The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, August 16, 1994, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Catherine C. Hanson, Chairman; Welton G. Cadwell, Vice Chairman; Rhonda H. Gerber; Don Bailey; and G. Richard Swartz, Jr. Others present were: Frank T. Gaylord, County Attorney; Peter F. Wahl, County Manager; Ava Kronz, BCC Office Manager; James C. Watkins, Clerk; Barbara Lehman, Chief Deputy, Finance & Audit Department; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.
Reverend Jim Furno, Minister of Youth and Music, First Baptist Church of Umatilla, gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Chairman opened the meeting.
AGENDA UPDATE
The Chairman asked if there were any changes to the agenda.
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, noted that Ms. Lois Martin, Director of Human Resources, would be making some changes to Tab 35, a request for approval of Revised Policy Section 7-03 - Compensation to Injured Employees, and that Commr. Gerber had requested that Tab 38, a request for discussion of Local Vendor Preference, be postponed until the meeting of September 6, 1994.
Mr. Wahl further stated that, when the Board put together the Future Public Hearing List, it contained a mistake for fire assessments, noting that discussions regarding the Town of Astatula and the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills would have to be held after 5:00 p.m., in accordance with the requirements of the Florida Statutes, therefore, noted that said matter would be discussed at the meeting of August 23, 1994, at 5:05 p.m.
Commr. Gerber noted that, under her Commissioners' Business, she was going to bring to the Board's attention a letter from Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, pertaining to the Board's interpretation of Section 3.02.01, Paragraph C, of the Land Development Regulations, however, had decided to postpone it until the meeting of August 23, 1994, under her Commissioners' Business, under Reports.
Commr. Gerber further noted that she would like to add the Progress of the Audit for the Disposable Operations and Recycling issue to the agenda, as Tab 31 (A), for discussion.
Commr. Hanson noted that she had a few items to be discussed, under her Commissioner's Business, under Reports.
Commr. Bailey noted a concern about whether the cities would be represented at the Impact Fee Study Workshop scheduled for 2:30 p.m. this date and was informed that representatives of the cities would be present.
MINUTES
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of June 21, 1994 (Regular Meeting), as presented.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of June 28, 1994 (Regular Meeting), as presented.
Regarding the Minutes of July 11, 1994, the following amendment was requested:
On Page 3, Line 32, insert "projected 20 year savings".
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of July 11, 1994 (Special Meeting), as amended.
The Minutes of July 12, 1994 (Special Meeting) and July 13, 1994 (Special Meeting) were postponed until the Board Meeting of September 6, 1994.
Regarding the Minutes of July 14, 1994, the following change was requested:
On Page 8, Line 2, clarification was made regarding a statement that Commr. Bailey had made about obtaining information from the Clerk's Office, with regard to past budgets.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of July 14, 1994 (Special Meeting), as amended.
PERSONAL APPEARANCES
CLERK OF COURT'S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:
Accounts Allowed/Clerk
Request to file and record proof of publication in the Minutes of August 16, 1994, for unclaimed monies, in the amount of $4,530.78, less those monies claimed on or before September 1, 1994 and receipted as fine and forfeiture revenue before September 25, 1994.
Accounts Allowed/Clerk
Request to approve List of items (5) to be deleted from Fixed Assets, for the month of August 1994, in the amount of $22,149.00.
Bonds - Contractor
Request to approve Contractor Bonds, New and Cancellations, as follows:
New
1638-94 Victor Fugate (Electrical)
5315-94 Peter Stafki d/b/a Central Roofing
5316-95 Crummers Roofing Enterprises, Inc.
5317-94 David J. Swatkowski (Swimming Pools)
5318-95 Susan M. Smith (Roofing)
Cancellations
4565-94 Timothy C. Carstens
5288-94 Advanced Air Conditioning & Refrigeration, Inc.
Accounts Allowed/Assessments/Subdivisions
Request for approval of Satisfaction of Assessment Liens (76), as follows, and authorized proper signatures on same:
Astor Forest Campsites
Leroy Carlisle and Richard Hagstrom $ 1,874.19
Elizabeth and Delmar Stever 1,562.24
First Street Astor
Marion and Julia L. Welch 1,816.29
Ocala Forest Campsites
David A. and Janet E. Ward 1,363.01
South Pine Lakes Subdivision
Hazel Underwood 679.07
Ernest H. and Evva Wagner 1,578.00
Hazel Underwood 789.00
Hazel Underwood 610.90
Dorothy Boardway 1,329.00
Michael Boardway 487.30
William Lloyd Gilmore and Virginia R. Gilmore 664.50
Gloria J. Boardway and Dorothy Boardway 620.20
Gary T. Tucholski 620.20
Gary T. Tucholski 620.20
Harland Gonya Sr., Life Estate,
Darrel P. Gonya and Harland J. Gonya, Jr. 1,992.61
Thomas Orlando and Victoria Knode 664.50
Sun Eden Subdivision
Howard and Avonne Hampton 232.00
Andrew M. Van Dam and Phyllis Van Dam 257.81
Jack B. Turner and Charlotte L. Turner 303.25
Mabel O. Cunningham, Trustee 237.80
Frank S. Balestrieri, Trustee 774.53
James M. Jones and Phyllis Reynolds Jones 145.00
Walter and Helen I. Kirkland 261.00
Gladys Appleby 1,650.19
Charles E. Huber and Zonabelle Huber 741.15
Edna Lanning 1,208.17
Robert Willie Williams 1,208.17
Deborah Bailey Lawton 2,428.00
Brigitte C. Bohr 1,214.00
Joseph L. Miller and Cheryl L. Miller 1,540.81
Lake Eustis Village Subdivision
Helen E. Cheslik 518.25
Howard F. Briggs 436.37
Perry J. Cady and Geraldine F. Cady 317.79
Daryl E. and Betty J. Yeider 352.00
Bobbie Joe Keith and Betty M. Keith 483.70
David L. and Janet C. Barker 483.70
Lola Grace Young and Ittoween Elizabeth Young 414.60
Earl and Marguerite Pierce 518.25
Fay E. Demarest, TTE and
Eleanore E. Demarest, TTE 483.70
Eugene A. and Florence Baron 345.50
Milton Earl Libby and Sudie B. Libby 621.90
Francis and Blanche Pickles 691.00
William David Varner and Marilyn Jeanne Varner 428.35
Solon D. and Myrtle Staley 483.70
Chester M. Staler and Willnetta N. Staler 414.60
Everett D. Ballard and Elaine L. Ballard 485.98
Donovan R. Faith and Mildred E. Faith 670.27
Charles Tornavacca and Doris J. Tornavacca 577.19
Ray Wells 552.80
Kenneth and Lois Harris 1,034.63
Wilber A. and Helen T. Ross 483.70
John H. and Ann E. Sonnenberg 483.70
Evelyn F. Jones, Life Estate 483.70
Anthony R. Bennett 483.70
Henry C. Decker 584.86
Conrad D. Desautels 483.70
Hershel A. Downing and Doris M. Downing 967.40
Howard E. Thompson and Marjorie Thompson 602.14
Eugene and Eleanor R. Kasycz 518.25
Albert C. and Evelyn L. Howse 602.14
Ivy Broome 483.70
Irvin R. Jones and Dorothea A. Jones 483.70
Floyd W. Smith and Marietia W. Smith 698.05
Edward J. Mitenius and Cynthia A. Mitenius 602.14
Edward R. Murdock and Eileen T. Murdock 483.70
Sherrie Gashaw and Hurley Gashaw, Jr. 483.70
Evelyn J. Hofmann and Ivy Broome 483.70
Carl E. and Vera B. Fuller 483.70
Hazel E. Sullivan, Estate 644.56
Karen S. Kowalski and Esther A. Harris 1,036.50
Emanuel L. and Helen Katzen 518.25
Barnett Bank of Lake County, NA 483.70
Glenns Cove - 1st Addition
Bernard and Iris Burgman 1,112.28
Walter W. Deihl 2,911.48
Wesley and Anna D. Owens 2,719.88
John E. Long 1,973.40
Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges
Request for approval of Satisfaction of Judgment for Larry Lynn Futch, in the amount of $250.00, Case No. 86-687CF, and authorized proper signatures on same.
Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges
Request for approval of Satisfaction of Judgment for Polly E. Berger, in the amount of $50.00, Case No. 87-26,356TT00162, and authorized proper signatures on same.
Utilities
Request to acknowledge receipt of Notice from the Florida Public Service Commission of Prehearing Conference and Notice of Hearing to All Parties and All Other Interested Persons, in reference to Docket No. 930485-TL - Generic Investigation into the Proper Regulatory Treatment of Inside Wire. The hearing will be held Wednesday through Friday, September 7-9, 1994, at 9:30 a.m., in Room 106, Fletcher Building, 101 E. Gaines Street, Tallahassee, Florida, 32399-0850.
Ordinances/Municipalities
Request to acknowledge receipt of Ordinance No. 94-14, from the City of Leesburg, adopted by the Leesburg City Commission on July 25, 1994, annexing certain property owned by Clifford M. Shedd and Emmagene Shedd, generally located South of SR 44 and East of Progress Road, lying in Section 29, Township 19 South, Range 24 East, Lake County, Florida, into the City limits of the City of Leesburg.
Accounts Allowed/Reports
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Monthly Distribution of Revenue Traffic/Criminal Cases, for the month ending July 31, 1994, in the amount of $123,412.36. Same period last year: $114,331.45.
PUBLIC HEARING
MUNICIPALITIES/SUBDIVISIONS
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, informed the Board that staff was trying to resolve an issue related to the advertising requirements for MSBU's and that, on Friday, August 12, 1994, staff received the County Attorney's opinion that the County can change the format for advertising. He stated that said opinion answered one of the questions that had been raised, however, noted that there were other questions to be resolved, therefore, requested that Items 1, 2 and 3, under Tab 1, be tabled until the meeting of August 23, 1994, in order to enable staff to address the issue.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Mr. Richard Scanlon, a resident of Silver Lake Forest, appeared before the Board to address the issue of street lighting in his subdivision and the cost of same, however, was informed that the Board had postponed the issue until the meeting of August 23, 1994 and was requested to attend that meeting and state his concerns at that time.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved to postpone Items 1, 2 and 3 (MSBU's for street lighting and maintenance), under Tab 1, until the Board Meeting of August 23, 1994, at 9:00 a.m.
