The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, September 5, 2000, 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: Welton G. Cadwell, Chairman; Catherine C. Hanson, Vice Chairman; Rhonda H. Gerber; Robert A. Pool; and G. Richard Swartz, Jr. Others present were: Sue Whittle, County Manager; Sanford A. Minkoff, County Attorney; Wendy Taylor, Administrative Supervisor, Board of County Commissioner's Office; Barbara Lehman, Chief Deputy Clerk, County Finance; and Toni M. Riggs, Deputy Clerk.
Commr. Cadwell gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA UPDATE
Commr. Cadwell informed the Board that there was one printed Addendum to the Agenda and noted that Road Vacation #933, Ken Stokes, District 2, was not on the agenda, although it was scheduled to be heard today.
Commr. Pool made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Gerber, to approve to add to the agenda the public hearing on Road Vacation #933, Ken Stokes, District 2.
Commr. Cadwell informed the Board that Mr. Ben Biscan from Florida Central Railroad was here today. The Board had some concerns in regards to rail car storage, in certain portions of the County, and Mr. Biscan will be giving the Board an update on this issue. He noted that this update will take place before the public hearing process starts.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
MINUTES
Commr. Gerber asked that the Board postpone action on the Minutes of August 1, 2000, until later in the day.
CLERK OF COURTS' CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Clerk of Courts' Consent Agenda, Tabs 1 through 8, for the following requests:
Account Allowed
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.
Bonds - Contractor
Request to approve the following:
New
4955-00 Eugene D. Aurand/All Air Service Systems
5796-00 Manuel Romero d/b/a Mar Electric
Cancellations
1865-99 Lance Dotson Construction
Accounts Allowed/County Property
Request to approve the list of items to be deleted from Fixed Assets for the month of September, 2000, in the amount of $40,774.45.
Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges
Request to approve the Monthly Distribution of Revenue Traffic/Criminal Cases, for the Month Ending July 31, 2000, as follows:
Disbursement made to Board: $156,234.77
Same period last year: $132,629.36
Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges/Code Enforcement
Request to approve and authorize signatures on the following:
a. Release of Fine for Lawton Minchew, from Order of Fine in the amount of $3,975.00, dated July 10, 1997, and recorded in OR Book 1532 pages 2149 and 2150, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida, on the 17th day of July, 1997.
b. Release of Fine for Lovie Jane McGauley, from Reduction of Order of Fine in the amount of zero dollars, dated July 21, 2000, and recorded in OR Book 1843 pages 1452 and 1453, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida, on the 25th day of July, 2000.
c. Release of Fines for Secretary of Housing and Urban Development from Order of Fine in the amount of $13,500.00, dated January 12, 2000, and recorded in OR Book 1786 pages 2361 and 2362, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida, on the 19th day of January, 2000 and the Reduction of Order of Fine, in the amount of $10,000.00 dated May 12, 2000, and recorded in OR Book 1821 pages 1536 and 1537, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida on the 12th day of May, 2000.
Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges/Code Enforcement
Request to approve and authorize signatures on the following:
a. Satisfaction and Release of Fine for John Wendell Bridges from Reduction of Order of Fine, in the amount of zero dollars, dated June 22, 2000, and recorded in OR Book 1834 pages 2147 and 2148, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida, on the 26th day of June, 2000.
b. Satisfaction and Release of Fine for Louie A. and Dixie A. Gilbert from Reduction of Order of Fine, in the amount of zero dollars, dated June 22, 2000, and recorded in OR Book 1834 pages 2145 and 2146, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida, on the 26th day of June, 2000.
c. Satisfaction and Release of Fine for Donald M. and Adelaida Dixon from Reduction of Order of Fine, in the amount of zero dollars, dated June 22, 2000, and recorded in OR Book 1834 pages 2142 and 2143, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida, on the 26th day of June, 2000.
d. Satisfaction and Release of Fine for Albert B. A. Jaite, Sr. and Albert B. A. Jaite, Jr. from Reduction of Order of Fine, in the amount of $500.00 dated July 21, 2000 and recorded in OR Book 1843 pages 1457 and 1458, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida, on the 25th day of July, 2000.
e. Satisfaction and Release of Fine for Jose D. and Zaida J. Nazario from Reduction of Order of Fine, in the amount of $500.00, dated July 21, 2000, and recorded in OR Book 1843 pages 1454 through 1456, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida, on the 25th day of July, 2000.
f. Satisfaction and Release of Fine for Marshall H. and Betty L. Gaard from Reduction of Order of Fine, in the amount of $2,500.00, dated June 22, 2000, and recorded on OR Book 1834 pages 2138 and 2139, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida, on the 26th day of June, 2000.
g. Satisfaction and Release of Fine for Marshall H. and Betty L. Gaard from Reduction of Order of Fine, in the amount of $2,500.00, dated June 22, 2000, and recorded in OR Book 1834 pages 2140 and 2141, of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida, on the 26th day of June, 2000.
Municipalities/Ordinances
Request to acknowledge receipt of the following:
Town of Montverde Ordinance No. 03-07-00, an ordinance of the Town of Montverde, Lake County, Florida, pertaining to minimum residential lot sizes for property annexed into the Town limits; requiring all property annexed into the Town limits to maintain a minimum residential lot size of one acre; providing for inclusion of minimum lot size requirements within the Town of Montverde Land Development Regulations for property annexed into the Town after March 7, 2000; repealing conflicting ordinances; and providing for an effective date. Passed and ordained this 7th day of March, 2000 by the Town Council of the Town of Montverde, Florida.
Town of Montverde Ordinance No. 07-11-00A, an ordinance of the Town of Montverde, Lake County, Florida, pertaining to property owned by Roy E. and Kathleen G. Patterson; located within the Town limits of the Town of Montverde, Florida; allowing for conditional use of subject property pursuant to certain conditions and terms; and establishing an effective date. Passed and ordained this 11th day of July, 2000 by the Town Council of the Town of Montverde, Florida.
Town of Montverde Ordinance No. 07-11-00B, an ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Montverde entitled Merchandising of Tobacco Products; prohibiting placement of tobacco products in self-service displays accessible to minors; providing for enforcement; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date. Passed and ordained this 11th day of July, 2000 by the Town Council of the Town of Montverde, Florida.
Utilities
Request to acknowledge receipt of the following:
Notice of Joint Application of Florida Water Services Corporation and Spruce Creek South Utilities, Inc. for Transfer of Water and Wastewater Facilities and Joint Petition for approval of Ancillary Agreements, as follows: Notice is hereby given August 17, 2000, pursuant to Section 367.071, Florida Statutes, of the Joint Application of Florida Water Services Corporation ("Florida Water") and Spruce Creek South Utilities, Inc. ("Spruce Creek") for approval of the transfer of Spruce Creek's water and wastewater facilities to Florida Water; cancellation of Spruce Creek's Water Certificate No. 511-W and Wastewater Certificate No. 467-S; Amendment of Florida Water's Marion County Water Certificate No. 373-W and Marion County Wastewater Certificate No. 322-S; and Joint Petition for Approval of Ancillary Agreements.
COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA
Ms. Sue Whittle noted that the Board had been presented with backup information to Tabs 11 and 12 and noted that there were no other changes.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the County Manager's Consent Agenda, Tabs 3 through 27, and Item I.A.1. on Addendum No. 1, for the following requests:
Communications Systems/Resolutions
Request for approval and signature on Resolution No. 2000-128 renaming East Thyme Court (4-8097F) in Royal Trails Unit 1 to Shady Rose Court.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Community Services
Request for approval and authorization for the Chairman to sign the Agreement between Lake County and the Lake County Funeral Directors' Association for the burial and transportation of indigent or unclaimed persons.
Community Services
Request for approval and signature on the Annual Report for the Affordable Housing Program for Fiscal Years 97/98, 98/99 and 99/00.
Economic Development
Request for approval of awards for Outstanding Industry of the Year to Marriott Distribution and Outstanding Leadership Award to Glenn Tyre..
Accounts Allowed/Economic Development
Request for approval to return $15,000.00 to the Jobs Growth Investment Trust Fund from Power Technology, Inc.
Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Grants/Municipalities
Request for approval for the Chairman to execute a Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Grant Program Project Interlocal Agreement for FY 2000/2001 between Lake County and the City of Mascotte, recipients of the grant for FY 2000/2001, in the amount of $10,000.00.
Assessments/Subdivisions/Resolutions
A request for approval and authorization for the Chairman to sign Resolution No. 2000-129 providing for certification of the assessment roll for the Greater Hills Municipal Service Benefit Unit, Greater Groves Municipal Service Benefit Unit, Greater Pines Subdivision, Valencia Terrace Subdivision, Village Green Subdivision, and Picciola Island Subdivision; providing for certified copies; providing for effect of adoption of resolution; and providing for an effective date.
Budget Transfers/Accounts Allowed/Landfills
Budget transfer from Contractual Services in the amount of $400,000.00 to Professional Services, Solid Waste Management, Landfill Enterprise Fund. Funds are needed to pay the attorney fees for the Ogden negotiations. Funds are available in Contractual Services due to the Ogden Martin fees being reduced.
