A regular MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
May 19, 2020
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, May 19, 2020 at 9:00 a.m., via teleconference, which is allowed per Executive Order of the Governor of Florida due to COVID-19, a novel strain of the coronavirus. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Leslie Campione, Chairman; Wendy Breeden, Vice Chairman; Timothy I. Sullivan; Sean Parks; and Josh Blake. Others present were: Jeff Cole, County Manager; Melanie Marsh, County Attorney; Niki Booth, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; Gary J. Cooney, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller; Kristy Mullane, Chief Financial Officer; and Josh Pearson, Deputy Clerk.
moment of silence and pledge
Commr. Campione called for a moment of silence, and Commissioner Breeden led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda update
Mr. Jeff Cole, County Manager, said that this meeting was being streamed live on the County’s website like all of the other Board meetings. He added that the meeting was also being made available through Zoom Webinar for members of the public who wished to provide comments during the Citizen Question and Comment Period later in the agenda. He stated that anyone watching the livestream who wished to participate in the meeting could follow the directions being broadcast through the livestream. He elaborated that during the Citizen Question and Comment Period, anyone who joined the Zoom Webinar using their phone could press *9 to virtually raise their hands; additionally, anyone participating online could click the raise hand button to let the County know that they wished to speak. He said that when it was time for public comment, Mr. Erikk Ross, Director for the Information Technology (IT) Department, would be prepared to read the person’s name or phone number, and then unmute the appropriate line and the speaker would be asked to provide comments. He explained that everyone would have three minutes to speak and that after three minutes, an alarm would sound letting them know that their time was up. He remarked that in the previous week, the County notified the public that comments could be emailed through 5:00 p.m. on the previous day, and those comments were shared with the Board prior to this meeting. He mentioned that anyone wishing to provide written comments during this meeting could visit www.lakecountyfl.gov/commissionmeeting, and that any written comments submitted during the meeting would be shared with each Board member following the meeting. He then reported that since the agenda was first published, staff made revisions to the attached agreement for Tab 29; furthermore, this update was provided to the Board and was uploaded to the County website.
Commr. Campione noted that these were changes made to a proposed settlement agreement for Tab 29. She anticipated a significant amount of discussion and deliberation on Tab 29, and she proposed moving Tab 31, the Clonts Grove Boundary Analysis, up to be the first item of the regular agenda. She noted that Tab 31 was previously discussed and thought that the items were in place to move through it quickly.
Commr. Breeden asked to move Tab 35, regarding the industrial revenue bonds for Montverde Academy, from her business up to the regular agenda.
covid-19 update
Mr. Tommy Carpenter, Director for the Office of Emergency Management, provided an update on COVID-19. He said that currently, the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) was at a level one full activation and that the EOC activated to support COVID-19 operations initially at level two on March 16, 2020. He elaborated that the activation level was moved to level one on March 31, 2020, and that they anticipated going back to level two when Florida Governor Ron DeSantis moved the state to phase two of the reopening. He remarked that the Florida Department of Health (DOH) in Lake County currently had a COVID-19 hotline available with no wait time for Lake County residents at 352-742-4830, which was available seven days a week from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. He added that the Lake County Citizens Information Line was open and available to provide local information to callers at 352-253-9999, seven days a week from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. He commented that in the previous day’s update from the DOH, Lake County reported 254 positive cases. He recalled that two weeks prior, he had reported that Lake County had 235 cases, which was an increase of 19 cases in two weeks. He said that there had been 14 deaths to date and that two weeks prior, there were 13 deaths. He mentioned that Lake County had 12,124 individuals tested, with him having reported a number of 7,464 two weeks prior, for an increase of 4,660 individuals tested. He stated that the percentage of positive results as of the previous day was 2.1 percent, compared to a positivity rate of 3.1 percent two weeks prior. He noted that as the County started considering the numbers at the end of March 2020 where they had a six percent positivity rate, the numbers had steadily decreased as there was more testing available. He related that the Office of Emergency Management continued to work with the Florida Division of Emergency Management (DEM) to obtain personal protective equipment (PPE) for first responders and healthcare providers, and they were beginning to see many of those vendors free up available PPE. He commented that gowns and N95 masks were still challenging to obtain but were becoming more available. He added that the DEM had sent PPE directly to the Lake County Supervisor of Elections, long term care facilities, hospitals, and they were also providing a large number of cloth masks for the county’s utility providers; furthermore, it was expected that the DEM would make them available to anyone who needed them. He explained that the Office of Emergency Management was working with the DOH to monitor COVID-19 cases in the county’s long term care facilities and group homes. He said that recently, his office had been able to work with the Agency for Persons with Disabilities (APD) for the group homes to obtain their numbers and statistics, and today he was reporting for both long term care facilities and group homes. He reported that there were a total of 160 facilities and that seven facilities had positive COVID-19 cases. He elaborated that five of those seven facilities had positive tests for staff but not patients, and two facilities had positive tests for patients. He said that within those 160 facilities, there had been two deaths. He said that his office was actively monitoring and working with those agencies to ensure that there was testing occurring when there was a positive case, and he felt that the DOH had done a great job with contact tracing to make sure the virus did not spread. He remarked that Lake County had a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) approved non-congregate sheltering plan and that to date, no one had been sheltered and the County did not have to use it. He recalled that on May 5, 2020, he reported to the Board about Lake County’s partnership with Adult Medicine of Lake County, and he said that testing began on April 24, 2020 and lasted through May 8, 2020. He stated that during this time, three drive-thru COVID-19 testing sites were available in the Cities of Clermont, Leesburg and Mount Dora. He elaborated that the site in the City of Clermont began at the Cooper Memorial Library and was later moved to the Clermont Arts and Recreation Center. He remarked this partnership with the County ended on May 8, 2020 and that within a week of the partnership ending, Adult Medicine of Lake County received a federal grant which allowed them to offer testing to residents for $20 for both COVID-19 and immunity. He noted that they currently had these two locations available: the Lake County Fairgrounds located at 2102 North County Road (CR) 452 in the City of Eustis, with testing being available there Monday through Friday; and the Clermont Arts and Recreation Center located at 3700 South Highway 27 in the City of Clermont, noting that this location was open on Tuesdays and Thursdays and that both locations’ times were 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. He commented that on the current morning, Adult Medicine of Lake County announced that they would offer free COVID-19 testing and immunity testing to Lake County first responders including emergency medical services (EMS), fire rescue, and law enforcement. He remarked that the County received updated statistics from Adult Medicine of Lake County for testing with the date range of April 21 through May 8, 2020. He explained that the numbers reflected only Lake County residents and the subsidized testing with 2,165 COVID-19 tests and 3,340 immunity tests. He said that the DOH in Lake County was also offering free testing at the following DOH locations: the Umatilla clinic located at 249 East Collins Street in the City of Umatilla; the Clermont clinic located at 560 West DeSoto Street in the City of Clermont; and the Leesburg clinic located at 1904 Griffin Road in the City of Leesburg, noting that all locations were open 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. He stated that as part of the County’s reopening process, his office was working with the DOH in Lake County to develop the County’s robust COVID-19 testing plan; additionally, working with Adult Medicine of Lake County, the County was finalizing plans to allow them to set up sites in Astor, the City of Fruitland Park, and the Four Corners area, and he hoped to be able to announce these locations with dates in the current week. He provided an update on Lake Support and Emergency Recovery (LASER), which was Lake County’s long term recovery organization and was working on three fronts to support the County’s COVID-19 efforts. He remarked that LASER began work with the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) and local churches to take the lead in the production of cloth masks for public safety professionals and healthcare providers to give to patients they care for. He added that the masks provide reverse isolation protection for those wearing them and that to date, 21,351 masks had been made and distributed. He said that LASER had also taken the lead with their work with Food for Florida to bring food to local food pantries in Lake County. He elaborated that as of May 15, 2020, LASER had delivered a total of 262,500 meals to 34 food pantries with a value of $555,000. He related that the latest endeavor of LASER was to work with local businesses to provide them with needed PPE and that in the previous week and a half, LASER had assisted about a dozen businesses in obtaining masks, gloves and hand sanitizer that they needed to open and start working.
Commr. Campione asked if Mr. Carpenter had numbers for the amount of positive immunity tests performed through Adult Medicine of Lake County.
Mr. Carpenter replied that he had the total number but that he would look to find the number of positive tests.
Mr. Aaron Kissler, Administrator/Director/Health Officer for the DOH in Lake County, conveyed information pertaining to COVID-19 testing in Lake County. He said that the DOH in Lake County was almost at 1,000 tests that they performed at their three locations in the past ten days. He reported that there were also teams that were sent out to long term care facilities and who were able to perform massive amounts of testing in a short period of time. He stated that his organization continued to perform Epi investigations where they tested individuals who were potentially exposed to COVID-19. He mentioned that Lake County had one of the highest contact tracing rates and that they were doing great at around 99 percent. He explained that contact tracing was that when a positive case was found, his organization tried to find potential contacts around that person to let them know that they may have been exposed and that they should be tested if they had symptoms. He noted that the DOH in Lake County developed a contact tracing application called Safe Paths in conjunction with other organizations, though they would not be using it at this time. He also said that they were working on a validation system for the DOH in Lake County to make their phone calls more secure, and that they were still receiving hundreds of calls to their information line. He related that they would be concentrating on testing long term care facility employees and that they were trying to fulfill the needs of their partners; however, some private providers of PPE were coming online. He mentioned that his organization had test kits available for providers that needed them, and he said that they were still considering serology tests but were not conducting them at this time. He explained that that the research was being reviewed for what type of immunity came from those antibodies, and he hoped that it was a long term immunity and that it was not possible to contract COVID-19 several times in succession. He relayed his understanding that this had occurred with several individuals but that it was still being studied, and he felt that it was important to perform serology tests to learn what was happening in the community. He also thought that as more information on immunity was received, serology tests would be useful in determining who was low and high risk. He said that the county’s numbers continued to decrease but that they had some occasional bumps, though this could occur with good testing. He thanked the County for releasing approximately $20,000 from the DOH in Lake County’s budget that was unused for one of their buildings, and this kept their County funding level the same as the previous year. He felt that this was especially important this year due to there being a significant drop in revenue, which was a major funding source for the DOH in Lake County, due to COVID-19.
Commr. Campione expressed appreciation for everything that Mr. Kissler’s team was doing and felt that they were doing a great job working with long term care facilities and conducting contact tracing. She noted that it was helpful for the County and that the testing allowed them to get a picture of what was happening in the community so they could get on track with learning to live with COVID-19 to a certain degree; furthermore, the county would have to find ways to survive and thrive economically while they managed and contained COVID-19.
Mr. Brandon Matulka, Executive Director for the Agency for Economic Prosperity, commented that his offices continued to work alongside the Offices of Emergency Management and Communications, along with other partner organizations, throughout the COVID-19 response, with the goals of continuing to be a quality source of information for individuals and businesses and working to address the needs of those groups. He said that they continued to send out consistent messaging to their partners each week regarding updated information as they received it. He remarked that the past two weeks had been significant for the information being released, with the announcement of reopening hair and nail salons and barber shops with restrictions from the State on May 11, 2020. He elaborated that this was due to Governor DeSantis’ executive order, which was announced on May 8, 2020. He also recalled that on May 15, 2020, Governor DeSantis announced the full Phase I plan which implemented items such as increased allowable capacity from the State for restaurants and food establishments, increased capacity for retail, museums and libraries, and the State allowed gyms and fitness centers to reopen with restricted capacity. He noted that it also outlined several additions to earlier plans and included addressing vacation rentals. He commented that the full Phase I reopening plan went into effect on May 18, 2020 and that all of this information had been messaged directly to his agency’s business contacts through the Offices of Elevate Lake and Visit Lake. He pointed out that the Office of Communications had been capturing this information and updating the www.ReopenLake.com webpage quickly and efficiently, and he thanked Mr. Levar Cooper, Director for the Office of Communications, and his team for everything they had done and for continuing to work with the Agency for Economic Prosperity to ensure that those activities occurred fast and accurately. He mentioned the Reopen Lake webpage’s forms for businesses to fill out with comments or questions, and said that they had received several responses over the past two weeks. He encouraged everyone to continue to fill out those items, and he noted that the Offices of Elevate Lake and Visit Lake had been working to address any questions directly. He remarked that his agency had also collaborated with education partners in the county to send out information regarding available resources for individuals and businesses related to the workforce. He mentioned that in the previous week, staff had worked with Lake-Sumter State College, Lake Technical College, CareerSource Central Florida, and Goodwill to provide options that could assist in developing and building the skills of the workforce during this period of uncertainty due to COVID-19. He said that his agency continued to stay in communication with those partners and would keep working with them on initiatives and opportunities. He also commented that his agency was continuing to monitor any actions from the federal government with regards to additional funding and stimulus actions that may be available for local businesses. He then discussed the reopening of Lake County vacation rentals and explained that his agency had worked on Sunday, May 17, 2020 to create a draft and process to expedite a plan that would be favorably considered by the State to open the county’s vacation rentals as quickly and safely as possible. He elaborated that the draft was based on guidance and recommendations put forward by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR) in response to Governor DeSantis’ executive order. He said that they also added a reference to additional Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) regulations and processes, as well as information provided by the Vacation Rental Management Association and the Florida Vacation Rental Management Association. He commented that the draft had been sent to key business and industry professionals and leaders on May 18, 2020, to start gathering input and feedback; furthermore, his agency already started to receive that feedback and was adapting the plan as they moved forward. He added that they would continue to collect feedback through the close of business on the current day, and would then work to finalize a draft to submit to the DBPR on Wednesday, May 20, 2020. He stated that for the next step, his agency would continue to focus on the vacation rental program and process to see it through to completion, which would include obtaining approval from the State. He added that they would also continue to gather information regarding additional reopening steps and resources that became available; additionally, they would work with the Office of Communications to ensure up to date and clear messaging for that information. He remarked that they would continue to work with each business that reached out to them, and to keep looking at ways where they could assist small businesses.