PUBLIC HEARING
FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES
Chief Craig Haun, Fire and Emergency Services, appeared before the Board and explained this request.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Fire and Emergency Services for approval of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, for Florida Hospital Waterman/Florida Regional Emergency Services, Inc.
PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/STATE AGENCIES
Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planner, Planning and Development, appeared before the Board and was sworn in by the Deputy Clerk, Sandra Carter. He reviewed, item by item, a Summary of Amendments Transmitted to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), on March 29, 1994, noting which amendments DCA objected to and which ones they did not object to. He stated that staff had prepared a response to the ORC (Objections, Recommendations and Comments) Report for each Comprehensive Plan Amendment that DCA objected to. He stated that DCA had objected to Policy 1-2.5 and Policy 7-2.14 of the Comprehensive Element, which addresses sinkholes, and that staff had tried to clarify the policies, because they ran into problems on how to interpret them. He stated that DCA objected to the fact that there was not enough detailed criteria to address sinkholes in the amendment that staff proposed, so, at this point in time, staff was requesting to withdraw said amendment and retain the language as it is in the adopted policy and allow them time to address it either through Land Development Regulations (LDRs) that would be consistent with the policy, as it exists today, or to propose a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, at a later date, when staff has had adequate time to address the concerns of DCA.
Mr. Knight stated that, regarding Policy 1A-2.8, which addresses the location of septic tanks in the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern, staff was requesting that the policy amendments be removed and that staff not pursue any additional amendments, at this point in time, and withdraw any amendments that staff transmitted to DCA.
Mr. Knight then reviewed the remainder of the policies listed on the Summary of Amendments and answered questions regarding same.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Ms. Rebecca Jetton, representing the Department of Community Affairs, appeared before the Board and was sworn in by the Deputy Clerk, Sandra Carter. She urged the Board to adopt the septic tank policies that she had outlined in a letter, dated August 11, 1994, to the County Manager, and Policy 1A-2.8. She stated that, in a recent challenge by 1000 Friends of Florida to Lake County's Comprehensive Plan, the Hearing Officer found, in his Findings of Fact, that the densities for the Green Swamp were appropriate, because of the additional septic tank protection measures within the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that the County has decided that they no longer need to enforce these policies. She stated that, if the Board wished not to adopt the policy that DCA is recommending, she would urge the County to require enforcement of the oversized and dual septic tank policy, which exists in the County's present Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Jetton stated that Secretary Shelley authorized the filing of a Notice of Violation against Lake County for failure to enforce its Comprehensive Plan, which she noted will provide the forum for resolution of whether DCA has the authority to require additional rules within an area of critical state concern. She stated that each permit that is issued that does not contain the oversized and dual septic tanks will be appealed individually by DCA, which she noted will be resolved through an Administrative Hearing, or voluntary compliance by the property owner. She stated that it will be expensive for the property owner and there will be delays, therefore, noted that this is not the way DCA wishes to resolve this conflict. She stated that DCA would prefer to see the Board adopt, this date, the policy that she outlined in her letter of August 11, 1994.
In response, Mr. Frank Gaylord, County Attorney, stated that the way this came about was that ELMS III had a provision that a state agency could not require greater restrictions on matters that are already regulated by another state agency. He stated that septic tanks are regulated by 10D6, by Health & Rehabilitative Services (HRS), which has criteria that they go through. He stated that, based upon ELMS III and DCA requiring those matters to be placed in the plan, it would appear that they were not enforceable. He stated that staff has had several discussions with DCA, trying to get this matter resolved, but have come to an impasse. He stated that it appears DCA and Lake County have a divergence of opinion and the property owner, or the person that is going out trying to pull a building permit in the Green Swamp, is caught in the middle.
Mr. Gaylord stated that he would recommend, rather than going through the arduous process of appeals, on each and every one of the permits, that the Board authorize and direct him to proceed with the filing of a declaratory action, in Circuit Court, to decide which is appropriate. He stated that it would be between DCA and Lake County, for that determination, and would take the little guy out of the process of having to go through an appeal. He noted that it would be up to DCA whether or not an individual would be able to go forward with his/her home. He stated that, as far as the time frame is concerned, it would involve a 90-120 day process, assuming the County gets good court dates.
Commr. Swartz questioned whether the County Attorney would recommend that the County enforce the language that is currently in the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that he would not.
It was noted that the County receives approximately 12 septic tank permits, per month, for the Green Swamp area.
Commr. Swartz stated that DCA was proposing an alternate, for the County to adopt, which would provide an additional process where the County would identify the types of lots that would be potentially impacted, and then try to provide them with an alternate permitting method, and questioned why the County was not considering it.
Mr. Knight responded, stating that the primary reason the County was not considering the alternate method was due to the fact that the County does not issue septic tank permits, HRS is responsible for doing so.
Commr. Swartz stated that he understood that, however, noted that there is an issue regarding the County's Comprehensive Plan policy where the LDRs back it up, and apparently the County has not been enforcing it and has been relying on one state agency's review, instead of the state agency that has review over the County's Comprehensive Plan. He stated that DCA has offered another way of trying to deal with the issue, rather than just not enforcing the County's Comprehensive Plan, which is to provide a review and somehow try to identify those lots that do not fall into that criteria, so that, within some parameters, a review of that could be made, without the dual septic tanks, as long as certain conditions can be met. He questioned why the County was not pursuing, or considering, that.
Mr. Knight stated it was his understanding that, if the County adopted an ordinance, HRS would comply with it, as a locally adopted ordinance, however, they will not comply with any Comprehensive Plan policy that is mandated by DCA. He stated that the process that has been established by DCA follows the same process that would be used by HRS, through 10D6. He stated that, in essence, what the County is doing is duplicating the same process and, with HRS being the one that issues the septic tank permits, they are the ones that have the final say and they are the ones better suited to identifying what the septic tank needs are, rather than staff at the Building Department and the Zoning counter.
Mr. Tim Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney, interjected that, included in that process is a septic tank inspection program and he felt the Board should look into it carefully, before doing a septic tank inspection program in the Green Swamp. He stated that, if the County accepted one, they would be accepting everything, from a legal standpoint. He stated it is the opinion of HRS that, if Lake County wants to develop a septic tank inspection program, or, if Lake County wants to have certain setbacks, or variances from wetlands, if Lake County would pass an LDR regarding same, HRS would enforce it, but, it is HRS's opinion that they will not enforce a Comprehensive Plan policy.
Commr. Swartz questioned whether Mr. Hoban was stating that, if the Board adopted an LDR regarding septic tanks, HRS would enforce the local rules. Mr. Hoban stated that was correct.
Commr. Swartz stated that the Board could adopt LDRs that are more consistent with what DCA is suggesting, which is less onerous for the property owner, because it does not require dual septic tanks, however, does require the County to try to identify those lots and set up some type of administrative procedure, where it could be reviewed and permits could be issued, so the County could do that.
Mr. Hoban interjected that DCA would then help the County enforce those LDRs.
Commr. Swartz stated that it would then not be a duplication of service, because DCA would still be the one going out and issuing the permits, but they would do it in the area of critical state concern, based on the LDRs that the County has in its Code.
Mr. Hoban stated that was true, however, noted that DCA, in conversations, stated that they do not want just HRS making those decisions, they want Lake County to also make those decisions. He felt, however, that it was something the County could work out.
Further discussion occurred regarding the matter.
Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, representing a client who has been involved in the septic tank issue for approximately two years, appeared before the Board stating what steps her client had been through, in trying to obtain a septic tank clearance, in order to obtain a building permit. She stated that she felt Ms. Jetton had done a lot, in trying to come up with a compromise that she felt DCA and the County would accept and not harm the real people in this, who are those individuals who bought what they thought was a buildable lot.
Ms. Bonifay noted that she agreed with Mr. Gaylord's legal interpretation, regarding this matter, in that, when the Legislature wrote the language in the ELMS III Bill, they did it for a specific reason, which was to stop the very thing that is going on and has been going on, which is DCA directing that the County must have restrictions in the Comprehensive Plan that exceed those of the regulatory agency, if one wants to get their permit approved. She stated that this is exactly what the Legislature did not want to see continued, therefore, suggested that the County get a declaratory statement that ends that issue once and for all, because it is not only going to come up on septic tanks, it is going to come up on a number of other issues. She stated that she felt there was room for compromise, in working out the matter.
Ms. Bonifay suggested, from a policy standpoint, that the costs and the actual way in which it is going to be accomplished be looked at, because it is just one more burden on the property owner. She stated that she understood the County has to protect the resource, however, on the other hand, people bought property in good faith. She stated that she felt, if one cannot build a house on their lot and there is nothing that they can do with it, that is a classic "taking" of property and she feels that is ultimately where the County is going to be. She reminded the Board that they would be the one to deprive an individual of their land use, not DCA - that the County would be the main defendant, not the State.
Discussion continued.
Commr. Bailey commended Ms. Jetton for working well with the County and the whole Green Swamp community, in trying to resolve this issue. He stated that he would agree to go along with the compromise, however, was concerned about the costs that the County may have to assume, in doing so.
Commr. Swartz stated that the people who are going to get hurt, during the time that the County deals with the declaratory statement, are those people who are going to try and pull a building permit. He stated that he felt, if the Board would instruct staff to develop interim regulations that are consistent with the proposal that Ms. Jetton submitted to the County and the County begins applying it to those people who want to pull permits, they would be able to pull permits this date. He stated that the County could do it on a case-by-case basis, therefore, there would be no delay for the property owners and the County could proceed to adopt, formally, LDRs that are consistent with the interim policies. He stated that the County need not go to court, further elaborating on the matter.
Commr. Bailey stated that he felt putting in oversized, or dual, septic tanks was ridiculous.
Ms. Jetton stated that DCA is willing not to require that, noting that the County could stop doing it as soon as the Board adopts the other provisions, being (1) that the drain field be located at least 75 feet away from wetlands, for new lots; (2) that pre-existing lots be given an administrative exception; and (3) that the septic tank minimum lot size be an acre, except in the transition area, where, if they are entitled to the density of one unit per acre, that DCA would be willing to let the minimum lot size go down to one-half acre. She stated that 10D6 does not require a 75 foot setback from wetlands, only from surface water.
Commr. Gerber stated that, being the County wrote the policy and DCA made the density determination in the area of critical state concern based on the County's policy, she did not feel the County would have a leg to stand on, if it chose not to enforce the policy.