Budget Transfers/Property Appraiser/Tax Collector/Sheriff's Department
County Commissioners/Judicial Center
Budget transfer from Machinery & Equipment in the amount of $46,008.00 to Machinery & Equipment, Fiscal and Administrative Services, General Fund. Equipment is needed to connect the Property Appraiser, Tax Collector and Sheriff to new gigabit backbone technology, and also install redundant failsafe equipment in BCC and Judicial Center. Monies were previously budgeted for upgrade and purchase of backbone technology.
Budget Transfers/Accounts Allowed/Landfills
Budget transfer from Contractual Services in the amount of $35,400.00 to Astatula Outside Disposal, Solid Waste Management, Landfill Enterprise Fund. Funds are needed to cover expenses for leachate hauling and leachate disposal. Funds were originally budgeted in Contractual Services and should have been budgeted in Astatula Outside Disposal.
Budget Transfers/Accounts Allowed/Landfills/Resolutions
Request for approval of Resolution No. 2000-130 to amend the Landfill Enterprise Fund in order to receive unanticipated revenue for Fiscal Year 1999/00 in the amount of $68,000.00 from the sale of marketable recyclables and to provide appropriations from the disbursement of these funds to Aids to Government Agencies to pay municipalities and schools their share of the revenue from the sale of recyclables.
Budget Transfers/Prelude/Resolutions
Request for approval of Resolution No. 2000-131 to amend the General Fund in order to receive unanticipated revenue for Fiscal Year 1999/00 in the amount of $41,064.00 from Orange County, Florida, for housing of prison inmates and to provide appropriations from the disbursement of these funds to reimburse costs to prepare Prelude for housing of Orange County prison inmates.
Budget Transfers/Accounts Allowed/Landfills/Resolutions
Request for approval of Resolution No. 2000-132 to amend the Landfill Enterprise Fund in order to receive unanticipated revenue for Fiscal Year 1999/00 in the amount of $42,888.00 from salvage funds for turning in the D-7 dozer and to provide appropriations from the disbursement of these funds to Machinery & Equipment to purchase a new loader.
Budget Transfers/Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges
Request for approval of Check Request (Direct Pay) from the Clerk's Office for payment of Criminal Court costs for July 2000 - total payment is for $29,165.00.
Insurance/Risk Management
Request for approval to renew the County's Self-Insurance Program with A. J. Gallagher & Co. and contract for claims management with Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc. effective Oct. 1, 2000; and authorization for Chairman to execute appropriate document(s) pending County Attorney's approval.
Insurance/Risk Management
Request for approval to renew the County's commercial insurance policies for the fiscal year 2000/2001; and authorization for the Chairman to execute the appropriate document(s), pending the County Attorney's review and approval.
Bonds/Growth Management
Request for approval of a mobile home bond for Ronald K. and Alison M. Gooding for property at 34315 Donna Vista Place, Eustis, FL to be placed on the property during construction of their home for security reasons, permit number for the single family residence is 2000070382.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Growth Management
Request for approval of a Developer's Agreement between Lake County and Holston Properties and Development, Inc. to build six model homes in March Hammock on CR 565A.
County Employees/Personnel
Request for approval and execution of Certificates for employees with one and three years of service.
Accounts Allowed/Personnel
Request for approval of the following positions to be changed from the Regular retirement plan to the Senior Management Plan: Deputy County Manager, Senior Assistant County Attorney, Senior Community Services Director, Director of Continuous Quality Improvement, Senior Emergency Services Director, Senior Facilities and Capital Improvements Director, Senior Director of Fiscal and Administrative Services, Senior Growth Management Director, Senior Public Works Director, Senior Solid Waste Management Director, in the approximate amount of $15,000.00.
Assessments/Road Projects
Request for approval and authorization for the Chairman to execute satisfaction of liens for five road assessments, as follows:
685019 Deborah & James Nappi, Jr. - 7/14/00
685100 Dorothy Willis - 7/14/00
685105 John Fisher - 7/13/00
690017 Anne Holzner - 7/5/00
692013 Don S. Smith - 6/23/00
Roads - County & State/Resolutions
Request for approval and authorization to execute Resolution No. 2000-133 accepting #2-2753 Robbins Road, #2-2653 Peebles Drive, and #2-2654 Carolyn Lane into the County Road Maintenance System.
Accounts Allowed/Impact Fees
Request for approval of an impact fee refund in the amount of $37,631.00 to Pennbrooke Fairways for the Clubhouse.
Accounts Allowed/Budgets/State Agencies
Request for approval and signature on the Tentative Certified Budget for Arthropod Control for FY 2000-2001 in the amount of $34,328.00.
Roads-County & State/Subdivision/Resolutions
Request for approval to execute Resolution No. 2000-134 accepting Debbie Lane (County Road #2-1847) of Howey Subdivision "A" into the county road maintenance system - Commission District 2.
Accounts Allowed/Subdivisions
Request for approval and authorization to release a letter of credit that was posted for tree planting requirements in the amount of $2,074.00 for Arrowhead Phase 1 subdivision.
Rights-of-Way, Roads & Easements/Resolutions/Municipalities/Signs
Request for approval and authorization of Resolution No. 2000-135 for posting "No Parking on Right of Way" signs on the north side of CR 561 north of Minneola from US 27 to a point 400 feet east.
Rights-of-Way, Roads & Easements/Resolutions/Municipalities/Signs
Request for approval and authorization of Resolution No. 2000-136 for posting of "No Parking on Right of Way" signs on the north side of CR 44, in the Eustis area, east of the driveway to Shasta Beverages Company.
Rights-of-Way, Roads & Easements/Resolutions/Municipalities/Signs
Request for approval and authorization of Resolution No. 2000-137 for posting "No Parking on Right of Way" signs on Old Highway 441 in the Tavares area. One sign will be posted on the south side of Old Highway 441 at 15246 Old Highway 441, west of Potter's Automotive; the second sign will be posted on the south side of Old Highway 441 east of the Eustis Roofing Company driveway.
Roads-County & State/Resolutions/Signs
Request for approval of Resolution No. 2000-138 authorizing the posting of 25 mph speed limit signs in the Astor area on the following 29 roads:
Fifth Street (4-9688) Palmetto Road (4-9787M)
Ann Street (4-9688C) Pearl Street (4-9788A)
Maxwell Street (4-9688D) Carl Street (4-9788B)
Williams Street (4-9888E) Sam Street (4-9788C)
Claire Street (4-9689) Keith Street (4-9788D)
Loyd Street (4-9689A) Carrol Street (4-9788E)
First Street (4-9689B) Lee Street (4-9788F)
Drive No. 1 (4-9689C) Redbud Road (4-9788K)
Riverview Drive (4-9689D) Holly Road (4-9788L)
Airport Road (4-9786) East Pearl Street (4-9789)
Blue Creek Road (4-9787A) West Otter Road (4-9887)
Gopher Road (4-9787D) Basin Drive (4-9887A)
Chestnut Road (4-9787E) Pecan Road (4-9887B)
Branch Road (4-9787F) Hickory Road (4-9888A)
Otter Road (4-9787G)
Roads-County & State/Municipalities/Subdivisions/Signs
Request for approval of Resolution No. 2000-139 authorizing the posting of 25 mph speed limit signs on the following roads in the Summit Lakes Subdivision in south Clermont:
Sterling View Court (2-0936H)
Lake Tree Court (2-0936J)
Summit View Way (2-0936L)
Crystal View Court (2-0936K)
Summit Lakes Lane (2-0936G)
ADDENDUM NO 1
Bids/Fire & Emergency Services
Request to reject the bids for the construction of Bay Lake Fire Station.
ROAD VACATION - PETITION #933 - KEN STOKES - DISTRICT 2 - S. LAKE CO.
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, addressed the Board to discuss Road Vacation Petition #933, Ken Stokes, District 2. Mr. Stivender stated that there had been some question concerning the impact to the lot owner at the bottom of the hill, and the elimination of stormwater. Mr. Stokes has gotten assurances from his engineer that there is not a problem with his lot, and therefore, staff was recommending approval of the request.
Commr. Cadwell opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Road Vacation Petition #933, Ken Stokes, District 2, South Lake County, Resolution 2000-140.
RAILROADS/MUNICIPALITIES
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, stated that Mr. Ben Biscan, Florida Central Railroad, was present to discuss some storage of equipment along the rails, and to update the Board on the study for the light rail.
Mr. Ben Biscan, Florida Central Railroad, advised the Board that he knows that there have been some questions about the use of some of the Florida Central Railroad tracks that have not been used in some time. Mr. Biscan explained that CSX Transportation has several thousand excess cars of certain types, and right now, they need to get some room, so they can move their railroad, and because Florida Central Railroad has some surplus tracks, they are storing some of their cars for a few months. He noted that this was being done near the Sorrento line, and the Leesburg line. Mr. Biscan stated that, since the Board voted favorably for the study of the commuter rail from Lake County into Downtown Orlando, he wanted the Board to know that it has been approved by the Central Florida Metro Plan, and it has been funded by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). He will come back in December to update the Board again. At this time, Mr. Biscan explained that the tracks are for railroad use and part of railroad use is the storage of cars.
Commr. Hanson stated that her big concern is the storage of cars right downtown Sorrento. She explained that there is a long distance between Mount Dora and Sorrento where cars would not be seen at all from the road. She stated that there was no problem, if it was just going to be for a couple of months.
