The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, March 21, 1995, 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: Rhonda H. Gerber, Chairman; William "Bill" H. Good, Vice Chairman; Welton G. Cadwell; Catherine C. Hanson; and G. Richard Swartz, Jr. Others present were: Rolon W. Reed, Interim County Attorney; Sue Whittle, Interim County Manager; Ava Kronz, BCC Office Manager; James C. Watkins, Clerk; Barbara Lehman, Chief Deputy Clerk, Finance, Audit & Budget Department; and Toni M. Riggs, Deputy Clerk.
Commr. Good gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES
Discussion occurred regarding the Special Minutes of February 6, 1995, LDR Workshop, with the following changes being made:
Page 4, Line 19 -
Add: "and the lack as set aside for Parks and Recreation in straight zoning."
Page 12, Lines 20-21 -
Amend: "He explained that, if that process were set up, the County would be financing improvements."
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Special Minutes of February 6, 1995, LDR Workshop, as corrected.
Discussion occurred regarding the Regular Minutes of February 7, 1995, with a correction being made to a proper name.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Regular Minutes of February 7, 1995, as presented.
Discussion occurred regarding the Special Minutes of February 23, 1995, LDR Workshop, with the following correction being made, as well as a change to a proper name:
Page 5, Line 11 -
Correct "follow" to "followed"
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Special Minutes of February 23, 1995, LDR Workshop, as corrected.
PERSONAL APPEARANCES
CLERK OF COURTS
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Good and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following:
Accounts Allowed
Acknowledged receipt of the List of warrants paid prior to this meeting, pursuant to Chapter 136 of the Florida Statutes, which shall be incorporated into the Minutes as attached Exhibit A and filed in the Board Support Division of the Clerk's Office.
State Agencies/Reports
Acknowledge receipt of the Southwest Florida Water Management District Reports, as follows:
(a) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for FY Ended
September 30, 1994
(b) Supplementary Grant Financial Statements Pursuant to OMB
Circular A-128 for the year Ended September 30, 1994
(c) Management Letter Pursuant to the Rules of the Auditor
General for the State of Florida
(d) Annual Local Government Financial Report FY 1993-1994
State Agencies/Audits/Clerk
Acknowledge receipt of Report No. 12448, State of Florida Office of the Auditor General, Operational Compliance Audit of the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services Administration of the Clerk of the Court Child Support Enforcement Collection System Trust Fund for the Period July 1, 1992, Through March 31, 1994, and Selected Actions Taken Through November 15, 1994.
Municipalities/Reports
Acknowledge receipt of the Greater Orlando Area Legal Services, Inc. Quarterly Reports for 1994.
State Agencies/Zoning
Acknowledge receipt of the following: Notice is hereby given that a helistop site approval will be issued on or after March 31, 1995, unless prior to March 31, 1995, cause is shown in writing to the Florida Department of Transportation, 5151 Adanson Street, Orlando, Florida, why such site approval should not be granted. If opposition to this site approval is received in writing prior to March 31, 1995, a Public Meeting will be conducted on April 10, 1995, at 6:30 p.m., at the Volusia Medical Center Clinic.
State Agencies/Utilities
Acknowledge receipt of the following: Before the Florida Public Service Commission, In Re: Application for transfer of facilities of Lake Utilities, Ltd, to Southern States Utilities, Inc.; amendment of Certificates Nos. 189-W and 134-S, cancellation of Certificates Nos. 442-W and 372-S in Citrus County; amendment of Certificates Nos. 106-W and 120-S, and cancellation of Certificates Nos. 205-W and 150-S in Lake County; Docket No. 940091-WS, Order No. PSC 95-0268-FOF-WS, Order Approving Transfer and Notice of
Proposed Agency Action Order Establishing Rate Base For Purposes Of The Transfer.
Meetings
Acknowledge receipt of the Southlake Community Development District 1995 meeting schedule.
Municipalities/Ordinances
Acknowledge receipt of Ordinances received from the City of Tavares as follows:
(a) Ordinance 94-44 - An Ordinance Amending the Boundaries of the City of Tavares Code by Including Within the City Limits Property Generally Described as approximately 47 acres located South of Lane Park Cutoff and West of CR 561.
(b) Ordinance 94-45 - An Ordinance Amending the Boundaries of the City of Tavares by Including Within the City Limits Property Generally Described as 2 Acres Located South of US441 and East of Lake Junietta.
Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges
Acknowledge receipt of the Monthly Distribution of Revenue Traffic/Criminal Cases, Month Ending 28-Feb-1995, in the amount of $123,901.47. Same period last year: $113,535.83
Budget Transfers
1. Fund: General
Department: Constitutional Officers - Sheriff
From: Contingency - Sheriff $ 10,000
To: Transfer/Law Enf. - Capital Outlay $ 10,000
Transfer #: 95-104
Justification: Pursuant to F.S. 30.49, the Sheriff is requesting $10,000 be transferred from Sheriff Contingency into Transfer/Law Enf. - Capital Outlay.
2. Fund: General
Department: County Manager
From: Executive Salaries $ 26,800
To: Contractual Services $ 26,800
Transfer #: 95-105
Justification: Transfer needed from Executive Salaries to Contractual Services to pay liquidated damages to Pete Wahl.
3. Fund: Solid Waste
Department: Solid Waste
From: Contingency $143,000
To: Contractual Services $143,000
Transfer #: 95-106
Justification: The settlement agreement with Phoenix Construction requires Phoenix to pay all engineering costs. Lake County has contracted with Post, Buckley, Schuh and Jernigan for this service. The Solid Waste Fund will be reimbursed by Phoenix in the amount of $143,000.
4. Fund: Solid Waste
Department: Solid Waste
From: Contingency $110,000
To: Improvements Other than Buildings $110,000
Transfer #: 95-108
Justification: The Astatula IIB Landfill project was completed in FY 93/94 but several outstanding bills were or will be paid in FY 94/95. The budget needs to reflect these payments.
5. Fund: Solid Waste
Department: Solid Waste
From: Construction Reserve $192,260
To: Improvements Other than Buildings $192,260
Transfer #: 95-109
Justification: An earlier encumbrance from liners for both Astatula and Lady Lake landfills is being paid from this cost center. Due to this encumbrance, there is not sufficient funds for the closure contract BCC adopted on 1-17-95.
6. Fund: Self Insurance
Department: Risk Management
From: Insurance Payments $100,000
To: Claims Payments $100,000
Transfer #: 95-110
Justification: Transferring monies from insurance premiums, as BCC will be paying claims incurred prior to 1/1/95 when the County was self insured for medical claims.
7. Fund: Solid Waste
Department: Solid Waste
From: Contractual Services $194,461
To: Improvements Other than Buildings $194,461
Transfer #: 95-112
Justification: Budget reflects expenditure from Contractual Services, but proper accounting is from Improvements Other than Buildings, and the budget needs to reflect this. The net effect is zero.