Commr. Swartz stated that DCA was giving the County a leg to stand on by adopting a compromise that would not put those people who need to pull permits in a position of having to face an appeal of each building permit, by DCA, on a case-by-case basis. He stated that the County could put together interim rules and work out an agreement with HRS where they will adopt, in the area of critical state concern, those rules and then the County can formalize the LDRs and resolve the problem.
Commr. Hanson stated that she felt the declaratory statement needs to be made, however, felt that the County could go along with the compromise until that occurs. She stated that she felt the County could even go along with the compromise after that occurs, but felt that the County needs to know what authority it has, in this matter, and what authority DCA has and to then work toward the County's objective, which is water quality.
Mr. Gaylord, County Attorney, questioned Ms. Jetton as to whether it would be an appropriate compromise for the County to enter into a Settlement Agreement with DCA, during the pendency of this matter, so that DCA would not appeal any permits, but implement the rules, on an interim basis.
Ms. Jetton responded that she felt sure DCA would not appeal any permits, if the County adopted Policy 1A-2.8, regarding septic tanks in the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern.
The County Attorney clarified the fact that, if the Board chose to enter into a temporary agreement with DCA that they would implement Policy 1A-2.8, in the interim, but not transmit it to DCA, for approval, they would not be approving the policy. He stated that, consistent with that action, the Board would need to proceed with declaratory action.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board authorized staff to enter into an interim agreement with the Department of Community Affairs to enforce interim rules that they have recommended for the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern, with regard to septic tanks, and to advise Health and Rehabilitative Services of said rules and work with them, in applying the rules, while approving septic tanks in the Green Swamp.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board authorized the County Attorney to file in Circuit Court for declaratory relief, with regard to ELMS III legislation and how it applies to areas of critical state concern.
Under discussion, Commr. Swartz stated that he felt for the County to come up with a ruling that would degrade the regulations and reduce the potential for maintaining water quality would be a step backwards.
Commr. Bailey stated that Commr. Swartz was stating that HRS was not capable of monitoring said permits and he did not agree.
Commr. Hanson stated that the Board needs to know where it stands on the matter, thus the reason for filing for declaratory relief.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion.
Commrs. Swartz and Gerber voted "No".
Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, appeared before the Board to address Map Amendment 94-1-1-2, on behalf of Mr. Charles Bradshaw, a client, as well as another client, who is interested in the potential development of the property in question. She discussed her client's property and what had transpired, up to this point in time, regarding same. She then discussed the ORC (Objections, Recommendations and Comments) Report that staff had received from DCA and requested Mr. Knight, Chief Planner, Planning and Development, to appear before the Board and review staff's response to DCA (included in Board's backup material) regarding same, for the record.
Mr. Knight appeared before the Board and answered questions from Ms. Bonifay regarding the report and staff's response to same.
Ms. Bonifay stated that she felt the issue was whether or not the Board was ever going to be able to amend its plan, without also instituting a planning process that consistently goes through the Future Land Use Map and takes off units. She stated that she felt Mr. Knight's proposal was a good one, noting that he has already freed up a number of units. She urged the Board to approve Map Amendment 94-1-1-2, noting that she felt it was sound planning policy.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, appeared before the Board stating that he was representing Royal Highlands and Pringle Development Company, which is currently developing a piece of property formally know as Monterey, a DRI with 1,800 units - 1,500 single family residences and 300 RV sites. He stated that he had appeared before the Board on an earlier occasion and submitted, for the record, documentation from the Department of Transportation, with regard to the issue of double access to the turnpike. He stated that he also provided information, with regard to central water and sewer that was being extended to Royal Highlands. He addressed the issue of the ORC Report, noting that he had retained Mr. Greg Beliveau, Land Planning Group, Inc., to do an analysis of all the suburban lands in Lake County, to determine exactly where the County is, in relation to Mr. Knight's evaluation, based on one unit per five acres, one unit per acre, and three units per acre. He requested Mr. Beliveau to appear before the Board and answer questions regarding same.
Mr. Beliveau appeared before the Board and was sworn in by the Deputy Clerk. He then answered questions from Mr. Richey about the analysis that he had prepared, alluded to earlier. Mr. Richey pointed out the fact that Mr. Beliveau was qualified as an expert witness, by Lake County, during its recent Administrative Hearing process with DCA and that he had testified on behalf of Lake County, in that matter, with regard to timeliness and the Green Swamp, and requested the Board to accept him as an expert in the field of land use. He requested Mr. Beliveau to respond to Mr. Knight's report, regarding the issue of suburban land use and the County's Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Beliveau reviewed an aerial map (on display), at which time he discussed the issue of timeliness and answered questions from Mr. Richey regarding same. He noted that he had evaluated Mr. Knight's response to DCA and that it was consistent with his evaluation of the suburban land use categories within the County. He stated that Mr. Knight was correct in his statement that suburban is not just a singular density area, that one has to evaluate it on a section-by-section, or parcel-by-parcel basis, and how it fits in with the timeliness criteria. He stated that the majority of the suburban land use classifications do not trigger timeliness, therefore, have to stay at one unit per five acres.
Mr. Richey had submitted, for the record, a composite exhibit (Exhibit 1) consisting of four pages, one pertaining to Policy
1-1.13: Land Use Density and Intensity Standards and the other three being copies of Comprehensive Plan standards that Mr. Beliveau utilized in doing his evaluation, as well as a Suburban Land Use Analysis (Exhibit 2) and requested that they be submitted to DCA, along with Mr. Beliveau's testimony, to support staff's response to the ORC Report.
Commr. Gerber questioned, for the record, whether Mr. Knight agreed with the methodology used by Mr. Beliveau to establish the numbers alluded to earlier and whether he would have done them in basically the same fashion.
Mr. Knight stated that he did agree with the methodology used and would have done the analysis in basically the same fashion as Mr. Beliveau.
Mr. Knight then answered further questions from the Board regarding this matter.
Ms. Dorothy Shipes, a local resident, appeared before the Board, was sworn in by the Deputy Clerk, and requested the Board to approve Map Amendment 93-1, regarding the relocation of the Lake Jem Rural Village.
The Board reviewed the remainder of the amendments contained in the Summary of Amendments Transmitted to DCA and questioned whether any one present wished to address them.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board approved Map Amendment 94-1-1-2 to the Comprehensive Plan for 1994, changing the land use designation of approximately 2,002 acres (1,323 uplands, 511 wetlands, and 168 water) from Rural to Suburban.
Commr. Swartz voted "No".
The Department of Community Affairs had raised an objection to this amendment.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved Map Amendment 93-1 to the Comprehensive Plan for 1994, relocating the Lake Jem Rural Village.
The Department of Community Affairs had raised an objection to this amendment.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved Map Amendment 93-1A to the Comprehensive Plan for 1994, removing Site K (new landfill location) from the Future Land Use Map.
The Department of Community Affairs did not raise an objection to this amendment.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved Map Amendment 93-1B to the Comprehensive Plan for 1994, incorporating recent annexations.
The Department of Community Affairs did not raise an objection to this amendment.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board withdrew the following:
Amendments to the Future Land Use Element:
Policy 1-2.5, which addresses sinkholes
Policy 1A-2.8, which addresses the location of septic tanks in the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern.
Amendments to the Conservation Element:
Policy 7-2.14, which addresses sinkholes.
The Department of Community Affairs raised an objection to these policies.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following Amendments to the Conservation Element:
Policies 7-5A.1, 7-5A.2, 7-5A.3, 7-5A.4, 7-5A.5, 7-6.2B, and 7-17.3, incorporating the most recent Best Management Practices of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
The Department of Community Affairs did not raise an objection to this policy.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following Amendments to the Five Year Schedule of Capital Improvements:
Acquisition and development of Phase I, South Lake Rail Trail.
Development of the County Park near the Astatula Landfill.
The Department of Community Affairs did not raise an objection to these amendments.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board adopted Ordinance No. 1994-11, the Ordinance Amending the Comprehensive Plan for 1994, as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAKE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP; PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER VII, CONSERVATION ELEMENT, THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES; PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENT TO THE FIVE YEAR SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR PROOF OF PUBLICATION AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 163, FLORIDA STATUTES, SECTION 163.3184(5); PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE LAKE COUNTY CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 9:45 a.m. the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for 10 minutes.
COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:
Budgets/Budget Transfers/Facilities & Capital Improvements/
Office of Budget/Public Services
Request from the Office of Budget for approval of the following Budget Transfers and to acknowledge receipt of For Your Information Item:
Budget Transfers
Fund: Landfill Enterprise
Department: Public Services
Division: Solid Waste Management
From: Contingency $ 36,500
To: Intergovernmental Transfers
Tax Collector $ 36,500
Transfer No.: 94-0268
Fund: Sales Tax Capital Projects
Department: Facilities & Capital Improve.
Division: Capital Improvements
From: Capital Outlay $1,075,000
To: Capital Outlay 187,500
Operating Expenses 887,500
Transfer No.: 94-0276
Fund: General
Department: Several Departments
From: Communications 6,000
Office Supplies 2,000
Office Supplies 1,000
Telecommunications 15,000
Salaries & Wages 9,972
EMS Operating Supplies 3,374
EMS/Equipment 2,439
$ 39,785
To: Reprographic Equipment $ 39,785
Transfer No.: 94-0291
For Your Information Item
Attachment I - Items which were approved by the County Manager, in accordance with Board direction, based on a policy adopted by the Board on March 1, 1993, increasing the transfer limit to $25,000 for the County Manager.
Community Services/Grants/Contracts, Leases & Agreements
Request from Community Services for approval and execution of Library Services and Construction Act (LSCA) Grant Agreement/
Library Services through Technology - Centralized Cataloging.
Fire and Emergency Services/Sheriff's Office
Request from Fire and Emergency Services for approval to transfer four Dodge Ram Chargers to the Sheriff's Office, due to high mileage and need for numerous repairs.
Planning and Development/Contracts, Leases & Agreements
Municipalities
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance and execution of Agreement between the Board of County Commissioners and DeWayne and Lisa Isaacs, for Temporary Non-Conforming Use, to place a RV park model mobile home on property located on Journey Lane, in Lady Lake, while constructing a conventional home - Commissioner District 5.
Accounts Allowed/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for final plat approval for Cross Tie Ranch, Phase II, and acceptance of a Letter of Credit, in the amount of $60,073.20, for performance, for 40 lots, subject to review and approval by the County Attorney - Commissioner District 4.