Commr. Breeden complimented today’s reports. She then asked to confirm with Mr. Matulka that he expected to be able to transmit a plan for opening vacation rentals to Governor DeSantis on the following day, and Mr. Matulka said this was correct. Commissioner Breeden thanked him for working on the past weekend to develop this plan.
Commr. Campione inquired that for vacation rentals, if Mr. Matulka had been receiving feedback from the groups he had reached out to. She related that some groups had reached out to the Board and that she had forwarded information to Mr. Matulka.
Mr. Matulka confirmed this. He said that the groups had been active in responding and that his agency was trying to capture and make all the changes that they had been putting forward. He elaborated that the groups had been providing additional resources to consider and that his agency had added almost everyone that had reached out to a Commissioner to the list for review.
Commr. Campione thought that the Board had discussed utilizing all of their contacts who participated in the survey, along with other business contacts they had to let employers know that if they needed COVID-19 testing done for their employees, they could use the sites that had been set up by the County with Adult Medicine of Lake County. She asked to confirm that this information was being provided to employers, and Mr. Matulka said this was correct and that he would be working with Mr. Cooper and the Office of Communications to relay this message.
Commr. Parks thanked LASER and the Office of Elevate Lake for the connection they made to assist local businesses. He noted that they were doing this without CARES Act funding, and that Orange County and some large cities had funding from this act to be used for small businesses such as restaurants, gyms and salons; however, he relayed his understanding that this was not available to Lake County. He felt that it was important to be positive, and he relayed that the Florida Association of Counties (FAC), in conjunction with the Lake County League of Cities, was trying to obtain more CARES Act funding for Lake County. He elaborated that they had recently sent a letter asking for the State to appropriate the final approximate $1.25 billion that was left to the State of Florida in the CARES Act, and they were asking for about $21.5 million to be reallocated back to Lake County for economic development assistance and other potential ways that the County could use it. He encouraged staff to stay in touch with them on this and to receive updates.
Commr. Campione thanked Commissioner Parks for informing the Board about this, and expressed interest in anything the County could do from a staff level to reinforce this. She also proposed possibly enlisting the County’s lobbyist to support this, and she thought that the Board could consider direct contact with their legislative delegation. She said that if the County received even a fraction of that amount to assist with business recovery, there were many items it could help with. She also thanked Commissioner Parks for pointing out LASER’s effort to work with businesses, and felt that it was very resourceful for LASER and the business community to find ways to meet these needs without government assistance.
Commr. Parks added that businesses had been helping other businesses, and he thanked Cemex for a recent $5,000 donation to LASER’s efforts to do this. He stated that some businesses had also been assisting the Office of Elevate Lake and LASER, and he thanked them.
Mr. Carpenter said that he had an update on COVID-19 testing and noted that 2,165 Lake County subsidized tests had been conducted. He elaborated that of those tests, 14 were positive, and that of the 3,340 immunity tests, 42 were positive.
Commr. Campione said that she had been trying to discuss with individuals in the community regarding where the county was at in April 2020 and where they were now with hospitalizations. She explained that at the county’s peak on April 7, 2020, they had 29 people in the three hospitals in Lake County; furthermore, as of the previous day, they only had one patient in a hospital. She felt that the next one to two weeks would be critical to see what was happening with regards to the reopenings and whether there was an uptick in cases. She thought that the keys were whether the positive cases translated into illnesses and hospitalizations, along with the efforts of individuals, nursing homes, and long term care facilities to protect themselves. She commented that in the state, 84 percent of those who had succumbed to COVID-19 were over the age of 65, and felt this was an important number to focus on; additionally, she relayed an understanding that 62 percent of these individuals were over the age of 75. She thought that this information indicated what individuals needed to be doing personally and for those that they interacted with.
Mr. Jeff Cole, County Manager, discussed Lake County operations during the COVID-19 situation. He recalled that County libraries were closed to the public on March 16, 2020, and they closed all other County buildings, with a few exceptions, to public access on March 20, 2020. He remarked that these steps were taken for the safety of the public and employees, to address employee morale issues that were occurring from frequent close interactions, and for the unrelated unknowns at that time. He commented that the County also identified all of the employees who could effectively telecommute and began deploying them on March 17, 2020 to telecommute. He explained that the County generally had about 23 percent of its non-fire, non-EMS workforce working remotely, and on March 24, 2020, they began having Board meetings remotely. He assured the Board and the public that over the past nine weeks, the Lake County government continued to be fully functional and operational. He elaborated that they had processed permits online, that they had provided services over the phone for veterans and those in need, that their parks had been maintained, that they had continued to care for the animals at the Lake County Animal Shelter, that their first responders had been fully engaged and deployed, and that their road and other construction projects had continued to move forward. He felt that County employees had done a great job keeping the government on track, and he shared that he had received no complaints about services not being provided or about anyone not having access to employees. He said that earlier in the current month, they began preparing for the reopening of County buildings to public access by identifying a number of modifications needed for employee work areas and public interaction areas, along with needed supplies. He said that they had been working to obtain the materials and make modifications to public-facing areas and employee work areas, as well as ensure that they had all the necessary sanitizing and cleaning supplies and PPE. He stated that as they evaluated the timeframe for reopening to public access, they had been following the CDC guidelines identified by Governor DeSantis, along with COVID-19 testing availability and trends statewide and in Lake County. He commented that he had been coordinating with municipalities in the county and that they were in agreement that it was important to be strategic and coordinated in the timing of reopening to avoid creating any unsafe conditions or situations. He felt that reopening the Lake County buildings to public access was a significant component of returning some normalcy to the county. He expressed that based on what was known today, current testing availability, and downward trends in Lake County, it was his intent to reopen County facilities to public access on June 1, 2020 followed by a return to in-person Board meetings on June 2, 2020. He explained that they were working to make the June 2, 2020 Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting a hybrid meeting that would allow members of the public to connect remotely via Zoom Webinar if they did not wish to attend in person, though the Board and staff would be in person in the County Commission Chambers if the trends continued. He commented that some employees who were working remotely would need to return to County facilities when they reopened to public access, though he anticipated continuing to have some employees work remotely to allow for continued social distancing in the workplace. He reiterated that this was all contingent on the data and the information received over the next 13 days, though he opined that it looked favorable.
Commr. Campione thanked Mr. Cole for the update, and she expressed a desire for the data continuing to trend the way that the County hoped. She said that even if there was an uptick in the number of positive cases, the County would have to focus on if it was translating into illnesses and hospitalizations. She felt that the state and country had learned a lot and now that they had more information, the idea that they would ever shut everything down again and not be able to function and keep commerce going was difficult to believe, if the county had the needed equipment so that they could isolate via masks or precautions. She expressed excitement for locations reopening and for normal foot traffic coming through County buildings. She also expressed appreciation for everything that staff had done to keep everything going. She mentioned that she had been in contact with about 40 churches and that LASER had been helpful in accommodating Zoom meetings where they had discussed the churches’ process for reopening. She thought that the first week of June 2020 was the same time that many of them were considering going back to something like a normal service but with precautions and social distancing in place. She elaborated that the churches would be modifying their services and having precautions such as reservations, assigned seating, etc.
Commr. Parks expressed appreciation for these comments and said that he was excited about reopening on June 1, 2020. He thought that the County had learned much and felt that COVID-19 was something that had to be respected; however, he opined that reopening would send a message that the County wanted the economy to keep picking up and that they were doing everything they could to be positive in the community. He looked forward to returning in June 2020 with the respect of COVID-19 and with appropriate measures.
Commr. Sullivan said that he agreed with everything that was said. He mentioned that he had received numerous calls about reopening the economy, and all of his fellow Commissioners had been praised by people in the private sector as they tried to move forward. He felt that they needed to continue to open the economy because being closed longer could lead it to being more challenging for small businesses to recover. He said that he had seen the efforts of LASER and that he had been conducting volunteer work with them, and he reported that the efforts were getting to the people who needed to receive it. He thanked LASER for their efforts and thought that if this could be carried forward for small businesses that needed their help, then it could be a positive situation.
Commr. Breeden appreciated that there continued to be positive news and that the county was looking forward to reopening more businesses. She mentioned the BCC sending the message that they wanted salons and gyms open, and sending their plan for vacation rentals. She felt confident that what the County would send would be approved, and she noted that while she would continue to wear a mask when she was out, it was good to be looking forward to opening up more, especially for local businesses. She then thanked Commissioner Campione, Mr. Cole and staff for working through this situation.
Commr. Blake concurred with everything that was said. He thought that it was time to reopen, and expressed excitement for being on the other side of this situation. He said that he had received many emails about vacation rentals, and asked about the timeline for this item after it was submitted on the following day.
Commr. Campione said that they were unsure, though they felt that submitting the plan to Governor DeSantis was the critical part that the County could do. She added that they could follow this up with inquiries and letters asking Governor DeSantis to respond, and she relayed her understanding that the Governor was concerned about rentals for those who were coming from states with high infection rates. She noted that as this should be addressed in the plan, it also should address the Governor’s primary concern. She stated that the Governor had indicated at some point that he would not be opposed to rentals that only went to State of Florida residents. She suggested that when Mr. Matulka submitted the plan, the County could provide such that if the Governor did not find the County’s portion of the plan that addressed rentals to non-Florida residents to be acceptable, this could be bifurcated so that they could at least move forward with that part of the plan. She thought that the County would be successful with this and that it would be up to the Governor and how quickly he responded.
Mr. Cole confirmed that there was no indication for the timeline, and he relayed that a number of Counties in the state were also doing this. He said that all of the plans were being submitted to the DBPR and would be reviewed there. He indicated that the recommendations would be going to Governor DeSantis at that point, and the County would engage their state lobbyists to ensure that they had a copy of the plan and could assist with this, in addition to assisting the County with information that they may need to either make enhancements or changes. He felt that Mr. Matulka, with the input of local stakeholders and the industry, had created a solid plan that was a good balance between what the Governor wanted to be included, while also ensuring that it could be accommodated by the industry and that they could support it and put it in place. He reiterated that the County expected the plan to be submitted by the following day, and they would follow up and ensure that they maintained communication with DBPR and the Governor’s office.
Commr. Blake asked that when Mr. Carpenter provided information on antibody testing, were there 3,340 overall antibody tests and 42 positive cases, and Mr. Carpenter confirmed this. Commissioner Blake said that this was about 1.25 percent.
Commr. Campione emphasized to residents that it was important to have empathy and understanding for those around us. She noted that some people chose to wear masks because they believed that if they self-isolated, then they would not be passing COVID-19 to someone else. She added that others were wearing masks to self-isolate and also to the extent that it might provide them protection if they would be exposed to something in the air; furthermore, it could give them confidence to go out and do things. She felt that it was important for the community to have understanding for what people wanted to do to return to some normalcy and contain the virus.
Minutes approval
On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Breeden, and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the minutes for the BCC meeting of March 24, 2020 (Regular Meeting) as presented.
citizen question and comment period
No one wished to address the Board at this time.
CLERK OF the Circuit COURT and comptroller’s CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Breeden, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller’s Consent Agenda, Items 1 through 2, as follows:
Commr. Sullivan was absent for the vote.
List of Warrants
Request to acknowledge receipt of the list of warrants paid prior to this meeting, pursuant to Chapter 136.06 (1) 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.
City of Eustis Ordinance 20-10
Request to acknowledge receipt of Future Land Use Amendment Ordinance 20-10 from the City of Eustis.
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Breeden, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the Consent Agenda, Tabs 3 through 26, as follows:
Commr. Sullivan was absent for the vote.
COUNTY ATTORNEY
Request approval of the First Amendment to the Lease Agreement with Hunt Family III, LLC (d/b/a Hunt Industrial Park) for the South Lake Business Opportunity Center at 15390 County Road 565A, Suite F, Groveland. The fiscal impact is $4,930.00 for fiscal year 2020 (expenditure - rent payments July through September 2020) and $19,720.00 for fiscal year 2021 (expenditure). Commission District 1.