Mr. Biscan stated that he already has three miles of cars to Mount Dora, and there are no vacant tracks in Mount Dora.
Commr. Hanson asked that Mr. Biscan keep this concern of hers in mind, as well as the time involved, when storing the cars in the area of SR 46.
PERSONAL APPEARANCES
Ms. Gwen Benton, Personnel Officer, Human Resources, presented information on the following employees, and Commr. Cadwell presented the awards:
EMPLOYEE AWARDS
Presentation of Plaque to Employees with Five Years of Service
James A. Brown, Survey Party Chief, Public Works/Engineering
Presentation of Plaque to Employee with Ten Years of Service
Robert C. Baker, Equipment Operator III, Public Works, Roads/Maintenance Area 3
David R. Crowe, Special Programs Director, Solid Waste/Special Programs
William D. Nicodem, Maintenance Shop Supervisor, Public Works/Fleet Maintenance (not present)
Ronald L. Olvis, Landfill Attendant II, Solid Waste/MIS Scales & Drop Offs
Douglas L. Conway, Capital Projects Manager, Facilities & Capital Improvements/Capital Improvements (not present)
Presentation of Plaque to Retiring Employee after Ten Years of Service
Ronald L. Olvis, Landfill Attendant II, Solid Waste Management, MIS/Scales & Drop-Off/MIS Scales
PUBLIC HEARINGS
MONTVERDE SMALL AREA STUDY BY THE GENESIS GROUP
Commr. Cadwell noted that a presentation will be made on the Montverde Small Area Study, and there will be another public hearing on this process September 19, 2000, which will be the final presentation, and the Board will take public comment at that time.
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director, Growth Management, introduced Mr. Kevin Denny, The Genesis Group, who was here to discuss the consensus plan, the implementation, recommendations and strategies, and to obtain some general direction from the Board.
Mr. Kevin Denny, Senior Planner, The Genesis Group, and Planning Section Manager for the Jacksonville Office, addressed the Board and stated that the Board had been presented with a handout of what would be covered during the discussion today. Mr. Denny noted that, since their presentation to the Board on June 20, 2000, they have had a Final Community Workshop on July 6, 2000, where they covered the goals, provisions, exclusion and benefits of the Small Area Plan (SAP), and they discussed implementation tools and transportation issues. They had a Special Town Council Meeting with the Town of Montverde on July 24, 2000, to discuss some of the issues with the special area study. Mr. Denny noted that today's presentation will focus on the following:
Comprehensive Plan
Comprehensive Plan
Mr. Denny stated that the main issue today is getting input from the Board, because they have to provide staff with a draft report in one week. He addressed the Transportation Analysis - Trip Generation page of the report and stated that, when they look at the Comprehensive Plan and take trip generation for each land use allowed on the Comprehensive Plan, they get a total of 278,949 trips within the Montverde area, at the build out of the Comprehensive Plan. They compared that to the Consensus Plan number of 61,539. Mr. Denny explained that they do not expect to see the maximum out of either the Comprehensive Plan or the Consensus Plan, but they needed a baseline. He explained that the Consensus Plan is what they worked on with the community, and it has the rural residential character and traditional neighborhood design. He stated that, as they discuss the Consensus Plan, there has been a discussion of the total density and number of dwelling units that they expect to see, and they did a population analysis, and the Board can reduce it to meet the needs of the community. Mr. Denny stated that, if you take 50% of the Comprehensive Plan density and build to that level, the County is still twice what the Consensus Plan is showing for trip generation for the area.
Mr. Denny discussed roadways and stated that their main function is to connect Point A to Point B and to move traffic. The second function is to provide access to adjacent property. The problem in Montverde is that there is one roadway that does it all. Mr. Denny stated that the transportation network that they proposed, which they shared with the community and the Board, provides alternatives to CR 455. Out of the community workshops came the idea of providing a parkway that went around Montverde and connecting it with CR 455 to the north, and then going to the south. He stated that their Transportation Analysis indicates that about 75% of traffic will go around Montverde at the time of build out of the Consensus Plan. Mr. Denny stated that it is design, and not density, that hurts transportation. The Board had before them a picture of Hilton Head, South Carolina, which has a density of less than one dwelling unit per acre. Their main transportation characteristic is one where they rely on one to four roadways to do everything just like Montverde, and then there is a lot of congestion and not a lot of mobility. When they compared this to Charleston, South Carolina, it was determined that they have a density of 6.7 dwelling units per acre, and they do not have congestion. He stated that the idea is to take this concept of increased mobility, pedestrian access, and multiple ways to move traffic, to Montverde. Mr. Denny reviewed the Developmental Roadway Classification, which compared the Path of Least Resistance to the Path of Charm. The Transportation Analysis indicated the following:
and roadway capacity be in place or funded prior to development.
capacity within the study area.
Long Range Transportation Plan.
(Statewide) - does not reflect any needed roadway improvements
within the Study Area through 2020.
Mr. Denny stated that the 2020 Transportation Plan took a different approach than the one they are taking now, because they looked at a reduced land use scenario, which was not entirely related to the Comprehensive Plan. Their report is going to include some necessary road improvements to implement the discussion they are having today with the Board, and with the discussion they had with the community. Mr. Denny discussed the implementation, which showed the existing path and the alternative path, and reviewed the Tools to Restrict Growth & Development, which included Locational Based Tools, Form Based Tools, and Quality/Character Based Tools. He noted the following:
Goals of the Plan:
The Plan Provides:
Benefits to the Residents:
SAP Options/Alternatives (3):
Mr. Denny stated that, for the first meeting with the Board, they followed standard population projection techniques to come up with a scenario from the area, and there was considerable concern, about following that type of technique, from this Board and the community. They want to use that as a baseline to identify the different avenues, and Florida Law requires that they look at population growth when planning for an area. Option one - the County can designate certain areas for growth, and certain areas for neighborhood preservation. He further stated that the Comprehensive Plan should have done that in the first place, so when you are trying to move density from one area to another, you are probably already over allocated in other parts of the County. As the Board sees areas such as Montverde that they do not feel are suitable for increased development, then County staff and the Board can designate that area as a preservation overlay. Option two - even if they take 50% of the density, as allowed by the Comprehensive Plan, it would still be substantial impact on the community, which they do not want to see. Option three - an opportunity to reduce the Consensus Plan. The handout material noted the following:
Final SAP Planning Document Outline:
I. Executive Summary
II. Goals & Objectives of the Plan
III. Existing Conditions Analysis
IV. Community Participation process and Preferences
VI. Implementation Plan
VII. Public Participation Record
a. Public Comments (letters, emails, comment forms, conversation
records, etc.)
Mr. Denny stated that they would like to take some comments at this time as to things they have not discussed. He stated that one week from today they will be giving staff a draft copy of the Final Area Plan, and on September 19th, they will be distributing it to the Board and to the public. He would also like to meet with the members of the Steering Committee, after this meeting to discuss their future progress.
Commr. Pool stated that the residents initially were pretty concerned about the entire area, and the integrity of the area, and what the future might hold for the area, and he feels that the process has done a lot with the citizens in the community and trying to stay in touch with growth pressures and what they want to see in the area, but he does think that they are going to see better growth patterns and lower densities.
Commr. Hanson stated that she has felt all along that the Board needed to be looking 50 years out rather than the short term that they have in the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Denny explained that the County's Comprehensive Plan is a 2020 plan, and they are looking at 2050. They are going to give the Board a breakdown up to 2020 of what the Consensus Plan will look like, so if they decide to go forward with some form of Comprehensive Plan Amendment, they will have something to work with. They are also going to give the Board a phasing schedule, which is one of the things that the community wanted to see, to help determine how they can regulate the number of homes coming in each year.
Commr. Swartz questioned how they were able to come up with nine million square feet under the current Comprehensive Plan for nonresidential square feet listed under commercial office.
Mr. Denny explained that they used the Geographic Information Services (GIS) system and came up with an area for land designated as industrial/employment center.
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director, Growth Management, addressed the Board and stated that there is a large tract of land on the Future Land Use Map that is reflected as employment center. She explained that it might actually be a part of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), so staff may have to look at that number again, but it is designated industrial and employment center. She believes that a PUD came in at the time the Comprehensive Plan was being adopted.
Mr. Denny explained that they did look at the land uses as a growth basis and not PUDs, because PUDs can change over time.
Commr. Swartz stated that the employment center issue versus the zoning that was grandfathered as industrial when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted is a whole other issue, but in the employment center, there is very limited commercial that can occur. The employment center is not intended as a commercial magnet, but it allows some commercial to support other things, so he cannot understand the nine million square feet of commercial.
Mr. Denny explained that the number does not include just the employment center. It also includes Montverde's commercial areas. He noted that he would check the nine million number again, which has been discussed with staff. He went on to explain that the two million square feet of institutional was the Montverde Academy.
Commr. Swartz stated that this is one of the things that the Board has failed at year after year as they have looked at the Comprehensive Plan, because the Plan shows things that may be permissive, but it also has a whole host of other criteria that you look at to determine whether or not what is being requested, or what might be allowed, is appropriate. He assumed that The Genesis Group had taken the most permissive allowances that the Plan might suggest you can have and developed these numbers, but he would like to see the background information that determined the nine million square feet, and he would like to see the two thousand square feet of institutional for the Montverde Academy compared to what it is today.
