy corporate needs, need a parking ratio of 2.7 or better - about 13,000 parking spaces for capacity of 37K.
• Create an entertainment center for "fan experience" for before and after game. Entertainment experience like being at an amusement park that happens to have a baseball game going on.
• Cost estimates $500-600 million (2010 costs), Rays pay 30%, need to somehow finance $400-450 million [Costs today will approach a BILLION dollars]
• Best sites were Carillon in St. Pete, Westshore and Downtown Tampa because it is nearer to wealthier, better educated, younger people (yes that's what was said)
• Critically important is the number of people within a 30 minute drive
• Need Corporate support, throughout league 2/3 of tickets are purchased by businesses and corporations and 1/3 by individuals
• "public transportation, whenever it comes, will serve wherever the stadium is" (Remember the rail tax put on the ballot just days before conveniently identified USF to downtown and downtown to Westshore as the two rail corridors)
• TBARTA said "where ever the stadium is, we'll have a stop..."
• When Hagan asked about size needed for an urban/downtown stadium, the answer was just the stadium footprint is about 12 acres but a fully functioning stadium with parking requires from 75-90 acres.
• Commissioners were supportive as long as it does not include public financing

Hagan clearly stated at that meeting: "Well, I want to say I appreciate the comments from all the commissioners, especially those regarding not using taxpayer dollars, I've said that repeatedly, but it bears - it bears being stated again, so I appreciate that."

Hagan then proceeded to get a motion passed that "when the Rays make their long term intentions known, this Board is open and interested in having a seat at the table and being part of the discussion in an effort to ensure that the Rays remain in the Tampa Bay region."

The rail tax was overwhelmingly defeated, 58-42% in November 2010.

In 2012, it was reported in this article Hillsborough leader willing to play "boyfriend" in Rays-St. Petersburg divorce:

Hagan said he wants a more active role in moving the discussion forward, including by courting the Rays, if necessary. He even volunteered to be the boyfriend in January when he saw team president Matt Silverman at a Rays charity event in Tampa.

Hagan was again BOCC Chair in 2013.

In February 2013, these interesting reports were made:
Who owns season tickets? 

Scouring Tampa Bay for Rays season ticket holders

Both Hillsborough County Commissioner Ken Hagan and Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn say they stand ready to seek a stadium solution on their side of the bay. Neither has season tickets, though Hagan once did before he ran for office.

By July 2013, the Transportation Policy Leadership Group (that morphed into the Go Hillsborough debacle) kicked off their first meeting in July 2013. We posted here how that kick off meeting was filled with the rail cartel.

At a July 25, 2013 Budget Workshop, Rick Homans, who was then CEO of the Tampa-Hillsborough EDC, was allowed to present his ask for $700K of funding from the county while stating the need to build public transportation and bring a stadium to downtown to create a "happening" downtown environment. (Note citizens/taxpayers at the budget public hearing that very same day who were asking the county to fund our roads got their usual three minutes allotted for a public comment.)

By August 2013, Hagan declared the stadium issue was "borderline dire."  

...he [Hagan] had a meeting Thursday morning with County Administrator Mike Merrill and County Attorney Chip Fletcher to begin plotting Hillsborough's course of action. He said the discussion was general and ranged from discussing what organizations should be participants in a committee he hopes to form to serve as a go-between between Hillsborough officials and the Rays. The discussion also touched on upcoming talks between the county and city of Tampa about renewing redevelopment areas and special taxing districts, one of which includes downtown Tampa and areas sometimes discussed as prospective stadium locations. 

Part of the discussion focused on the state's sunshine law and ensuring that any committee created doesn't include members whose participation would trigger open meeting requirements because they serve on other boards together. Hagan said he doesn't believe that will be a problem.

What was really dire then was the neglect by the county to properly fund our local roads and infrastructure.

It was also reported in this August 6, 2013 Tribune article:

A group of chamber of commerce leaders from Tampa and St. Petersburg formed a study group called the Baseball Stadium Financing Caucus and found that paying for a stadium would be difficult, but not impossible. Last November, it released a plan that considered, among other things, increasing hotel taxes on tourists, creating a new car rental surcharge at Tampa International Airport and tapping into Hillsborough County's Community Investment Tax, which among other uses helps pay for Raymond James Stadium's bonds.