Request:
1. Approval to accept Offers to Purchase on Alternate Keys 1181526, 1254787, 1270634, 1341191, 1342597, 1376491, 1415268 and 1603510.
2. Authorization for the Chairman to execute any necessary donation resolutions and closing documents.
The fiscal impact is $16,000.00 (revenue). Commission Districts 3 and 5.
HUMAN RESOURCES AND RISK MANAGEMENT
Request approval to amend Contract 16-0209 with Healthstat Wellness, Inc. (Charlotte, NC) to allow for the physician’s work hours to increase from part-time to full-time and to allow for a rate increase. The estimated fiscal impact for Fiscal Year 2020 is $50,000.00 (expenditure), and the estimated fiscal impact for Fiscal Year 2021 is $170,000.00 (expenditure).
AGENCY FOR ECONOMIC PROSPERITY
Request approval to support Phase III of the Four Corners Area Council's One Vision Initiative, and authorization for the Chairman to execute any necessary documents. The fiscal impact is $15,000.00 (expenditure). Commission District 1.
Request approval of a second amendment to the Real Estate Option to Purchase Agreement with Project Rapid. There is no fiscal impact. Commission District 1.
PUBLIC SAFETY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Emergency Management
Request approval to:
1. Amend the agreement with Lake Support and Emergency Recovery (LASER) approved on December 17, 2019, to change the agency's name from Lake and Sumter Emergency Recovery to Lake Support and Emergency Recovery (retaining LASER acronym).
2. Provide additional funding in the amount of $49,000.00 to LASER upon request during each County Declared Local State of Emergency, including the current County Declared Local State of Emergency.
The fiscal impact per event is $49,000.00 (expenditure - potentially eligible for partial FEMA reimbursement).
Request:
1. Ratification of the Amended COVID-19 Testing Reimbursement Agreement with Adult Medicine of Lake County executed by the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners on May 11, 2020, under the authority of Resolution 2020-29, as extended, and
2. Authorization for the Chairman to amend the Agreement as warranted for later Board ratification.
The total estimated fiscal impact from the original agreement and the amended agreement is $360,000.00 (expenditure - 75 percent eligible for FEMA reimbursement).
Fire Rescue
Request approval of repairs and renovations at Fire Station 21, Eustis (Black Bear), and approval of a budget transfer necessary to move funds for the project. The fiscal impact is $71,332.00 (expenditure). Commission District 4.
Request approval to apply for the 2019 Federal Emergency Management Agency's Fire Prevention and Safety grant for funding designed to reach high-risk target groups and mitigate the incidence of death, injuries and property damage caused by fire and fire-related hazards. The estimated fiscal impact is $50,000.00 (revenue/expenditure - $47,619.05 in grant funding and $2,380.95 in County funding).
Request:
1. Ratification of an application for a U.S. Department of Homeland Security 2020 Assistance to Firefighters COVID-19 Supplemental Grant for personal protective equipment (PPE).
2. Approval to accept the grant if awarded.
3. Authorization for the Chairman to execute all related documents.
The estimated fiscal impact is $371,500.00 (revenue/expenditure - $337,727.00 in grant funding and $33,773.00 in County funds).
Planning and Zoning
Request for approval to advertise an ordinance to amend the Lake County Code to increase the number of infill development waivers available to a single entity and to make the affordable housing impact fee waiver available for moderate income levels. The fiscal impact cannot be determined at this time.
Public Safety Support
Request approval to apply for the 2020 E911 State Grant Program to implement and maintain next-generation 911 (NG911) network services and recurring network/circuit costs for the first-year implementation period. The fiscal impact is $383,091.08 (revenue/expenditure - 100 percent grant funded).
PUBLIC SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Housing and Human Services
Request approval:
1. Of the Substantial Amendment of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 Annual Action Plan and approval of related Resolution 2020-80.
2. To authorize the Chairman to execute any documents required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
3. Of Unanticipated Revenue Resolution 2020-81 to amend the CDBG Fund budget in order to receive unanticipated revenue for FY 2020 and to provide appropriations for the disbursement of these funds.
The fiscal impact is $787,166.00 (revenue/expenditure).
Request approval of:
1. The sub-recipient agreement with LifeStream Behavioral Center for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for Fiscal Year 2020 to expand its homeless services offered through the Open Door program by staffing an eight-bed emergency shelter.
2. An amendment to the sub-recipient agreement with Lifestream Behavioral Center for CDBG funds for Fiscal Year 2019 to extend the term of the agreement.
The fiscal impact shall not exceed $119,397.00 (expenditure). Commission District 4.
Request approval of the amended Citizen Participation Plan relating to the administration of the Community Development Block Grant Program of the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development to include new provisions related to the COVID-19 pandemic allowing for a shorter time frame for comment and virtual meetings as needed, and approval of related Resolution 2020-82. There is no fiscal impact.
Request approval and execution of a United States Bankruptcy Court Middle District of Florida Reaffirmation Agreement for Jacquelyn Warzecha regarding a Lake County Community Development Block Grant Mortgage and Note for $80,000.00, recorded in O.R. Book 4324, Page 571, Public Records of Lake County. There is no fiscal impact.
Public Works
Request approval:
1. To execute a County Incentive Grant Program and Local Transportation Project agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for construction and inspection services for the construction of a County Road 466A Stormwater Retention Pond (Pond 4), in the Fruitland Park area.
2. Of supporting Resolution 2020-83 authorizing the Chairman to execute and deliver the agreement to FDOT.
3. Of Unanticipated Revenue Resolution 2020-84 to increase the Lake County Federal/State Grants Fund for Fiscal Year 2020.
The estimated fiscal impact is $1,292,292.00 (revenue/expenditure – $871,146.00 in FDOT grant funding and $421,146.00 in Transportation Impact Fees). Commission District 5.
Request approval to:
1. Release a performance bond of $7,968,046.52 for the completion of the Hartle Road / County Road (CR) 455 extension project in Clermont.
2. Accept a maintenance bond of $330,978.58 to ensure the improvements to the Hartle Road / CR 455 extension for a two-year period.
3. Execute Resolution 2020-85 accepting CR 455 "Part" into the Lake County road maintenance system.
There is no fiscal impact. Commission District 2.
Request approval of Contract 20-0517 with West to West Construction, LLC (Dunnellon, FL) for the County Road 455 and Ridgewood Avenue Roundabout project located in the Town of Montverde. The fiscal impact is $959,082.42 (expenditure). Commission District 2.
Request approval of Resolution 2020-86 to advertise a public hearing to vacate right of way and cease maintenance on a portion of Cook Road, located east of U.S. Highway 27 and south of Schofield Road, in the Clermont area. The fiscal impact is $2,295.00 (revenue - vacation application fee). Commission District 2.
Request approval to purchase a 4x4 agricultural enclosed cab tractor from Fields Equipment Company, Inc. (Minneola, FL) for the Road Operations Division's mowing needs. The fiscal impact is $50,750.00 (expenditure).
Transit Services
Request approval:
1. To submit a Federal Transit Administration CARES Act Section 5311 Grant application to be utilized for operating assistance and for the purchase of one 35-foot bus.
2. Of supporting Resolution 2020-87.
The fiscal impact is $1,566,869.00 (revenue/expenditure).
Request approval to apply for the Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged Trip and Equipment Grant, and approval of supporting Resolution 2020-88 for Fiscal Year 2021. The fiscal impact is $872,832.00 (revenue/expenditure - $785,549.00 in grant funding, and $87,283.00 in County funding).
Request approval of:
1. Unanticipated Revenue Resolution 2020-89 recognizing $1,938,820.00 in unanticipated revenue from the Federal Transit Administration resulting from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act of 2020.
2. An addendum to the agreement with RATP Dev USA for additional transportation services due to changes in operations and maintenance requirements in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The estimated fiscal amount is $1,938,820.00 (revenue/expenditure - 100 percent grant funded).
public hearings: REZONING
rezoning consent agenda
Mr. Tim McClendon, Director for the Office of Planning and Zoning, displayed the advertisements for that day’s rezoning cases on the overhead monitor in accordance with the Florida Statutes. He commented that for Tab 1 on the rezoning consent agenda, in the previous week the Board had received a letter from an adjacent neighbor of the subject property who was objecting to items proposed for the conditional use permit (CUP) request with regards to the number of horses, parking, lighting, and manure stockpile locations. He elaborated that on the previous night, the applicant sent an email attempting to satisfy most of these concerns with some modified conditions, and he said that the Board should have received a copy of the email this morning; however, staff had received another email from the objecting neighbor requesting a continuance for this case until June 16, 2020. He noted that it was the Board’s discretion whether to entertain this continuance request. He stated that options for the Board to consider for the current rezoning agenda would include to accept the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board and approve the rezoning consent agenda with those modified conditions as presented by the applicant of Tab 1, to accept the consent agenda but remove Tab 1 for a full presentation and discussion, or to possibly consider a continuance. He believed that the applicant and the neighbor for Tab 1 were present at the meeting.
Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, suggested that the Board not vote on the rezoning consent agenda tabs as a single group and rather address them individually to give anyone from the public a chance to raise their hand if they wanted to speak about one of those items.
Commr. Campione reiterated that for Tab 1, there were participants at the current meeting, along with a request for a postponement by an adjoining property owner. She recommended addressing Tabs 2 through 6 and then coming back to Tab 1 to decide how to address it.
Tab 2. Ordinance No. 2020-21
Rezoning Case # RZ-20-06-3
Bitter-Warren Property Rezoning
Amend Ordinance #5-93 to rezone property from Community Facility District (CFD) to Urban Residential (R-6).
Tab 3. Ordinance No. 2020-22
Rezoning Case # RZ-20-03-4
Tzimon Barto Property Rezoning
Rezone property from Agriculture (A) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to facilitate development of a cultural arts center.
Tab 4. Ordinance No. 2020-23
Rezoning Case # RZ-20-07-5
LCBCC Umatilla CFD Rezoning
Rezoning property from Community Commercial District (C-2) and Urban Residential District (R-6) to Community Facility District (CFD) to accommodate fire station related improvements.
Tab 5. Ordinance No. 2020-24
Rezoning Case # RZ-20-05-1
Hansen House Rezoning
Rezone approximately 0.66 +/- acres from Agriculture (A) to Estate Residential (R-2), to facilitate the construction of a single-family residence.
Tab 6.
Rezoning Case # CP-20-02-4
Great Corners Comprehensive Text Amendment - Transmittal
Amend Comprehensive Plan Policies I-2.1.4 and I-2.1.13 to allow the Board of County Commissioners to approve alternative design standards within the Mount Plymouth-Sorrento Main Street Future Land Use Category.
Tab 1. Ordinance No. 2020-20
Rezoning Case # CUP-20-01-4
Martin Sport Horses
Conditional Use Permit to allow a horse stable for boarding, riding, horse sales, and breeding of horses on Agriculture (A) zoned property.
Bitter-warren property rezoning
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Breeden, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Tab 2, Rezoning Case # RZ-20-06-3, Bitter-Warren Property Rezoning.
Commr. Sullivan was absent for the vote.
tzimon barto property rezoning
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Breeden, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Tab 3, Rezoning Case # RZ-20-03-4, Tzimon Barto Property Rezoning.
lcbcc umatilla cfd rezoning
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Breeden and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Tab 4, Rezoning Case # RZ-20-07-5, LCBCC Umatilla CFD Rezoning.
hansen house property rezoning
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Sullivan, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Tab 5, Rezoning Case # RZ-20-05-1, Hansen House Property Rezoning.
great corners comprehensive text amendment - transmittal
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Breeden, seconded by Commr. Sullivan and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Tab 6, Rezoning Case # CP-20-02-4, Great Corners Comprehensive Text Amendment – Transmittal.
martin sport horses cup
Commr. Campione relayed her understanding that the Board likely each received an email on the current morning from Mr. George Gideon, the objecting neighbor, who was on the line. She questioned if the Board would entertain the request for a postponement or if they wanted to hear from Mr. Gideon and the applicant before making this decision. She noted that the case was in her district, Commission District 4.
Commr. Parks asked if she wanted a continuance for this case. He indicated that if a situation like this could be addressed, then the Board could continue it.
Commr. Campione said that issues could be worked out, and that neighbors could find ways to coexist and feel that they were each able to use their properties in the way that they wanted and have the least impact on each other. She supported this type of situation and felt that some progress was made in this regard. She commented that based on the submitted images and concerns about visibility and lighting and if the applicant was agreeable to waiting until June 2020, there could be a meeting in the County Commission Chambers and this could be helpful in finding a resolution that both parties would find acceptable.
Commr. Breeden expressed interest in hearing from the applicant regarding if they had any objections to a continuance.