Accounts Allowed/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for final plat approval for the Plantation At Leesburg, Riverwalk Village, Pod E, and a Letter of Credit, in the amount of $872,439.00, for performance, for 55 lots, subject to review and approval by the County Attorney - Commissioner District 2.
Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases & Agreements
Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for final plat approval for Madison Park and Escrow Agreement for Maintenance between Lake County and Amdev Properties, Inc., for the Madison Park plat, in the amount of $2,120.00, for 30 lots, subject to review and approval by the County Attorney - Commissioner District 2.
Deeds/Planning and Development
Rights-of-Way, Roads & Easements
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance of a Non-Exclusive Easement Deed from Mr. and Mrs. Herman Payne.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval and authorization for the Chairman to sign Developer's Agreement between Lake County and Robert Dello Russo.
Budgets/Mosquito-Aquatic Plant Management/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval and authorization for the Chairman to sign Tentative Certified Budget for Anthropod Control for FY 1994-95.
Accounts Allowed/Public Services/Road Projects
Roads-County & State
Request from Public Services for approval to award Project No. 11-94: Montclair Road Widening, Resurfacing, and Paving, Bid No. B-5-4-58, to Professional Dirt Service, Inc., and to encumber and expend funds, in the amount of $213,832.03, from the Road Impact Fee Fund, Benefit District 3 - Commissioner District 1.
Accounts Allowed/Public Services/Road Projects
Roads-County & State
Request from Public Services for approval to award Project No. 12-94: Adel Street, Carroll Avenue (4-4387), Fidra Avenue
(4-4388C), Arlington Avenue (4-4388D), and Niles Street (4-4488A) Paving, Bid No. B-5-4-59, to Professional Dirt Service, Inc., and to encumber and expend funds, in the amount of $125,777.42, from the Transportation Trust Fund - Commissioner District 4.
Public Services/Rights-of-Way, Roads & Easements
Request from Public Services for acceptance and execution of a non-exclusive easement over County owned property, to provide access to Old Mill Stream RV Park.
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for acceptance and execution of the following Statutory Warranty Deeds:
Jon D. Dickerson and Susan C. Dickerson
S. Landfill Road (1-6503) and Lake Ella Road (1/5-6604)
Austin C. Wagner and Elaine C. Wagner
C-42
Raymond P. Sutherland, Trustee
C-44A and Calhoun Road (4-6581)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:
Deed: 209/475 and 223/225;
Murphy 943 and 1294
Applicant: Robert Porter and Denise Pyke
Groveland Farms Subdivision,
Sec 4, Twp 23S, Rge 25E
Recommend: Reserve 40 feet from centerline of C-565-B,
according to Right-of-Way Map filed in RPB 6, Page 124-131, Public Records, Lake County
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:
Deed: 2708
Applicant: Mildred G. Smith
Location: Mt. Plymouth, Section "A"
Recommend: Reserve 25 feet from centerline of Pine Valley Drive (4-4088A) and reserve 25 feet from centerline of Oakmont Avenue (4-4189C)
(reserve platted right-of-way)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:
Deed: 2848
Applicant: Harold C. Treadway and Marvin C. Treadway, Jr.
Location: East Umatilla Subdivision, Lots 1-15, Block 23
Recommend: Reserve 33 feet from centerline of West Eighth Street and reserve 33 feet from centerline of West First Avenue
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:
Deed: 2741, 2484
Applicant: Andrew L. Betz and Fay L. Betz
Location: Lots in Block 67 and 47, Mt. Plymouth, Section "A"
Recommend: (1) Reserve 25 feet from centerline of Druid Hills Street and 25 feet from centerline of Exmoor Drive; (2) Reserve 25 feet from centerline of Englewood Street, 25 feet from centerline of Grassy Sprain Avenue, and reserve platted Right-of-Way on Oakmont Avenue
(4-4189C) - Right-of-Way varies from approximately 100' to 150' from centerline.
Public Services/Resolutions/Roads-County & State
Request from Public Services for approval of Resolution raising the speed limit from 25 mph to 40 mph on the paved portion of Silver Eagle Drive (2-1726).
Public Services/Resolutions/Subdivisions
Request from Public Services for approval of Resolution advertising Road Vacation Petition No. 763, by Robert and Ardeanne Gatrell, to vacate cul-de-sac (Posey Drive), Pine Hills Subdivision, Section 4, Township 18, Range 29, Pine Lakes area - Commissioner District 4.
Public Services/Resolutions/Subdivisions
Request from Public Services for approval of Resolution advertising Road Vacation Petition No. 765, by Beatrice B. Ettinger and Homer N. Allen, to vacate road, Lake Highlands Company, Section 29, Township 22, Range 26, Clermont area - Commissioner District 2.
Purchasing
Request from Purchasing for approval to advertise for bids, proposals and professional services; award and issue purchase orders for quotes, bids, proposals, annual bids, state contract, G.S.A. cooperative bids, OEM repairs, sole source and proprietor
source; and approve and execute contracts and encumber funds, as follows:
E) Authorization to waive Bid Requirements and Issue Purchase Orders for Services or Commodities that are not Bid or Quoted, or, if they are OEM Repairs.
DIVISION AMOUNT
1) SOLID WASTE $25,000.00
(Estimated)
Authorization to reject the one and only bid for one new cab and chassis, with a twenty foot aluminum van body, from Boebinger International, at a bid price of $42,733.87. It is also requested that the Board authorize waiver of the bid requirements and allow Purchasing to receive quotes for a used cab and chassis, with an aluminum van body. Award will be to the vendor
that is the most responsive to the County's revised Quote Specifications for a used vehicle.
Purchasing used equipment from a dealer's lot is not conducive to the bidding process, because of the time sensitivity of guaranteeing the price only for as long as the vehicles are available.
CITIZEN QUESTION AND COMMENT PERIOD
No one present wished to address the Board.
COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS
FACILITIES & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Mr. Mike Anderson, Director of Facilities and Capital Improvements, appeared before the Board and answered questions regarding this request.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for approval of a modification to the Owner-Architect Agreement, to increase the ceiling on Reimbursable Expenses from $10,000 to a limit not to exceed $25,000.
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS
FACILITIES & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, explained this request.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for approval of a Change Order to the
Odell contract, to include the consultant's work on the Historic Courthouse Museum and the Board Room audio/visual systems, at a cost of $48,840.
COUNTY BUILDINGS & GROUNDS/FACILITIES & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
REPORTS
Mr. Mike Anderson, Director of Facilities and Capital Improvements, appeared before the Board stating that Mr. Tom Hitz, a representative of the general contractor for the Lake County Judicial Center, Barton-Malow Constructors, and representatives of the architectural firm, Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum (HOK), were present to discuss their findings, to date, with regard to the water intrusion problems that are currently plaguing the Judicial Center and to make a recommendation for resolving the problem. He distributed a letter, dated August 1, 1994, from Barton-Malow and HOK jointly, to him, regarding said problem and their solution for correcting it.
Mr. Anderson discussed what has occurred, thus far, regarding said problem and how the County has dealt with it. He stated that the team feels they have discovered the source of the problem and have a solution for correcting it, which he noted he endorses.
Mr. Tom Hitz, Vice President, Barton-Malow Constructors, appeared before the Board and discussed the leaks and how his firm has handled them in the past, noting that there have been leaks for some time. He stated that the most chronic leaks appear to be from system failures, rather than from workmanship, or defects in the overall design. He stated that the greatest concern is with the exterior walls, noting that the most noticeable leak is along the base of the glass gallery area and at the entry to the elevator lobby, off the gallery. He reviewed a report that had been provided to the Board, from the team, regarding the problem and their solution to it. He stated, in evaluating the leaks, they found that the exterior walls were deteriorating, primarily at the control joints and indicated the process that his firm would use in correcting the problem. He stated that the system, as originally designed, had a five year manufacturer and installer warranty, therefore, the proposed solution is to follow the procedure that they tested in the field and install a silicon caulk, which he noted has a ten year warranty. He stated that they will also seal the entire building with a clear sealant, to provide a greater shield on the plaster material, so that there will be no water penetration to the exterior of the building. He noted that the remedy being proposed will be of no cost to the County, because they feel that it is a product failure and the manufacturer will be picking up the repair costs.
It was noted that said procedure will need to be done to the building approximately every ten years.
Mr. Foard Merriweather, Vice President, Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, appeared before the Board stating that his firm does not have any concerns about the aesthetic effects of the sealant, at which time he displayed a photograph of the Judicial Center and pointed out some minor changes that might occur, due to the application of the sealant. He stated that the changes would probably not be noticeable and might, in fact, enhance the aesthetics of the building. He stated that the type of sealant being used should give 25 years of extended service, with a 10 year warranty. He stated that, due to some minor corrosion that has occurred in some areas, they are proposing to map the building, as they proceed with the sealant, so that, if there are any inconsistencies, the workers can pick out a few of them, cut them open and see if there are any changes in the integrity of the joint and if the leaks have indeed stopped. He stated that HOK will not provide a warranty, however, they will stand behind the repair and make sure that it does maintain its service.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved staff's recommendation for resolving the water intrusion problems related to the Lake County Judicial Center, as proposed by Barton-Malow Constructors, the general contractor, and Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, the architect.
CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS/EDUCATION
FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Fire and Emergency Services for approval and execution of Interlocal Agreement between Lake County and the School Board of Lake County Relating to the Provision of Fire and Rescue Services to Schools Located in the Unincorporated Areas of Lake County.
COUNTY EMPLOYEES/HUMAN RESOURCES
Ms. Lois Martin, Director of Human Resources, appeared before the Board and requested approval of a change in the language of Section VII - Safety, of the Lake County Personnel Rules and Regulations, as submitted in a memorandum from Ms. Martin to the Board, dated August 3, 1994.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Human Resources for approval of changes to the language of Section VII - Safety, Sub-Section 7-03 - Compensation to Injured Employees, of the Lake County Personnel Rules and Regulations, as follows, to be effective upon approval:
On Pages 2, 3 and 4, change the wording Worker's Compensation carrier to Worker's Compensation Administrator.
On Pages 3 and 4, change AD - Administrative Leave to CW - Worker's Compensation Leave.
On Page 5, change one (1) month to one (1) calendar month, or upon approval of disability retirement.