The group even contemplated a novel way to raise money from wealthy immigrants. Through a program called EB-5, would-be immigrants essentially can buy a visa from the federal government if they are willing to invest either $500,000 or $1 million in a venture that creates jobs. The developers of the Brooklyn Nets' new arena used EB-5 money to pay for some infrastructure surrounding the arena.

The biggest source of money could come from a hypothetical regional tax, in which people from several local counties would contribute to a stadium fund. However, it would be hard to get people in one county to support a tax for a stadium located in another county, said Eric Hart, executive director of the agency that runs Raymond James Stadium, the Tampa Sports Authority.

In September 2013, it was reported that Hagan had been having conversations with Jeff Vinik and his team for the past six months or so about a downtown stadium.

By September 2014, Hillsborough county had just handed Parsons Brinckerhoff/Beth Leytham their crony $1.2 million contract to lead the failed Go Hillsborough campaign for another tax hike referendum. There seems to be a consistent connection between Hagan's push for tax hikes for costly transit and his push for a new baseball stadium. 

Coincidentally, as reported here on September 27, 2014, Hagan planned to ask the commissioners at the October 1 BOCC meeting, to designate the Tampa Sports Authority to lead discussions with the Rays and he would setup a baseball committee:

If other commissioners approve, Hagan said Saturday, he would then set up a working committee to focus on finding a location for a Rays ballpark in Hillsborough, and the money to pay for it. The committee ideally would include Hagan, Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn, Tampa Sports Authority CEO Eric Hart, and a prominent member of the private sector, Hagan said.

The BOCC agenda for the October 1 meeting had already been distributed and sent out on  September 25, 2014, as we receive the email distribution of the BOCC agendas. Hagan's agenda item was not on the 9/25 version.

According to the article above, Hagan had told the media by at least September 27th, that he planned to bring the stadium/Tampa Sports Authority request to the October 1 meeting that begins at 9am on 10/1.

At 5:29PM on September 30, 2014 (we have the email and timestamp), this addendum was sent out adding Hagan's stadium agenda item.

Hagan throws the stadium "discussion" on the 10/1 BOCC
agenda at the very last minute
(click to enlarge)

Hagan's last minute agenda addition simply states "discussion". Discussion is a noun not a verb. Thus Hagan's agenda item, as stated. was not asking for any action to be taken. Click on the addendum link above and read all the other agenda items that are asking for action by the commissioners. They all start with a verb such as approve, terminate, adopt, authorize, conduct.

Note that Hagan's last minute agenda addition was to be considered as "Pursuant to Rule 13 of Rules of Order". Who, except the commissioners, county staff and county attorney, have any idea what that means?

Rule 13 of the county commissioners Rules of Order is found here. It provides the procedure for scheduling of BOCC agenda items. Basically, commissioners are not supposed to throw agenda items out requesting action by commissioners without proper notice and background information, except for some type of emergency issues like public safety, health, etc. We doubt many think a baseball stadium "discussion" is an emergency no matter how "dire" Hagan may have thought it was.

But Rule 13 also states:

Commissioners may raise substantive, off-the-agenda matters only in instances where the County Administrator has been provided prior written notice thereof not later than 3:00 p.m. on the Friday preceding the regular Board meeting held the following week. Any item not meeting these guidelines, except for emergencies and external deadlines outlined above, will be scheduled on the subsequent Board meeting. 

The addendum to the Board’s agenda must be made available to the Board and to the public at least 48 hours prior to the Board meeting. 

Obviously, the addendum was not made available to the public 48 hours prior to the October 1 Board meeting.

According to the transcript of the October 1, 2014 BOCC meeting, Merrill told the commissioners that Hagan's agenda item for a "discussion" to designate the Tampa Sports Authority as the agency to negotiate with the Rays stadium was added "pursuant" to Rule 13. That does not appear to be true because Miller, a stickler for rules of order, immediately made a motion to "waive" the rules for item F-1. The motion was seconded by Beckner and passed unanimously to legitimize Hagan's agenda item.