Mr. Jonathan Martin, the applicant, explained that he had met with Mr. Gideon over the past four or five months to explain the CUP. He noted that Mr. Gideon was adamant about there being no lights, and he relayed that he had been informing the Gideons about his intentions and that he had also discussed this with the other neighbors. He explained that his daughter was the owner of Martin Sport Horses and that she currently owned between four and eight horses depending on the time of year. He relayed his understanding that the only item that Mr. Gideon would not agree to was lighting. He thought that the number of allowable horses was per statute, and said that they were requesting 15 horses. He opined that this was consistent with the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) and all normal procedures, and mentioned that the only item they were requesting was lights until 8:00 p.m. for three or four months of the year when it became dark early in the winter. He thought that there was currently a substantial buffer between Mr. Gideon’s property and the arena on the subject property. He felt that this item and the lighting could be deferred to the BCC’s judgement with the understanding that when his daughter had clients that wanted to take lessons, they may arrive in the evening and leave the residence by 8:00 p.m. He stated that he had submitted the application on January 2, 2020 and that there was a list of people who were ready to participate in the company.
Commr. Campione asked if the proposed ordinance addressed the specific months when the lighting would be allowed.
Mr. McClendon replied that modified condition as presented by the applicant did not specify a month timeframe; rather, it indicated that the lights would be turned off at 8:00 p.m.
Commr. Parks inquired if there was any guidance given to the type of lighting. He stated that this could be less intrusive if lighting was placed lower and was of a different type of light-emitting diode (LED) when compared to older types.
Mr. Martin said that Item M of the ordinance indicated that exterior lighting shall be consistent with dark sky principals in accordance with the LDR as amended. He indicated that they wanted to use LED lights and that they wanted to be as sustainable as possible. He remarked that they intended to do this in an appropriate manner in consideration of all of their neighbors.
Commr. Parks commented that one possible idea could be recommendations or criteria that staff could include as a condition of the CUP.
Commr. Campione said that the Board could call on Mr. Gideon to receive his input and see whether he was receptive to provisions that would ensure that the lighting was pointed downward and was such that would not spill off the property.
Mr. Gideon expressed that he wanted the case to be postponed. He indicated a concern that Mr. Martin’s information had changed, and he said that Mr. Martin recently proposed to only place lights on the western side of the arena facing east. He relayed his understanding that Mr. Martin was now planning to place lights around the arena. He mentioned how he had a tree canopy taken down, and he indicated a concern that a tree acting as the largest buffer between the properties could break in the next year. He expressed a concern that there could be 11 horses on only about 10.5 acres. He thought that the Lake County Property Appraiser allowed one horse per acre in horse breeding situations unless it was evaluated, and he did not think that the Property Appraiser’s Office had been questioned on this issue. He also voiced concerns about parking issues, and he expressed interest in the neighbors working out this issue so that the Board would not have to.
Commr. Campione thought that this could be challenging without having the vantage point of the impacted property owner. She noted that the Board saw some photographs, and questioned if additional trees could be planted to take the place of trees that were no longer going to be there. She also said staff had recommended that 15 horses would be an acceptable number.
Mr. McClendon confirmed this and added that for reference for this number, the property located directly west of the subject property also had a CUP for horse stable boarding; furthermore, in this ordinance that was done in 1988, there was no limitation on the number of horses.
Commr. Campione thought that having one horse per acre was tied to having horses grazing, along with agriculture exemptions, and Mr. McClendon said this was correct.
Commr. Parks thought that staff could create some more descriptive technical specifications for the lighting, which could be addressed along with the buffering. He asked if this could be done now versus waiting another month for the next zoning agenda in June 2020, unless it was specified that the Board wanted to hear it in two weeks from the current day.
Commr. Breeden indicated an understanding that the tree buffer was on Mr. Gideon’s property and that his trees were reaching their end of life, and Mr. McClendon thought that this was correct. Commissioner Breeden noted that if Mr. Gideon wanted to replace those trees, then he would have the right to do that. She was unsure if Mr. Martin and Mr. Gideon had agreed on the parking and the placement of manure, and she thought that if LED lighting was used with dark sky lighting, then she was not sure if there was a need to delay the case until the next Board meeting.
Commr. Campione asked if parking and the placement of manure were adequately addressed in the CUP.
Mr. McClendon responded that this was part of the applicant’s modified conditions, and they agreed to keep the manure piles 250 from the property lines. He said that this was contained in the email that the applicant had submitted. He commented that for lighting, staff could include language for the light fixtures to be shielded, and all lights shall be angled and directed away from the western property line.
Commr. Parks thought that this could help, and suggested possibly indicating that there would be less than one foot candle of light on Mr. Gideon’s property.
Mr. McClendon responded that this could be done.
Mr. Martin said his email indicated that they would not be allowed any horse trailers except for their two personal trailers. He was amicable with the additional language for lighting, and he related that they would be in support of Mr. Gideon replacing his trees if he had concerns about buffering. He explained that historically, the manure had been by Mr. Gideon’s house but that it would now be on the north side of the barn.
Commr. Campione commented that she had been leaning toward a postponement but felt that they were making progress to accommodate the concerns. She opened the floor for Mr. Gideon to speak with the Board an additional time.
Mr. Gideon reiterated that he wanted the case to be postponed, and expressed a concern that the condition for trailers only addressed where he wanted to park. He indicated concerns with the conditions changing and for pictures misrepresenting the property. He indicated that he had planted more trees on his property than those that had been removed, though it took many years for them to grow into a buffer. He said that he was unable to have companies bring trees in, and he wanted the Board to give him and Mr. Martin time to address his issues. He relayed concerns for horse grazing affecting the ground, along with runoff issues.
Commr. Campione asked Mr. Martin to confirm that he had two trailers belonging to his family and that he would not allow any trailers for his daughter’s customers. She also said that with regards to the manure, Mr. Gideon had mentioned 350 feet and that Mr. Martin had indicated 250 feet.
Mr. Martin confirmed this and said that this was included in his email. He said that he would be amicable with the manure being placed 400 feet the property line if Mr. Gideon preferred this.
Commr. Campione supported placing the manure 350 feet from Mr. Gideon’s property, and Mr. Martin said that this was acceptable. Commissioner Campione then noted that for horses, the Board’s packet indicated that he had 13.92 acres, and she mentioned that the Property Appraiser’s numbers were based on if someone had a bona-fide agricultural use. She did not think that the same requirement was established for the health and safety of the horses, and she asked to confirm if the horses would be kept in the barn, brought out for training, and only graze part of the time.
Mr. Martin confirmed this and explained that the horses would sometimes be out at day or night, but none of the horses would permanently be outside. He related that this was why he felt that the number of horses was appropriate, and he remarked that they had researched other conditional uses. He opined that there was no limit placed on other properties; however, they were trying to be fair in placing a limit because this was the number of horses that they could take care of.
Commr. Campione noted that the adjoining CUP did not have a limit on horses and that this had been the case in other CUPs in the county; furthermore, having a limit would establish a ceiling. She noted that having one horse per acre would allow for 14 horses if the acreage was rounded up, and she asked if this would be acceptable as opposed to 15 horses.
Mr. Martin relayed that 14 horses was amicable.
Commr. Campione thought that the lights were an issue to ensure that they were not impacting the Gideons’ use of their property. She mentioned the 8:00 p.m. restriction during the months of the year where it became dark earlier, and asked if the lights would be pointed downward and meet the requirements discussed by staff. She expressed that if these conditions were included in the ordinance, then she was unsure of what the difference would be in June 2020 if the same meeting was held. She opined that there would still be certain points of contention and that this would at least specify that two trailers were allowed, the manure would be 350 feet away from Mr. Gideon’s property, the number of horses would be 14, and the lights would have to be pointed downward and meet the dark sky requirements. She was unsure if a postponement could lead to a better resolution, and she relayed her understanding that this business wanted to begin but had been in a holding pattern for several months.
Commr. Parks felt a motion should include that for lighting, that staff would use their expertise to create the technical specifications for light on the adjacent property.
Mr. McClendon said that this could be addressed.
Commr. Parks added that there could be a timer on the lights to turn them off at 8:00 p.m.
Commr. Campione felt that this was a good suggestion and could avoid a situation where the lights could stay on inadvertently.
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Sullivan and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Tab 1, Rezoning Case # CUP-20-01-4, Martin Sport Horses CUP with the following modifications: staff would use their expertise to create the technical specifications for light on the adjacent property; there would be a timer on the lights to turn them off at 8:00 p.m.; two trailers belonging to the Martins would be allowed on the property; manure would be stored at a minimum of 350 feet away from the property boundary; and the number of horses would be limited to 14.
public hearing - ordinance 2020-19 repealing business taxes
Ms. Marsh placed the proposed ordinance on the floor for reading by title only as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA; REPEALING ARTICLE IV, CHAPTER 13, LAKE COUNTY CODE, ENTITLED BUSINESS TAXES; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commr. Breeden was pleased that the Board would hopefully move forward with this item. She recalled that in February 2020, the Board voted to phase out the business tax receipt (BTR) and that during the Board’s priorities workshop, she had suggested that the Board end BTRs. She felt that this was a step in the right direction for providing relief to the county’s local businesses.
Commr. Blake agreed with Commissioner Breeden and thanked her for bringing this item back up. He also appreciated the support of the BCC, along with Mr. David Jordan, Lake County Tax Collector, for making it a priority in his office.
Commr. Parks expressed support for this item and felt that it was good timing. He thought that it would be another positive step as the county came out of the COVID-19 situation, and he thanked Mr. Jordan and his office for doing this so quickly.
Commr. Sullivan agreed with everything that had been said on this item.
Commr. Campione opined that the timing could not have been better and that this was something the County could do for its businesses right away. She noted that this was one less item that businesses would have to deal with, and she thought that it sent a positive message. She noted that there would be a cost of $220,000 to do this and that there were needs for revenues this year, though she felt that this was simply a tax that served no other purpose. She also thought that this would be a way to give relief to local businesses and reduce red tape for them. She recalled that Commissioner Blake had raised this issue early on as something that he wanted to see accomplished, and she thanked him for asking for it to be addressed several years prior.
Commr. Blake expressed appreciation for this, and he thanked Mr. Jordan and Mr. Bob McKee, former Lake County Tax Collector, for bringing this to his attention years ago.
On a motion by Commr. Breeden, seconded by Commr. Sullivan and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to adopt and execute Ordinance 2020-19 repealing Article IV, Chapter 13, Lake County Code, entitled Business Taxes.
clonts grove boundary analysis
Mr. McClendon presented the information regarding the Clonts Grove Boundary Analysis request, which was last heard on May 5, 2020. He explained that there were three phases for development within Wellness Way including boundary analysis, preliminary master planned unit development (PUD) and community input, and the final PUD. He noted that any master PUD must contain a minimum of 1,000 acres unless exempted by the Board. He listed these three criteria that the Board should consider to grant a waiver for the minimum acreage requirement: proximity to existing public infrastructure; compatibility with existing future land uses; and must be consistent with the financial capability of local government or private entities to fund that infrastructure. He stated that Clonts Grove was located on the east side of U.S. Highway 27 and that the original Clonts Grove proper contained over 750 acres, with about 500 acres of that having either been annexed or developed at this time; therefore, the remaining acreage was within the Wellness Way Town Center designation and would be serviced by South Lake Utilities. He commented that this meant that this portion would never be annexed by the City of Clermont, and he relayed these staff analysis findings: the proposed development program was about 700 dwellings and over half a million square feet of non-residential uses; the project was under the 1,000 acre minimum threshold which was why the case was being presented today; the majority of the Clonts Grove property had already been annexed; and the applicant had supplied justification for how they met the three criteria required to move forward. He commented that as of yesterday, the Board should have received the signed acknowledgement from the applicant effectively agreeing to the items that were discussed by the Board during the May 5, 2020 BCC meeting, including the items currently displayed on the screen. He stated that the requested action would be to allow Clonts Grove to proceed through the Wellness Way development process as a master PUD.
Commr. Parks felt that the public was watching what was happening in Wellness Way, and he relayed his understanding that the land owners there were watching each other to ensure that everything was done fairly. He commented that an agreement was reached that would be more fair and upfront about what was occurring with Wellness Way. He thanked Mr. Rex Clonts, owner of Clonts Grove, and he felt that Mr. Clonts was deserving of this item, noting that he had worked with the County from the beginning on Wellness Way. He opined that this agreement was fair for everyone and that they could move forward with optimism related to upcoming items related to Wellness Way. He said that the engineering and design for the Lake-Orange County Connector through the Central Florida Expressway Authority (CFX) was approved in the past week, and that he felt this had made Wellness Way very valuable. He said that it was important that this was done right and that it was planned correctly, along with following the original intent and vision of Wellness Way. He thanked staff, along with Commissioner Campione and the other Commissioners for the two week continuance of this item.
Commr. Campione thanked everyone for getting this agreement in writing over the past two weeks, and for ensuring that everyone was on the same page and had the same expectations about the design criteria and transportation improvements. She also thanked Mr. Clonts, Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, an attorney representing Mr. Clonts, staff, and Commissioner Parks for working to complete this.