COMMITTEES/ORDINANCES/PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
Commr. Swartz suggested that a request from the Planning and Development staff for direction to proceed drafting an Ordinance, for public hearing, amending the Land Development Regulation considering Concurrency Management, Timing Residential Development in the Transitional and Suburban Land Use Categories and Criteria to Direct Commercial Development, and incorporating the recommendations of the Land Development Regulations Advisory Committee be scheduled for a workshop, to discuss exactly what it is that the Board is proposing staff to develop.
The Board directed that a workshop meeting be scheduled to address said issues and requested Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planner, Planning and Development, to come back to the Board with a recommended date for holding said meeting.
COUNTY MANAGER/LANDFILLS/MUNICIPALITIES/SOLID WASTE
Commr. Hanson brought up for discussion allegations that had been made about solid waste collection services in the Pine Lakes area (free use of dumpster by residents in that area) and signage in said area. She stated that she had been approached by some residents in the Pine Lakes area, approximately one year ago, and asked if there was anything that the County could do to help relieve the situation with the roads in their area, as the County was going into mandatory disposal and making curbside collection available for all residents.
Commr. Hanson stated that she had gotten together with Mr. Ron Roche, Director of Solid Waste, and he informed her that the County could place a dumpster in the area. She stated that, at that time, everyone in the area had twice a week pickup and the agreement was that they would go to once a week pickup and a dumpster would be provided at the Pine Lakes Fire Station, on a trial basis, to see if the residents liked it, how they used it, and whether they would abide by the rules. She stated that there was to be no charge, due to it being on a trial basis.
Commr. Hanson stated that Mr. Roche had indicated that a sign would be erected thanking the Board of County Commissioners for the dumpster and thanking her for helping to get it accomplished. She stated that she did not ask where the sign was coming from and that she never saw it. She stated that she assumed the residents of Pine Lakes were erecting the sign, or that the hauler was erecting it, however, she has since discovered that the County put the sign together and erected it.
Commr. Hanson stated that the nearest transfer station is in Paisley, which is 40 to 50 miles roundtrip. She stated that the people in the Pine Lakes area needed some help, because of the road situation, therefore, staff worked with her to try to find a solution to a very serious problem. She stated that, if the County takes away the dumpster, it will still have to deal with the problem of providing garbage collection for the residents in that area. She stated that it is a major problem, in some of the outlying areas of the County, and Mr. Steve Hiney, Recycling Coordinator, has been working to try to resolve it. She stated that was her extent of involvement in the matter.
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, informed the Board that several weeks ago Commr. Hanson received a binder of information, in response to a letter from Commr. Swartz to him, indicating a series of allegations. He stated that he asked Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Services, and Mr. Ron Roche, Director of Solid Waste, to respond to said charges. He stated that they did so and their response was provided in said binder. He stated that, in investigating the matter, he found no malicious intent on the part of any staff member, however, noted that some errors were probably made and the matter should have probably been handled differently.
Mr. Wahl stated that staff will effect certain changes, as a result of this issue, and that there will be a policy on signage that Mr. Stivender is currently addressing. He stated that staff has attempted to address the issue of solid waste in Lake County and have had to deal with very difficult issues, in a compressed time frame, and meet deadlines placed on them by regulatory agencies. He stated that staff was present to respond to any questions that the Board might have, or receive any direction that the Board may wish to provide.
Commr. Gerber questioned whether staff had been reprimanded.
Mr. Wahl stated that he had directed a letter to both Mr. Stivender and Mr. Roche indicating that they needed to take some corrective action, in at least two areas.
Commr. Hanson stated that this issue brings to head some of the problems that the County faces with garbage collection. She stated that the Board knew, with all the rural roads in the County, that some tremendous problems would be created, with regard to garbage collection, because the County told people that they could receive curbside collection.
Mr. Sallee, a resident/businessman in the Pine Lakes area and the gentleman who originally approached Commr. Hanson with the garbage collection problem, appeared before the Board stating that he had a petition with approximately 323 signatures protesting the removal of the dumpster in question. He stated that a lot of people use the dumpster, due to the distance of the Paisley transfer station from Pine Lakes. He suggested ways in which he felt the problem could be handled, noting that he felt it certainly needed to be addressed.
Mr. Dick Seron, a resident of Tavares, appeared before the Board stating that he sympathized with the residents of Pine Lakes, noting that he felt it was a tragedy for all areas of the County to not receive an equitable garbage disposal arrangement. He noted some concerns he had with responses that had been made to some questions that he had directed to the Board at a meeting that was held recently in Sorrento, in which he felt inaccurate statements had been made. He indicated ways in which he felt the problem could be handled, temporarily, until other arrangements could be made.
Commr. Swartz stated that he had read the packet that had been provided to the Board by Mr. Wahl several times, had listened to approximately two hours of tapes from a solid waste meeting that was held at Tavares Middle School, and had read the Minutes from all the Solid Waste Committee Meetings and that he had many concerns, which he noted.
Commr. Swartz stated that the Solid Waste Committee spent a significant amount of time talking about the issue of the drop off stations and the fact that they should be manned, so that the County could control what goes in them. He stated that the only change the Board made from the Solid Waste Committee's recommendation was that the Board did not go along with the Committee's recommendation to assess everybody, regardless, for solid waste disposal. He stated that the number one recommendation of the Solid Waste Committee was that the Board continue with the system of drop offs and noted that the Board never changed that. He stated that he had no doubt there were other places in Lake County that would benefit from having additional drop off locations, that Pine Lakes is not unique.
Commr. Swartz stated that the matter should have come back to the Board, noting that it was a change in the scope of provision of services that the Board adopted, through the budget. He questioned whether Mr. Wahl felt the matter should have come back to the Board.
Mr. Wahl stated that, in hind sight, he felt that it probably should have.
Commr. Hanson concurred.
Commr. Swartz stated that what irritated him was not the fact that a sign was erected, or that it mentioned a particular district Commissioner (Hanson), but that it stated that it was a courtesy of the Board of County Commissioners. He stated that he was not aware that a dumpster had been placed in the Pine Lakes area, or that the sign had been erected. He noted that the sign came down, after he talked to staff about it.
Commr. Hanson questioned how long Commr. Swartz had been aware of the dumpster and the sign, before he acted on it. He stated that it had been sometime after the first of the year.
Commr. Swartz stated that there were places in the report that alluded to the fact that what the Board was discussing this date was his fault and that he was not going to accept it. He stated that the only thing he knew about the issue was that a sign had been erected in the Pine Lakes area. He stated that he did not know the County was paying for the dumpster, until he received documentation on it. He stated that he was also disturbed about the fact that the dumpster was charged to the curbside recycling account, at which time he questioned whether Mr. Wahl, County Manager, felt that it was appropriate to charge the cost of the pick ups for a container that is essentially collecting solid waste, that is later transported to the incinerator, to the curbside recycling account, and, if so, how it would be appropriate.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, stated that he could not respond to Commr. Swartz's question at this time.
Commr. Swartz stated that, not only was it charged to curbside recycling, but the particular line item that it was charged to was the curbside container account, for purchasing curbside recycling containers. He stated that he felt the billing system that was used for the containers was inappropriate, as it was not common, generally accepted accounting practices. He stated that neither the Board nor the Solid Waste Committee approved, or recommended, any unsupervised drop off stations. He stated that what was said, over and over, was that, if the County had areas where it needed to look at additional drop off stations, to do it, but, that they should be supervised.
Commr. Swartz questioned, if the dumpster in Pine Lakes was being proposed as a pilot program, what happened to the solid waste tons that were collected at Paisley. He questioned whether the County had records to show that the hauls that were going to the incinerator were checked, noting that the first check was not made until sometime in July, at best, which is about nine months after the dumpster was placed in the Pine Lakes area. He questioned who determined whether or not there was stuff in the dumpsters that should not have been in there. He questioned whether there were records that show what the County's nonprocessible waste is that the County is having to haul back from the incinerator and questioned whether staff would be able to provide said information to him.
It was noted that staff would be able to provide said information.
Commr. Swartz questioned staff further about the matter.
Commr. Hanson questioned whether the Board wanted to pull the dumpster from the Pine Lakes area, or find a way to make it work, noting that the County cannot afford manned drop off stations throughout the County, in those areas that have problems.
Commr. Swartz stated that the County cannot afford not to have manned drop off stations, because of the potential of what might go into the dumpsters, that is then hauled to the incinerator. He stated that he was not opposed to keeping the dumpster at Pine Lakes and having staff come back to the Board with additional recommendations, but that it was going to need to be manned. He stated that the County was going to have to rearrange the schedules in such a way that, for the hours that it is in place, it is manned and that it operates just like the other drop off stations.
Commr. Hanson stated that the dumpster is located at a fire station and that, although it is not manned by a paid individual, being that it is located at the fire station, it is somewhat supervised.
Mr. Bob Gatrell, a resident of the Pine Lakes area, appeared before the Board stating that, if all the County can do is have an unmanned drop off point in the Pine Lakes area, he was all for it, because if they do not, the residents will dump their garbage somewhere else and he would rather have it all dumped in one area.
He stated that, since the dumpster has been in place, he has not had garbage dumped on his land, as in the past.
A motion was made by Commr. Bailey and seconded by Commr. Cadwell to direct Mr. Ron Roche, Director, Solid Waste Management Division, to come back to the Board, on August 23, 1994, with a recommendation for funding a manned station in the Pine Lakes area and what the hours of operation will be, however, in the interim, the dumpster will remain at the Pine Lakes Fire Station site.
Under discussion, Mr. Wahl, County Manager, stated that staff had been in discussion with the hauler and he honored his original commitment not to charge, therefore, withdrew his bill.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried.
Commrs. Swartz and Gerber voted "No".
Commr. Gerber stated that she was worried about the precedent that the Board was setting.
Commr. Cadwell discussed what he felt was and was not the Board's job and stated that, if the County is going to have a County Manager form of government, the Board has got to let the County Manager manage it. He stated that there are staff employees who may disagree with a particular Commissioner, but they are scared to disagree publicly and give their professional opinion, because they do not know what the outcome will be, if they do have the backbone to disagree. He stated that the County cannot have employees that are trying to do their job, if certain Commissioners are going to continually be directing them and not going through the County Manager.
Commr. Swartz responded to Commr. Cadwell's comments, noting that he has been and will continue to be a watchdog, to see that the County's policies, projects, and objectives are handled properly. He stated that the reason he does some of the things he does is because he sees things that do not make sense and then sees responses that make less sense.