Accounts Allowed/Assessments/Subdivisions
Approve and signature authorization on the following Satisfaction of Assessment Liens:
Mt. Plymouth Subdivision
Walter P. Tierney $632.43
Walter P. Tierney 722.44
Walter P. Tierney 654.94
Walter P. Tierney 629.94
Mt. Plymouth II
Ruth B. Clark $764.89
Albert F. Lawton Jr. 766.72
Ocala Forest Campsites
Jerome & Patricia J. Mallace $1,627.11
Rainbow Lane
James R. & Mary Lou Tyre $1,488.61
Lake Eustis Village
Robert and Mary G. Smith $637.55
Sorrento Village
Juanita Grizzle Cox POA,
James C. Grizzle $2,235.99
Walter & Phyllis Money 2,580.51
Sorrento Ranchos/Penlan Park
Paul E. & Teralene Faircloth $3,517.55
Sandra Gale Baker 5,337.80
Lake Junietta Homesites Subdivision
Alvin & Nellie Joyce Hodge $1,206.16
Garcias Subdivision/E E Edges Subdivision
Jessie Jones Jr. $507.16
Western Shores Subdivision
John W. & Patricia Sedman III $1,099.29
John W. & Patricia Sedman III 607.06
Sparks Village Subdivision
Lynn Bell Dewitt $1,224.85
Hilltop Subdivision
Ronald R. & Barbara Heffler $1,752.19
Forty Eight Estates
L. R. Busk $1,166.34
Ocala Forest Campsites
Vernon L. I. Day $252.03
Astor Forest Campsites
Howard F. Robinson $1,825.28
Florida Fruitland Park Tropical Homesites
Michael A. & Judy S. Camilli $1,382.67
Sorrento Shores Subdivision
Kim E. Radliff $ 4,308.04
S & K Realty, subject to an Agreement
for Deed in favor of Joseph G. and
Nancy L. Phelps 3,775.77
S & K Realty, subject to an Agreement
for Deed in favor of Joseph G. and
Nancy L. Phelps 2,938.66
S & K Realty, subject to an Agreement
for Deed in favor of Joseph G. and
Nancy L. Phelps 6,654.00
S & K Realty, subject to an Agreement
for Deed in favor of
Kenneth D. Neilsen 10,087.19
State Agencies/Utilities
Acknowledge receipt of the following: Notice from the Florida Public Service Commission of Notice of Cancellation of Prehearing Conference and Hearing to All Parties and All Other Interested Parties - Docket No. 930416-TC - Re: Investigation of North American Intelecom, Inc. for Incorrect Billing of Collect Calls from Various Prisons, scheduled to be held in Tallahassee, Florida, on March 13, 1995 and March 22, 1995.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ORDINANCES/PARKS AND RECREATION
The Chairman announced that the advertised time had arrived for the public hearing on the proposed Ordinance Amending Ordinance 1991-5 Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
Mr. Chuck Pula, Director of Parks and Recreation, was present to answer questions of the Board.
Commr. Swartz suggested adding the following language to Page 2, B. 6., regarding the member of the Board of County Commissioners who shall serve as liaison to this Committee: "in a non-voting position."
Commr. Gerber opened the public hearing portion of the meeting. There being no public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following amendment to the language: Page 2, B. 6., "in a non-voting position."
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved Ordinance 1995-5, as amended, and as follows by title only:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1991-5 TO INCREASE THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE "LAKE COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD."
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ORDINANCES/ANIMAL CONTROL
Mr. Craig Haun, Director, Fire and Emergency Services, was present to answer questions of the Board.
Commr. Gerber opened the public hearing portion of the meeting. There being no public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Good and carried unanimously, the Board approved Ordinance 1995-6, as follows by title only:
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE DISPOSITION OF IMPOUNDED LIVESTOCK BY THE LAKE COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL DEPARTMENT; PROVIDING THE PROCEDURES FOR SALE OF IMPOUNDED LIVESTOCK; SETTING FEES TO BE CHARGED BY ANIMAL CONTROL FOR THE HOUSING AND FEEDING OF THE LIVESTOCK PRIOR TO SALE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Good and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Libraries/Grants
Approval and execution of Library Services and Construction Act (LSCA) Grant Agreement for Project No. DLIS-95-I-02-G-02.
Grants/Libraries
Approval and execution of Library Services and Construction Act (LSCA) grant application for Fiscal Year 1996/1997, subject to County Attorney's review and approval.
Community Services
Approval for Lake County Board of County Commissioners to sponsor AmeriCorps Lake Program for year two or three year funding cycle.
Community Services
Approval of AmeriCorps Lake Program Grievance Procedures.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Community Services
Approval of Agreement of Participation in the Lake County AmeriCorps*USA Program.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Community Services
Approval and execution of the Consolidated Annual Contributions Contract for Project FL29-E135-904 (Section 8 Housing).
Private Industry Council/Community Services
Approval to transfer all inventory and other property currently under PIC Division control to the Volusia, Lake, Flagler, Private Industry Council, Inc. effective July 1, 1995.
Accounts Allowed/Community Services
Approval of payment of monthly Medicaid bill in the amount of $21,929.45 and the Medicaid Nursing Home bill in the amount of $52,050.10 for the month of January.
Resolutions/Community Services
Approval of Resolution 1995-53 to recognize the accomplishments of Lake County Volunteers and to declare the month of April 1995 as Volunteer Month.
Deeds/Rights-of-Way, Roads and Easements
Acceptance of the following Non-Exclusive Easement Deeds:
Jack Kramer Austin - private deed for the creation of 4 lots in Agriculture zoning on an easement off of CR 44A, Commission District 5
Robert and Gerald Eulett - 3 deeds for the creation of 4 and 5 lots in Agriculture zoning on an easement off of Dewey Robbins Road, Commission District 3
Barbara Peterson - deed for the creation of 3 lots in Agriculture zoning on an easement off of Ferndale Road, Commission District 2
Harold Bylsma - deed for the creation of 4 lots in Agriculture zoning on an easement off of Thomas Boat Landing Road, Commission District 5
Pearl Jackson - deed for the creation of 4 lots in Agriculture zoning on an easement off of Thomas Boat Landing Road, Commission District 5
Timothy and Nancy Wilcox - private deed for the creation of 2 lots in Agriculture zoning on an easement off of CR 46A, Commission District 4
Danny Marshall - private deed for the creation of 1 lot in Agriculture zoning on an easement off of Huff Road, Commission District 4
Sharri Gittens and Donald Gissy - deed for the creation of 2 lots in Agriculture zoning on an easement off of SR 33, Commission District 3
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Zoning
Acceptance and execution of an Agreement Between the Board of County Commissioners and Debbie Little for a Temporary Non-Conforming Zoning Use to place a travel trailer on property located on Locust Street of Royal Trails Sub. while the conventional home is being built - Commission District 2
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Accounts Allowed/Resolutions
Roads-County & State
Acceptance of Final Plat and Escrow Agreement for Maintenance Between Lake County and W.B.B., Inc. for Lake Idlewild Estates, First Addition in the amount of $8,600, and approval of Resolution accepting the following roads into the County Maintenance System: Woods Drive #1-6510B, Williams Street #1-6510C, and Bergen Hall Road #1-6510D, 46 lots - Commission District 1, subject to County Attorney's review and approval, subject to County Attorney's review and approval.
Accounts Allowed/Subdivisions
Approval to release an Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $35,086 for performance of improvements in Highland Lakes, Phase 2D.
Accounts Allowed/Subdivisions
Approval to release an Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $5,300 for maintenance of improvements in Rose Hill, Phase II.
Accounts Allowed/Subdivisions
Approval to release an Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $5,673.20 for maintenance of improvements in Allenwood Subdivision.
Accounts Allowed/Bonds/Subdivisions
Approval to release a Maintenance Bond in the amount of $41,398.20 for maintenance of improvements in Greater Hills, Phase IV.
Accounts Allowed/Bonds/Subdivisions
Approval to release a Maintenance Bond in the amount of $37,666.37 for maintenance of improvements in Greater Groves, Phase II.
Accounts Allowed/Bonds/Subdivisions
Approval to release a Maintenance Bond in the amount of $16,660 for maintenance of improvements in Spring Lake Pines.
Accounts Allowed/Bonds/Subdivisions
Approval to release a Maintenance Bond in the amount of $5,850 for maintenance of improvements in Urico Subdivision.
Accounts Allowed/Bonds/Subdivisions/Roads-County & State
Approval to release a Maintenance Bond in the amount of $11,550 for maintenance of improvements in Magnolia Island and a Maintenance Bond in the amount of $14,190 for maintenance of improvements for the Hartle Road extension.
Accounts Allowed/Bonds/Contracts, Leases & Agreements
Subdivisions
Approval to release an Escrow Agreement, in lieu of a Maintenance Bond, in the amount of $3,152.50 for maintenance and improvements in Silverglen III.
Accounts Allowed/Bonds/Contracts, Leases & Agreements
Subdivisions
Approval to release an Escrow Agreement, in lieu of a Maintenance Bond, in the amount of $4,546 for maintenance of improvements in Silverglen II.
