1) Welcome and Introductions 2) Approval of Minutes: April 14, 2016 Agenda Pinellas County LMS Working Group Meeting Thursday, July 21, 2016; 1:30 P.M. Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council Offices 4000 Gateway Centre Blvd, Pinellas Park 3) Annual LMS Updates (2016) Appendix 7, 9, 10 a. Amendment package and update instructions will be sent via email. b. Deadline for Submission of amendments is Sept 30, 2016. c. Preliminary review of receipt of new projects for Appendix 9 at October 2016 quarterly meeting d. Sub-committee review of ranking for new projects in November/December 2016 e. Annual CRS Recertification Requirements/Documentation i. Annual evaluation report (Lisa Foster) ii. Report must be submitted to EACH local governing agency (receipt and file only) iii. Press Release iv. Post on website f. Annual update package reviewed by LMS Working Group NLT January 2016 4) Annual report (2016) for CRS Re-Certification (Lisa Foster) a. Review and approval (report based upon most recent 2015 annual update sent to FDEM in January, 2016) and additional recommendations for upcoming update 5) LMS Five Year Update Schedule (Lisa Foster, Pinellas County) a. Annual LMS Public information meeting i. Schedule for April 2017 b. Establish LMS Stakeholder Committee and schedule meeting i. Each municipality identify 2 stakeholders (minimum) and send contact information to Lisa Foster or Chris Moore by January 30, 2017 ii. Annual Meetings for 2017 and 2018 (Set first meeting date for April 2017) iii. Bi-Annual Meetings beginning 2019 c. Annual LMS presentation at ONE BAY Working Group meeting (June time-frame) 6) Conferences & Training, 2016 a. Florida APA Conference September 6-9, Tampa FL 7) Adjourn NEXT SCHEDULED QUARTERLY LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY MEETING: THURSDAY, OCT. 13, 2016 1:30 PM TBRPC, 4000 Gateway Centre Blvd, Pinellas Park
Minutes Pinellas County Local Mitigation Strategy Work Group Meeting Thursday, April 14, 2016 1:30 P.M. Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council Office 4000 Gateway Centre Blvd, Pinellas Park 1. Welcome and Introductions Chairperson Renea Vincent welcomed the attendees and the attendees introduced themselves. 2. Approval of Minutes, January 14, 2016: Ms. Catherine Porter, City of Pinellas Park, made the motion to accept the minutes from the last meeting, January 14, 2016. Ms. Paula Cohen, Treasure Island seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Proposed LMS Amendments (Discussion) Introductory discussion of LMS amendments that would enhance CRS scoring for local participating jurisdictions Chairperson Vincent stated that the annual update process is occurring for Appendices 9 and 10 for projects and accomplishments. She also informed the group that the LMS Working Group has the ability to do interim plan updates before the 5 year cycle that the state would review should the group want to do so. The newly updated DRAFT Plan will be due to the State in December of 2019, roughly 6 months in advance of the expiration; therefore, the goal is to have a good working DRAFT Plan in the summer of 2019. This would have the group starting the update amendment process again in early 2018. Internal discussions have been conducted with the CRS staff about what can be done to further strengthen the Plan, whether it is done as an interim or as a full Plan update. Ms. Lisa Foster, with Jones-Edmunds explained what the update would do in terms of the group s structure etc. She informed the group that the County achieved a total of 278 points on the LMS/CRS, which she stated was a very good score. She listed the following things that could be done to improve that score: Improving stakeholder participation for the 50% stakeholder requirement As this is a multijurisdictional LMS the County s Program for Public Information (PPI) Committee which only includes participants from unincorporated Pinellas County, cannot solely be relied upon. There are 24 municipalities and each jurisdiction should have 2 people on the committee with a match of 2 non-governmental people, then adding all of the County people with a match of 2 non-governmental people etc. could boost the number up to 100+ which is not feasible or manageable to do an LMS. Ms. Foster spoke with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and posed the idea of a subcommittee, whereas the unincorporated Pinellas County PPI Committee would facilitate a LMS Stakeholder Committee. With this setup, representatives from the County PPI would run the meetings and organize this group of stakeholders where only 1 person would have to attend every meeting. ISO expressed that such a setup would be very effective. The LMS Stakeholder Advisory Committee would meet less frequently than the LMS Working Group. The individuals on the LMS Working Group who are also on the County PPI will also attend the LMS Stakeholder Committee meetings and tell the attendees what s going on with the LMS and get their recommendations/comments/feedback and then take it back to the LMS Work Group. Up to two meetings per year are recommended. It would technically be using the LMS to improve the CRS. Ms. Foster also explained that a public meeting would 1
need to be held prior to starting the update as well as prior to draft submission. Stakeholder meetings would be separate. At this time this idea is just conceptual. Chairperson Vincent asked Ms. Foster to send her a cleaner, more detailed copy of the LMS Stakeholder Committee proposal for her to send to the workgroup for review and feedback. Ms. Vincent asked if some sort of Inter-local agreement had to be drawn up should the group decide to move forward with the implementation of the idea. Ms. Foster stated that yes, either an Inter-local Agreement or a Resolution had to be developed reflecting the signatures of the jurisdictional representatives. Video conferencing, Web Ax etc. are some methods that would help to: a) increase attendance and, b) help with the stakeholder committee meetings extra points can be gained if these types of outreach methods are implemented. Additional points can be added if they are also implemented into the PPI. Mrs. Vincent stated that she was