Commr. Swartz further questioned Mr. Wahl, County Manager, about the issue of curbside recycling and the fact that the dumpster in Pine Lakes was incorrectly charged to that account. He then questioned whether there were any other items that had been charged, or budgeted, to the Solid Waste account that were inappropriate.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, stated that he had two computers in his office that were charged to the Solid Waste Account, based upon an agreement that was reached that his clerical staff would back up the Solid Waste Department, when necessary, therefore, he felt said charges were appropriate.
Commr. Swartz stated that those computers, as well as some printers, were budgeted in the Solid Waste Recycling Account, noting that he recalled when said issue came before the Board.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, disagreed, stating that said computers, along with a printer and a typewriter, were purchased in the prior fiscal year.
Commr. Swartz stated that his concern was one of budgetary integrity, noting that, when the Board approves line items in the Solid Waste budget for computers, he does not expect those computers and printers to end up in another department. He stated that, to take funds out of the Recycling Account that was budgeted particularly for computers, for the Solid Waste Department, which they stated they needed, and put them in the County Manager's Office was wrong.
Discussion continued regarding the matter, at which time Commr. Hanson requested the County Manager to respond to any further concerns that Commr. Swartz might have through a memorandum.
At this time, Commr. Gerber requested Ms. Barbara Lehman, Chief Deputy, Finance and Audit Department, to inform the Board of what her scope of services will be and what she is going to be
doing, with respect to an audit that she had requested be performed, regarding the Solid Waste Budget.
Ms. Lehman stated that had not yet been determined, noting that a meeting had been scheduled for Monday, August 22, 1994, to discuss the matter and determine the purpose of the audit.
Commr. Gerber stated that she had requested an audit be performed for disposal operations and recycling. She stated that she had also spoken with Mr. Wahl, County Manager, and Mr. Ron Roche, Director, Solid Waste Management Division, about those two divisions. She stated that she hoped, through the audit, some of the accounting glitches that the Board is presently seeing can be resolved, in a fashion to where it will not happen again. She stated that she called for the audit, due to the fact that staff misrepresented the truth, at a public meeting, and that gave her pause, enough to where she would question a few things, internally.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 12:35 p.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for lunch and would reconvene at 2:00 p.m.
WORKSHOP
CHARTER GOVERNMENT
Sheriff George Knupp, Jr. appeared before the Board and presented Commr. Gerber with a "Tough on Crime" Achievement Award for the way she handled a situation in which her purse was snatched while shopping.
A letter was submitted, for the record, from Mr. Tom Wetherington, a member of the Charter Government Study Committee who was not present, indicating his feelings about a Charter form of government.
At this time, Commr. Gerber invited those members of the Charter Government Study Committee who were present and had any comments, positive or negative, to come forward and state their feelings.
Ms. Mary Smith Fletcher, a member of the Charter Government Study Committee, appeared before the Board stating that when she became a member of the committee she was President of the League of Women Voters and noted that the League, statewide, has endorsed charter government. She stated her concern was that, since Lake County is such a vastly growing county, the County may regret it, if it does not have a charter government in place a few years down the road, because no one knows what type of situation might come along. She further stated that she felt the County needed more correlation, where the County is overlapping in various parts of the County's government and that she feels the citizens of the County deserve more voice.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he did not see anything wrong with the constitutional government that the County is under now. He further stated that the proposed charter does not affect any of the constitutional officers and, in most cases, that is the biggest change that is made, when a county goes to a charter form of government. He stated that, with all the things the County has going on, he felt this was one issue the County did not need to deal with, at this time.
Commr. Bailey stated that he agreed with Commr. Cadwell's statements, however, he wanted the committee to know that he appreciated the work they did and that he found it interesting to hear all the diverse opinions. He stated that he felt, under a charter form of government, the Chairman has too much power and that he did not feel the Board needed to be expanded to seven members, as proposed, that five members was enough. He stated that he would support leaving the County government the way that it presently is.
Commr. Gerber stated that a charter form of government gives more power to the people, which she elaborated on, and it gives the Board increased recognition as a player in regional politics. She stated that the electorate would decide whether the County had a charter form of government, or not, not the Board and she feels that, eventually, a charter form of government will come to pass. Commr. Swartz stated that he agreed with Commr. Gerber and noted that he was dismayed that the Board would vote to put together a group of citizens and ask them to look at the issue of a charter government, which he noted they spent a considerable amount of time doing and voted 10 to 5 to recommend going to a charter form of government, and then not consider their recommendation. He stated that he did not understand why the Board even started down that road, if they were not going to pay attention to the recommendation.
Commr. Swartz stated that he feels a charter form of government gives the people the opportunity to have much greater say in their government, the opportunity to say exactly how they want the organization of government to be set up, and gives them the ability to approach their government on initiative issues. He stated that the concerns about what the people might decide to do, he finds to be a disturbing concern, because they democratically elect all of the Commissioners and all of the Constitutional Officers and he feels that the Board should have some respect for their ability to decide what they may want to have in a charter and how they may want to have a charter operate in Lake County.
Commr. Swartz stated that he had hoped a majority of the Board would agree to move forward, although they might disagree about which manner to do it, but that they would at least form a charter committee, which would come back to the Board with their findings. He stated that he would support going forward, either under the charter commission, or under the ad hoc committee. He thanked Commr. Gerber and all the members of the Charter Government Study Committee for the time they spent studying the issue, regardless of which side they may have taken on it.
Mr. Ed Havill, Lake County Property Appraiser, appeared before the Board stating that he had mailed letters to the other 13 charter counties, with some questions that were not asked by the Charter Government Study Committee. He discussed what the responses were and noted that the number of employees and taxable value increased in each of those counties. He stated that he felt the bottom line of a charter form of government is control by a small group of elected people and possibly by a countywide Administrator.
Mr. Havill stated that the initial expense in setting up a charter commission starts at $100,000 and those expenses are paid for by the taxpayers. He stated that if one was to take a poll in the County, regarding this issue, they would find that 96% of the people would not know what they were talking about. He stated that there is a small group of people in this county who are trying to force charter government down the throats of the people. He stated that the County does not have a problem with any of the constitutional officers, or anything else, other than some publicity that the County recently received about the School Board. Mr. Havill stated that he felt the problem with the County is that there are not enough people who are educated enough to know what is going on, regarding a charter government, to stop it and recommended that the Board turn down the request to form a charter commission, or committee.
Doctor Joe Stephany, a local resident, appeared before the Board stating that Orange County had some problems associated with the lack of bringing things under County control. He stated that the Board is the only policy making group in Lake County and are held accountable for things that they may not be responsible for, or have control over, so it is very important that they think this issue through, very carefully, before they reject the idea of a charter government. He stated that it brings government closer to the people and that is what it is all about. He further stated that Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes is written for a charter
government and that it is going to happen, whether the Board likes it or not. He requested the Board to consider the request.
Mr. Mac Elder, a member of the Charter Government Study Committee, appeared before the Board stating that, for the Board to appoint the members they appointed, they must have felt they would serve conscientiously. He stated that some of the members that were appointed were known to be against a charter government, but, in spite of that, the majority voted to recommend that it be put before the voters, in the form of a referendum. He stated that he did not believe the majority of the voters in the County are apathetic, or ignorant, and he would not want to see any kind of referendum, without a lot of advertising about the pros and cons of a charter government. He stated that, if the Board decided against putting this issue before the voters of the County and disregarding the decision of the ones that they trusted to study it, they would be denying the electorate their right to real democracy.
Mr. T. Keith Hall, Lake County Tax Collector and a member of the Charter Government Study Committee, appeared before the Board stating that he was opposed to the charter form of government, in the sense in which it was handled, for a number of reasons. He stated that he probably had more experience in working with charter officers than all the people in the room combined and was aware of problems that they had with a charter form of government. He stated that, in many instances, the charter government ignored the responsibilities that they previously had, as elected constitutional officers, and the citizens suffered greatly because of it. He stated that he recognized the fact that it does not have to be that way, under a charter form of government, and that it would be a great deal different, if it were properly written. He stated that, in light of where the County presently is and where it expects to be going in the next few years, he saw no reason for the County to go to a charter form of government.
Commr. Hanson thanked those individuals who served on the Charter Government Study Committee, noting that she felt they brought forward some issues and explanations that had not been known earlier and gave the Board a greater understanding of a charter form of government. She stated that she felt, basically, the County's constitutional officer form of government was working and discussed those things that could be exempted out, however, noted that by doing so, the County would be right back where it is today, without the benefit of what might be a charter form of government. She stated that the County can presently do most of the things that a charter commission can do, through an ordinance, so, if something is broken and the County needs to fix it, they can.
Commr. Hanson stated that she did not believe today was the time to go with a charter form of government. She stated that she felt the action of the School Board was part of what drove this movement in Lake County to go to a charter form of government, however, noted that it was not going to solve that problem. She stated that she felt going to a charter government would increase bureaucracy and costs and that what had been presented as a form of government that would bring it closer to the people actually drives it further away from them.
Commr. Hanson noted that it was not a unanimous vote of the committee to go to a charter form of government, therefore, she was not going to support it, at this time. She stated that she felt there will be a drive to continue on for a charter government and that sometime in the future the County will probably have one, but she did not feel that today was the time for it. She thanked Commr. Gerber for her work on the Charter Government Study Committee, noting that she felt she had done an outstanding job in bringing some of the issues to the Board's attention.
A motion was made by Commr. Gerber and seconded by Commr. Swartz to accept the Charter Government Study Committee's recommendation that the Board appoint a Charter Commission, pursuant to Florida Statute 125.61, to draft a charter to be sent to referendum, preferably in 1996.
The motion was denied, by a 3-2 vote, with Commrs. Hanson, Cadwell and Bailey voting "No".
Commr. Hanson thanked the members of the Charter Government Study Committee for serving on said committee.
WORKSHOP
IMPACT FEE STUDY
Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planner, Planning and Development, appeared before the Board stating that, at the last workshop meeting that was held regarding the issue of impact fees, the Board gave staff direction to identify impact fees, based on the existing level of service for parks and recreation, as well as libraries, and incorporate the most recent corrections in the Transportation Impact Fee Study. He stated that staff was also directed to proceed with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, to amend the level of service for parks and recreation. He stated that staff processed that Comprehensive Plan Amendment and it was transmitted to the Department of Community Affairs on August 2, 1994. He stated that the document before the Board was a revised document, noting that it was revised after having met with Ms. Jean Kaminski, Executive Director of the Home Builders Association. He referred to Page
I-16, under the Transportation Section of the Impact Fee Study, and noted some minor corrections that were made.