Accounts Allowed/Bonds/Contracts, Leases & Agreements
Subdivisions
Approval to release an Escrow Agreement, in lieu of a Maintenance Bond, in the amount of $6,279.60 for maintenance of improvements in Lake Griffin Terrace.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Municipalities
Approval and authorization for Chairman to execute Interlocal Agreement Between City of Clermont and Lake County Related to Affordable Housing Program Coordination.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Public Services
Parks and Recreation
Approval for the Chairman to execute an Agreement Between Lake County and The Trout Lake Nature Center, Inc. Relating to Contribution of Infrastructure Sales Tax Funds for Long Term Recreational Programs.
Accounts Allowed/Road Projects/Municipalities
Approval to award Rose Street (Umatilla) Widening and Resurfacing Project No. 4-95, Bid No. B-6-5-11, to Superior Asphalt Company, Inc. and to encumber and expend funds in the amount of $162,887.15 from the Road Impact Fee Fund - Benefit District 2, Commissioner District 5.
Accounts Allowed/Bids/Road Projects
Approval to award CR-561 Widening and Resurfacing Project No. 6-95, Bid No. B-6-5-13, to American Asphalt, Inc. and to encumber and expend funds in the amount of $670,092.80 from the Road Impact Fee Fund - Benefit District 2, Commissioner District 3.
Accounts Allowed/Bids/Road Projects
Approval to award CR-435 Widening and Resurfacing Project No. 15-94, Bid No. B-6-5-10, to Professional Dirt Service, Inc. and to encumber and expend funds in the amount of $560,966.00 from the Road Impact Fee Fund - Benefit District 3, Commission District 4.
Accounts Allowed/Bids/Road Projects
Approval to award Brantley Branch Road (CR# r-6797) and SR-44 Intersection Improvement Project No. 2-95, Bid No. B-6-5-11, to Superior Asphalt Company, Inc. and to encumber and expend funds in the amount of $134,578.00 from the Transportation Trust Fund - Commission District 4.
Accounts Allowed/Bids/Road Projects
Approval to award Project No. 7-94: Road Improvements to Lake Griffin Road, Griffin View Drive, French Road and Richardson Road, Bid No. B-6-5-09, to Paquette Paving Company, Inc. and to encumber and expend funds in the amount of $104,312.50 from the Transportation Trust Fund and $684,603.50 from the Road Impact Fee Fund - Benefit District 3, Commissioner District 5.
Municipalities/Roads-County & State
Approval of temporary closing of Old 441 (5th Avenue) in Mount Dora from Alexander Street East to Tremain.
Accounts Allowed/State Agencies/Contracts, Leases & Agreements
Approval to advertise a Request for Professional Services (RPS) for Consulting Engineering Services pursuant to the CCNA Act, Chapter 287 of the Florida Statutes at an estimated cost of $120,000 from the Road Impact Fee Fund, request approval of signatures on Joint Participation Agreements with St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and approval of the selection and negotiating committees for the SR-19 Stormwater Management Feasibility Study Project No. 12-95 - Road Impact Fee Benefit District 2, Commissioner Districts 3 and 4.
Accounts Allowed/Public Services
Approval to advertise a Request for Professional Services (RPS) for Consulting Engineering Services pursuant to the CCNA Act, Chapter 287 of the Florida Statutes, at an estimated cost of $250,000 from the Transportation Trust Fund, and approval of the selection and negotiating committees for the Lake Minneola and Lake Minnehaha Bridge Design Project No. 11-95 - Commissioner District 2.
Accounts Allowed/Bids/Road Projects
Approval to advertise for bids for Road Improvement Project No. 9-95 to Donovan Lane, N. Emeralda Island Road, N. Em-En-El Grove Road, and CR-452 at an estimated cost of $232,200 from the Transportation Trust Fund - Commissioner District 5.
Road Vacations
Approval to advertise Road Vacation Petition No. 783 by Lake County Public Services/Solid Waste to Vacate Road Right-of-Way, Plat of the Town of Lady Lake, Sec. 20, Twp. 18, Rge. 24, Lady Lake area - Commissioner District 5.
Road Vacations
Approval to advertise Road Vacation Petition No. 784 by Karl Rosebaum to Vacate Utility Easement, Orange Blossom Gardens Unit 3.1B, Sec. 6, Twp. 18, Rge. 24, Lady Lake area - Commissioner District 5.
Road Vacations
Approval to advertise Road Vacation Petition No. 785 by Lykes Brothers, Inc. to Vacate Tracts and Rights-of-Way, Plat of Bowman Realty Company, Sec. 8, Twp. 24, Rge. 26, Clermont area - Commissioner District 2.
Resolutions/Signs/Roads-County & State
Approval of Resolution authorizing the posting of speed limits on the following roads: Indiana Av. (3-4463); Elray Bv. (3-4463B); Palmetto St. (3-4463A); Carroll's Ct. (3-4356); Betty's Ct. (3-4356C); Chestnut Dr. (3-4361); Melanie Ln. (3-4261); Simpson Ln. (3-4362A); Close Ct. (3-4560); Valencia Av. (3-4253); Tangelo St. (3-4253A); Mandarin St. (3-4253B); Temple Av. (3-4253C); Alane Ct. (3-4356A); Brown Av. (3-4464); Wee St. (3-4360); Saunders Cir. (3-4259); Bennett Dr. (3-4660); Lake Center Dr. (3-4562); Droylsden Ln. (4-5269); Lakeview St. (3-4257); Westmoreland Av. (3-4867B); Oak View Dr. (3-4353A); Anderson Dr. (3-4353); Bernice Ct. (3-4661); Country Club Dr. (4-5268); Bay Rd. (3-4260) and Country Club Rd. (4-5170).
Deeds/Roads-County & State
Approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:
Deed No.: 1347
Applicant: Ronald Miller and Florence Prohaska
Location: Eustis, Belmont Heights, Lots in Block 1
Recommend: Reserve 33 feet from centerline of Aldrich St.
#3-4866C, reserve 33 feet from centerline of
Belmont Ave. #3-4866
Deeds/Roads-County & State
Deed No.: 2521
Applicant: Samuel A. Griffey and Juanita B. Griffey
Location: Lake Kathryn, Lakeview Park, lots in Block Z
Recommend: Reserve 25 feet from centerline of Luella Avenue
Deeds/Roads-County & State
Deed No.: 2695
Applicant: Rickey E. Roberson and Jeanette H. Roberson
Location: Mount Plymouth, lots in Block 14
Recommend: Reserve 50 feet from centerline of CR#435,
25 feet from centerline of Creston Avenue,
25 feet from centerline of Ghent
Deeds/Roads-County & State
Deed No.: 2803
Applicant: Longbranch Enterprises, Inc.
Location: East Umatilla, lots in Block 62
Recommend: 33 feet from centerline of West 7th Ave.,
33 feet from centerline of West 6th Ave.
Deeds/Roads-County & State
Acceptance of the following Statutory Warranty Deeds:
Judith A. Bazinet
C-#448
James S. Foutz and Carrie P. Foutz
C-#42
H. James Simpson, Jr.
Turkey Lake #2/3-2924
James A. Thomas and Charlene U. Thomas
Lane Park #3-3637
Nancy Barth
Lane Park
Accounts Allowed/Purchasing
Request 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; approve and execute contracts and encumber funds.
A) Authorization to Seek Bids, Proposals and Professional Services.
DIVISION AMOUNT
PUBLIC SERVICES $15,000.00
Authorization to seek quotes for Professional Services for surveying of Merry Road's Right-of-Ways; this will be associated with the Impact Fee Project 10-95. Quotes will be obtained per the guidelines specified in Lake County Procedure LC-13, Acquisition, Selection, Work Assignment and Contract Negotiation for Continuing Contract for Consulting Services. Funding for this project is available from account #115.5056610.541.8600672.
B) Authorization to Waive Bid Requirements and Accept Quotes and Issue Purchase Orders.