We highlighted parts of the October 1, 2014 BOCC meeting transcript but below are some  takeaways:

• Hagan tells the commissioners they will be discussing extending the downtown CRA at the next BOCC meeting and stating it will have "long-term implications to redeveloping downtown but also as it relates to funding options regarding a potential stadium. 

• Hagan almost immediately turns his late agenda item labeled "discussion" (noun) into a substantive ask for action. Hagan asks commissioners to "approve" designating the Tampa Sports Authority as the organization tasked with negotiating with the Rays. Did the commissioners know they were going to be asked to take action on Hagan's agenda item and not just discuss? 

• Hagan proceeds to appoint himself to represent the county, appoint Mayor Buckhorn to represent Tampa, appoint Eric Hart, President/CEO of the Tampa Sports Authority. These three would then select some unnamed private sector representatives. Hagan makes his motion to do all this and Commissioner Murman immediately seconds. There is discussion about Sunshine (how to go around Sunshine laws), having minority representation, and about this action is supposedly only a "first step" in a multi step effort. Commissioners got Hagan's assurance that he will provide updates back to the commission and they will have input. (How did that work out?)

The entire premise for designating the Tampa Sports Authority as the agency to negotiate with the Rays was to ensure there were no Sunshine law challenges aka keeping everyone in the dark, including as we now know, Hagan's commissioner colleagues.

October 1, 2014 is now declared the day that Commissioner Hagan became Candidate Hagan, R-District Rays.

Stay tuned for updates about the Rays Candidate.

And as always follow the money.

Another County Mess: Taxation Without Representation

The Hillsborough county commission has created another mess. 

They continue to waive one of their own policies that has no waiver provision provided in it. In addition, the commissioners ignored the intentions of a Charter that created an independent special taxing district.

Why? Because they or someone(s) wants control of that taxing entity. The timing is not coincidental since it relates to the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART).

What the commissioners have done as a result of their recent HART Board appointments is disenfranchise HART's property taxpayers who reside in  unincorporated Hillsborough.

First, the background information.

Independent special districts have limited explicit - not implied - authority specified in its charter. 

Statutes, charters and policies provide the requirements, criteria and governance for establishing Boards, Committees, Authorities, Councils or Agencies and who may get appointed to them. In the interest of fairness, proportional and equitable representation is often a requirement, especially if the Board will be providing governance and oversight of a taxing authority.

Florida Statute 163.567 enabled the creation HART by allowing a home rule Charter to establish the transit agency. HART was founded in 1980 by a local Charter approved in 1979 by the county commission of Hillsborough and the city council of Tampa. 

HART's Charter defines a HART Member as "the unincorporated areas of a county or the incorporated areas of a municipality if such county or municipality has been admitted to membership the Authority.." 

HART's Charter states each HART member shall appoint one Director plus one additional Director for each 150,000 persons, or major fraction thereof, resident in that member's jurisdictional limits. In addition to those Board members, the Governor of Florida shall appoint two Directors.

HART's Charter specifies they are a special taxing district and may levy an ad valorem (property) tax not to exceed one half mill ($.0005) on taxable property within the jurisdictional limits of its members. Current jurisdictional members of HART include city of Tampa, city of Temple Terrace and unincorporated Hillsborough County. Plant City is not a member of HART and Plant City residents do not pay HART's property tax. 

To abide by the Charter's intent of ensuring equitable and proportional representation on the HART Board who oversees this taxing authority, Hillsborough County has a policy that appointees to the HART Board by the Hillsborough County commissioners MUST reside in unincorporated. From the county's website regarding HART Board applicants (emphasis mine):

Citizens appointed to this board must reside in the unincorporated area of Hillsborough County. 

In addition, according to Board of County Commissioners BOCC POLICY - SECTION NUMBER 0 1 . 3 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 for Appointing and/or Confirming Nominations of Citizens, Agency/Government Body Representatives, or Staff to any Board, Council, Committee and Authority (emphasis mine):

..applicants for certain boards/councils undergo background checks and/or be residents of the unincorporated area of Hillsborough County. All applicants must be residents of the state of Florida. 