Ms. Bonifay thanked the Board for supporting this item so that Mr. Clonts could begin working on a PUD. She also looked forward to attending a Wellness Way meeting on the following day where design guidelines and other items would be discussed.
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Breeden and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Clonts Grove Boundary Analysis to allow Clonts Grove, Inc. to proceed as a Master PUD within the Wellness Way Area Plan, located in the Clermont area.
refund of bond issuance fee for montverde academy
Commr. Breeden explained that several weeks prior, the County had received a request from Dr. Kasey Kesselring, Headmaster of Montverde Academy, for relief on some bond issuance fees. She elaborated that in November 2020, the Board approved a bond issuance to assist with the construction of a new middle school building and an attached gymnasium at Montverde Academy. She relayed her understanding that Montverde Academy had applied and closed on industrial revenue bonds of $6 million, and they had to remit some fees to the County. She commented that they had requested a refund of allowable fees of $24,950 and that normally, she would not think that this was a necessary request; however, with trying to give relief to businesses and institutions, she felt that this was worth consideration. She opined that Montverde Academy was a great institution and noted that they had a significant economic impact on Lake County. She said that the school knew what they were facing with international students and other issues for the upcoming year, and she supported approval of this item.
Commr. Parks recused himself from voting on this item and said that he served on a related board in an advisory fashion.
Commr. Blake expressed support for this item and felt that Montverde Academy was an asset to Lake County. He recalled that Dr. Kesselring had advocated for increased taxes and fees in other areas and for the County incurring increased debt for certain projects. He opined that since Dr. Kesselring went this route and used the County for this bond to avoid a significant amount of taxes, that he could have some empathy for other taxpayers in the county.
On a motion by Commr. Breeden, seconded by Commr. Sullivan and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved a refund of the bond issuance fee associated with the Industrial Revenue Bonds for the construction of a new middle school building with an attached gymnasium at Montverde Academy.
Commr. Parks abstained from voting.
regular agenda
Lake County vs. Lake County Fish Farm settlement agreement
Ms. Marsh presented information pertaining to a proposed settlement in Lake County vs. Lake County Fish Farm, Inc. She displayed an image of the fish farm and noted that there were two parcels involved with this settlement agreement. She explained that the top parcel had been operating with an aquaculture certificate from the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS) since 2014, and the plan for this parcel was to install 26 agricultural ponds, which she believed were currently on the property. She commented that the bottom parcel was the injunction parcel and was an additional 40 acres that was not included in the aquaculture certification from 2014. She said that in the previous year, the property owner started to remove material from that injunction parcel. She remarked that the County filed the injunction and that since the November 2019 timeframe, they had been working with the property owner to try and bring this to a resolution. She commented that the property owner had voluntarily agreed to have the temporary injunction entered, that he had not been hauling material off the back parcel, that the County had to extend the temporary injunction three times, and that the injunction would currently expire in the first part of June 2020. She reiterated that an agreement had been worked out and that the Board had the following information in their packet on Friday, May 15, 2020: the property owner would have the ability to haul an additional 750,000 cubic yards of material in a phased approach, noting that there would be three phases and that the first phase would be for 250,000 cubic yards; at the same time or before they started hauling the 250,000 cubic yards of material, they would reclaim 13 of the 26 ponds within the first six months of the date that the court approves the agreement; if the ponds are reclaimed to the satisfaction of the County, then the property could move into phase two, which was an additional 250,000 cubic yards that they could haul after or concurrent with reclaiming an additional 10 ponds between the months of six through twelve from the date that the court approves the agreement; and three ponds would remain on site but would continue to operate for aquaculture purposes, noting that they would need to have their aquaculture certificate from FDACS and that if they did not have this certificate or if they chose to abandon those three ponds, then they would need to reclaim them to the same extent and manner that they did for the other 23 ponds. She then relayed the following additional information as part of this settlement agreement: the property owner was also going to reconstruct the setbacks and slopes on the property lines for the adjacent property, which would be in accordance with approved engineering; the property owner would have to apply for and receive all of their applicable permits from the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and in order to do this, they would need the County to sign the local notification form, commenting that the County signing the agreement was part of this settlement agreement; the property owner would provide a reclamation bond to the County at 100 percent of the amount to reclaim all of the ponds, with the reclamation bond also covering the back 40 acres; and once the property owner was done with their 750,000 cubic yards of material, they would have to reclaim the back 40 acres and maintain it as well. She remarked that the property owner would have to ensure some traffic safety measures including having a flagman at the intersection of their driveway and State Road (SR) 44, and the flagman would be there on days where they had more than 200 truck trips per day, or 30 or more truck trips per hour, to ensure that those vehicles were stopping at the intersection prior to entering onto SR 44. She elaborated that they were also planning on installing a solar powered flashing stop sign to bring that intersection to the attention of the truck drivers, and they would also install additional signage on SR 44 to the effect of “trucks entering highway.” She noted that this would have to be approved by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and they were working on a variable message board for SR 44 to let people know about the days where they had heavy truck traffic. She explained that on Thursday, May 14, 2020, the County sent this agreement to local residents who had been following this matter and bringing issues to the County’s attention, and the County had a Zoom call with them to review the settlement agreement and receive additional input, which was incorporated into the agreement. She reiterated that the property owner had already approved these conditions and had signed a revised agreement which the Board should have received in their packet. She then listed the following additional terms: the property owner would leave the existing tree line on the west property boundary and would plant trees on the east property boundary, to include two rows to create a visual barrier with red cedar and/or pine trees, noting that there was a tree line on the east boundary and they would not remove this tree line but rather plant around it; they would not knowingly utilize any hazardous, contaminated or unclean material for reclamation purposes, commenting that they brought some clean soil onto their property in the previous week as they began to work on their setbacks; they agreed that property would neither be used as a landfill nor a construction and demolition (C&D) pit, and they would record the necessary document to put future purchasers on notice about this; they would not remove or destroy any old growth oak trees in the wetland areas on the back 40 acres, nor would they remove or destroy the wetland areas on that parcel, noting that this information had also been communicated to the SJRWMD; and they would limit their operations to Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and on Saturdays, 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., with federal holidays being excluded. She commented that there would be some adjustment to these hours when the time changed, and she believed that it would be 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on Monday through Friday, and 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. on Saturdays, which was specified in the settlement agreement. She said that they would also provide the County a grading plan to show the existing and final grade, and they would remit to the County 20 cents per cubic yard of material that they hauled; furthermore, if they hauled the entire 750,000 cubic yards of material, this would equate to approximately $150,000 that the County could use toward the roads there. She read the recommended action to authorize her office to execute the joint motion and settlement agreement so that they could file it in this case, noting that it would become final once the judge approved it. She explained that currently, the County’s injunction was on the back 40 acres and they did not have any enforcement action on the front parcel with ponds because the farm was operating under the Right to Farm Act, which allowed them to be removed from County regulations if they were following best management practices (BMPs) through the State of Florida and if they had an agricultural classification, both of which they had on the front property. She felt that this was a good resolution to obtain some relief for the adjoining property owners because they did not have any setbacks when the property owner was creating the ponds on the front parcel. She reiterated that some traffic safety measures would be included, and that there would ultimately be a reclaimed piece of property that would hopefully avoid any environmental issues in the future. She recommended that the Board approve this agreement.
Commr. Campione noted that it had been a long process to reach a point where the County had any ability to stop them from conducting their activities because they were working under the Right to Farm Act with their plan that had been filed with the State. She asked about what recourse the County had if they did not adhere to the terms of this settlement agreement, noting that there was a bond in place for reclamation so that if they did not perform the reclamation, the County could call the bond and use it for that purpose. She indicated a concern for if the property began violating the rules with regard to removing trees in the back or leaving the setbacks intact, and she questioned the County’s course of action at that point.
Ms. Marsh responded that because this was a settlement agreement through litigation, if the judge approved it, the court would retain jurisdiction over this case; furthermore, if there was a violation of the settlement agreement, the County would go back to the judge and seek relief from the court system.
Commr. Campione inquired about what type of relief would be sought.
Ms. Marsh replied that it could be a variety of items and that the court could hold the farm in contempt of court, which had its own penalties and issues. She added that the judge could enter a more forceful order for the property owner to do something, giving them a specific time to do that. She also said that relief could potentially be damages, and it depended on what the violation was and what the judge felt would rectify it.
Commr. Campione said that for trucks and safety, FDOT would have to sign off the signage that the County requested. She asked if there was any indication that they would not be agreeable to that plan.
Ms. Marsh did not believe that FDOT would have any objections to installing those types of signs on SR 44, noting that they had been in other locations for other projects. She mentioned that the property owner had also agreed to notify all of the drivers who came to their property that if they were found in violation, they would be banned from further coming to the property.
Commr. Campione mentioned a similar situation with a blueberry farm on CR 437. She also brought up a situation on SR 44 where the property owners took trees down and started digging, recalling that the County had sought an injunction that was overturned and that the property owners had filed an application for a mine. She felt that this had been an ongoing issue with properties digging holes and taking dirt, and she relayed her understanding that this had been frustrating for the people of northeast Lake County who had to observe the trucks affecting the roads; additionally, she opined that many truck drivers sped and did not seem to be considerate of other drivers. She expressed that it was challenging for her to look at the possibility of a settlement agreement other than if the County did not do anything, then they faced the possibility that this property would stay as it was and would never be reclaimed. She noted that an item brought up in the previous week that was incorporated into the settlement agreement was the restriction of using this property in the future as a landfill or C&D pit. She thought that this condition was a key item coming out of this situation and protected the surrounding property owners, along with keeping mature trees in place and obtaining setbacks to slope the sides for the people that were adjacent to the front area. She opined that the County would get many positives from this agreement but that it was challenging to feel that they were rewarding improper behavior; however, if this was not done, it could continue to be an issue. She expressed that this agreement would allow the County to protect the surrounding property owners and the environment.
The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.
There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the floor for public comment.
Commr. Campione said that the Board had been in conversations with people who had been vocal on these issues and who had been asking for remedies. She noted that the Board had discussions with them to receive their input, and some of the provisions in the settlement agreement that was before the Board today were items that had been brought up by those residents. She expressed appreciation for their input and mentioned that there could be concerns that the County may have difficulty enforcing the agreement, though she said that the County had the mechanisms now to enforce it.
Commr. Sullivan echoed Commissioner Campione’s comments, and he thought that this situation had pushed the limits of what county government could do when considering agriculture exemptions, the work with the SJRWMD and FDOT, etc. He commented that much work had gone into this item and that while it was not perfect, he believed that it was a good solution. He remarked that the County now had something in writing that was enforceable; furthermore, he thought that if the judge approved the agreement, then it would be a great way to move forward.
Commr. Parks felt that many individuals wanted sand from Lake County, and that this was making the best out of the situation while respecting the agricultural exemption.
Commr. Breeden echoed the comments that had been made. She expressed a concern for being at this juncture, but she thought that the County would at least have this mechanism, noting that the landowners had agreed to it. She hoped that they would live by their word moving forward.
Commr. Campione suggested that if they did not do this, then the County would enforce the agreement to the full extent of the law and take it back to court to ensure that they live up to their end of the bargain and pay damages if necessary. She asked Ms. Marsh to keep everyone apprised as staff monitored this activity and as the County did what was necessary to ensure that the property owner was adhering to the phases and requirements. She expressed appreciation for Ms. Marsh’s work on this item and noted that it involved a considerable amount of time, research, and work with other agencies. She also thanked Mr. Cole and everyone that had gotten the County to this point to have tools to address the issue.
On a motion by Commr. Sullivan, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved for the County Attorney or designee to execute a Joint Motion and Settlement Agreement in Lake County vs. Lake County Fish Farm (Circuit Court Case No. 2019-CA-2404).
recess and reassembly
The Chairman called a recess at 11:24 a.m. for 15 minutes.
fiscal year 2020 fire assessment study
Mr. Brian Jaruszewski, Director for the Office of Management and Budget, said that this presentation was to give the Board an update on the fire assessment study for the year 2020. He explained that the fire assessment was used to fund fire protection services such as fire suppression, fire prevention, fire building inspections, and first response medical services, or basic life support (BLS). He remarked that the funding provided through the fire assessment rate could not fund advanced life support (ALS) services, and that the fire assessment study had been performed annually for the past 18 years by an outside consultant. He said that the study examined the utilization of fire services in seven land use categories including residential, hotel/motel/recreational vehicle (RV) park, commercial, industrial/warehouse, institutional, agricultural, and vacant land. He remarked that the assessment rates were calculated annually based on the allocation of resources and the assessable portion of the proposed budget, and he noted that the assessable portion could not fund ALS services; furthermore, that balance was the BLS and associated services that were intended to be funded by the fire assessment rate. He concluded that Tindale Oliver had been tasked with providing the 2020 update study.
