A special MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

October 5, 2021

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in special session on Tuesday, October 5, 2021 at 2:00 p.m., at the Lake County Agriculture Center, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Sean Parks, Chairman; Kirby Smith, Vice Chairman; Douglas B. Shields; Leslie Campione; and Josh Blake. Others present were: Representative Keith Truenow; Jennifer Barker, Interim County Manager; Melanie Marsh, County Attorney; Kristy Mullane, Chief Financial Officer; and Josh Pearson, Deputy Clerk.

welcome and pledge of allegiance

Commr. Parks welcomed everyone to the meeting and said that this was a special meeting to discuss proposed legislation affecting the Lake County Water Authority (LCWA) with Representative Keith Truenow. He then led the Pledge of Allegiance, and he recognized the LCWA Board members in attendance.

The following LCWA Board members introduced themselves: Mr. Marty Proctor, representing District 1; Mr. Tyler Brandeburg, representing District 3; and Mr. Keith Farner, Member At-Large and Chairman.

Mr. Ben Garcia, Interim Executive Director of the LCWA, also introduced himself.

discussion

Commr. Parks asked if Representative Truenow wanted to present the bill.

Representative Truenow commented that the LCWA was created by the Florida Legislature in 1953. He opined that the LCWA had done many great things for the county, but said that as there were currently five water management districts in the state, along with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), the United States (U.S.) Army Corps of Engineers and other State bodies that addressed environmental needs, he opined that the LCWA was a relic in a sense, or was created for a reason that did not fit the current running of the State of Florida. He mentioned trying to refine and make it easier for people to get things done, and for the State to be more accountable. He also mentioned the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD), which was an entity which covered 18 counties, and he thought that Lake County was sometimes looked at as a county that did not need any help from the SJRWMD even though they had done things to help Lake County residents as a whole. He thought that with the LCWA being in existence and doing productive things for water quality and the environment, Lake County sometimes took a backseat to some of the initiatives that the SJRWMD had. He indicated that this was the premise of the bill.

Commr. Shields relayed his understanding that the item they were trying to address was that because Lake County had their own water management board, they were not being served by the rest of the water management boards properly.

Representative Truenow replied that the LCWA was a taxing district, along with the SJRWMD. He mentioned that the two entities did similar types of work, though the LCWA did not have any powers to write a permit or enforce regulation; therefore, they had a duplication of abilities that they should hold the SJRWMD and FDEP accountable for.

Commr. Smith indicated an understanding that Representative Truenow was not trying to do away with the LCWA, but that he just wanted to move it under the umbrella of the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) so they could target areas and concentrate on their waterways.

Representative Truenow confirmed this and said that this was a way to accomplish something that would still give them a sense of home rule, and that it would give the BCC the same basic rights as the water authority created currently, noting that it could reduce the number of repetitive items they were doing. He added that they could reduce the number of places where the constituents of Lake County would have to go to find the information they needed to address an issue, noting that they could just go to the BCC.

Commr. Parks recalled that there had been questions about canals, who owned them and how to get them dredged. He was unsure if there were any canals under the County’s responsibility to dredge, though they had constituency that was wanted the County to dredge them; additionally, the LCWA did not have the management responsibility of these canals. He asked how the bill could affect this.

Commr. Campione added that in the previous year, the Board adopted an ordinance for a municipal service benefit unit (MSBU) or a special assessment, noting that the BCC could do this using the Florida Statutes if they had agreement by the property owners who adjoined the canal.

Representative Truenow clarified that this bill would not affect who owned the canals or who had jurisdiction over them. He commented that he was speaking to some people in the Florida House of Representatives regarding how they could find some grant funding to address things, such as after a hurricane. He said that FDEP could possibly set aside some funding if they had a bill indicating that they were impacted by an event such as a hurricane, and that the County could possibly receive some funding through this.

Commr. Campione relayed that there was some concern that if the LCWA mission was to come under the BCC, would the millage stay as a line item so that it would still be dedicated for water quality purposes, or would it be included in the BCC’s other budgetary responsibilities. She noted the concern that if it was included with everything else, then water quality issues could lose their priority. She expressed that she did not want to see this happen, and she opined that there was more that needed to be done and that they needed to make the funding go further. She indicated that she would only be interested in going this direction if they knew they would continue to have water quality projects and that mission as the highest priority, and that funding would still be allocated for that purpose.