In an effort to have boards/councils that include citizens who represent the entire county, the BOCC shall largely consider race, gender, and those citizens who actively participate in the community when making appointments and/or confirming nominations. Unless specifically approved by the Board of County Commissioners, no citizen may serve on more than one committee at a time. 

If an applicant does not meet the relevant requirements the application shall be rejected.  

Residency for appointment/confirmation applicants. The Board of County Commissioners has not established a general residency requirement for all board, council, committee, and/or authority appointments. However, citizens seeking appointments to the following boards councils, committees, or authorities shall reside in the unincorporated area of Hillsborough County.

• Code Enforcement Board 

• Code Enforcement Special Magistrate  

• Cross Connection, Backflow & Back-Siphonage Control Board  

• Enterprise Zone Development Agency 11 

• Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission 

• Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority  

• Historic Resources Review Board  

• Land Use Appeals Board  

• Nuisance Abatement Board – at least five (5) members 

• Tampa Sports Authority * 

• Water Conservation Technical Advisory Committee  

*Unincorporated residency requirements for the Tampa Sports Authority only may specifically be waived by the Board of County Commissioners (see Waiver Procedure below).  

ARTICLE V. WAIVER PROCEDURE The notice of a vacant position for the Tampa Sports Authority shall include a statement informing the public that the Board of County Commissioners has the authority to waive its unincorporated residency requirement, that, notwithstanding residency status, all citizens may apply; and that all names shall be presented to the Board of County Commissioners for consideration. The Boards and Councils Coordinator shall list all names on the ballot and identify those persons who met the residency requirement and those who did not.

Note: there is only a residency waiver procedure for appointments to the Tampa Sports Authority. 

Since 2012, based on population, there are thirteen HART Board members, appointed as follows:

• City of Temple Terrace - 1
• City of Tampa - 3
• Unincorporated Hillsborough - 7
• Gubernatorial - 2

Now let's review the unincorporated Hillsborough appointments made by the county commissioners since 2012.

The make up of the 7 HART Board members representing unincorporated in 2012 included 3 electeds, Beckner (lived in unincorporated), Murman and Sharpe (both lived in city of Tampa), and 4 citizen appointees Wallace Bowers, Karen Jaroch, Ann Madden and Steve Polzin who all lived in unincorporated Hillsborough.

Then along came the county's Policy Leadership Group (PLG) transportation initiative in 2014 led by the unelected County Mayor Mike Merrill.

Everything that is done down at County Center is in context.... 

About the same time that Ann Madden resigned from HART on June 16, 2014, Merrill was proposing a hostile takeover of HART by all electeds and creating some transportation super agency - see our post here. 

The commissioners never sought a citizen appointee to replace Madden, who lived in unincorporated and resigned June 16, 2014. 

Instead they sneakily used a July 31, 2014 Budget Workshop meeting, where public comment is not normally allowed and actions are not supposed to be taken, to appoint Madden's replacement on HART. That agenda item was added at the last minute to a meeting that had been publicly noticed as a Workshop.

This action occurred coincidentally right before the county handed Parsons Brinckerhoff their crony contract to launch the Go Hillsborough tax hike campaign.

The Eye reported about the county commissioners shenanigans on July 31, 2014 in this post Sneaking in Les:

There was an interesting non-budget item added to the Budget Reconciliation agenda, not on the original agenda, created by Commission Chair Mark Sharpe or County Administrator Mike Merrill, to fill an open seat on the HART Board. A BOCC citizen appointee to the HART Board, Anne Madden, resigned on June 16, and the Board needed to approve a new appointee. 

They have 20 days to fill vacancies accord to the law. 

There have been 2 BOCC meetings since Maddens' resignation. 

45 days is my count. Reading through the statute above, can the Commission even make a legal appointment now? 

Yet they waited for a Budget Reconciliation workshop to take up filling a HART Board vacancy? 

They did not follow the law.

And they even knew they weren't following the rules because the workshop agenda noted they were supposed to have filled the vacancy within 20 days of the resignation.