Ms. Nilgün Kamp, with Tindale Oliver, said that the purpose of this study was to provide an interim annual update, and the last update in 2019 included 10 year incident data from 2009 to 2018, and the previous year’s assessable budget. She explained that the current update would include updated 10 year incident data from 2010 to 2019, updated property unit data, and the assessable budget based on the fiscal year (FY) 2021 requested budget. She said that the FY 2020 assessable budget was about $22.1 million, and the FY 2021 assessable budget was about $23.3 million, for an approximate five or six percent increase. She relayed these findings of the update study: the assessment factor, which was the portion of non-ALS incidents, remained relatively stable; there was a slight increase in the assessable budget, along with some changes in incident and resource distribution between the land uses; the property units remained relatively stable; and using all of this data, the study calculated the maximum rates for each land use. She commented that the calculation components included the distribution of incidents, both for ALS versus non-ALS and by land use, and also considered the assessable budget, property units, and the rates. She displayed the various components and said that ALS versus non-ALS resource distribution was relatively stable and that when considering the resource uses by land use, there was some shift from vacant, hotel/motel/RV park and commercial toward industrial and institutional land uses. She mentioned that budget had a slight increase, and that property units remained relatively stable with some reduction in vacant parcels and a slight increase in residential property units. She remarked that for final rate changes, residential had an increase of about 3.5 percent, hotel/motel/RV park and vacant land decreased by about 1.5 percent, and non-residential increased from about four percent to approximately 18 percent on a per-parcel basis; however, when this was converted into a dollar amount per square foot, the increase averaged from one cent to ten cents per square foot. She showed a chart with the distribution of incidents in terms of preconceived staff time and vehicle time, which was combined in the study to show the total resources; additionally, the study also showed this in terms of ALS versus non-ALS over time. She pointed out that the non-ALS portion, which helped determine the assessable portion of the budget, had been decreasing slightly over time and was now about 76 percent, which was consistent with the County providing more ALS services from additional stations. She displayed a slide with the distribution of total resources by land use, noting that they looked at the resources from each land use and that of those, they reduced the vacant land to 50 percent of the original distribution to recognize that vacant land did not benefit from fire services as much as the parcels with buildings and people. She commented that the remaining 50 percent was distributed among the other land uses, also to recognize that when there was a fire at a vacant property, the property adjacent to it benefitted as much from fire response. She showed a table that took the assessable budget and distributed it among land uses based on the resource allocation just shown; furthermore, between the budget increasing about five to six percent and the shifts in the allocations, there was an increase of about five percent for residential, industrial and institutional had the highest increases of about 18 percent, and the agriculture land use was not charged per legal requirements. She displayed a slide with the updated property units by land use and noted that there was some decrease in vacant land, and there was an increase in residential, while most other categories were relatively stable. She stated that the calculated rates showed an increase from $206 to $213 for residential land uses for about 3.5 percent, and for hotel/motel/RV park and vacant land, there was a slight decrease of $1 per parcel. She added that commercial, industrial and institutional land uses had a tiered structure and they were showing an example tier of 15,000 square feet, highlighting that the increased range was from nearly four percent to about 18 percent, which converted to a high end of about ten cents for dollar amount per square foot.
Mr. Jaruszewski listed the next steps and said that the current day was the opportunity for consideration of the interim fire assessment study as prepared by Tindale Oliver, which was interim because every five years the County conducted a complete study and in every other year, an update was performed, with this being an update year. He commented that on July 21, 2020, there would be the opportunity to adopt a resolution with any updated assessment rates, and September 15, 2020 was when the County would have the coincidence of their public hearings with the truth in millage (TRIM) process. He then read the requested action for acceptance of the fire assessment study as prepared by Tindale Oliver.
Mr. Cole noted that Dr. Kesselring had raised his hand during this presentation.
Dr. Kesselring thanked the Board for making this meeting available through Zoom and for discussing his request earlier in the meeting.
Commr. Campione thanked Dr. Kesselring and wished him and his graduates the best. She then said that at this point, the Board just had to accept the fire assessment study, and that the Board would not be voting on fees until July 2020.
Commr. Parks noted that this was the cost of doing business and providing a valuable service to the County’s constituents, which was why the study was updated each year. He said that the cost of providing service sometimes increased, and he relayed that the County’s staff, firefighters and EMS worked hard to be efficient and effective in using tax dollars that came through ad valorem and this assessment. He expressed appreciation for those individuals, and he looked forward to the Board’s next hearing on this item in July 2020; additionally, he thought that the Board could possibly discuss how Lake County compared to other Counties at that time.
Commr. Campione thanked Commissioner Parks for his comments and said that with all of the fires around the state and the potential for fires, Lake County Fire Rescue remained on call at all times in the event that they needed to go to other places in the state, and she expressed appreciation for this and for other departments around the state being willing to help Lake County. She mentioned that they needed to cover a significant amount of territory and needs in Lake County.
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Breeden and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board accepted the Fiscal Year 2020 Fire Assessment Study presented by Tindale Oliver.
appointment to the board of adjustment
Commr. Parks expressed support for the appointment of Mr. Rick Ault to the Lake County Board of Adjustment, noting that the County had needed someone from Commission District 2 for this position. He felt that Mr. Ault would do a good job.
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Breeden and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to appoint Mr. Rick Ault to the District 2 vacancy on the Board of Adjustment to fill an unexpired term ending January 31, 2023.
workshop – fiscal year 2021 budget development
Mr. Cole recalled that staff began providing updates to the Board on the FY 2021 budget development on April 21, 2020, and they would provide updates at each of the Board’s meetings leading up to the consideration of the tentative budget and millage on July 21, 2020.
Mr. Jaruszewski presented an update on the FY 2021 budget development. He displayed a slide on the General Fund outlook for the total revenue stream projected for FY 2021, and noted that the first few rows were essentially identical to what had been presented in the past; however, they had added a line for other revenues and fund balance to provide a complete picture of what the General Fund revenue stream outlook was for FY 2021 when compared to the FY 2020 adopted budget. He pointed out that the bottom line represented a roughly three percent increase of about $5.2 million, which was largely attributed to the ad valorem increase at a stable millage rate. He commented that everything that staff was working on so far was based on a status quo budget, and he then displayed expenditures. He remarked that the top row represented the General Fund revenues and that staff had broken down the General Fund expenditures into the major components, though the County did not yet have the budgets from all of the Constitutional Officers. He explained that County departments represented the County operations, which currently was reflecting an increase of approximately $710,000, and the non-departmental portion of the General Fund was reflecting an increase of roughly $167,000. He said that debt service had a slight increase of approximately 0.1 percent, and the total year over year increase for County operations was approximately $885,000 or 1.4 percent. He stated that for the $710,000 increase in County operations within the General Fund, staff had broken this down into several categories such as mandated expenditures, which included utility increases for $204,000, repair and maintenance costs projecting at a $141,000 increase, State-mandated Medicaid cost increases of about $230,000, and a $35,000 increase to projected inmate medical costs. He explained that discretionary expenditures represented about a $325,000 increase and was broken down into operational increases associated with the animal shelter for approximately $225,000 largely representative of additional staffing, and $100,000 for IT security enhancements. He said that the balance against the total $935,000 increase was other operational efficiencies within the various County departments that had been identified in excess of $200,000.
Mr. Cole displayed a slide with three items that were not currently contemplated in the FY 2021 budget development. He elaborated that as it stood now, the budget did not include any funding for staff salary increases, which was not intended to suggest that employees were undeserving of raises, but was merely a conservative approach to budget development during uncertain economic conditions. He relayed that staff was currently working on some creative ideas that could be implemented for merit-based employee raises that would not negatively impact the overall budget, and depending on the economic conditions, staff may bring back a recommendation this summer to fund merit-based raises in FY 2021 that would not negatively impact the budget or millage rate. He said that another item not yet included in the budget was any additional positions that may be needed, noting that they expected a need related to the opening of the animal shelter in summer or fall 2020. He added that this also did not include potential increases in the employer share of the Florida Retirement System as set by the State, and one additional item not on the slide was expenses related to COVID-19. He commented that the County did not yet know what those costs would end up totaling, but they expected them to be in excess of $400,000 and they would need to come back to the Board to provide funding for those expenses.
Mr. Jaruszewski showed a slide for federal and state grant funding that had either been awarded or applied for up to this date. He said that this slide was identical to what staff had previously presented and that under the funds awarded, there was the CARES Act Community Development Block Grant (CDBG-CV) funds at approximately $787,000. He explained that as part of the consent agenda, the item that updated this grant included a breakdown of the activities that the $787,000 would fund and that this was primarily for program administration, PPE, testing sites, emergency shelter, transportation for homeless individuals, food bank assistance, small business mini grants, and utility assistance. He commented that State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP) funding was in the amount of about $142,000, and staff anticipated updating this number for the June 2, 2020 presentation. He believed that the County was just awarded some additional SHIP funding, and said that they were given notice that they could use $350,000 of prior year funding for eligible rental assistance. He mentioned $8 million in Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding to cover three years of costs both operational and capital, and these three funds were largely the funds that the County had guaranteed award for year to date. He then stated that the County had applied for another Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grant in the amount of roughly $1.09 million, and also a Homeland Security Assistance to Firefighters Grant for about $337,000. He said that the County was continuing to pursue all available revenue sources, and it was their intention to continue to update this slide.
Mr. Carpenter then discussed disaster event funding possibilities. He said that sheltering in schools in the State of Florida was how they planned for hurricane sheltering, and all of the Counties worked with their school boards to prepare for hurricane sheltering. He said that per the Florida Statutes, during a declared state of local emergency and upon the request of the director of the local emergency management agency, the district school board, or school boards in the affected area, shall participate in emergency management by providing facilities and necessary personnel to staff such facilities. He elaborated that each school board providing transportation assistance in an emergency evacuation shall coordinate the use of its vehicles and personnel with the local emergency management agency. He recalled that in 2004, Lake County had been impacted by Hurricanes Charlie, Frances and Jeanne which passed in the vicinity of Lake County within two months. He mentioned that the county did not have to conduct emergency sheltering again until 2016 with Hurricane Matthew and at that time, the County opened nine shelters and sheltered roughly 142 people. He said that in 2017, Hurricane Irma’s eye passed within 40 miles of the western border of Lake County, and the County sheltered about 4,100 people with 14 shelters, with this being the first time that the County had opened that many shelters. He recalled that in 2019, Hurricane Dorian passed north-northeast of Lake County and that the County had planned to open 15 shelters, though with a last minute forecast they changed and only opened six shelters. He explained that the existing reimbursement process for the Lake County School Board had been that after each season where the County had a hurricane that impacted the county, there had been a federally declared disaster and each County must meet a threshold based on population before they were eligible for public assistance through FEMA. He said that in 2019 for Hurricane Dorian, the county threshold that Lake County had to meet was just under $1.2 million; additionally, in 2004 and 2016, the County met its threshold and the school board was the direct applicant to FEMA through the DEM. He remarked that when the County applied for public assistance, FEMA would minimally pay back the applicant 75 percent of their expenses, and typically the most out of pocket funding the applicant would pay is 25 percent. He said that in 2017, this process changed and the DEM and FEMA decided that the applicant for each county should be the County that requested emergency sheltering, and the school boards would then work through the County to provide reimbursement. He commented that this process worked in 2017, and the Lake County School Board submitted their documentation through the County to the DEM and FEMA for their review. He opined that it took longer than desired to receive reimbursement, though the school board should have received at least 75 percent back of what they spent for Hurricane Irma expenses with 25 percent being the most out of pocket expenses. He said that in 2019 with Hurricane Dorian, there was a federally declared disaster and Lake County did everything they needed to do to prepare locally, but then the course of the hurricane changed. He commented that when all of the eligible applicants came together in Lake County and looked at what they spent, they did not meet their threshold and were not eligible for public assistance funding; therefore, all eligible applicants were responsible for all funds spent. He recalled that at an executive policy group meeting for Hurricane Dorian, the chairs of the BCC met along with the school board and determined that the County could refund them back the money spent for Hurricane Dorian in the amount of $116,000, which was submitted and paid back to the school board. He said that with moving forward and developing an interlocal agreement with the Lake County School Board, within the last several months, Mr. Jarod Moskowitz, Director for the DEM, had indicated that he would leave the decision of who the applicant was up to the Counties, and each County should have a memorandum of understanding (MOU) completed by June 30, 2020. He relayed that staff had developed an MOU which outlined the responsibilities of the school board and the County, and that for financial responsibility, it outlined that during a federally declared disaster, the County would then pay the school board the 75 percent of their expenses and the school board would be responsible for 25 percent. He added that in the event of a large hurricane where the local impacts are more severe, FEMA or the State may pay more money back in reimbursement and those funds would be passed to the school board, increasing the amount they were reimbursed and reducing the amount out of their budget. He relayed that the MOU also addressed the Hurricane Dorian scenario where if the County was not eligible for public assistance from FEMA, then the County would pay to the school board 100 percent of their costs. He said that the next steps were determining who the applicant would be and how this funding ratio would work for the County and school moving forward; additionally, the school board had expressed concerns about being able to cover the costs of the 25 percent in the event that they had to activate for a hurricane. He mentioned that Colorado State University was forecasting a busier year for hurricanes with 16 named storms where it was typically 12, eight hurricanes when a typical season had six, and four major hurricanes where a normal season had three. He mentioned looking forward to preparing the funds that would need to be available for a disaster response.