interested in knowing how many other local governments either had or were planning to start their own PPIs. Ms. Foster stated that the City of Clearwater and the Town of Redington Shores are pretty much piggy backing off of the County s PPI to ensure that they keep I line with the branding etc. The group expressed interest in further exploring Ms. Foster s proposal as there is some time to adequately structure the plan before having to actually get the Plan update done. PPIs in Pinellas County: Pinellas County St. Petersburg Madeira Beach Indian Rocks is working on one Coordination with other agencies It includes actively working with any agency through this working group that has anything to do with any of the hazards (i.e. SWFWMD, Regional Planning Council etc.) in order to avoid the duplication of efforts and to share ideas. For whatever reason, Pinellas County did not get credited with points in this area. Ms. Foster stated that participation in One Bay meetings count and having a few representatives from the LMS Working Group attend the One Bay meetings who in turn come back and share the information should be sufficient for points; however, she would find out specifically how the points work for this section. Mr. Brady Smith added that One Bay is technically a sub-committee of the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council and suggested that Ms. Foster check to ensure that the group would not be double counting points. Ms. Foster requested that Mr. Smith send her a list of the organizations that regularly participate in the One Bay meetings. She added that it might be as simple as a couple of the members of the LMS Workgroup give a presentation at one of the One Bay meetings then ask for questions or do a survey. Mr. Smith stated that the next One Bay meeting was scheduled for June 6, 2016 and that it was actually going to be a CRS Improvement Workshop. Assessment of less / frequent floods This section could include information from the Flood Risk Assessment (i.e. historical flood events, potential hot spots etc. It was suggested that a log be kept for all meetings. 4. Presentations (Discussion) a. National Flood Insurance Program Re-Authorization; Mary Scott Hardwick, Pinellas County Intergovernmental Liaison 2
Ms. Hardwick explained that one of the Board of County Commissioner s highest priorities for a Federal Legislative Program is the National Flood Insurance Program & Re-Authorization. It expires in 2017 and will need to be re-authorized. Pinellas County is the 2 nd highest after Miami Dade in regards to the dollar amount of premiums paid each year. The goal is to have a list of items (i.e., issues to be addressed, problems that Pinellas has seen, new ideas etc.) ready that Pinellas County wants included in legislation by the end of this calendar year. The County would also like to establish a group of stakeholders and experts on various topics, so that, as a part of Pinellas advocacy with the members of Congress in the Federal Government, that Pinellas is able to provide additional information. Additionally, Pinellas wants to show that insurance agents, realtors, business owners in addition to home owners on the beach, have concerns and are affected by flood insurance. Ms. Hardwick stated that Pinellas County is trying to reach a balance between financial stability of the program and making the rates affordable to the home/business owners. A meeting was held in January with a small group representatives from various industries (Property Appraiser, Realtors, Chambers of Commerce, insurance industry, local governments, and some elected officials etc.) with Congressman Jolly as the speaker to provide Pinellas with an idea of where we are now, where we are going forward and also to get some of his ideas and feedback. Key Points of what was identified: FEMA open data (letting others have open access to information) Increase mitigation funding for local governments, residential/business to do improvements on their property to mitigate risk in the future Affordability (phased in increases opposed to rate increases happening all in one year) National Insurance Program & Private market on equal footing Ms. Hardwick requested some additional feedback/ ideas from the LMS group. Suggestions from the group: Having the higher deductions on flood policies tied to a major, declared event Providing insurance data to the private market Finding a way to ensure that people are actually being billed to the actual risk. Addressing insurance agent fees and how much is actually going into the program? Having other states pay more into the program. Florida being a donor state, pays more into the program. Having some sort of small percentage fund per state based upon how many policies they actually have in effect? If donor states is helping out the other states, a small percentage would go back to the donor states. It would be based off of the percentage that the state is spending, which would in turn help to lower premiums. Establishing some type of All Hazards Policy that is required for all mortgages regardless to where you live as different areas are plagued with different hazards (i.e. hurricanes, tornadoes, wild fires, earthquakes etc.) as a means of spreading the cost. Providing jurisdictions flood data from FEMMA and private market (including the list of repetitive loss structures) The City of St. Petersburg s CRS contains a Repetitive Loss Area Analysis is there a way to tie it to the insurance, so that the people that fall within those identified repetitive loss areas, can get discounts on their insurance premiums? 5. Conferences & Training, 2016 a. Governor s Hurricane Conference May 8 to 13, Orlando, FL. b. Florida APA Conference September 6-9, Tampa FL c. ESRI User Conference June 27-July 1, 2016, San Diego Convention Center Chairperson Vincent brought the upcoming conferences and trainings listed above to the group s attention for informational purposes. 3
6. Other Business: note date change for next quarterly meeting The next QUARTERLY LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY MEETING is scheduled for THURSDAY, July 21, 2016 1:30 PM 7. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 2:30 p.m. 4