July 31, 2014 Budget Workshop improperly used for
HART Board appointment (click to enlarge)

In perfect orchestration at that workshop, Sandy Murman nominated Les Miller and Kevin Beckner seconded her nomination. The commissioners voted 5-1 to appoint Miller, who lives in the city of Tampa, to replace Madden, who lived in unincorporated south county. Higginbotham was absent and Crist voted no. 

Appointing Commissioner Miller to the HART Board changed the balance of the HART board. It tilted it toward more county electeds and more Board members who live in the city of Tampa. 

As of 8/1/2014, the 7 HART Board members representing unincorporated consisted of 4 electeds (Beckner, Miller, Murman, Sharpe) with only Beckner living in unincorporated Hillsborough and 3 citizens (Jaroch, Polzin, Bowers) who all lived in unincorporated. 

What happened next?

The three citizen appointees terms were expiring in November 2014. In October 2014, 17 applicants had submitted applications for a county appointment to HART Board. All three citizen appointees (Bowers, Jaroch, Polzin) applied to be reappointed. Steve Polzin is our local transit expert who works at CUTR, our own transportation think tank at USF.

Having a transit expert on HART Board makes total common sense. And Polzin lives in unincorporated Lutz, satisfying the residency requirement.

Apparently not to the county commissioners. There were some political games to play. This appointment was occurring during the PLG transportation effort when Parsons Brinckerhoff had just been awarded their crony contract to kick off Go Hillsborough. 

Find all 17 HART Board applications here. A note below was included in the board packet of HART Board applicants stating that the BOCC can simply waive the residency requirement with their vote, without any discussion or a motion passed to do so. 

The commissioner's own BOCC policy 01.30.00.00 provides for a residency waiver only for Tampa Sports Authority appointments. When did the commissioners approve changing their policy to waive residency requirements for HART appointments? Or does Mike Merrill and the commissioners just make stuff up to fit an agenda?

According to the transcript of the October 15 BOCC meeting, there was no motion or discussion to waive their own policy. The commissioners just voted.
  
They reappointed Jaroch and Bowers, who lived in unincorporated and appointed Mickey Jacobs, who lives on Harbour Island in the city of Tampa. 

Jacobs is an architect who is a member of the Downtown Partnership and Tampa Chamber. According to this October 16, 2014 Times article 

Jacob's experience as an architect made him a favorable option because of his focus on economic development, a key issue for the area.

The county commissioners tossed Steve Polzin off HART who was the only transit expert on the transit authority board for someone who's focus is economic development. 

By October 2014 the HART Board tilted more towards members who lived in the city of Tampa. Only 3 of the 7 county appointed HART Board members lived in unincorporated. 

Subsequently Commissioner Sharpe was term limited and Stacy White elected in November 2014. White, who lives in unincorporated, replaced Sharpe on HART Board.

Then in November 2016 Beckner was term limited and Pat Kemp was elected. Kemp who lives in the city of Tampa replaced Beckner (who lived in unincorporated) on HART. 

What happened next?

The three citizen appointees terms were expiring in November 2017. Two of the three county citizen appointees, Jaroch and Bowers who both live in unincorporated, reapplied and Mickey Jacobs, who lived in the city of Tampa, did not reapply. 

The county received only 7 applications which can be found here. Again there is a note in the Board packet that the commissioners can simply waive their own residency requirement. 

Note to commissioners regarding residency requirement
for HART Board appointees

The commissioners actions were perfectly orchestrated again at the October 18, 2017 BOCC meeting. When the appointee agenda item came up, Commissioner Miller immediately made a motion to waive the residency requirement and Commissioner Murman seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0. 

This go round the commissioners formally passed a motion instead of just voting as they did in 2014. But there was no discussion about the motion - it just passed unanimously 7-0. 