Mr. Jaruszewski presented the FY 2021 budget timeline with the following 2020 dates: on June 1, the County would receive the preliminary estimates of property values from the Lake County Property Appraiser, along with budgets from the Constitutional Officers with the exception of the Lake County Tax Collector, which would be received on August 1, 2020; June 2 was a regularly scheduled Board meeting which would include another workshop to discuss non-General Fund County operational budgets; on June 16, staff would have had an opportunity to synthesize the property values and the Constitutional Officers’ budgets to give the Board a budget summary, and it would be appropriate to discuss the millage rate with a presentation of a range of options from a rollback rate to keeping a constant millage rate, along with mention of other economic incentives and additional projects and initiatives; on July 1, the County would have the certification of taxable property values due from the Property Appraiser; July 7 would be a regularly scheduled Board meeting with another workshop for a complete consideration of the FY 2021 budget, which would include other economic incentives and additional projects and initiatives; on July 21, at the Board public hearing, there would be the setting of the tentative budget and millage rate adoption, and the Board would also have the opportunity to vote on resolutions for the fire assessment and solid waste rates; on August 1, the County would receive the budget from the Tax Collector; and August 11 and 25 would be regularly scheduled Board meetings, with a Board workshop on August 11 to discuss the Infrastructure Sales Tax Capital Improvement Plan, and on August 25 there would be the public hearing for this plan; September 15 would include the adoption of the tentative budget and millage rates, along with the setting of the final public hearing date, time and location; and on September 29, there would be the final public hearing to adopt the FY 2021 millage rates and budget.
Mr. Cole said that staff was interested in any feedback that the Board wanted to provide, particularly for the next steps regarding disaster event funding.
Commr. Campione wondered that for disaster preparedness and the issue with the school board, if the County could formulate a few scenarios of what the expenses may look like based on past history.
Mr. Cole replied that this could be done and that staff could review storms that had occurred and give the Board numbers that would have been for those storms.
Commr. Campione thought that the Board needed a better understanding of where the school board obtained the funding to address their side of the expenses if they were responsible for the 25 percent. She recalled having a discussion with Mr. Bill Mathias, a Lake County School Board member, regarding how the school board did not have reserve funds for those additional expenses. She added that because of how their budget process worked, they did not have discretionary funds to that extent. She expressed interest in obtaining more information about this, and she said that the County could possibly establish a threshold so that the school board would have some leeway, but if it went over a certain amount then everyone would be informed of what they were able to do versus what they did not have the funding to cover. She also wondered about the possibility of designating a line item in the County’s budget that was part of their reserve fund but was designated for hurricane preparedness. She added that it could be budgeted as a range for a worst case and best case scenario, and this amount could be designated and set aside on an annual basis.
Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that the school district had agreed to the 25 percent coverage, and he thought that they would have known this was part of the budget.
Mr. Cole relayed that according to the superintendent, they were not interested in the 25 percent but rather were interested in having the County pay 100 percent.
Commr. Parks relayed that this is what they were doing currently, and he asked to confirm if the original message received from them was that they would still pay the 25 percent during a recent hurricane.
Mr. Cole explained that during Hurricane Dorian, the school board had a concern about their ability to fund that, and the County advanced them some funding toward that storm and toward their 75 percent. He also relayed that they had indicated that they would absorb the remaining 25 percent.
Commr. Parks inquired if they could be responsible for 100 percent.
Ms. Marsh said that historically, they had always paid 100 percent and then submitted to FEMA for reimbursements. She stated that there was nothing in the Florida Statutes that specified who paid the costs and that it was silent as it pertained to the funding distribution. She commented that all the statute required is that the school board make the facilities available at the request of the emergency manager.
Commr. Campione remarked that the school board was required by statute to open up schools as hurricane shelters, but the school board looked to the County from the standpoint of the County being in the business of emergency management and disaster response. She felt that they made a compelling argument that this was not something that they had the ability to fund. She was unsure how other Counties addressed this, and she felt that this was something that the County could consider.
Commr. Parks agreed with this and clarified that he wanted to work with the school board on this item.
Commr. Breeden also agreed with this and thought that Counties and school districts throughout the state may be reviewing how this had been done in the past and how they could be done in the future. She expressed that she liked the idea of the school system being responsible for recording their costs and receiving the 75 percent back from FEMA; however, she opined that there should be some mechanism where the County could help them with the 25 percent. She noted that each situation was different and she was unsure of how to build flexibility into this, though she would not object to having some flexibility to assist them with the 25 percent.
Mr. Carpenter shared that he had done some preliminary research with other Counties around Lake County, and the Volusia County School Board handled all the sheltering and worked with emergency management for planning; furthermore, Volusia County paid all of the costs that the school board had and then they went to FEMA for reimbursement. He relayed that Seminole County paid 100 percent of all sheltering that occurred, and Osceola County also paid 100 percent of all of the sheltering. He relayed his understanding that Orange County had a split of 75 and 25 percent, though he was trying to definitively confirm this.
Commr. Breeden asked if it was known what Sumter County did.
Mr. Carpenter replied that he was unsure of this, and remarked that he was waiting to hear back from them. He thought that they were also working through the MOU process to have it back to the State by June 30, 2020.
Commr. Campione urged him to also consider Marion County, and Mr. Carpenter said this could be done. Commissioner Campione expressed that one concern was that the ability to get paid or repaid hinged on how well the record keeping was done and whether it was verified that the recorded expenses were reimbursable, that time sheets were being kept, etc. She asked if there was any issue with regards to the school board keeping the records needed to be reimbursed.
Mr. Carpenter confirmed this but felt that it was an issue for every agency due to having to ensure that meticulous records were kept. He recalled that for Hurricane Irma, the school board had to keep those records and submit them through the County, but the County did not provide a cost upfront; rather, the school board paid all of the costs and then were reimbursed from FEMA. He noted that a concern would be to ensure that they had all of the needed documentation to satisfy the auditors from FEMA and to ensure that payment was made.
Commr. Sullivan questioned who kept these records and who manned the shelters when they were open. He asked if this was the County’s function.
Mr. Carpenter confirmed that it was the County’s function and that historically, this was an area that the County had asked the school board for help with because school boards can provide teachers and other staff to help supplement the people working in a shelter. He noted that they had not been able to provide a large number of people to assist and that it was typically the principal, assistant principal and administrative staff for each school that provided a small group of people to help manage each shelter. He added that the County had also worked with volunteers and the LCSO, noting that the LCSO staff were the shelter managers and that their school resource deputies were reassigned and trained under the American Red Cross standard. He said that the County needed more people to work within shelters but that historically, they had not been able to get a large number from the school board to do this because of costs; additionally, the County had to determine how many volunteers they could train who were willing do to this, along with how many County staff members could be repurposed for shelters.
Commr. Sullivan thought that the County should continue to move forward and maintain control of this operation. He opined that whether they reimbursed the school board at 100 percent was a separate issue, and he expressed interest in seeing some historic numbers so that the County could have a number to plan for in the event of a major disaster. He relayed his understanding that the State was moving this issue to the County’s level to address, and he indicated concerns about the current hurricane season.
Commr. Breeden added that the County had some challenging decisions to make, but noted that this was an instance where the State was restoring local control and that she appreciated this.
Commr. Campione thought that the County needed a good understanding of the school district’s limitations and what they could use their funding for. She relayed her understanding that this created a significant hardship for them, and she wanted to explore this more. She noted that this had been sent back to the County to make a local decision, and she felt that the County had to take into account their own facts and the school board’s facts for their ability to budget and fund these items. She opined that this, along with getting numbers for the County’s worst and best case scenarios, would be the County’s next steps.
Commr. Breeden asked if this needed to be decided by June 30, 2020.
Mr. Cole replied that if the County did not make a decision by June 30, 2020, the State would decide who would be submitting but would not decide the percentage of funding.
Commr. Breeden then inquired if staff could bring something back at the next BCC meeting, and Mr. Cole said that staff would work on accomplishing this for the June 2, 2020 BCC meeting.
Commr. Campione said that with regards to other items as part of the budget planning process, she would be reaching out to the Lake County Sheriff regarding his needs and to express the County’s concerns about rollback rates, revenue and the economic impacts of COVID-19.
Commr. Breeden hoped that the Constitutional Officers would be conservative in this budget cycle to lessen the impact on the public. She then mentioned the slide for federal and state grant funding, and asked about what the $8 million in FTA funding could be used for over three years.
Commr. Campione mentioned that the County did not receive CARES Act funding for some economic development items that Orange County was given funding for, and she questioned about what kind of leeway the County had for these funds.
Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that it was mostly for transit over three years. He stated that it would go directly toward transit and that the County was not yet receiving much CARES Act funding. He felt that it may be helpful for the transit system, and he indicated interest in the next meeting including an update on what the FAC and the Florida League of Cities were doing to get the remaining $1.275 billion that the State had which had not been spent out of CARES Act funding. He indicated his understanding that Lake County’s allotment would be roughly $21.5 million, which did not include what the Cities would receive, and that it could possibly be used for economic development incentives, infrastructure, and anything that the Lake County EOC or LASER were doing. He expressed interest in discussing how this funding could be spent on June 2, 2020.
Commr. Campione asked if this was the funding that Lake County could potentially receive if the FAC was successful in obtaining those funds for Counties in the State of Florida.
Commr. Parks confirmed this and relayed that the FAC seemed to indicate positivity for this being done.
Mr. Cole addressed Commissioner Breeden’s question and explained that there was $8.3 million that the County was slated to receive that was specific to transit, and they had some requests at this meeting and previous meetings relating to this funding. He commented that Ms. Jill Brown, Director for the Office of Transit Services, had outlined an approach for how that funding would be expended which included items such as buses, software for the fixed routes, touch-free solutions for printing bus passes, changes in the transit lobby for protection of the public and employees, and for the County’s contractor RATP Dev to address salary issues for employees who had to be furloughed.
Commr. Campione recalled that at the previous meeting, the Board had discussed the impacts on the FRS from the COVID-19 situation and the downturn in the market, and she asked if there was any indication for what might change with regards to FRS contributions.
Mr. Cole replied that the preliminary indication had been an increase.
Ms. Jennifer Barker, Executive Director of Administrative Services, confirmed that an increase was projected but that Governor DeSantis had not adopted the budget yet.
Commr. Parks commented that this could affect the County’s net position and could be an additional expense.
Mr. Cole said that this increase had emerged as part of a legislative session before the economic impacts of COVID-19, and the County was waiting to see the final budget.
Ms. Barker added that the Florida House of Representatives and Senate both agreed on the increase.
Commr. Sullivan commented that based on the way the time benefit plans were funded, it would have a negative impact on the County’s budget.
Commr. Parks referenced slide seven of the presentation with the items that staff was not currently considering. He noted that staff was asked to do more and that the County did not hire new people. He added that additional positions were something that the Board voted on and the Board knew that this would come along with the new animal shelter. He expressed appreciation for Mr. Cole bringing this up and emphasized the importance of staff. He also noted that there was sensitivity with staff salary increases, and he indicated appreciation for staying flexible on merit-based pay increases. He said that these pertained to his overall comments for not overacting one way or the other as the Board continued to move into this process in June and July 2020. He mentioned the Board possibly governing by a preconceived millage rate, and he noted that there were some possible alternatives such as incentives and tax rebates that could be more helpful. He urged caution for the Board to not budget by millage rate and to consider the long term effects. He felt that if the millage rate was reduced to a rollback or lower, then it would never come up again. He looked forward to having the long term ramifications of this, in terms of numbers, before the Board. He commented that the Board would have this information combined with incentives, and he shared that he had been working in the community with some business leaders to determine who this could help most; furthermore, he felt that there was a way to help Lake County business owners directly.
Commr. Campione asked to confirm that he was talking about if the County received funding from the FAC that they could use for these types of incentives.
Commr. Parks opined that any funding from the FAC would be a great bonus, and he noted that it was federal money. He opposed the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act because it contained items that would not help the County locally, though he thought that the CARES Act could have funding to assist the County with incentives. He noted that this would be a bonus but that the County could also provide tax rebates from the General Fund targeting a category of people who needed it most, rather than lowering the millage. He gave an example of if there were 1,200 targeted businesses in the county, the County could give each of them a $500 check directly which would equal about $1 million; additionally, this would go directly toward a business that was owned in Lake County.