DIVISION AMOUNT
FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES $27,000.00
Authorization to waive bid requirements and allow Purchasing to receive quotes and award a Purchase Order to the most responsive quoter for one, new 14' Step Van. This van will be used by Emergency Services for a Mobile Air Supply Unit. Their old Mobile Van was totalled in an accident in February and replacement is needed immediately to ensure that air support service is provided to the Fire Surpression Forces. Funding for this vehicle is available from account #168.2136131.522.8300640.
F) Approve and Execute Contracts, Agreements, Amendments, Chairman's Signature and Encumber Funds.
DIVISION AMOUNT
PUBLIC SERVICES $ 9,800.00
Farner, Barley and Associates/Authorization for the Chairman to sign an amendment to their Continuing Contract for Countywide Professional Consulting Services to survey County Road 42, for Road Project 8-95, pending the County Attorney's approval. On February 7, 1995 the Board approved permission to quote per the guidelines of Lake County Procedure LC-13, Acquisition, Selection, Work Assignment and Contract Negotiation for Continuing Contract for
Consulting Services. Funding for this service is available from account #115.5056610.541.8600671.
SOLID WASTE $120,000.00
Laidlaw Environmental Services/Authorization for the Chairman to sign a Change Order to increase the encumbered funds to $240,000.00 for Laidlaw Environmental Service's contract for Hazardous Waste Management Services pending the County Attorney's approval. On November 12, 1993 the Board approved a two year extension with an approximate fiscal impact for 1993/94 of $120,000.00. This contract will expire on December 16, 1995. Funding for this service is available from account #420.4546270.534.8300340.
TAX COLLECTOR'S OFFICE $ 0.00
Tavares Associates/Authorization for the Chairman to sign amendment one to Tavares Associate's contract for the lease of office space for the Tax Collector pending the County Attorney's approval. This amendment specified that the rental payment will include estimated charges for common area maintenance and upkeep, property taxes and insurance. On December 16, 1994 the Board approved the original contract with an approximate fiscal impact of $30,356.88; this amendment causes no fiscal increase.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Ordinances/Solid Waste
Approval to issue Temporary Franchise #103 to Ace Septic, Inc. for the collection and disposal of septic waste with the requested exemption from Lake County Ordinance 1988-13 Waste Flow.
Municipalities/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Solid Waste
Approval and signature on an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Umatilla related to the payment of Solid Waste Management System Fees.
COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/PARKS AND RECREATION
Mr. Chuck Pula, Parks and Recreation Coordinator, addressed the request for approval for Sunrise ARC to maintain 18 County Parks and four Cemeteries twice a month for the months of April through September, 1995 at a cost of $15,540. Mr. Pula noted that it had been costing the County approximately $27,300 to maintain these same areas. Mr. Pula explained that staff, during this period of time, would be caring more often for the larger parks and providing the level of service that they have needed. He recommended that Sunrise ARC perform these services, for a six month period, after which time an evaluation would be done, in order to determine whether they were performing up to a satisfactory level of service, and an evaluation would be done on
the parks services to see whether accomplishments were being made in the larger parks. It would be his recommendation to come back to the Board and request that these services by Sunrise ARC be considered on a year round basis.
Mr. John Askew, Executive Director, Sunrise ARC, addressed the Board and explained that, for some time through the County, Sunrise ARC had been receiving annual grants, in the amount of approximately $10,000. He would like to come forward with the concept that Sunrise ARC would rather provide services to the County that would develop into employment opportunities for people with disabilities, and therefore, waive its right to bill the County for $2,500 per quarter, in return for a working contract with the County.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved for Sunrise ARC to maintain 18 County Parks and four Cemeteries twice a month for the months of April through September, 1995 at a cost of $15,540.
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS/MUNICIPALITIES
Mr. Chuck Pula, Parks and Recreation Coordinator, addressed the Board to discuss the differential fees in relation to the City of Clermont's proposed revision to Section 6 of the Interlocal Agreement Between Lake County and the City of Clermont concerning the amount of $40,000 for ball fields. He explained that the City of Clermont was requesting that a change be made to allow the differential fees. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board had reviewed the request several times and voted unanimously not to support the revision, due to this being recommended after the project review and preliminary work process. The Advisory Board also recommended that the $40,000 be awarded to Clermont; if it was not awarded to Clermont, that $20,000 be awarded to Groveland and $20,000 be awarded to Montverde. Mr. Pula noted that Mr. Jim Myers, Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, and Ms. Debbie Stivender, Vice-Chairman, were present in the audience.
Mr. Wayne Saunders, City Manager, City of Clermont, addressed the Board and discussed the history of the League of Cities Committee, which was organized sometime during the late 1980s to meet with candidates to discuss the growing problem that the cities had with providing recreational facilities and services for everyone in the County. He explained that, since that time, there had been a tremendous amount of growth in south Lake County in the unincorporated area. Mr. Saunders addressed the number of teams that currently exist and explained how often the fields were used during the week. Mr. Saunders explained that the City of Clermont does not need ball fields to meet the needs of the City, but it needed them to meet the needs of the people in the unincorporated area of the County. Mr. Saunders stated that a tally was made of everyone that was registered last year, and 71% of the users of the fields were from outside of the City. He explained that the County Commissioners would only be providing capital funds to build fields, but consideration needed to be given as to who would be paying to operate and maintain the fields. The costs involve approximately $5,000 to $6,000 per year to operate and maintain one field, and Mr. Saunders explained that it would not be reasonable to ask the citizens of Clermont to pay those costs every year, because if it were not for the influence of the people outside of the City, the City would not even need the field. He stated that, in the future, consideration needed to be given to an operation and maintenance budget from the County for recreation to help all cities. He estimated approximately $7,000 to be generated this year from the non-residential fees.
Discussion occurred regarding other ways to maintain the ball fields, and the schools involvement with the maintenance of the fields.
Mr. Saunders explained that he was aware of the criteria in the grant application and noted that approximately one year ago, the League of Cities had submitted a letter to the Board requesting
that the stipulation, that the City was opposing, be taken out of all of the contracts, and that the City of Clermont had been pursuing this issue before it applied for the grant. Mr. Saunders pointed out that another recreation project could have been created, and a request could have been made for money where a non-residential fee would have come into account. He explained that the $40,000 would not cover the actual costs for building the field.
Commr. Cadwell explained that, at some point, the County may need to consider another revenue source to help the cities with the programs, but that all applicants were made aware of the criteria prior to making the application for the funds, and if the City of Clermont could use a part of the funding for another project, the Board could award a portion of the $40,000 to the City of Clermont, and distribute the rest of the money between the other two applicants this year. He suggested that the rules not be changed in the middle of the process, and to leave the program just the way it had currently been established, because of the needs for this program, and if the Board needed to offer other monies in operation and maintenance, then the Board could consider another revenue source.
Commr. Good explained that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee pointed out to him that this grant was applied for under the condition of no residential fees, and the Board needed to move forward with the decision, and perhaps address the other issues in the future, with hopes that the Advisory Board would consider some of the discussion from today, as well as whether capital improvements include upgrading facilities, or just the creation of new facilities.
Mr. Saunders noted that the City was not sent an agreement, until after the awards were made for funding.
Commr. Gerber explained that the Board had to be cautious about the way it distributed the grant, and it being an incentive for the cities to spend money on recreation that was passive, in most respects, and not meeting the needs of recreation in its area.
Discussion occurred regarding the funds being spent on other types of recreation, with Mr. Saunders noting that the City's number one priority would be the ball field and this would be where the money would be spent.
Commr. Gerber expressed her concern that, as a Board, it needed to be cautious about being asked in the future to become a recreational department for the people in the south end of the County, if it does not get into some type of working partnership with the cities, especially Clermont. She indicated that she did have a problem with changing the rules for this particular year, however, she would seriously suggest future consideration being given to some type of agreement for cost sharing.