Representative Truenow relayed his understanding that this was the way that the legislation was put forward currently. He elaborated that if the bill passed, it would eventually be the BCC’s responsibility to navigate and direct those funds, noting that they would have the authority to decrease or increase the millage.

Commr. Campione mentioned eliminating duplication, noting that permitting and enforcement were primarily under FDEP and the SJRWMD.

Representative Truenow clarified that the LCWA did not have this enforcement to start with, and that they were not eliminating FDEP or the SJRWMD.

Commr. Campione asked if it was Representative Truenow’s thoughts that active parks, parklands, etc. would be better served to be included in or to receive the benefit of coming under the Lake County parks and recreation facilities so that there would not be a duplication of staff, such as having maintenance under the same arm.

Representative Truenow confirmed this and said that it was to make it easier for the County and the constituents to know where to come to for information. He added that they were honing this for purposes of information, communication and efficiencies.

Commr. Campione asked about the chance that the SJRWMD would be agreeable to taking over the cost of the Nutrient Reduction Facility (NuRF), noting that it was a significant annual cost for the LCWA budget.

Representative Truenow said that they had many conversations about water quality issues in Lake Apopka and the Harris Chain of Lakes, noting that the issues fell under the purview of the SJRWMD and FDEP. He thought that they would have to work through a plan to address this so that the burden would be on State of Florida citizens rather than Lake County citizens, noting that science and new technology were in play. He opined that the NuRF was somewhat coming to the end of its life expectancy and that new technology needed to be put in place to do a better job. He said that he had other bills which would go to this effect for water quality.

Commr. Campione stated that Lake County taxpayers contributed with regard to hydrilla treatments, and that the Florida Wish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) was the main agency; however, in previous years, the funding was possibly reduced, or Lake County was lower on their priority list. She added that the BCC had used Tourist Development Tax (TDT) revenue to help pay for hydrilla treatments, noting that several water bodies in the county were in need of additional treatment. She asked how to address an issue like this and if Representative Truenow could help with receiving more funding from the FWC for this, or if this bill could be used to ensure that Lake County had sufficient funding for this need.

Representative Truenow explained that he was not restricting what the County could or could not do currently. He said that it was just transferring it from the LCWA to the County, and the County utilizing it to the best of their abilities and being wise with the funding and the efforts. He commented that he had been working with FDEP and FWC on water quality issues and initiatives, and that he would do everything he could to get more assistance for their lakes and water bodies.

Commr. Blake said that governmental entities were not subject to the same economic pressures that the private sector faced when it came to eliminating redundancies, trying to find efficiencies and consolidating when necessary. He thought that having this conversation was important because it forced them to critically consider something. He expressed that generally, his impulse for government was to remove unnecessary layers, and that he had friends on the LCWA; however, he thought that this was worth considering. He stated that his typical position was that if the justification was there, if the duties and responsibilities would still be fulfilled, and if one could do this in a way that increased efficiencies and removed redundancy, then he opined that this was typically a good move.

Representative Truenow said that other entities, such as the SJRWMD, could have been the receiver of the LCWA; however, he thought that this would take away from home rule and the effect that the County could have to better suit what they did. He said that moving things to parks and recreation to manage those activities for residents removed a large component of what the LCWA did, and if they had a five person appointed panel to consider water quality issues, then the County would still have an effective mechanism to accomplish the goals for the county and the good of the people while reducing the cost. He stated that it made it more efficient for individuals with questions, noting that they would only have one place to go to find the answer.

Commr. Shields opined that if they were going to eliminate the old model, then they needed to be fixing something. He said that currently, the voters had a choice of who was managing the county’s water, and that this would be consolidated into the BCC. He was unsure if this was the best idea, and he added that the County had so much to do already and that they had to do whatever it took to maintain their water quality. He opined that while the current BCC would be good at managing their water resources, they would not be there forever, and it could be tempting to move funding around because the Board was not raising property taxes.

Commr. Smith asked if there was a way to move the LCWA Board under the BCC but still have the LCWA Board members be elected.

Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, denied this.

Commr. Smith then inquired that if this moved under the BCC, was there a way to make a resolution that all of the funding received through the LCWA millage rate would be restricted solely to water quality.

Ms. Marsh replied that currently, the LCWA’s millage was set by the Florida Legislature, and this bill would not change their millage. She added that it had to be used for LCWA purposes under the bill; therefore, the BCC would not be able to bring it in under the Lake County General Fund and use it for anything other than to fund the LCWA.