Mr. Knight distributed the following handouts, for the Board's perusal:
Comparative Study of Impact Fee Adoption Rates
Comparative Impact Fee Summary
Mr. Knight then distributed the following pages, to be
inserted in the Comprehensive Impact Fee Study:
Revised pages VIII, IX, 1-16, 1-17, 1-27 and 1-28
Mr. Knight referred to Page 1-19, of the Impact Fee Study, noting that, in Paragraph H. Impact Fee Credits, the figure 37% should be changed to 23.9%.
Mr. Knight referred to Page 1-27 of the handout, Table 1-10, Lake County Transportation Impact Fee Model, noting that the
net impact fee cost for a three bedroom home was $2,153, with all the corrections on the calculations. He noted further changes that were made in said chart and the reason for said changes.
Further discussion occurred regarding the Impact Fee Study, at which time Mr. Knight answered questions regarding same.
Ms. Jean Kaminski, Executive Director of the Home Builders Association, appeared before the Board stating that there were some problems with the methodology of the Impact Fee Study and a lot of concerns, which she elaborated on. She stated that, throughout the entire methodology, there were enough questions and concerns and enough inconsistencies that she would ask the Board to allow a workshop meeting and have everyone involved go through it, line by line, item by item, and have the fees evaluated, to see where they are, noting that she did not feel they were done in a fair and correct manner. She requested the Board to consider doing so and not have this meeting be the final workshop.
Commr. Bailey interjected that he felt the matter should be taken before the Industrial Development Authority, before a decision is made regarding it.
Mr. Andy Wheeler, Reynolds, Smith & Hill, appeared before the Board and responded to Ms. Kaminski's comments, noting that he was 100% certain that the figures given in the study were accurate. He pointed out the fact that the study his firm undertook was merely an update, noting that they took methodologies that were accepted by the committee in 1991 and updated them. He further elaborated on the matter.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he was going to recommend that the Board not increase education impact fees, until requested to do so by the School Board, and, thus far, they have not been requested to do so. He stated that various cities had contacted him, with some concerns, and he did not see anything wrong with representatives from said cities sitting down with staff, the engineer, and the Home Builders Association, if they would like to, and go through the Impact Fee Study, if Reynolds, Smith & Hill is secure with their figures and the methodology.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, appeared before the Board stating that he was representing Pringle Development Corporation, as well as Golden Gem Growers and Consolidated Mineral. He stated that, if the fees were adopted, as proposed in the methodology, by one fell swoop the County would be losing in excess of 400 jobs, because the projects that he was representing could not happen. He stated that, if the Board accepted the methodology as being right, he felt a political decision would have to be made, through the Industrial Development Authority and the Board's own initiatives on economic development, about how much of this and to what percentage it would affect the County and he felt this was something that the Board needed to look at.
Mr. Richey stated that, on behalf of his clients, he retained the services of some professional transportation people to evaluate Reynolds, Smith & Hill's re-evaluation, specifically the cost factors. He stated that he needed the opportunity to take the new fee schedule that was distributed this date and evaluate it, to decide if it is equitable, and, if it is not equitable, how it can be made equitable. He further elaborated on the matter, at which time he requested the Board to delay making a decision, until they have something worth passing.
Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, appeared before the Board stating that she was representing a number of residential, commercial, and industrial developments that were going to be affected by the impact fees, as proposed. She addressed the issue of rebates and concurrency, noting that the County has some real legal problems involving concurrency, which she elaborated. She stated that development wants to do what is fair and equitable, however, they feel that there are questions that still need to be answered.
Mr. Gene Molnar, Growth and Development Planner, Lake County School Board, representing the Superintendent of Schools and the School Board, appeared before the Board stating that, when the County first started this study, the School Board was invited to participate and they decided to pay their fair share. He stated that the Superintendent and the Chairman of the Lake County School Board stated, in a public forum, that they were in favor of impact fees. He stated that the School Board is very appreciative of what the Board of County Commissioners has done in the past and noted that they do not expect the Board to vote 5-0 to go to the maximum, for school impact fees, but they feel that it deserves to be looked at very closely and would participate in it. He discussed the fact that the size of a campus, in terms of acreage, and outfitting a new school would be a big part of a school impact fee study, however, it was left out of the first study. He stated that the School Board wants to be a positive partner and does not want to interfere with the Board's business.
Mr. David Gray, Florida Regional Econametrics, Tampa, Florida, appeared before the Board stating that a week or two before the Board planned to meet he wanted to have the opportunity to present to the Commissioners, the Planning Department, and Reynolds, Smith & Hill a written copy describing the issues that his firm intended to undertake. He questioned whether the Board intended to discuss school impact fees, or whether it was going to be purely a transportation impact fee meeting.
The Chairman noted that the Board would be looking at all fees, at this point in time.
Mr. Gray informed the Board of what the study that he would be doing for the Home Builders Association would entail and stated that he would be open to any questions that the Board, or anyone else in the community might have.
Mr. Hubert Hartman, a local resident, appeared before the Board and briefly discussed the issue of industry coming into the County and how he felt about the matter. He stated that he felt either growth was not paying its way, or the Board was not being frugal enough in controlling the cost of running the government. He stated that he felt a proper impact fee was not unfair, to provide for all the facilities that the County would need, for all the new residents. He urged the Board to consider enacting an ordinance to provide proper impact fees for both the County's infrastructure and for its schools and to consider bringing in people from the retired community and other areas in any new negotiations, or discussions, that are held.
The Chairman stated that the Board recognizes the importance of the retirement community in Lake County and that they are trying to determine what is a fair share.
Commr. Swartz discussed what transpired, regarding impact fees, when he first became a member of the Board and stated that, if this Board ends up taking the same approach that the previous Board took and does not enact all the impact fees, or enacts them at substantially less than what the Board knows the cost of new growth will be, whether it is on the school system, roads, fire and police protection, etc., some future Board will be discussing the matter again and the fees will be dramatically higher, because the County will have fallen further and further behind.
Commr. Swartz stated that it is a political decision and that he, for one, during the time that the Board moves forward from this point until the time of adoption, feels that it is perfectly appropriate and that he will welcome and encourage everyone to meet with staff and the County's consultants, to ensure that there are no obvious errors and that the County has fees that are reasonable and reflect the costs of the new growth, in whatever area they happen to be talking about. He stated that he does not want to see that delay the Board from moving forward and enacting impact fees that will slow down the process that Mr. Hartman alluded to.
Commr. Swartz stated that growth has not been paying its way, noting that the clearest way to look at it is in the gas tax, which he elaborated on. He stated that it is time for the Board to step forward and enact impact fees that represent the costs of new development that is coming into the County, because the alternative is always going to be to lower the level of service and the quality of life, or the costs is going to be through some impact fee that helps bring that money in. He stated that there is a cost, no matter which way the Board goes. He stated that he was not going to vote to postpone, or reduce, the impact fees before the Board this date, but would support what he feels is a reasonable approach to take, with regard to the gas tax issue, which is to enact the impact fees and phase the gas tax out, over three years, so that the County can put monies into its road projects, which are underfunded at this time.
Commr. Swartz stated that he would like to see the Board instruct staff to begin preparing for public hearings and, during the interim, invite all comments and let people work with staff and, if they can show staff where there are errors in the formulas, let them do so, and let staff come back to the Board and inform them of such. He stated that, if the Board has technically correct information, then it will become a political decision as to whether or not the County is going to enact full and fair impact fees, or whether it is going to enact something less than that and once again either subsidize growth, or let the level of service continue to degrade. He stated that he would like to see the County move forward.
Commr. Bailey stated that he could not support what Commr. Swartz was recommending this date.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he felt Commr. Swartz's conclusion was correct, however, disagreed with how he reached that conclusion. He agreed with Commr. Swartz that the County needs to move forward and that he feels the Board needed to set a time frame to make a decision about the matter and that, within that time frame, staff can meet with everyone that they need to meet with, to make sure the numbers are right and to make appropriate changes that need to be made. He also agreed with the fact that, at that time, it becomes a political decision.
Commr. Swartz questioned how long it would take to draft the ordinances and get them back to the Board, for approval.
Mr. Knight, Chief Planner, Planning and Development, stated that the County Attorney's Office would be required to draft the ordinances and he did not know how long it would take them to do so, however, he noted that the County would have to go through the full Land Development Regulations procedure, through the Planning and Zoning Commission, and advertise it 30 days in advance of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting, plus go through the two public hearing processes, as well.
Commr. Hanson stated that she did not have a problem with moving forward and setting a date, but she did have a problem with the issue of fairness and whether the process was equitable.
A motion was made by Commr. Swartz and seconded by Commr. Cadwell to instruct staff, along with the County's consultants, Reynolds, Smith & Hills, to prepare the necessary ordinances, based on their recommendations, to present at the appropriate hearings and workshops for the Planning and Zoning Commission, and to prepare a schedule of public hearings that move forward from this date, in a time frame that can meet a schedule of getting from Planning and Zoning back to the Board and provide time for people to give input to staff.
Under discussion, Commr. Hanson questioned how long the process would take, to complete.
Mr. Knight stated that it would take approximately two and one half to three months.
Commr. Swartz questioned whether the scope of services for Reynolds, Smith & Hill would need to be expanded. It was noted that they would.
Commr. Swartz then requested that the matter be put on the Agenda for the August 23, 1994 Board Meeting, for discussion.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, questioned whether the motion included revisiting the alternate study provision of the LDRs.
Commr. Swartz stated that his motion did not include it, however, he would have no objections to staff, through the County Manager, providing some alternatives for revisiting the alternate study provision of the Land Development Regulations, to be brought back before the Board at a later date.
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, explained this request.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the appointment of Carol Ann Morris-Smith to fill the remainder of the vacant At Large Representative term on the Lake County Library Board. Her term will expire October 1, 1996.
ADDENDUM NO. 1
COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:
Budgets/Budget Transfers/Office of Budget
Request from the Office of Budget for approval of the following Budget Transfer:
Fund: General
Department: Sheriff
From: Operating Expenses $7,500
To: Capital Outlay 7,500
Transfer No.: 94-0302
Appointments-Resignations/Committees
Request from Public Services for approval of the appointments of Donald A. Griffey and Lori Webb-Paris to the Selection and Negotiation Committee, for the Hicks Ditch Basin Study, as representatives of Lake County.
COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS
COUNTY BUILDINGS & GROUNDS/FACILITIES & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Mr. Mike Anderson, Director of Facilities and Capital Improvements, explained this request.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for approval of the Standard Form of Agreement between Lake County and Metric Constructors, for the renovation of the Old Jail, Administration Building (Round Building), Historic Courthouse, and site work, with an estimated project cost of $13,451,234.00.
COMMITTEES/COUNTY EMPLOYEES/HUMAN RESOURCES
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, explained this request.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Human Resources for approval of the following individuals to serve on the Selection Committee to review proposals and make recommendations on the selection of the consultant for the Classification and Compensation Study:
Lois Martin, Director, Human Resources, Chairman
Rhonda H. Gerber, Commissioner, District 1
Jim Stivender, Jr., Senior Director, Public Services
Fletcher Smith, Director, Community Services
Craig Haun, Senior Director, Fire & Emergency Services
Sandy Baum, Executive Secretary, Agricultural Cooperative
Extension Services
Sharla VanScoyk, Staff Assistant, Public Services
James Bridgewater, Jr., Aquatic Spray Technician, Mosquito & Aquatic Plant Management
Thomas D. Mitchell, Fire Lieutenant/EMT, Fire/Rescue
Mickey Haben, Executive Secretary, Development Regulations Services
Walter Wood, Water Resources Branch Supervisor, Environmental Management/Pollution Operations
OTHER
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved the appointment of the following individuals to the newly created Lake County Comprehensive Health Care Committee:
Robert E. Snyder, Jr., Chief Operating Officer
Florida Hospital-Waterman
Richard T. Bosshardt, President, Lake County Medical Society
Jay Marshall, Supervisor, Student Services
Lake County School Board
John C. Pellosie, Jr., Director, State of Florida
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
Reverend Dr. Terry Jackson (interim basis), Chairman
North Lake County Hospital Tax District
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the appointment of Thomas L. Wetherington, representing the Citizen-at-Large, and Sue Wolfe, representing the Citizen Representing the Elderly Consumer, to the newly created Lake County Comprehensive Health Care Committee.
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the appointment of Patricia
L. Price, representing Big Business, to the newly created Lake County Comprehensive Health Care Committee.
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board appointed Commr. Hanson as the Liaison Commissioner, representing the Board of County Commissioners, to the newly created Lake County Comprehensive Health Care Committee.
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES/PROPERTY APPRAISER
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board appointed the following Commissioners to serve on the Value Adjustment Board, set for September 28, 29, and 30, 1994:
Commr. Catherine C. Hanson
Commr. Don Bailey
Commr. Welton G. Cadwell
REPORTS
COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS
MISCELLANEOUS
Commr. Bailey informed the Board that they had been invited to attend the 105th Homecoming Celebration for the Bay Lake First Baptist Church.
ANIMAL CONTROL/COMMITTEES/RESOLUTIONS
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request to amend the Animal Control Study Committee Resolution, by deleting the Owner of Exotic Animals category and creating a fifth Resident-at-Large category.
ANIMAL CONTROL/APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the appointment of Linda S. Spradlin to the Lake County Animal Control Ordinance Study Committee, as Representative of the Business Community, to fill the unexpired term of Hosea Walls, who resigned; and the appointment of Carolyn K. Wolfe, as Representative of Resident-at-Large on said committee.
AGRICULTURAL CENTER/APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the appointment of Brian C. Huffman to the Agriculture Advisory Committee, replacing Charles Hudson, who resigned, and appointment of William J. Benham to said committee, replacing Mike Dixon, who's term expired July 21, 1994.
COMMISSIONERS/ELECTIONS
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board appointed Commr. Cadwell to serve on the Canvassing Board, on Election Day.
PUBLIC HEALTH
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Steve Richey, Attorney, that staff be directed to prepare a letter, from the Board of County Commissioners to the Farmers Home Administration, which helps fund the Community Health Centers, a non-profit corporation which provides medical care to indigents, in support of said corporation.
REPORTS
COUNTY ATTORNEY
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT/STATE AGENCIES
Mr. Frank T. Gaylord, County Attorney, brought to the attention of the Board the fact that there was a scrivener's error in the last draft of the Land Development Regulations and requested permission to have said error corrected.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from the County Attorney to correct a scrivener's error in the Land Development Regulations, in that "Restaurants are not permitted uses under a C.1 zoning district" was inadvertently left out of the last draft of the Regulations and that same be communicated to the Secretary of State, for correction.
REPORTS
COUNTY ATTORNEY
COUNTY PROPERTY/RIGHTS-OF-WAY, ROADS & EASEMENTS
SUITS AFFECTING THE COUNTY
Mr. Frank T. Gaylord, County Attorney, requested authorization from the Board for the Chairman to execute a Disclaimer of Interest, in a condemnation case involving the County and Florida Power Corporation, with regard to a parcel of property that Florida Power condemned, which the County had an easement across, and, due to the fact that when they value what goes to the property they value it in fee, the County is possibly entitled to a portion of that fee. He noted, however, that the County waived said fee, but it requires the Board to approve a Disclaimer of Interest in that easement, for valuation purposes.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from the County Attorney for authorization for the Chairman to execute a Disclaimer of Interest, in a condemnation case involving the County and Florida Power Corporation, regarding an easement on some property that Florida Power condemned, in which the County would be entitled to a portion of a fee, with respect to the property.
REPORTS
COUNTY ATTORNEY
LANDFILLS/SUITS AFFECTING THE COUNTY
Mr. Frank T. Gaylord, County Attorney, requested authorization from the Board to (1) file suit against Phoenix Construction Corporation, if they do not proceed, as scheduled, on October 31, 1994, to correct a problem regarding the old Umatilla Landfill project, which was done incorrectly, and (2) go out for bid, if they falter.
Commr. Swartz recommended that a letter be sent to Phoenix Construction Corporation indicating that the Board hopes to work with them, however, has authorized the County Attorney's Office to file suit, if they are not forthcoming and timely.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from the County Attorney for authorization to (1) file suit against Phoenix Construction Corporation, if they do not proceed, on October 31, 1994, to correct a problem regarding the old Umatilla Landfill project, and (2) go out for bid, if they falter.
REPORTS
COUNTY ATTORNEY
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT/STATE AGENCIES
Mr. Frank T. Gaylord, County Attorney, informed the Board that he had supplied them with a memorandum related to the costs of the defense of the Comprehensive Plan, which he noted was found to be in compliance by the Hearing Officer. It was noted that said memorandum did not include the costs related to the Planning Department, in their preparation for said defense, therefore, the County Attorney would update the Board regarding same, once all the figures are compiled.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 4:10 p.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for 10 minutes.
WORKSHOP
100 YEAR FLOOD PLAN/STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, informed the Board that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has made some significant changes in their requirements over the last few years and that Mr. Don Griffey, Director of Engineering, Public Services, had been working with staff relative to complying with some of their requirements, however, noted that there were some issues where staff needed direction from the Board, based on some options available for complying with the FEMA requirements.
Mr. Griffey appeared before the Board stating that he had been having regular meetings, regarding the matter, coordinating with some of the departments, and that some of the items that came up for discussion were items that affect both Public Services and Planning and Development. He stated that staff found some problems in the flood prone areas, for single family residences, which he elaborated on, and noted that he had provided the Board with some backup information regarding same.
Ms. Lori Webb-Paris, Public Services, discussed problems that she feels Lake County would be faced with, if they approve to implement the type of regulation that Seminole County requires, for driveways and septic tanks, in the 100 year floodplain areas.
Discussion occurred regarding the interpretation of the 100 Year Flood Plan requirements, at which time Mr. Griffey stated that, if one wanted to take a strict interpretation of same, for each and every case, for every shovel of dirt that goes into the floodplain, a shovel of dirt has to be removed. He stated that becomes difficult to monitor and regulate and it increases the cost of people trying to develop their lots. He stated that staff is looking at taking a strict approach, which he elaborated on, however, noted that, if the County decides to take a stricter approach, it will put the County into a situation where staff is going to need more detailed information from the applicant when they pursue a building permit, they are going to need a more detailed Comprehensive Plan, and they are going to have to review it, to make sure that it complies.
Discussion occurred regarding options that the County has, regarding floodplain requirements, and what effects those options would have on the County.
Commr. Swartz stated that he would tend to lean more toward the more strict interpretation of the regulations, because he feels that there is a way to build in the flood prone areas, without filling in the floodplain and altering it. He stated that there is nothing magical about building an elevated structure, enough to get one out of the floodplain, rather than requiring and compensating for storage.
Commr. Swartz stated that the County has lots that have been, at some point, approved and platted and are in place. He stated that he could see the County being more lenient with those lots, regarding what an individual could do, however, for future lots that would be developed in floodplains, he feels the County needs to be more restrictive. He stated that he feels the County should try to avoid being in the floodplain and, if there is going to be development in the floodplain, it should come under the strict interpretation, if they are going to build in that floodplain.
Mr. Griffey stated that staff thought about writing language in its existing Code, rather than developing a new permit, or a consolidated permit, and attach this activity to existing permits. He stated that, if the Board wished to put everything under one umbrella, then a development permit would probably be the best way to do that. He stated that one would still have to go through reviews, by each of the departments that regulate this sort of thing.
Mr. Jim Barker, Director of Environmental Regulations, interjected that, if one had a site permit, it would make things a lot less difficult.
Mr. Griffey stated that staff needed to obtain some direction from the Board regarding this matter and draft a policy that the Board could adopt, that puts this all down in black and white and then the County needs to modify its Code and Plan, in order to incorporate that policy.
It was noted that staff would come back to the Board with a policy for filling in flood prone areas, with regard to the 100 year flood plan, for single family residential homes, and with an all inclusive permit for site development, for filling, excavating, and grading parcels of land within Lake County.
No action was taken at this time.
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCES/PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planner, Planning and Development, appeared before the Board stating that two weeks prior to this meeting the Board held a public hearing to remove Research Facility from the definition of Kennel, in the Land Development Regulations, for the Wekiva River Protection Area, and they revised the ability for a Kennel to fall under a Conditional Use Permit, in the A-1-20 and the A-1-40 categories.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one present who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Planning and Development for approval of the Ordinance adopting the Land Development Regulations amending the definition of Kennel in the Wekiva River Protection Area.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
________________________________
CATHERINE C. HANSON, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
_________________________________
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK
sec/8-16-94/9-19-94/boardmin