Commr. Swartz explained that the intent of this Board had been for several years to find a way to work cooperatively with the cities to provide those intensive, active recreation programs, because it would be far more expensive for the County to try and fund those in any parts of the County. He explained that a couple of issues needed to be considered, because then, when the Board gets into the next cycle of funding, those issues can be addressed. Commr. Swartz discussed the possibility of providing some method by which cities, that are particularly impacted on the operational end, have the ability to recover some of those costs, and stated that he would be glad to take these things to the Advisory Committee to begin looking at these issues. He stated that he did not believe that the Board could make that change during this funding cycle given the fact that everyone that had applied had understood the requirements.
Mr. Jim Myers, Chairman, Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee, addressed the Board and explained that the issue today was the current funding cycle, and that he felt it was very clear on the applications that you cannot charge a differential fee.
Last year when the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board made a recommendation to the County Commissioners, it was anticipated on the Advisory Board's part that this may be an issue, and it was stipulated, at that point in time, if it was an issue, the Advisory Board would be allowed to make recommendations for alternative projects in the district. Mr. Myers stated that there was a need to take another look at the direction that the County was going to go in the future, as far as some of the other problems, and if there was a direction that the Board wanted the Advisory Board to take other than the current one, it needed to be worked out before the next funding cycle.
Commr. Swartz suggested that option one would be to consider would having the Advisory Committee look at whether or not it makes any sense to have any type of uniform differential fee that would be allowed, even under this program, and option two would be to try an implement something that would be similar to the library funding formula whereby there would be a fee that would go to any operational cost based on the number of unincorporated residents that use the facilities.
Commr. Cadwell asked that he be able to work with the League of Cities on the options presented by Commr. Swartz, because the grant program involved others besides the cities. He felt that the Board would not want to get into something as extensive as the library interlocal agreements, because that would dictate the level of service. He hoped that the Board would commit to meet with the League of Cities and look at the differential fee question.
Mr. Saunders explained that there were many other cities that charge differential fees, and if the City of Clermont was denied its request, he would then request that the Board consider another need, which would be an independent group called Recreation Club, which runs a park with shuffleboard courts and tennis courts, in the amount of $10,000.
Mr. Myers addressed the Board and indicated that he did not doubt the need for the project being alluded to by Mr. Saunders, but he was concerned with the process that was in place and the time tables for the applications, and the Board getting away from the criteria that was in place. Mr. Myers explained the projects that were being proposed by Groveland and Montverde.
Commr. Cadwell discussed awarding Clermont $10,000 and splitting the balance between Montverde and Groveland.
Commr. Good regretted that the issue regarding the change to Section 6 could not be worked out with the City of Clermont, but he did believe, in terms of establishing the policy of funding the non-differential fee programs, to be consistent with the grant application process, and the Board needed not to make this change. He further stated that he understood that Clermont was not willing to accept the grant with its original conditions.
Commr. Good made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Swartz, to split the $40,000 into two $20,000 grants, under the recommendations of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, and to be awarded to the Montverde and Groveland projects under the 1994/95 funding.
Commr. Swartz stated that, as Commr. Cadwell takes this issue to the League of Cities, he, as liaison of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee, would work with them to also look at alternatives.
Commr. Gerber stated that she would vote against the motion, because she felt that $10,000 should be given to Clermont, with the balance of the funding being split with Groveland and Montverde, and because the request was proportional to the need. She explained that this area of the County had the biggest burst in development, and the need was there.
Commr. Hanson felt that everyone had recognized that there were not enough funds to meet all of the recreational needs in the County, but yet the Board could not ignore the outlying areas and
the smaller towns. She explained that sometimes you have the greatest opportunity for volunteerism in the smaller towns and less dependence on the cities and the government. She agreed that the interlocal agreements needed to be developed with long term funding in mind for maintenance and operation.
The Chairman called for the vote on the motion, which was carried by a 4-1 vote. Commr. Gerber voted "no".
RECESS AND REASSEMBLY
At 10:15 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for ten minutes.
SOLID WASTE/CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS/LANDFILLS
Mr. David Crowe, Interim Director of Solid Waste, and Mr. Gary Debo, Construction Contracts Manager, were present to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Phoenix Construction Services, Inc.'s Final Change Order No. 1A for the Umatilla Sanitary Landfill Closure Repair and authorized the Chairman to execute upon receipt of executed documents from the Contractor, subject to the County Attorney's review and approval.
COUNTY MANAGER'S BUSINESS
FACILITIES AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS/COURTHOUSE
Ms. Sue Whittle, Interim County Manager, addressed the Board and stated that there had been a number of questions raised about furnishings for the Administration Building and the purchases, and she thought it would be helpful to have an update on the issue presented by staff. She requested that staff bring to the Board a report on the process that was followed, and that staff would be looking for more direction on where it needed to go from here.
Mr. Mike Anderson, Director, Facilities and Capital Improvements, addressed the Board to review the history of the program, and stated that, upon the completion of the Criminal Justice Facility and Judicial Center, the renovation of the three
buildings, the Historical Courthouse, the round building (Administration Building), and the Sheriff's building, had to be considered. Mr. Anderson explained that, after many meetings with the Board, it was the consensus that the renovation of the new facilities needed to be larger, because of more interaction of the Board over the last 20 years, and the County needed to comply with the space standards that had been approved by the Board, which began with the design of the courthouse and the jail and was carried over to the renovation of the existing buildings. After many public meetings, which included workshops, it was the consensus of the Board that the meeting room would be moved to the second floor, and the Commissioners' offices would be located on the third floor. Mr. Anderson discussed the process used to determine how the existing furniture would be utilized, as well as what new furniture would be required to meet the existing needs. He explained how the total budget of $700,000 for Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment (FF&E) was established, and noted that the Commissioners furniture was not identified separately. He explained that he consulted with the architect, Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum (HOK), on how to establish a budget for FF&E line items, and they explained that it was typically determined by user demand and would be a percentage of the construction costs. Based on their experience, they recommended 15% of the bricks and mortar cost, which would be the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). The 15% was used for the courthouse and the jail, but when establishing the FF&E line item for the renovation project, staff felt that 15% was excessive, because the same level of furnishings was not needed. Therefore, a 6 1/2 percent of the GMP, which was established at that time to be $10,750,000, was determined as the percentage needed for the renovation project ($698,750 which was rounded to $700,000). Mr. Anderson explained that 300 work areas, to be placed in the Historical Courthouse, the round building, and the Sheriff's building, had to be supplied with furniture, as well as
the Commissioners' offices, and the County Manager's offices, and it was determined that it would take approximately $2,333 per work area. He noted that the Commissioners' areas were not pulled out separately and placed into a single line item.
Mr. Terry Short, Odell & Associates, addressed the Board to explain the selection process that was used for the purchase of the furniture. He noted that the project was bid through Metric, and the purpose of the bidding was to get to a vendor/supplier manufacturer who could provide the best discount, meet the quality requirements, and would provide the discount for an additional five years after the project was completed. He stated that four vendors bid on the project, and all four were above budget, but one of reasons was because they bid on a unit price basis. After reviewing the bids, there were two firms that were short-listed, Mohler and Interior Design Services (IDS). After visitations and negotiations, Mohler offered the best package in terms of quality of products, discounts, and commitments to meet budget and schedule. At this time, the recommendation was brought to the Board, and the FF&E budget was transferred to Metric as part of their contract. Mr. Short pointed out that a separate line item for the Commissioners' furniture was not identified, and if that was a fault on his part, he would accept the responsibility for not making that as a recommendation. Mr. Short addressed the concern about the quality of what was purchased, and the price for the quality, and explained that the furniture by Mohler had a ten year warranty, fix or replace, which was a high guarantee for office furniture. He explained that the 53% discount was the best price that Mohler had ever offered on this furniture. Mr. Short stated that he had consulted with the President of Mohler, and he wanted to do anything he could to help resolve the problems with the furniture. The company had offered to take back partial furniture giving the County full credit for all items that were returned.
The other option to the Board would be to maintain the furniture that had been received.