The HART Board appointee vote then proceeded as follows:

• White chose Karen Jaroch, Marvin Knight, David Mechanik
• Murman chose Adam Harden, Marvin Knight, David Mechanik.  
• Miller chose Wallace Bowers, Marvin Knight, David Mechanik
• Crist chose Wallace Bowers, Karen Jaroch, David Mechanik
• Hagan chose Adam Harden, Marvin Knight, David Mechanick
• Kemp chose Adam Harden, Marvin Knight, David Mechanik
• Higginbotham chose Adam Harden, Karen Jaroch, David Mechanik

Murman prefaced her vote by some carefully worded mumbo jumbo about the two current board members being on the board quite a while and she wanted to rotate her appointments. Wallace Bowers had been on the board for about 18 years but Karen Jaroch had served for 6 years, less time than Sandy. 

Jaroch was the only county citizen appointee that was a woman and Murman tossed her off to vote for 3 males. We found this Times article highlighted on Murman's campaign website about her efforts to help women get appointed to committees and boards and that women should be helping each other.

That was 2014. Do those statements still mean anything or just more mumbo jumbo? 

Ironically, David Mechanik already had served as a city of Tampa HART Board appointee for 16 years between 1994 and 2011 - so much for worrying about being on the HART Board for "quite a while".....And Mechanik, who all 7 commissioners voted for, was on HART Board when HART gave us the Alternatives Analysis for the 2010 rail tax that was overwhelmingly defeated.
Hmmm.....

Three males, including Adam Harden and David Mechanik, who both live in the city of Tampa, and Marvin Knight, who lives in unincorporated were appointed to the HART Board October 18th. The county commissioners tossed Bowers and Jaroch, who live in unincorporated and abide by the residency requirements, off of HART Board. They were replaced by 2 appointees who live in the city of Tampa. 

According to the University of Florida BEBR, about 50% of Hillsborough county's population is female. The only county citizen appointee who was a woman and officially qualified, according to county policy and the Charter by living in unincorporated, was not reappointed. No woman was appointed by the county.

The commissioners could have delayed their HART Board appointments if they had wanted more applicants. They did not and that is telling. 

How did their actions impact the representation of the governing board of this independent special taxing district?

Five of the 7 (over 71%) of the HART Board members appointed to represent HART's unincorporated jurisdiction reside in the city of Tampa. An overwhelming majority, 10 of 13 or 77% of all the HART Board members reside in the municipalities of Tampa and one member from Temple Terrace. That leaves 3 of 13 or 23% of the Board members who reside in unincorporated.

Over 2/3 (67%) of the total population of Hillsborough county resides in unincorporated and about 2/3 of the property taxes paid to HART comes from unincorporated and the city of Tampa receives most of HART's services. 

The issue is the HART Board is totally upside down now with regards to who is paying the vast majority of HART's taxes and the overwhelmingly majority of HART Board members governing HART who reside in city of Tampa. 

HART's Charter clearly defines HART members as unincorporated OR incorporated municipalities that have been admitted. We are not lawyers but the use of the word "or" represents alternatives (apples or pears) when separating nouns. "Or" is used for exclusiveness because unincorporated Hillsborough or an incorporated municipality could withdraw as a member of HART. 

HART's financial documents, as seen in their 2016 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) includes the following:

It [HART] was originally chartered for the purpose of providing mass transit service to two charter members, the City of Tampa and the unincorporated areas of Hillsborough County

The commissioners have created another mess. Their own policy that requires HART Board appointments must live in unincorporated has no waiver provision. They just made it up. Merrill used the waiver procedure that county policy states is only for Tampa Sports Authority appointments on the board packet for the HART Board appointments.

It's never a good idea to simply waive policies without any discussion of the ramifications. Policies are put in place for a reason, especially policies affecting a governing board of an independent special taxing district created by a governing Charter.

Did the commissioners also violate HART's Charter? That is a legal question that should be answered. 

Is a remedy needed? Does anyone have standing to sue the county?

At the very least, taxpayers in unincorporated should put a microscope on HART and watch their every action.

This mess smells. The timing is not a coincidence. We can certainly speculate why some politicos want to stack HART Board with those who reside in the city of Tampa at the same time numerous transit initiatives are underway in Tampa Bay. Special interests....

This time the commissioners created an issue of taxation without proportional and equitable representation. Their actions have disenfranchised the vast majority of HART's property taxpayers who reside in unincorporated Hillsborough. 

No wonder there is little or no trust left with County Center.