Mr. Denny explained that, in the report, there is a map that can show the Board exactly what piece of land is generating this number. He showed the Board a map, which depicted the location of the parkways, boulevards, and avenues. He explained that two of the three study groups came up with the idea independently for the parkway, and the majority of the attendees thought it was a good idea, because it made a lot of sense, from a planning and engineering standpoint, to do this. He noted that they have talked to the Parkway Authority, and the position that he was showing on the map, if they get into the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) next year, based on census projections, will meet the spacing criteria for the Turnpike Authority. He noted that they referred to Chapter 163.3177(6)(a) Florida Statutes when they were planning for growth.
Commr. Swartz stated that he agrees with half of what Mr. Denny has said, with it not being the density, but the design. He stated that clearly the design and the development patterns that are adopted are extremely important, and he believes that the County, the cities, and the State of Florida have done an abominable job with its development patterns and its design, and it has lead to the problems that people see, but where he disagrees with him is to say that it is not the density. It does become the density, as it relates to whether or not people want to live in a very urban setting, or a more rural setting, and then density is a primary focus, and then you design within that density. He fears that what is being proposed is something that is inconsistent with what he believes that most of the people that either live in Montverde, or those who live around Montverde, want. He does not believe they want an urban setting like Charlston, and anything that changes Montverde is going to be a disservice to the people who live there today, and those who have moved in and around Montverde. He stated that this is why the Small Area Study is so important.
Commr. Pool explained that The Genesis Group has picked out problems with the Comprehensive Plan and allowed the neighbors to understand what the Plan says, and it is the Plan's inability to control the growth that Mr. Denny has pointed out. He stated that Mr. Denny is trying to give the Board design ideas to lower densities and ensure that the rural character is maintained in Montverde.
Mr. Denny stated that he sees their role as giving the County a legally defensible plan that the Board can implement that does take into account community values, but also looks at what is coming to the area. If there is a policy decision to be made by the Board, that they are going to redirect growth, it is an entirely separate issue, and that will be one of the issues in their report, and it will be an option for them. He explained that this Small Area Plan is meant to be a baseline, and as the Board goes forward with the implementation, and as the community continues to be involved in the process, the Small Area Plan will change. Mr. Denny stated that this Plan is to point out the big issues, and to give the Board a general direction of where it can go.
Commr. Swartz stated that he had a chance to read the citation noted by Mr. Denny, and it does not say in this citation that you take population projections and put them on top of an area, but it says you look at a whole host of things, including the character of the area and what people want in the area, and that is the basis upon which you decide how much growth should occur in the area, and that has been probably the single, most significant fallacy in the comprehensive planning in the State of Florida, and in Lake County. He does not believe that what is being shown today is what the people in Montverde, and around Montverde, want, and it is not, in the large part, what the people of Lake County want. Commr. Swartz stated that this is the fallacy of the proposal before them today, and the Board hired The Genesis Group to prepare the Small Area Plan, and the Board has to make sure that the Plan reflects what the people in the area want. He stated that the area around Montverde has generally developed in fairly rural densities, and that tells them what the people want, and therefore, they need to design something that is in keeping with that. After making that determination, he stated that he would then agree that they come back and make the types of plans with design that will best accomplish that, but he fears that is not what they have done.
Discussion occurred regarding the numbers that have been projected for commercial, with Mr. Denny noting that the figures have been reduced.
Commr. Swartz stated that the problem he sees with what is being proposed is that they do not have any single ownership in this, because they have many, many different landowners, and the ability to actually make happen what they are suggesting is very difficult, and possibly impossible, and it has almost not been done in the State of Florida, except for places where you have large pieces of land that are under a very few common owners who are willing to go into a plan. He explained that Disney and Celebration have been able to do what they have done in a semi-urban traditional neighborhood type design, because they own the land. He fears that, even if the residents bought into their Small Area Plan, he does not believe it will happen that way, because of the complexities of the multiple ownerships of land. He stated that the Board has got to find a way to take this process and get it back into a format that the people can feel like they have significant input in, in determining the vision, instead of them being burdened by a number that the Board, through their consultants, have put on them, because that is what this process has done to this point, and they have used the Florida Statute erroneously to suggest that this is how they have to do it. Commr. Swartz stated that he was suggesting that the Board go back to the drawing board and determine what is the vision of the people in Montverde and the surrounding area. He stated that, once that vision is determined, then lets turn those numbers into commercial and residential, and then determine the design criteria and the changes that might need to be done to the Comprehensive Plan. Commr. Swartz suggested that it would be a disservice to all of those people who worked on some of those committees to go from this to a public hearing on September 19, 2000.
Commr. Pool stated that he was here today as District Commissioner facing the people and trying to help and reduce densities, and he agrees that the plan being brought forward is not a good plan, but Mr. Denny is trying to show the Board their inabilities, and the problem, with the Plan, because the Plan is not what the people that are around Montverde, or in Montverde, want to see. He stated that the Board has a serious issue here of how they do lower those densities, and how they do negotiate a better plan without litigation, so they can have a win/win situation. He agrees that maybe the Board does not like some of the things that they have brought forward, but they have to deal with that from this day forward, and with the citizens of Lake County. Commr. Pool stated that he wished the Small Area Study could be incorporated countywide, even though it may be a huge process, and the County could never afford it, but he feels that every neighborhood and every area should take a good look at what it wants to see in the future. Commr. Pool stated that Lake County's job and their mission should be to make it a better plan for the future.
Commr. Swartz stated that, if the District Commissioner believes that the Plan is not a good Plan, it is the clearest indication to him that the Board does not want to go forward with the September 19, 2000 public hearing, only to find that folks agree that it is not a good Plan. He suggested that the Board not go forward to a public hearing, but that it finds a way to put this process back into a different light in the community, in which the Small Area Study was being done.
Commr. Pool explained that he was interested in finding out what this Board can do to change land use maps without concerns for long term court cases.
Mr. Denny noted that overlays are defensible and stated that, on September 19, 2000, they want to give the Board a baseline document that the Board can take forward, and it will be entirely up to the Board as to what it does with the densities, and the total build out, as it goes through its comprehensive planning process, and as it goes through other processes in place.
Commr. Swartz explained that the Town of Montverde has been a rural town for many years, and the only thing that has been impacting it largely has been development approvals that the Board has allowed around it, and some of those, when they are built out, will devastate Montverde. He stated that the final analysis is that the District Commissioner thinks it needs more work, and there is no need to go forward with a baseline that the Board does not feel comfortable with. He referred to the subject of litigation and stated that the County is allowed to have a Land Use Plan, and it is mandated by the State, and the County can change its Land Use Map. He stated that the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) process is exactly the time to do it.
Commr. Pool stated the he did not mind having the September 19, 2000 meeting, with the understanding that the Board may not agree with the end result, or it may decide to go somewhere else from there.
Mr. Denny explained that the September 19, 2000 meeting was scheduled for them to present the Small Area Plan, and the Board can adopt it, but it does not mean that the Board adopts the contents, or it concretely believes the number of dwelling units that will come out of the Plan. He clarified that the meeting is to give the Board the baseline, so it can start its comprehensive planning base process, and to start looking at the details, and without that, the Board will not be able to go forward.
Commr. Swartz stated that this baseline information, some of which he has questioned, is not baseline information. He wants to go forward with a public hearing, but he certainly does not want to adopt the Plan, not at this point, with what information he has at this time. He stated that he sees no reason for going forward with the scheduled public hearing.
Commr. Pool stated that he was not willing to adopt either Plan, but hearing the Plan is very important, so he would recommend that the Board at least hear the Plan on September 19, 2000, with the understanding that the Board may not adopt any part of it.
Commr. Gerber stated that she would like to see the current numbers.
Commr. Pool made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Hanson, to hear the presentation on September 19, 2000, and to at least continue the process, at a public hearing.
Under discussion, Commr. Cadwell stated that, at that point, the Board should have the full presentation of the study. He suggested that the agenda be changed from final presentation for adoption, to just say presentation, and during that presentation, the Board will allow public comment from anyone who has been involved in the process at that point.
Commr. Swartz stated that having the presentation on September 19, 2000 does not make any sense, because The Genesis Group will be making the same presentation as today, unless the Chairman wants to use it as a hearing for people to come and comment on this issue.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried by a 4-1 vote.
Commr. Swartz voted "no".
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 10:15 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would take a ten minutes recess.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
FEES/RESOLUTIONS/SOLID WASTE
Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, informed the Board that Ms. Kathleen Thomas, Director of Solid Waste Management Operations, would be making a presentation on the Final Assessment Resolution for Solid Waste Management Collection and Disposal, but before she started the presentation, she wanted to introduce the new Solid Waste Director, Mr. Bill Gilley, who was coming from Volusia County with 20 years experience in the solid waste business.
Ms. Kathleen Thomas, Director of Solid Waste Management Operations, addressed the Board and stated that she was happy to report that this year there are basically no changes to the assessment resolution. Ms. Thomas stated that there was not a rate increase for the assessment, and they were also able to negotiate a cheaper rate for the haulers, with thanks going to Mr. Jeff Cooper, Solid Waste Support Services Director. She stated that the maximum amount for collection this year was expected to be $116.49, but they were able to negotiate $113.81 for the two-times-a-week pickup, and the disposal rate remains the same at $90.46.