Discussion occurred regarding the efforts being made by those involved with the renovation to reuse materials, doors, and furniture.
Mr. Anderson stated that, when the County first began the project, because of the nature of the job and the amount of money, and one large project just being completed, he had requested that an internal audit be made. Because of comments that had been made regarding the credibility of his department, he offered to the Board a request for an internal, procedural audit on his department, because Facilities and Capital Improvements takes great pride in how it conducted its business. As far as policies and procedures that have been reflected through Facilities and Capital Improvements, Mr. Anderson stated that he would take full responsibility, and noted that all of the design and construction had been done with the Board's approval.
Commr. Swartz discussed the tracking that had been done of the budget, except for the heating and cooling system, which had to be replaced in the round building. He noted that this was a major cost that was not in the original plans.
Mr. Anderson presented an explanation of the heating and cooling technology that was devised to resolve the problem in the round building.
Commr. Hanson stated that she had no problem with the credibility of Mr. Anderson's department. She explained that, if there had been fault, the fault had been that the Commissioners did not ask the right question. The question would have been what was it going to cost for the offices, and the County Commissioner's Chamber, and she stated that the Board should have asked the question. Commr. Hanson discussed some of the decisions made previously by the Board members, and explained that, at this point in time, it was immaterial to her whether the Commissioners kept
their furniture, or what they did with it. She felt that the furniture was appropriate for the office, she did not see it as extravagant, and it would serve the need of the public. Commr. Hanson stated that, if the Board made a decision on the furniture, it needed to be made by the entire Board, not by one Commissioner. She reminded the Board that the company would not be charging a restocking fee, which was an indication that the vendor was willing to work with the County to rectify the problem.
Commr. Swartz explained that everyone had different feelings about their needs for their office. He informed the Board that he had consulted with the vendor, and there were other items of furniture available, and that would be more suitable, if the members wished to have some of the pieces sent back and replaced with other furniture. He suggested that, in the immediate coming days, the members indicate to Mr. Anderson and Mr. Short the items that each Commissioner did not need, or that he felt uncomfortable having in his office. The vendor had expressed a real willingness to work with them, and to any extent where a Commissioner might want to downsize his furniture. Commr. Swartz encouraged the Board, if they were inclined to operate within that framework, to advise Mr. Anderson and/or Mr. Short of the changes.
Commr. Good discussed the issue of elected officials not always knowing the right questions to ask, with this being one of those cases, and explained that the Board needed to check on its priorities, as elected officials. He discussed items that he felt he could return, or exchange, in order to reserve funds.
Mr. Short stated that, fortunately, the vendor had two other major businesses that use the same type of furniture in this particular finish. It was his understanding that any items being returned would be picked up immediately, so there may be a duration before getting them replaced.
Ms. Sue Whittle, Interim County Manager, explained that the County had been moving fast on the three projects, which involved
$14 million. She noted that the cost of the furniture in the six offices had been the only criticism, that she was aware of, that had been made on the entire project. Ms. Whittle stated that the total renovation was necessary, because of conditions of the buildings, and the needs of the County as it had grown and progressed. The policy that the Board had followed may not be one that it wished to follow in the future. It did not allow for examination of individual prices, but that was the process that was approved, and the process that was followed. For the future, she explained that the Board may want to set up some system that would allow a little more pre-auditing of individual items that are purchased, and a closer look being made by possibly someone in the Finance Office prior to items being purchased.
Commr. Swartz stated that, if the Board was agreeable, within the context of keeping the major pieces in tact, so the offices remain in terms of their major appearance, and some latitude being provided on some of the other pieces, the Board should instruct staff and move forward.
Discussion occurred regarding the different needs of each Commissioner, with an agreement being made that the 42 inch table be replaced, and the four side chairs, with each Commissioner continuing to determine his own needs, and consulting with staff.
It was noted that no formal action was needed by the Board.
Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, addressed the Board to discuss the purchase of the furniture. Mr. Havill stated that the people of the County wanted not only an investigation of the seven offices furnishings, but they wanted to look at the whole $14 million that was being spent on the County's renovation. He stated that the people wanted to know what the Board was spending the seventh cent on, and that the Board owed it to the people to have a public investigation of this by outside sources and contractors. Mr. Havill stated that all of the furniture should be sent back, and the County should go to Budget Furniture, or some place like
it, and buy furniture. It was noted that he had given the Board a proposal for $1,165 per office. Mr. Havill explained that this was a $14 million renovation, and the people of this County wanted a responsibility from the Board as to what was being done with the money, and they wanted the details.
Mr. Anderson explained that he had requested a procedural audit at the beginning of the project, and he would invite the same audit at any time. He stated that he had extended this in the past for all of the projects. At this time, he explained the commitment that the Board had with the vendor of the furniture.
Ms. Barbara Lehman, Director, Finance, Audit and Budget, explained that the cost of an audit would depend on the scope of the audit. The audit of the County's Financial Statements cost $106,000. She explained that, when a audit was prepared for a lesser scope, it would be based on the hours it would take to do the work. A fixed cost could be negotiated for a contract, not to exceed a certain amount.
Commr. Swartz stated that the Board could ask the Clerk's Office, who was the Comptroller and the auditor of how the County spends its money, to review, as they have done in the past, County expenditures.
Commr. Swartz made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Cadwell, to request from the Clerk of the Courts that his Finance Department, as they have done in the past, review and audit the expenses of the renovation projects and compare them, in terms of costs, to the previous projects that have been done for the County's Capital Improvements.
Under discussion, Commr. Cadwell noted that the Interim County Manager had indicated that, from this point forward, there would be some type of review process on purchases.
Commr. Swartz discussed the balance of the contract with Mohler and explained that staff was going to continue to look at places where furniture could be reduced and additional savings
could be made, and noted that the County was not obligated to buy a particular level from Mohler. He explained that the County had a contract based on specifications and unit cost for those items.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously.
TIMES CERTAIN
AGRICULTURE/COMMITTEES
Commr. Hanson addressed the Board and stated that Mr. Joe Shipes was present to discuss the formation of an Ad Hoc Committee for the purpose of acquiring the Museum of Agriculture for Lake County. She noted that the Board had a list of proposed members that had been put together by Mr. Shipes for consideration. She stated, if the County had an Ad Hoc Committee that would look at the costs and the benefit of the Agricultural Museum being in Lake County and determine whether it would be feasible to move forward, a proposal could then be made to the County Commission for their approval or objection. If it was approved, the recommendation could then go on to the Agricultural Museum Board of Trustees for the State. The Board had also been presented with a list of members who serve on the Board of Trustees at the State level. Commr. Hanson informed the Board that September would be the date for the site selection.
Mr. Joe Shipes, member of the Board of Trustees, Florida Agricultural Museum, addressed the Board and explained that September was a tentative date. The Florida Agricultural Museum was waiting for State funding to do the feasibility study, design and layout of the museum. Mr. Shipes explained that, if the County was interested in acquiring the Agricultural Museum, it needed to put together an effort and go after it, because there were other counties interested in it. He explained that the Board of Trustees was looking for certain demographics, which were not clear at this time, but would be developed through the study. If the County was interested, an Ad Hoc Committee needed to be put together. The
list of individuals provided to the Board were interested in serving on the Committee. Mr. Shipes hoped that this issue would fall under some department, such as the Tourist Development Council (TDC), who could give the Ad Hoc Committee the support it needed to pursue the Agricultural Museum.
Commr. Cadwell felt there had been interest expressed for the Agricultural Museum, but an avenue had not been found where the Board could take it. It came before the Industrial Development Authority (IDA), and the IDA did not feel it should be placed with them as an issue. It was then sent to the TDC, who directed it to the Agriculture Committee. Commr. Cadwell stated that he was concerned about the size of the Committee being proposed, and the time frame that had been put together.
Discussion occurred regarding the membership being suggested for the Ad Hoc Committee, with Commr. Hanson indicating that she would step down and let Mr. Shipes be the representative from the Board of Trustees, Florida Agricultural Museum.