Commr. Campione mentioned that if the FRS increased, then the County’s high risk employees would increase considerably more as the Board was thinking in terms of the Sheriff’s budget. She also questioned if Ms. Marsh had the opportunity to research the topic of rebates and if she could discuss whether the County had any flexibility and whether they could use tax relief as something other than a rollback.
Ms. Marsh explained that statutorily, the County had the authority for economic development purposes to have incentive programs, grant programs, etc. to expand existing businesses or bring new business to the county. She commented that if the County was going to do any type of tax exemption or rebate program for economic development, there was a separate statutory section which required them to take that through a referendum. She commented that this was tied to their taxes but that they could have a grant or incentive program that would not require a referendum. She said that statutorily, there were not any provisions that would allow them to do rebates or tax exemptions for tax refunds for individuals, so this would not be a possibility. She stated that some Counties had explored whether they could do a grant program for individuals, but they were struggling with finding a public purpose for this, noting that with economic development, the County would be expanding a business or bringing a new business to the county. She remarked that a public purpose with regards to individuals and helping them through this process could likely be challenged. She related that if the County only wanted to benefit businesses, then they could consider a grant or incentive program. She noted that the County already had a program in its code; however, it pertained to large-scale business ventures such as those with $25 million in investment or a large number of employees that they would hire, so the County could amend its code and create something for smaller business with a smaller grant amount.
Commr. Parks thought that the County needed to continue to work on this and said that the Board could work with staff. He relayed his understanding that some other Counties were doing something similar to this.
Commr. Campione suggested looking at the state and comparing what was being done. She indicated an understanding that Duval County was awarding grants and that there was a certain amount that could be received. She also thought that Duval County had a loan program but that they were partnering with someone to do it.
Commr. Parks said that Lake County’s grant criteria could be simple, such as being a Lake County business in a certain category.
Commr. Sullivan felt that this area needed to be researched. He said that he liked the idea of adjusting the County’s current program to include smaller businesses because this may be the easiest way to do this. He questioned how this would be funded, but agreed that this was an area that the County could explore. He noted that there were businesses experiencing challenges because of the pandemic.
Commr. Parks commented that the funding could come from the General Fund and that this could show constraint upon the County because they would be using it this year rather than spending it on something else. He noted that the County also had to build up its reserves.
Commr. Campione said that if they considered the rollback and the fiscal impact to businesses and how much this could help businesses, a tenant may not necessarily benefit from this but they could also be a business that was struggling. She stated that if a grant was awarded, that business would have money and this could help cover their mortgage, pay their rent or keep their workers employed. She added that it may have a more direct positive impact on them, though she indicated a concern for how the other Lake County taxpayers may feel about the County taking money that they contributed and paying it out to a business. She related that she would feel more comfortable with this if the County received CARES Act funding which could be used to help businesses.
Commr. Parks felt that this would help but also noted that the federal government was taking tax dollars and directing them toward businesses. He said that this could be done in the sense that it was for the good of Lake County to help businesses that were struggling. He thought that there were some landlords or landowners with tenants who would be understanding and would be good to pass the tax savings onto, and he added that it could help individuals who owned buildings.
Commr. Breeden felt that the Board would know more when they had a better picture of the tax rolls. She thought that this was good discussion but that it would take more work to determine what the Board wanted to do.
reports
county attorney
Litigation with dtr leasing corporation
Ms. Marsh mentioned the County’s litigation with DTR Leasing Corporation and recalled that this pertained to a concrete plant in the Sorrento area. She said that the County had been sued under the Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act, and that a few months prior, the Board had approved a settlement agreement which entailed the County purchasing the property. She said that the County was in the middle of due diligence and that they had a survey done. She commented that the County discovered there was no insurable legal access to this property and that access was currently shown in the title commitment as an exception. She remarked that at this point, the settlement agreement was worded such that if DTR Leasing Corporation could not convey marketable title, they would go back to mediation and try to renegotiate; furthermore, if they came to an impasse, then the County would end up taking this case to trial. She did not recommend that the County go back to mediation at this point, and she commented that the County had other avenues where they could obtain access. She mentioned that this property abutted a CSX Transportation railroad, and that the County had positive results negotiating with them in the past to obtain right of way; therefore, they could potentially obtain an easement across the railroad property. She added that the County could negotiate with other property owners and that they could also use eminent domain. She said that unless the Board wished for her to bring this item back on June 2, 2020, they would move forward to closing, which was currently scheduled for June 2, 2020, although she noted it could be postponed for a few days if the Board wanted it brought back for discussion.
Commr. Campione thought that this should move ahead, and the Board relayed a consensus to move ahead.
commissioners reports
commissioner sullivan – district 1
appreciation for the board
Commr. Sullivan said that he liked the ideas offered during the Board’s discussion today. He expressed appreciation for the Board members as they moved through this pandemic, along with staff for maintaining their operations.
commissioner parks – district 2
one vision four corners website
Commr. Parks pointed out that www.onevisionfourcorners.com was now up and running. He said that this was the continued effort that he and Commissioner Sullivan participated in to ensure that there was one vision for the Four Corners area between four counties and for the cities there. He commented that this effort continued to move forward and had this website to promote common visions, standards, joint economic efforts, and how to share services. He thought that it was great to see the coordination reaching this level, and he thanked those who were associated with this item.
lake/orange county connector
Commr. Parks relayed that he had passed along to the Board the updated CFX budget and proposed work plan. He highlighted that the Lake/Orange County Connector engineering and design was now funded and remained on the work plan. He said that the numbers continued to support its construction, and he felt that it would be a great project. He hoped that it would be under construction or possibly finished in a few years, and he thought that it would change things in South Lake in a positive way while also helping Orange County. He also felt that it changed the value for the Wellness Way area and that it was good for the county.
lake 100 assisting with attainable housing strategy plan
Commr. Parks remarked that he had also distributed a letter to the Board from Mr. David Colby, with the South Lake Chamber of Commerce, which expressed support for housing. He relayed that The Lake 100 affordable housing subcommittee believed that The Lake 100 could enact the attainable housing strategy plan for Lake County, so the County would not have to put it out to bid and wait additional months, in addition to saving tax dollars. He commented that The Lake 100, in conjunction with individuals from South Lake such as the South Lake Chamber of Commerce, could put this plan together for the County. He added that The Lake 100 could also go on the County’s behalf and along with the County to the Cities for their buy in. He proposed placing this on the agenda for the next Board meeting on June 2, 2020, and he said that he could ensure that The Lake 100 was in attendance.
Commr. Campione thought that this was a great idea and a good way to bring people from the business community into the discussion, along with having them formulate the plan with the expertise of the County staff. She added that it could save money and be efficient, and that the County could get buy in from the business community on the front end because they were helping to formulate it.
Commr. Breeden also thought that it would be a good item to bring forward on June 2, 2020.
Commr. Parks said that he appreciated this and noted that Commissioner Campione and Commissioner Sullivan had also worked on this. He expressed respect for The Lake 100 for how organized they were in addressing attainable housing, trails and other important items for the county. He stated that they would try to get information to include in a proposal format for the next BCC meeting.
Commr. Sullivan indicated appreciation for The Lake 100 moving forward and for being involved in the community in the areas of trails and housing.
Commr. Breeden said that Mr. Cole may have some direction on how to formulate this agenda item, and she questioned if there were any procurement issues.
Mr. Cole asked if Commissioner Parks’ intent was to have The Lake 100 present the items that they could provide so that it would be a more information type of presentation, and then the Board could decide if they wanted staff to come back with an agreement with The Lake 100.
Commr. Parks clarified that The Lake 100 was ready to conduct the attainable housing strategy for the County, and this would be a request to authorize them to begin that process with the understanding that staff would be working with them. He added that The Lake 100 would be reaching out to the business community and the Cities, alongside the Commissioners who wished to participate.
Mr. Cole relayed his understanding of this request.
pd&e studies for trails
Commr. Parks said that the Board likely received a letter from the Friends of Lake County Trails, and noted that there was a significant request for project development and environment (PD&E) studies for trails. He proposed considering that it was important to have PD&E studies and that they were required to obtain grant funding. He thought that it could be considered in the next month for what portion could be funded through tourist development taxes (TDT). He felt that TDT could experience a reduction, but if the County was going to begin collecting it from all Vrbo and Airbnb-type platforms, then that revenue number could change. He opined that this should be considered as a way to try and fund the PD&E studies in a phased fashion.
Commr. Campione expressed appreciation for his comments about PD&E studies and felt that the County needed to consider these items and be creative. She thought that the County would have to leverage what they and their municipal partners could do, along with the possibility of obtaining grants for trails with the understanding that in the long term, businesses and the community could economically benefit if these projects occurred.
resolution for green mountain scenic byway
Commr. Parks said that this was a letter of support from the BCC for a national designation for the Green Mountain Scenic Byway. He pointed out that nothing was required of the Board and that this was just supporting that designation; additionally, there was no fiscal obligation, and this was being done strictly through the Green Mountain Scenic Byway Committee. He felt that the benefit to the County was that it was a national designation and would continue to market Lake County as “Real Florida, Real Close.” He added that the County would not have to change its Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan).
Commr. Campione thought that this designation would allow the committee to pursue federal grant funding or to obtain the recognition that would allow them to have more use of the facility. She noted that they wanted to expand the lookout facility to go higher, and she asked if this was part of why the committee was doing this.
Commr. Parks confirmed this and said that it changed the landscape for the committee’s grants. He added that they would be more eligible for a grant to raise the overlook another 100 feet, which had been presented as a concept plan.
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Breeden and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Resolution 2020-90 supporting the efforts to designate the Green Mountain Scenic Byway as a National Scenic Byway.
commissioner breeden – vice chairman and district 3
vacation rental plan
Commr. Breeden thanked staff for working on the vacation rental plan to submit to Governor DeSantis.
cares act funding
Commr. Breeden expressed appreciation for Commissioner Parks working with the FAC on the additional Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act funding. She hoped that there could be a discussion with the County’s lobbyist to see if they could provide assistance.
local preference in procurement
Commr. Breeden mentioned local preference in procurement and opined that this could be a good time to see if the County needed any changes for the next few years to help local businesses be more competitive and have a better chance at obtaining County contracts. She noted that construction contractors may not want local preference because it may work against them, whereas those that provide goods and services may benefit from local preference. She expressed interest in the Board considering this.
Commr. Campione thought that the County may have some research that had been done in the past on this issue. She recalled that the conclusion was that it backfired when businesses were trying to expand and obtain contracts outside of the county which they needed to survive and thrive; additionally, they would be penalized if they were coming out of the county but had local preference.
Commr. Breeden said that she liked how it had been done in the past, but that she had multiple people mention to her that they wanted the County to reconsider it.
Commr. Parks expressed interest in considering the surrounding Counties that had the retaliation clause. He noted that some Counties had gone back to full open local preference, though Lake County could survey this again and possibly eliminate this clause if the other Counties had also done so.
Commr. Breeden questioned if Mr. Matulka or the Office of Procurement Services could survey some businesses to obtain their thoughts. She commented that the County possibly did not need to change, but the current perception was that businesses needed some assistance.
Commr. Campione expressed support for this if it helped businesses; however, she felt that the County should tread carefully. She indicated a concern for giving the perception that they were trying to help businesses when in reality, the businesses could be negatively affected. She liked the idea of considering the issue and ensuring that the businesses were aware that the County was examining it so that if the conclusion indicated that the businesses would be hurt, they would understand why this conclusion was reached and possibly provide input to the County. She recalled that in the past, staff had researched this item and presented it to the Board, and she proposed potentially conducting research and engaging a cross section from the business community as part of a community discussion. She felt that being penalized for selling goods or services outside of Lake County could be harmful to business survival and that if everyone began doing this, there could be smaller economies around the state in which businesses would only conduct business with their own.
Commr. Breeden suggested that The Lake 100 could possibly explore this.
Commr. Campione noted that The Lake 100 could set up a committee and research the issue, and she supported asking them if they would be interested in this.
Commr. Sullivan agreed with Commissioner Campione and recalled that when this was researched in the past, it would have helped a few businesses but also would have hurt others. He said that he could take the item back to The Lake 100.
Commr. Blake commented that when he was working for the State, they conducted a significant amount of research into local preference ordinances, and they found that there were as many risks as rewards; however, he was open to any discussions about the item.
commissioner campione – CHAIRMAN AND district 4
COMMENTS ABOUT COVID-19
Commr. Campione said that the County would keep a positive attitude and continue to work with businesses and residents. She urged everyone to be safe and to help the County get its businesses and economy back in a careful way. She felt that the DOH in Lake County was a great partner, and she stated that the County would make sure everyone would be apprised of any changes resulting from COVID-19 testing. She thought that the county had done very well thus far, and she was thankful for the professionalism and the work ethic of the County. She noted that staff had been working hard, and she hoped that there would be more positive items to discuss at the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 1:24 p.m.
_________________________________
leslie campione, chairman
ATTEST:
________________________________
GARY J COONEY, CLERK