Commr. Hanson stated that she had talked with Ms. Thomas about looking at some of the folks that were just getting once a week pickup and bringing in some of those areas that have become more urbanized over the last few years.
Ms. Thomas explained that Mr. David Crowe, Solid Waste Management Services, is working with Florida Recycling, because they are the only hauler that has only a one time a week collection area, and they are looking at those roads to make a determination on the ones that can be added into two times a week pickup.
Commr. Hanson stated that she has talked to Ms. Whittle about the road issue and how that ties into the solid waste, and that is one reason why they did not go to mandatory collection, because it would have forced the trucks on to many of those roads that were already impassable. She stated that it also becomes a solid waste issue that these roads be passable, so perhaps, at some point, the County can use funds from Solid Waste to help get the trucks to these locations.
Commr. Swartz stated that he wanted to support Commr. Hanson's position, because even when the original contracts were put into place, he reluctantly supported the one time collection in those areas, because they had another hauler who said that, for the same money, they would do it twice a week. He stated that staff needs to take a very hard approach with them and insist on this, because most of the area that Commr. Hanson is talking about now is not that distinctly different from other rural parts of Lake County, and they need to have the same collection service that the other parts do. Commr. Swartz stated that he would support doing that and he would encourage staff to take a very hard position on that very quickly to ensure that they have twice a week collection. Commr. Swartz requested to see a copy of the notice that was mailed regarding the assessment.
Ms. Thomas explained that a first class mail out was sent to everyone, but she did not have a copy of the notice available for review at this time.
Commr. Swartz stated that he would like to see the notice, before the Board takes action.
Commr. Cadwell opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the Board would postpone taking action on Tab 30 regarding the Final Assessment Resolution for Solid Waste Management Collection and Disposal, until the Board could look at the notice that was mailed.
PUBLIC HEARING
FEES/RESOLUTIONS
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, informed the Board that his office compiled Tab 30, which were the fee schedules from all of the departments. Mr. Minkoff stated that the Florida Statutes require that the building permit fees be done as a public hearing. He stated that, in looking at the fees, there were really no significant changes in any of the departments.
Commr. Cadwell opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution 2000-142 Adopting Fee Schedules for Fiscal Year 2000-2001 for Services.
PUBLIC HEARING
ASSESSMENTS/FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES/RESOLUTIONS
Ms. Sara LaMarche, Senior Director of Fiscal and Administrative Services, addressed the Board and stated that the County is in its third year of a five year plan for the fire assessment. Ms. LaMarche informed the Board that this year, the fire assessment did increase five percent, and the Board had a Resolution to adopt the final rate. She noted that this involves a $90 fee for an individual dwelling; the commercial rate is noted in the backup; and a copy of the assessment notice is included in the backup.
Commr. Cadwell opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Commr. Hanson stated that she was going to vote for the resolution although she has not voted for it in the past, because she still has concerns about the assessment. She feels that it should be ad valorem rather than an assessment, but she was glad that the County has the dollars to use for fire protection in the County.
Commr. Cadwell noted that there was an individual in the audience who wished to speak. He re-opened the public hearing and called for public comment.
Mr. Travis Whigham stated that the County is receiving monies from homeowners, and there are acres and acres of undeveloped land in the County, which are more of a fire hazzard than any of the homes, and it would lower the homeowners' assessment, if the County started charging the landowners of those properties.
Commr. Hanson explained that the only way this can be done, according to the consultants, and to have it legally defensible, would be to have ad valorem rather than an assessment, because they cannot just put a dollar amount on vacant land. She explained that this was the reason she wanted to go to ad valorem, because then the commercial would pay a larger share, and vacant land would pay, which pays nothing now.
Ms. Renee Ardondo stated that she was here before the Board, because her parents are out of town. Ms. Ardondo stated that she was concerned, because their fire assessment was $1,300, and then $4,300, and now it is going up to $4,883. She explained that her father's income on his property is only $6,000 a year, and his ad valorem taxes exceed his property taxes. She further explained that he has to borrow money to pay his taxes every year to keep his property. Ms. Ardondo explained that he has a small mobile home park, and there are only 41 spaces, even though they are billed for 48 spaces. She did not understand why they were being billed for 48 spaces, and for spaces that are empty. Ms. Ardondo stated that he has been trying to sell his property, but for a new owner to take over his park, the County is requiring $300,000 worth of improvements to be done in a year's time. She noted that the park was established in 1948, and they have never had a fire, but a mobile home will go up in smoke in seven minutes, and there is no way that they can get anyone there in seven minutes. Ms. Ardondo stated that she is opposed to any increase of any tax for the fire assessment, and she feels that the County needs to see if there is another way to determine a fee that is more affordable. She noted that the assessed value of the property is approximately $285,000, and her father owns all of the mobile homes except for eight of them.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, explained that, between January and March, staff physically looks at the property, and empty pads are not assessed, and staff is willing to meet with the property owner to review the fee.
Mr. Paul Anderson addressed the Board and stated that he has a small RV park that his mother and father have owned for 15 to18 years. Mr. Anderson explained that a count is done in March, which is the busiest time of the year. He stated that he did call the Property Appraiser's Office, and they were going to send someone out to reappraise the property, because when they came through the park, they took any trailer that happened to be in the park that did not have a current tag on it, and they counted it as park property and assessed it as park taxes. He understands that some legislature has been passed that says that a RV park cannot be billed any differently than any other commercial building, such as a motel. He is in the process of challenging his taxes, because his taxes have doubled. Mr. Anderson feels that they are grandfathered in, so a new purchaser could not keep a trailer park there. The tenants are low income, and a lot of the parks will not take their trailers, because of their condition, and this limits the living space for a lot of people who cannot afford nicer parks with all of the amenities.
Commr. Hanson stated that she feels the County really needs to look at this type of situation, as it relates to a motel, because it is probably a lot easier to put a fire out in a RV trailer than an entire motel.
Mr. Minkoff explained that the basis of the previous study was more on the response that was necessary, as opposed to the time it would take to be at the response. He further explained that, when a fire call comes in for a RV park, the fire truck still goes just as it would go to a house, or any other type of structure. In regard to the statutory change, he stated that there was a change that mandated a different type of assessment for RV parks and mobile home parks, if they were Municipal Service Taxing Units (MSTUs), which do not affect the County's fire assessment. If the County assesses them as commercial property, the assessment would actually be higher than it would be if it was assessed as a RV park.
The Chairman called for further public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Commr. Hanson stated that she still feels the inequities are much greater with an assessment than they would be with an ad valorem tax.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved and authorized the execution of Resolution 2000-143 imposing fire rescue assessment; establishing the rate of assessment; approving the assessment roll; adoption of the resolution; and providing an effective date.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
FEES/RESOLUTIONS/SOLID WASTE (CONTINUED)
Commr. Cadwell stated that the Board would now continue with the public hearing on the Final Assessment Resolution for Solid Waste Management Collection and Disposal and noted that the public hearing portion of the meeting had been closed.
Commr. Swartz stated that he reviewed the notice that was mailed to the public and stated that he had received a couple of comments about it, because of the confusion it has caused the public. He questioned whether staff has some latitude about how the form reads.
Ms. Kathleen Thomas, Director of Solid Waste Management Operation, stated that this year staff actually made a number of changes to the notice, because of the complaints from last year, even though they do have to include the legal language. A committee was formed this year with citizen input, and there were representatives from the Solid Waste Study Committee on the committee to design and approve the notice this year. She stated that they have already noted a few changes they want to make on the notice for next year, and they are open to any input to make it better.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved and authorized the Final Assessment Resolution 2000-141for Solid Waste Management Collection and Disposal for Fiscal Year 2000-2001 and Each Fiscal Year Thereafter Until Discontinued..
PUBLIC HEARING - BUDGET HEARING
Commr. Cadwell noted that the first public hearing on the budget will be held at 5:05 p.m. in the Administration Building.
CITIZEN QUESTION AND COMMENT PERIOD
No one present wished to present questions, comments or concerns to the Board.
COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
BIDS/PROCUREMENT SERVICES/TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, addressed the Board to discuss the request for approval to reject RFP 00-049 and accept bids for RFP 00-084, which will allow the Lake County Board of County Commissioners to become the Community Transportation Coordinator (CTC) and contract out for the Transportation Operator and associated services. Mr. Stivender explained that, in May, 2000, the Department of Public Works had a workshop concerning Transportation Disadvantaged, and the alternatives associated with ways to go about it in the future. He stated that staff brought an agenda item back to the Board in June, 2000, to move forward with two RFPs, and they also met with Lynx. Mr. Stivender explained that two RFPs were put on the street, one for a Community Transportation Coordinator, and one for the Transportation Operator and associated services. He explained that Lynx wants to work with the County and provide it with technical assistance, if it becomes a CTC, and they waived any other interest in the Transportation Disadvantaged process. Mr. Stivender stated that two bids were submitted, LifeStream Behavioral Center and Intelitran, and staff has scheduled time to meet with them on September 13, 2000, and then negotiations will begin September 20, 2000. He noted that LifeStream Behavioral Center was the only bid received for the regular RFP.
Commr. Swartz asked that staff briefly describe the bids, at which time Mr. Bruce Conway, Procurement Services, addressed the Board and explained them and noted that Intelitran is from Pennsylvania.