Commr. Cadwell noticed that there were two individuals listed from his district and stated that one could be eliminated.
Commr. Hanson explained that the Ad Hoc Committee would consider the area located at Highways 19/27, as well as other possible locations. She noted other elements to be considered for the location of the Agricultural Museum.
Commr. Swartz discussed the tourist/fairground attraction that was being considered for the property at Highways 19/27, and stated that, if the County was able to attract this type of facility at the property, in conjunction with this type of facility, the County might find that some of the things that the Agricultural Museum would have to incorporate in their buildings would be the type of things the Board would want to also see, and could work cooperatively and jointly. He stated that he did not have a problem with the list of individuals presented, but questioned the time frame involved with the selection.
Commr. Hanson stated that, if the County was able to get the Agricultural Museum in Lake County, it would definitely have an affect on the feasibility of the Expo Center, therefore, the timing was critical.
Commr. Swartz noted that, if the Ad Hoc Committee was designed to study this issue, to put together plans and proposals, and ultimately make recommendations to the Board for action, it would be a Sunshine committee, and suggested that they would benefit from having a liaison, even if it would be a non-voting liaison, so that the Board would have a member there who could report back to the Board periodically.
Discussion occurred regarding the timing involved for the appointment of members to serve on the Ad Hoc Committee.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Good and carried unanimously, the Board approved for the "Lake County" Florida Agricultural Museum Ad Hoc Committee to be formed, with any changes, recommendations, or deletions by the next meeting, and that it would come under the auspices of the Tourist Development Council (TDC), with some support from staff.
REPORTS - COUNTY ATTORNEY
CONTRACTS, LEASES AND AGREEMENTS/IMPACT FEE STUDY
The Board was informed by Mr. Rolon W. Reed, Interim County Attorney, that Mr. Tim Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney, was requesting the opportunity to bring an item up for discussion. Mr. Reed noted that, procedurally, the item was not on the agenda, and the Board needed approval, by a motion, to place it on the agenda for discussion.
On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to place on the agenda, for discussion, the issue involving the impact fee study.
Mr. Hoban explained that the Board was in the process of negotiating a contract with Real Estate Research Consultants for an impact fee study. There were two issues that needed to be
addressed. Mr. Hoban addressed Task 2.5.1 and stated that it was his understanding, after the meeting with the consultant, and Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney and President of the Leesburg Area Chamber of Commerce, that based on an exchange between Commr. Good and the consultant, more than one statistical measure would be used in the contract. After speaking to the consultant, he had indicated that he did not want to proceed to take this direction.
Mr. Hoban addressed the second issue, which involved Task 3.2.1 regarding State Road 441. He stated that there was a portion of SR 441, from Highway 27 to SR 441 into Tavares, which was somewhat close to full capacity, but was not at full capacity yet. There was an exchange in the agreement at the Board meeting that, when the interpretation was made, and the study done, they would take into account that the County was close to a moratorium situation on SR 441. He explained that, even though he and Mr. Richey were close to reaching an agreement on the contract language, his discussion with the consultant has indicated that he does not want to do this, that it was not really in his computer models, and that this would not be a part of what he gives as a final product.
Mr. Hoban explained that, as of this morning, the consultant had expressed to Commr. Good that he does not wish to have the two items, as he explained, in the contract, and therefore, he would like direction from the Board whether these two items should be waived, or whether they should be in the contract.
Commr. Good explained that, in regards to Task 2.5.1, the consultant's statement basically indicated that he felt that there may be some data sets arise, which were not conducive to statistical measure, and judgment, or opinion might be needed. He understood that the purpose of the study was to try and resolve conflict to make a decision. Therefore, he had requested that two measures be used for data sets, and at this time, explained his reasonsing for the request. Commr. Good explained that the Board
needed to commission the study with a very clearly defined scope and sequence, and that this measure would be very critical to the study, so whoever does the study needs to apply more than one measure. He further stated that it was his understanding that this point had been agreed to by those involved.
Mr. Steve Richey addressed the Board and explained that it was his understanding that the consultant was saying that there may not be two evaluations, and there may be only one way to verify, so he was not going to agree to two, when, in fact, it may not be available. If there are two, and it was reasonable to do it, he understood that the consultant was going to do it, depending on the data analysis that he was looking at, but that may not be available, and he did not feel comfortable having Mr. Hoban telling him how to do his data analysis. He suggested that additional language indicating that, when it was available and reasonable, he would do it two different ways, and that this may help to clarify the issue.
Commr. Swartz discussed Task 2.5.1 and suggested the following: "In order to assure validity of analysis where possible, each data set will be analyzed utilizing more than one (1) statistical measure."
Mr. Hoban addressed Task 3.2.1 and presented the background for determining the language currently before the Board, which he felt had been agreed upon as a consideration at the public hearing. The response that he was currently receiving from the consultant was that this would not be very helpful with his study, and it would not be factored into his study. Mr. Hoban explained that Mr. Richey and he were very close to agreeing upon the contract language, which indicates closely to what was before the Board, but the consultant was verbally expressing that, even if the language was provided, which he does not have at this point, or the numbers, it would not help him do his study.
Mr. Richey explained that it was his understanding that the wording would be acceptable, he just did not want to generate the information. He stated that whatever information was available would be available to the consultant to have him analyze as part of the evaluation, and he felt comfortable that this would be done. He stated that he does not have a problem, on behalf of the Chamber, with modifying the language. He would not have a problem signing the contract, and he would not sign the contract, or have the Chamber sign the contract, without that analysis being there, and he would like the County to provide the underlying information of the status of State Road 441. He felt that it was not unreasonable to ask the consultant to consider the information as part of the economic effect, and he would consider it to be an appropriate condition of the contract, and would not sign it, unless he agreed to do it for the $33,000.
COMMISSIONERS
At 12:10 p.m., it was noted that Commr. Cadwell had to leave the meeting, due to other commitments.
CONTRACTS, LEASES AND AGREEMENTS/IMPACT FEE STUDY (Continued)
The Board reviewed the following revised language to Task 3.2.1, as submitted by Mr. Hoban and Mr. Richey:
"Real Estate Research Consultants, as part of the evaluation of construction activity likely shall consider there are portions of 441 in Lake County which have level of service restraints which might result in construction limitation, restrictions, or moratorium in those areas until remedied to comply with the Lake County Comprehensive Plan and Florida Statutes."
Commr. Good addressed the proposed wording and suggested the following:
"Real Estate Research Consultants, as part of the evaluation of construction activity likely shall consider there are portions of 441 in Lake County which have level of service restraints which shall result in construction limitations, restrictions, or moratorium according to the present Lake County Comprehensive Plan and Florida Statutes."
Mr. Richey explained his reasoning for including the term "remedied" in the language.
Mr. Hoban explained that he was verbally being told by the consultant that this would be another study and that, even if data was provided of what it would cost to remedy it, and the cost of building permits, it would not fit into his modem.
Mr. Hoban stated that the County would be paying the $10,000 when the agreement was signed between Real Estate Research Consultants and the Leesburg Area Chamber of Commerce.
Mr. Richey noted that, once the language was agreed upon by the Board, the only condition of the wording would be that the Board's staff would be providing underlying information, which would be evaluated by the consultant.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Good and carried unanimously, the Board approved to modify Task 2.5.1, as follows: "In order to assure validity of analysis, where possible each data set will be analyzed utilizing more than one (1) statistical measure."
The motion was carried by a 4-0 vote, with Commr. Cadwell not being present for the discussion or vote.
On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to strike the word "might", and insert the word "shall", in Task 3.2.1, in the modified language submitted to the Board.
The motion was carried by a 4-0 vote, with Commr. Cadwell not being present for the discussion or vote.
Mr. Richey noted that the new language would be conditioned upon information being provided by the County staff.
ADDENDUM NO. 1
COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA
RIGHTS-OF-WAY, ROADS & EASEMENTS/SUBDIVISIONS
CONTRACTS, LEASES AND AGREEMENTS
Mr. Jim Barker, Director, Environmental Management, and Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Services, were present to discuss the requests.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved the acceptance of Final Plat and Conservation Easement for Lake Myrtle Shores Subdivision, 19 lots - Commissioner District 1, subject to the County Attorney's review and approval, and approved the execution of the Agreement Between Lake County and Frank Robert Stiles and Patsy Dean Stiles for Conveyance of Right-of-Way property.
The motion was carried by a 4-0 vote, with Commr. Cadwell not being present for the discussion or vote.
COUNTY ATTORNEY - REPORTS
STATE AGENCIES
Mr. Rolon W. Reed, Interim County Attorney, discussed the request for direction to support the Department of Community Affair's (DCAs) effort to enforce the County Comprehensive Plan, or to defend the case on behalf of Viola Sharp, or merely to monitor its progress. Mr. Reed suggested that consistency would require the Board to give the same direction on this case, as the Board did with the case against Mr. Don Bailey, which was to continue to monitor the case and advise the Board of any pertinent changes.
Commr. Good made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Swartz, for the County Attorney's Office to continue to monitor the DCA vs. Viola Sharp case, and to inform the Board of any major changes that may be submitted.
Under discussion, Commr. Swartz explained that, when this issue came up before, he had asked for some review, at the staff level, of procedures that were being used for these types of cases. He felt that there had been some applications, not unlike these, where the applicants were told of a lot of these requirements, and went away dropping the whole issue. He believed that there may have been some inconsistency of how the County had applied, or not applied, the criteria, and he wanted to ensure that this would be reviewed and no longer occurring. Commr. Swartz stated that this was the issue that he would like to have reviewed, to ensure that the County was consistently applying the Comprehensive Plan criteria across the Board.
Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney representing Ms. Viola Sharp, addressed the Board and expressed her concern with the way the request had been worded. She felt that what DCA was calling for in the appeal was well beyond the County's Comprehensive Plan, so she felt that it was a misstatement of the issue that was before the Board. She stated that she was continually not copied on the matters from the County Attorney's Office, but yet the County was making the applicant the real party and interest, although with others it would be an appeal of development orders, which have been issued by Lake County. Ms. Bonifay stated that she would be happy to have the County monitor the case, but if the Board would read what was in the appeal, it goes well beyond anything in the Comprehensive Plan that was required, because DCA wanted the County to abandon the lot split process, and to only allow any subdivisions through the platting of lots. If the County wanted to take this direction, she suggested that the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) be changed to reflect this, but not to hold down the Administrative process, take peoples money, have them get through it, and now, if they are in the Green Swamp, if they applied for a lot split, they are going to be appealed. She suggested that perhaps the County should have a disclaimer.
Commr. Swartz explained that his question was whether the County, in these cases and others, was applying what the Comprehensive Plan was saying. He stated that DCA's position was that the County was not doing so, and this was what he wanted reviewed. He stated that he wanted this issue reviewed on these two points.
After further discussion of the issue, Ms. Bonifay noted that the case before the Board was a very contemporary case.
Commr. Swartz made reference to a case that went back almost a year or more ago, which was based on some of the same criteria, and requested that the issues he brought forward be reviewed. He felt the Board needed to stay consistent with what had been done in the past, and therefore, the County needed to step aside and monitor this case.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote. Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote.
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES
Commr. Good discussed the Resolution establishing the Solid Waste Study Committee and recommended the following changes to the language:
Page 2, Section 3. Membership, A.1. - Amend: "Two (2) members from each Commission District."
Page 3, Section 3. Membership, A.2. - Strike: "One (1) member of the unincorporated area of each Commission District."
Commr. Hanson felt that the membership would have the potential of becoming more weighted toward those who live in the city that have a completely different perspective than those who live in the unincorporated areas.
Commr. Good discussed having a committee with two sub-committees, which would consist of an unincorporated committee and a committee made up of cities.
Commr. Swartz stated that the two changes being recommended by Commr. Good would give the Board the latitude of going in either direction and ensuring the representation that reflected what each Commissioner felt he needed out of his district. He suggested the following change:
Page 3, Section 3. Membership A.3. - One (1) member recommended by the Lake County League of Cities and two municipal representatives from the cities' solid waste and/or recycling services.
Commr. Swartz stated that the Board could request that the League of Cities forward all three names to the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved to place the amendment of the Solid Waste Resolution on the agenda.
The motion was carried by a 4-0 vote, with Commr. Cadwell not being present for the discussion or vote.
Commr. Good made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Swartz, to approve the following changes to the Resolution:
Page 2 - 1. Two members from each Commission District.
Page 3 - 2. One member recommended by the Lake County League of Cities, and two members from the cities' solid waste services to be recommended by the League of Cities.
3. One (1) County Commissioner as liaison.
Under discussion, Commr. Swartz questioned whether this would change the quorum requirement. It was noted that the liaison Commissioner would be a voting member. He suggested that the liaison Commissioner only vote in case of a tie.
Commr. Good amended his motion to include the liaison Commissioner voting only in the case of a tie, with Commr. Swartz seconding the amendment to the motion.
The Chairman called for a vote on the amendment to the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote. Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote.
Commr. Good further amended his motion to change the quorum to seven (7) members to the Solid Waste Study Committee, with Commr. Swartz seconding the amendment to the motion.
The Chairman called for a vote on the second amendment to the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 4-0-vote. Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote.
The Chairman called for a vote on the original motion, as amended, to amend the Resolution for the Solid Waste Study Committee, which was carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote. Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote.
Commr. Good noted that he had presented a list of members for the Board to review.
Commr. Swartz suggested that names be brought back to the Board for consideration.
Commr. Good stated that he would bring back, to the next meeting, a list of the members who have been appointed, the reappointments and the new additions.
RESOLUTIONS
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Resolution proclaiming April, 1995 as Environmental Awareness Month.
ADDENDUM NO. 1
REPORTS
Commr. Hanson discussed the reception for the volunteers and informed the Board that it would be held at the Vocational-Technology Center.
Commr. Swartz suggested that, in terms of how the County notices the volunteers, the Board try to take advantage of the fact that all of the volunteers are, for the most part, of groups, and that a notice should be sent to those groups to ensure that they invite members of those groups. He also suggested that perhaps a few volunteers could be identified in a few categories for special recognition.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Good and carried unanimously, the Board approved to hold a reception for the volunteers working in Lake County Government on April 27, 1995.
COMMUNICATIONS
Commr. Hanson informed the Board that Derby Day would be Saturday, March 25, 1995, with the Trotter's Affair being Friday night.
COMMUNICATIONS
Commr. Swartz informed the Board that the program for the Moving Wall at Lake-Sumter Community College would be held Sunday, March 26, 1995, at 2 p.m.
COMMITTEES
Commr. Gerber reminded the Board, in behalf of Commr. Cadwell, that the Economic Development Council's (EDCs) quarterly meeting would be at Mission Inn on Thursday, March 23, 1995, at 5:30 p.m.
RESOLUTIONS/IMPACT FEES
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to adopt Resolution 1995-58 urging the Legislature to preserve home rule authority to impose impact fees and authorized the Chairman's signature, and to be forwarded to the League of Cities.
Commr. Swartz requested that the Chairman contact, either through letter or phone, all of the members of the Legislative Delegation, and impress upon them the importance of the Resolution, and the get Commr. Cadwell to make sure the cities were aware of the issue.
COMMITTEES/EDUCATION/ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Commr. Gerber discussed the recommendation made by the Natural Resources Advisory Committee concerning the formation of a task force on environmental education.
Commr. Hanson suggested that the Chairman bring back to the Board a recommendation of those individuals to serve on the task force on environmental education, on April 6, 1995.
CITIZEN QUESTION AND COMMENT PERIOD
Commr. Gerber called for any public comment or questions. It was noted that no one present wished to speak before the Board.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 12:50 p.m.
RHONDA H. GERBER, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK
TMR\BOARDMIN\3-21-95\4-3-95