Commr. Swartz stated that staff is confident that the County's best choice is to become the CTC, and then sub-contract to an operator, as opposed to what the County has now, where the CTC and the operator are one and the same. He questioned whether staff saw any significant change in the County's financial obligation.
Mr. Stivender stated that LifeStream has already requested additional funds in the current contract, and staff feels that it can provide a better service to the public, and more of a comfort level to the Board, by providing, in much more detail, the tracking of the dollars. He anticipates an increase in the number of dollars, but he did not have a number for the Board at this time.
Commr. Swartz questioned whether there will be a significant difference with the County stepping in as the CTC, as opposed to not doing this, and Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, indicated that there would not be a significant difference. Commr. Swartz questioned whether the County would be picking up some of the costs that LifeStream currently has that are related to performing those functions, such as for additional staff.
Mr. Stivender explained that the funding being received is supposed to cover the costs for any additional staff that may be needed.
Commr. Swartz noted that Mr. Tom Wynn, the current CTC provider and operator, was present. He stated that the Board met in an extensive workshop on this issue, and there was unanimous support for the County to consider becoming the Transportation Coordinator and looking at contracting an operator. He felt this was the best way, but he did feel that there would be some additional costs involved, which may be offset with the additional accountability and review by the County, but it would be at a price.
Commr. Swartz made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to reject RFP 00-049 and to agree to appoint the Board of County Commissioners as the County Transportation Coordinator (CTC) and to submit the necessary forms to the State.
It was noted that, under this option, to accept bids for RFP 00-084, the Lake County Board of County Commissioners will become the Community Transportation Coordinator and contract out for the Transportation Operator and associated services.
Commr. Pool seconded the motion for discussion and stated that he will not be able to support the request today, because he feels that the Board needs some actual figures, and to go forward without them concerns him. He stated that the County has one of the lowest costs per mile and the safest way to do it, and he questioned why the County would want to get involved in a process that may cost more money. He also wanted to know the amount of dollars.
Commr. Gerber explained that the Board has already been told that the costs are going to go up, and by implementing the request today, the County will get more accountability as to where the dollars are going and how they are spent.
Mr. Stivender stated that the County can apply for a lot of grants that are not even associated to the grants today, because of what is occurring in the County, in areas such as population.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he can understand the concerns expressed by Commr. Pool, but this is an area the County has been moving toward over the past several years, and he feels that the citizens are going to be better served with the County taking the responsibility for the service it is providing.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
ASSESSMENTS/PUBLIC WORKS/ROAD PROJECTS
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, addressed the Board to explain the list of potential road assessment projects, which were broken down into several categories, Total Meeting Requirements; Total With Significant Percentages; and Total Other Petitions Not Over Two Years Old. Mr. Stivender explained that Holiday Road & Holiday Circle, and Forest Drive, have the petitions in place, and they are ready to go, for the estimated $1 million worth of work associated with these two projects. The next list of roads are the ones where they do not have the percentages and are not ready to go. The rest of the list shows roads where people are pulling together petitions, but the County has not gotten any signatures.
Commr. Hanson stated that there were a couple of more roads in Mount Plymouth that may have started the process, and they should probably be done at the same time. She stated that they are a couple of short roads, with one being a section of Westmoreland. She further stated that, if they can get busy with those very quickly, they may be able to move them at the same time Quaker Ridge is moving.
Mr. Stivender stated that, during the budget process, the one reason they brought this forward to the Board was to inform them that they do not have any funding for these projects.
ROAD PROJECTS/PUBLIC WORKS
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, addressed the Board to discuss alternate routes for The South Lake Recreational Trail (Apopka- Mabel West Greenways Trail) Project. Mr. Stivender stated that staff, along with Commr. Pool and Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, went to Tallahassee on Friday to discuss their funding with the State. He explained that they ran into trail blocks in several locations. He explained that, in the original study that was done about six or eight years ago, there were a couple of alternates that staff has taken and done some research on over the last few weeks. One involves starting at the West-Orange Trail, running along Old Highway 50, but continuing along Old Highway 50, and running a segment to the Turnpike, and continuing along Highway 50 to the intersection with the trail. Mr. Stivender stated that he has met a couple of property owners on the north side that own about two miles, and they are very interested. It is vacant land right now, and staff would like to survey that line to determine what is there. The other alternate is LT&G, which has been abandoned since 1959, and it is vacant land, and it does have potential route. He stated that, thirdly, they talked to the Turnpike, and they have looked at joint use where the County can run along in certain sections parallel with their facility within their right-of-way, which they really do not want to do. They did talk to the State about them still pursuing an access down to the college, however, the 50 corridor will be the first one they will tackle for the next three or four months to see how it surveys out, and to get response from the adjacent property owners. He noted that Highway 50 has not been surveyed, and they would utilize that to get information to survey, plan and profile that road.
Commr. Pool stated that he is disappointed in the outcome, and staff has worked very hard, and he appreciates Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, Mr. Alvin Jackson, Deputy County Manager, and Mr. Stivender going to Tallahassee on Friday. He explained that they found out that the problems were many, and he still thinks there is funding available, but the County needs to be able to move very quickly. He noted that there were some individuals here today from the Rails to Trails program. Commr. Pool stated that the County still wants to get to the hospital and back to the college and the training center, and he feels that this is still a viable option.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, explained that the County never had signed option contracts. There was one from the Carters, but not on some of the other parcels that they owned. The one that was signed was offered to the County, based on the Board taking a certain action, which never occurred.
Commr. Pool thanked Mr. Stivender and staff for their efforts in trying to help them to continue to get the funding for the project, and he would ask for support to go this route on the Old Highway 50 corridor.
Commr. Swartz questioned what the possibility would be of continuing to get State funding for that portion that would take it to the college, as a south leg, and then proceeding with the other.
Commr. Pool stated that the County does not want to lose any dollars that are available to make that spur, and he hopes that they continue to try and do both, with the spur going down to the college and hospital, with the continuation of the trail out to Orange County.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to pursue the alternate routes (the spur) for the South Lake Recreational Trail (Apopka-Mabel West Greenways and Trails) Project, and to proceed with the surveying on the Old Highway 50 corridor.
OTHER BUSINESS
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the appointment of Abbie Moore as Florida Department Transportation's alternate member on the Transportation Disadvantaged Coordinating Board, and the appointment of Peggy Beley as the Agency for Health Care Administration's alternate member on the Transportation Disadvantaged Coordinating Board.
REPORTS - COUNTY ATTORNEY
COURTS-JUDGES/CODE ENFORCEMENT
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, addressed the Board to discuss the request for approval and authorization to file Injunction Action on certain Code Enforcement cases and stated that this would be a blanket approval to use litigation as a method to address code violations rather than just the Code Enforcement Board. He stated that unsafe buildings would be the largest category, but sometimes when there is trash and debris that is really a serious health problem, if the property constitutes a homestead, the Code Enforcement Board is powerless to take any action, or foreclose their liens, and this would allow staff, instead of using Code Enforcement, to go to Circuit Court and ask for a judge to order the property owner to comply with the codes. He noted that this is the method that was used to enforce the codes prior to the Code Enforcement Board being authorized by Statute.
COMMISSIONERS
At 1:28 p.m., it was noted that Commr. Swartz was not present.
COURTS-JUDGES/CODE ENFORCEMENT (CONTINUED)
Commr. Gerber made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Hanson, to approve the request for approval and authorization to file Injunction Action on certain Code Enforcement cases.
Under discussion, Commr. Hanson asked if staff was still working on the citation issue.
Mr. Minkoff explained that staff was still looking at citations although they would really not solve this problem.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried by a 4-0 vote.
Commr. Swartz was not present for the vote.
MINUTES
Discussion occurred regarding the Minutes of August 1, 2000, Regular Meeting, with Commr. Gerber making the following change:
Page 26, Line 2 - Change: "what they consider intransigent TDC requests, which means they cannot get the money from the TDC that they feel the TDC could give them." to read as follows: "what they consider to be the intransigent position of the TDC."
COMMISSIONERS
At 1:30 p.m., it was noted that Commr. Swartz was present for the meeting.
MINUTES (CONTINUED)
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Minutes of August 1, 2000, Regular Meeting, as corrected.
ADDENDUM NO. 1 - OTHER
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES/CODE ENFORCEMENT
Mr. Tommy Leathers, Director of Code Enforcement, addressed the Board to discuss the request to fill two vacant positions on the Code Enforcement Board, a realtor and a contractor.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the appointment of Mr. Steve Rothschild to serve in the capacity of contractor on the Code Enforcement Board.
After some discussion, it was noted that the Board would postpone the selection of an individual to serve in the capacity of realtor until later in the day.
REPORTS - COUNTY MANAGER
COUNTY EMPLOYEES
Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, presented the Board with a copy of a letter of support, to the Governor's Office, regarding Mr. Dale Greiner and his pursuit for appointment as a member of the Florida Building Commission.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to place the item, as noted, on the agenda for Board action.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to authorize the full and complete support of Mr. Greiner in efforts to have him appointed to the Florida Building Commission.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER POOL - DISTRICT #2
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES
Commr. Pool informed the Board that it has been brought to his attention by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee that a member is not attending the meetings, and they have voted to remove the member. They have tried to contact Ms. Jennifer Welsh, but have gotten no response. As the liaison for the Committee, he was asking whether the action taken by the Committee needs Board action.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, explained that the Board has the ability to remove the members, so it would have to be placed on the agenda.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to place the item, as noted, on the agenda for Board action.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the request to remove Ms. Jennifer Welsh from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee.
BIDS/FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES
Commr. Pool addressed the request to reject the bids for the construction of Bay Lake Fire Station and stated that someone has expressed to him that they hope there will be someone coming forward that has an idea on how to build this in a very cost effective manner, either a metal building, or concrete block building. He questioned whether the County can advertise for either type of building.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, explained that staff could advertise for either type of building, but it would be difficult without plans. If the County went with some type of design build concept, it could be done.
Commr. Pool stated that he would like the opportunity to advertise as a design build, or that type of facility.
Mr. Minkoff stated that the County has procedures that would allow staff to do a design build.
Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, explained that the County does have on hand proto-type designs to be used for fire stations all over the County.
Commr. Swartz explained that part of the staff recommendation that was approved this morning was to re-evaluate the scope of the work and bring something back to the Board.
Commr. Pool stated that he wanted to make sure that the County allows a variety of options and not just limit the scope on the size. He noted that Mr. Dave Barker was present from Bay Lake who is involved in the process.
Mr. Dave Barker, Bay Lake, addressed the Board and stated that the reason they asked this to be set aside is because the cost per square footage is a little extravagant, and after some investigation, he knows that it can be built for a lot less. He stated that Commr. Pool has recommended that they get a cost for a metal building, and a concrete block building. He stated that, in the records, some years ago, the County, in working with the people in the area and the fire chief, came up with a concept design for a building. He stated that it would be great for them, if they wanted to use it, and they have a copy of it.
Commr. Swartz stated that, in looking at Ms. Whittle and Mr. Minkoff, they are getting the direction of the Board that it wants to see this brought back, and the Board will be able to choose from among that variety of options.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER CADWELL - CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT #5
COUNTY ATTORNEY/COUNTY MANAGER
Commr. Cadwell explained that, under the matrix that has been approved for all employees, Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, scored a 4.03 on her evaluation, which would be equivalent to a 6% salary increase ($113,431.50), and Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, scored a 4.24 on his evaluation, which would be equivalent to a 6.4% salary increase ($111,247.50).
Commr. Swartz made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Pool, to approve the salary increases for the County Manager and County Attorney, as recommended.
Under discussion, Commr. Hanson explained that she still thinks that there are major problems, even though she knows it is an ongoing process, to close the gap between the lowest employee in the County and the highest level of management. She explained that most of her comments were from employees that are with the County today, or have gone on, so they are not necessarily her comments, but the perceptions that she has gotten from them. She still thinks that the County has a lot of work to do, especially in the communications department, and she knows that the County Manager is working on these. She knows it is a problem in any large organization, but it is one that she takes very seriously.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES/CODE ENFORCEMENT
Commr. Hanson noted that she would like to wait another week before the Board appoints someone to serve in the capacity of realtor on the Code Enforcement Board.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the following reappointments to the Code Enforcement Board: David Springstead, James Sisco and Charles Jacobs.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER HANSON - DISTRICT #4
ASSESSMENTS/ROAD PROJECTS
Commr. Hanson stated that, back on Tab 33 regarding potential road assessment projects, she was given the figure of $750,000 for Forest Drive, not $904,000, and that would be the total amount including the property owners share in that assessment.
Commr. Cadwell noted that the Board would get clarification on the figure for the next meeting.
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/MUNICIPALITIES
Commr. Cadwell informed the Board that he had several discussions with Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, in regards to the Board's intent with the Astor-Astor Park Water Association permitting fees. It was his understanding that the County was going to pay the fees for the actual hookups to get the water and wastewater system in place. Right now the cost is somewhere around $75 a home. Now they are going to work with Astor and do a block or two at a time, and the fee was based on someone going out and making the inspection just like for one person. He stated that staff was still working on some of those figures, but he thought it was their commitment.
Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, stated that it was not staff's understanding that the Board had contemplated doing the permit cost on the individual homes.
Commr. Swartz stated that he did not think that this was a part of what the County did either.
Commr. Hanson stated that she did think the fee could be reduced, if the fees are figured on a cost.
Commr. Cadwell stated that there are over 500 homes, and the cost is now to the Water Association, not to the homeowner.
Commr. Hanson stated that, if it is not costing the County as much, there should be a discount in the charge.
Commr. Cadwell explained that the grant money, and the loans, are part of the construction money, and they do not have enough money.
Commr. Swartz questioned whether the Board could ask staff, between now and the next meeting, to come forward and explain the scope of work and whether there should be any cost, and clarify the issue.
Commr. Cadwell explained that the County and the Astor Water Association are partners in providing this sewer service. In the rate structure they have set up, all of the construction costs are covered, but in the permitting proportion, they are higher than they anticipated.
Commr. Swartz thought that, at the previous discussion of this item, the Board, in fact, was going to cover some of the costs that was not covered by grant money, so he was asking for an analysis. He stated that, since the Board was dealing with the one entity, rather than individual homeowners, it is a matter of them carrying the bill until the Board can get a decision. He noted that, to some extent, if this was a public utility, the County probably would not be waiving anything. If the County was doing it, it would be his guess that it would be charging probably the difference between what it got in grant money, and what it felt it cost the County.
It was noted that information would be brought back to the Board.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
MEETINGS
At 11:55 a.m., Commr. Cadwell noted that the Board would recess the meeting and reconvene at 5:05 p.m. for the first public hearing on the budget.
FIRST BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING
At 5:05 p.m., Commr. Cadwell, Chairman, announced that the advertised time had arrived for the first public hearing on the proposed budget for the purpose of amending and adopting the tentative budget, recomputing the proposed millage rate, if necessary, publicly announcing the percent by which the recomputed proposed millage exceeds the rolled-back rate, and discussion of the specific purposes for which ad valorem tax revenues are being increased.
Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, stated that the Board has before them the tentative Annual Budget for Lake County for Fiscal Year 2001. Ms. Whittle noted that the proposed budget accomplishes the goals of the Board. She stated that, during the July workshop, the following tentative millage rates were established:
Ms. Whittle stated that the tentative budget for Fiscal Year 2001 totals $234,365,081, which includes $8.3 million in rebudgets - projects not yet completed during Fiscal Year 2000. The County's operating budget continues prior years' Fiscal Tenets, as follows: provides that current revenues are sufficient to support current expenses; maintains the County's strong General Fund reserves; provides maintenance and replacement dollars; assures existing or enhanced service levels; and maintains a competitive compensation and benefits package.
Ms. Whittle explained that, in this evening's public hearing, the Board should open the public hearing and receive citizen comment, and then staff will publicly announce the percent by which the recomputed proposed millage rate exceeds the rollback rate; the Board will adopt a tentative millage; consider any amendments to the tentative budget and adopt the tentative budget; and announce the public hearing for final adoption.
Commr. Cadwell opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment.
Sheriff George E. Knupp, Jr. addressed the Board and requested that the Board reconsider the cuts that were made to his budget, particularly in the area of salary increases for his employees. He asked that the Board look at the Deputy Sheriffs that were cut from the budget, in order to continue the level of service needed in South Lake County. He and his staff have met separately with the Board members and reviewed the dollars that are coming in from Orange County for housing their inmates, which will generate about $300,000 between July 1 and October 1. Sheriff Knupp explained that he discussed staggering the eight deputies throughout the year, which will save about $97,000. He explained that, if the Board cuts the four deputies for South Lake County, and they stagger the four that the Board gives to him, they will start hiring them on April 1, which will save $88,000. Sheriff Knupp asked that the Board look at the revenue sources that he mentioned to the Board, the need in the Sheriff's Office for additional personnel, and salary increases. He stated that he does not agree with giving the salary increases on anniversary dates, and he will continue to give his on October first of each year.
Mr. Elmer Berol, Fruitland Park, addressed the Board to call the Board's attention to the trim notice he received in the mail regarding his taxes. Mr. Berol wanted to know how much money the General Fund contributed to 911 services in the year 2000, and in the year 2001.
Ms. Sarah LaMarche, Director of Fiscal and Administrative Services, addressed the Board and stated that she spoke to the Property Appraiser regarding the trim notice, which has the wrong wording on the back of the form, and she was told that the form should be changing. She explained that zero dollars have been used out of the General Fund for 911 services.
Mr. Berol wanted to know the amount of dollars from the General Fund that were contributed to the maintenance of County roads.
In response to Mr. Berol's question, Ms. LaMarche explained that zero dollars have been used, and she noted that the information on the trim notice also reflected the wrong information in that area.
Mr. Berol stated that last year, the taxes for stormwater was .19 mills, and this year it has almost doubled. He questioned whether this was true for the 14 cities and incorporated areas.
Commr. Cadwell explained that the stormwater millage is only in the unincorporated areas of the County, and the County does not collect that tax inside the cities.
Ms. LaMarche referred to Page 3 of the handout material and noted that Fund 123, Stormwater Management, reflects a tentative amount of $1.2 million in 2001 from the unincorporated areas of Lake County.
Commr. Swartz explained that the cities collect their own stormwater fee, which is usually reflected on the water and sewer bill. The cities budget and spend those monies themselves, and the County has nothing to do with those monies. The County has a stormwater fee that went in place last year, which was .10 mills, and this year it will be .2 mills. The total budget this year will be $1.2 million, which is actually carrying over about $400,000, with the County bringing in about $800,000 this year into this fund from the unincorporated area only.
Mr. Berol was concerned that the County was duplicating the efforts of the cities, and he thought that the County had hired someone to handle this issue.
Commr. Swartz explained that the County has existing staff who have been working on stormwater for a number of years, and it has not hired any individual to handle stormwater.
Mr. Lauren Gusterson addressed the Board and stated that he and his family are newcomers to Lake County. Mr. Gusterson stated that they moved here from Seminole County last June. He stated that they think this is a beautiful County, but when he got his proposed property taxes, he was very stunned, because of the percentages of increases. The assessed value of their property went up over 42% from last year, and their total tax burden would go up 60.6% over what it was last year, which he feels is unreasonable.
Commr. Hanson explained that Mr. Gusterson probably got caught in the Save Our Homes assessment, and the only time that the homes have a chance to correct themselves on value is when it changes hands.
Commr. Swartz explained that there was a Constitutional Amendment that was adopted a few years ago, which caps the increase in assessed value on a home to 3%, or the cost of inflation, whichever is less.
Commr. Hanson stated that the County could look at a way to provide more education to those individuals buying homes, because this is a problem throughout the State.
Mr. Roy Hunter addressed the Board to extend his appreciation for the many changes and improvements to Northeast Lake County. Mr. Hunter asked that the Board not cut the Sheriff's budget, the ambulance budget, or the fire budget. He appreciates the future aspect of having a library in Paisley, but he wanted the Board to take care of the safety and welfare of the County.
Ms. Susan Libert, Coordinator for Childhood Development Services, addressed the Board and stated that they are the central agency for resource and referral for childcare in Lake County. Ms. Libert extended her thanks to the Board for their support in the past, for the low income families of the County, because, since their funding comes from the Federal Government, they are required to obtain a match from the local community to show support of their program. She stated that without that support, they can actually lose the dollars for childcare. Ms. Libert stated that the $35,000 that they have requested this year will pull down $548,333 in childcare for the working poor. She noted that the average cost of daycare in Lake County for an infant is $113 per week; for 3 and 4 years olds - $84; and for before and after school - $79. She further noted that there are over 700 people employed in the childcare industry in Lake County. Ms. Libert stated that, in the past years, the Board has supported their program, and she was encouraging the Board to vote in support of the recommendations by the Childrens' Commission, and Director of Childrens' Services, Emily Lee.
The Chairman called for further public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed at 5:35 p.m..
Commr. Cadwell explained that he has met with the Sheriff several times over the last few weeks, and he still supports the increase for the raises for the deputies, and the ability to stagger the other four positions at mid-year, at earliest, and postponing the additional four positions that were scheduled for South Lake. He hoped that this was enough for the Board to support the increase to the current deputies, and leaving those additional dollars in Capital monies for the cars, as opposed to the General Fund.
Commr. Swartz stated that he understands that the only thing happening, with regard to the raises for the deputies, is that the proposal he made when the Board set the tentative millage, if the Sheriff was to change the date at which he gave the raises to the deputies, that would be the $400,000. It would be the same thing as what the County and the Clerk's Office does, and it does create a one time savings of $400,000. Commr. Swartz stated that the Sheriff does not have to do that, but there was nothing that deleted his ability to give raises.
Commr. Cadwell explained that, after many discussions with the Sheriff, he is not going to give raises on anniversary dates, and if the Board gives him $400,000 less on October 1, he will give out raises with the dollars that are available on October 1. The Sheriff has agreed to talk to the Board over the next month about the new hires from this point on that come in, in regards to looking at anniversary dates, but there is no commitment on the Sheriff's part to do that, but he has agreed to discuss it. He noted that, by taking out four of the deputies and staggering the other four, there will be a savings close to $90,000, and he is willing to do this for the Sheriff. Commr. Cadwell stated that he would like to fund the deputies in South Lake County, but he did not know fiscally how the Board would do that.
Commr. Pool stated that the people are concerned in his district, and they recognize the need in South Lake County for deputies. He stated that the Sheriff is doing a fine job on a per capita basis with the dollars that he has now, but he was wondering if there was anything that the Board could do to help with the other four deputies.
Commr. Cadwell stated that, by staggering the four deputies throughout the County, it will help everyone, and at mid-year, with no commitment to do it, the Board can at least look again and see if revenues are up and see if there is any way to do it at that point, as opposed to waiting until October.
Commr. Pool stated that obviously he feels the deputies should go where the population is increasing, and if the need is in South Lake County, that might be where the new deputies go, and he certainly supports any and all new deputies in South Lake.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, publicly announced the following:
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the tentative Lake County General Fund Millage of 5.117.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the tentative Lake County MSTU for Ambulance and Emergency Services Millage of .550.
Commr. Swartz made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Gerber, to approve the tentative Lake County Stormwater Management MSTU Millage of .200.
Under discussion, Commr. Pool stated that, while he knows that stormwater is an important issue, he feels that the Board should take a good look at leaving the ad valorem tax the same for one year, based on the increase. He feels this is a good recommendation, and people will recognize that the Board is trying to keep the budget in line for one more year, and then allowing it to go up the following year, if the budget can be met and balanced. He stated that, for this reason, he will not be able to support the additional increase on the stormwater this year.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried by a 4-1 vote.
Commr. Pool voted "no".
Commr. Cadwell stated that the Board will now consider any amendments to the tentative budget and adopt the tentative budget.
Commr. Swartz stated that he does not have any proposals for any amendments. He explained that the Sheriff has the ability, if he chooses to delay those hires and use the money any way that he sees fit. Once the money is put into his Personnel line item, he has the ability, within that line item, to do whatever he wants to do.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he is unable to make a motion, but he can pass the gavel, but first he would like to say that he would appreciate a motion that would place back into the Sheriff's budget the needed amount, and if they stagger the deputies, it would be approximately $310,000 to $312,000 for salary increases for deputies.
Commr. Gerber made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Hanson, to approve to place approximately $312,000 back into the Sheriff's budget for salary increases for deputies.
Under discussion, Commr. Swartz requested clarification on where the money will be taken from.
Commr. Cadwell stated that, before the final hearing, he would appreciate Ms. Whittle bringing back the information in regards to where those actual dollars will come from.
Ms. Whittle stated that, as the Board goes through this process, they are always carefully looking at the revenues to see if the County has any additional dollars, and she thinks that staff can possibly identify some, in order to do what the Board wants to do.
Commr. Swartz stated that he is going to vote against the motion. He explained that he might feel differently, if there was a motion that said exactly where the Board is taking the money from, and secondly, there is $400,000 savings simply by changing to the anniversary date. All of the County employees and Clerk's employees receive their raises on their anniversary date, and simply by making that change, there is no loss to the Sheriff's Department budget, with the exception of the reduction of eight deputies to the four deputies. The increase, as it stands today, is $1.7 million, and it needs to be made clear that this is not a cut to the Sheriff's Department budget, but it is a reduction in the increase. He noted that, even if the vehicles are taken out, which is about $549,000, that means the increase in the Sheriff's Department budget is $1.2 million.
Commr. Hanson stated that she feels it a fairness issue. She realizes that the County's employees are at anniversary dates for their raises, but when the Board implemented this method, it was done at the same time that they corrected the salaries. She stated that they are not doing that at this point, and the Sheriff is not doing that, and if he were, she would suspect that the Board would be spending a lot more than the $400,000 today. She feels that the Board should be very careful with that issue, because it could be a lot more than what the Board is looking at today.
Commr. Cadwell clarified that the motion on the floor is to amend the Sheriff's budget, to place back into the budget the additional dollars for increase in salaries, which does not effect the bottom line of the General Fund.
Commr. Hanson stated that she understands Commr. Swartz's thoughts, because she felt very strongly last year about the libraries, but there was not a funding source, therefore, she voted against libraries, although she feels there is a great need in the County for them, but her concern was not having that funding source. She noted that the Board will have a funding source before the next public hearing. She stated that the Board had also committed two more years beyond that for libraries, which put the Board in even a more difficult position budget wise, and she feels that is partly why the Board is having to raise the millage this year. Commr. Hanson stated that she has never voted to raise the millage since she has been on the Board, but she knows the needs are there, and the enhancement of services is being demanded, and that is why she is voting for the increase in millage.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried by a 4-1 vote.
Commr. Swartz voted "no".
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to adopt the tentative budget for the General Fund in the amount of $81,337,770.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to adopt the tentative budget for Lake County MSTU for Ambulance and Emergency Services in the amount of $6,165,156.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried by a 4-1 vote, the Board approved to adopt the tentative budget for Stormwater Management MSTU in the amount of $1,227,422.
Commr. Pool voted "no".
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to adopt the tentative Countywide Budget in the amount of $234,365,081.
Commr. Cadwell announced that the Board will hold the final adoption hearing on September 19, 2000, at 5:05 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, in the Board Room at the Lake County Administration Building, 315 West Main Street, Tavares, Florida.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:53 p.m.
WELTON G. CADWELL, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK
TMR/BOARDMIN/9-5-00/9-19-00