Commr. Parks asked if it would be separate on a truth in millage (TRIM) notice, and Ms. Marsh said that this was correct.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that the chances of the current or any future BCCs being able to use funding received from the taxpayers for any project other than water quality or the LCWA mission was not possible, and Ms. Marsh confirmed this. Commissioner Smith then indicated that he liked this idea, noting that the LCWA currently operated 7,000 acres of parkland; additionally, he opined that it could be nice to move this to the Lake County Office of Parks and Trails and relieve the LCWA of it so that they could concentrate on water quality.

Commr. Parks noted that the millage rate would still have to be separate, and that there would still be a statutory requirement for spending. He asked about there being an appointment for an advisory board.

Representative Truenow explained that currently, it would likely end up being a five member board with one member for each district. He indicated that it would be individuals who could advise the BCC, and that the BCC could choose the individuals who were most appropriate for the task, such as those who had been elected. He mentioned that these individuals would make decisions and pass them onto the BCC to make their decision easier.

Commr. Parks asked to clarify that if this bill passed, could a future BCC decide to eliminate it.

Representative Truenow said that the BCC would be able to decide the future of the millage and the board, and that they could eliminate it completely. He clarified that the Florida Legislature would be giving this power to the BCC, and that it would no longer be a legislative board.

Commr. Parks expressed a concern for what would happen if this was not a priority for someone in the future.

Representative Truenow stated that currently, the Florida Governor, the House of Representatives, and the Florida Senate were in lockstep for water quality; furthermore, they had been moving the needle every chance they had with the budgetary funding they received at the Florida Legislature to ensure that more water quality initiatives were taking place. He added that they were considering multiple mechanisms for funding water quality projects, and legislation that was being passed to increase reuse. He indicated that the funding came from general revenue and went to FDEP and the SJRWMD, opining that those agencies should be held accountable for what they needed to be doing for Lake County and the other seventeen counties.

Commr. Campione recalled a statement that Lake County had a water authority and a millage rate established by the State; therefore, the SJRWMD would possibly not do as much for Lake County.

Representative Truenow mentioned Lake Apopka and said that Lake County occupied one-third of the lake, and two-thirds of the lake was in Orange County; furthermore, they did not do anything to participate in water quality issues going into the Harris Chain of Lakes. He indicated that their response had been that this was why they had the SJRWMD, noting that Orange County residents paid a millage to the SJRWMD.

Commr. Campione stated that if they moved active parks to the County, but the millage was for water quality, then there would be a cost to shift it. She said that it could possibly be that the LCWA could continue to operate this, though they could contract with the BCC for staffing and land management.

Representative Truenow pointed out that Lake County would still have a board, employees and all of the functions they needed to manage this.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that this bill had to pass the House of Representatives and the Senate, with or without Lake County’s involvement, and Representative Truenow confirmed this.

Commr. Parks said that this was strictly a legislative item but that it was classified as a local bill.

Ms. Marsh remarked that with the way the statute was set up, if they took an independent active special district and tried to change it to a dependent special district, it had to go through a referendum. She elaborated that although the bill in its current form did not reference this, there were previous bills involving the LCWA where it had gone to referendum when it made changes. She proposed that it needed to be suggested to be added to the bill because State law required it, and she mentioned that if a dependent special district was created, the BCC did not have the ability to dissolve or repeal it. She commented that the statute indicated that when the Florida Legislature created a dependent district, only the Florida Legislature could repeal that district. She added that per Chapter 189, Florida Statutes, the BCC had to consent to the Florida Legislature creating a special district that fell under their jurisdiction, assuming that the Florida Legislature did not change these statutory provisions in this legislative session.

Representative Truenow said that the bill was going to individuals who knew how to write a bill, and that he was relying on the attorneys in the House of Representatives to answer these types of questions. He indicated that currently, they had not included anything in the bill that reflected what Ms. Marsh was saying.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that if the bill passed the House of Representatives and Senate, it would come back to Lake County for residents to vote on.

Representative Truenow clarified that as the bill was written currently, this was not the case; however, the bill had not yet come out of drafting, and there were more items to be recognized in the future.

Commr. Parks asked when the bill would change over the next couple of months.

Representative Truenow replied that as the bill moved through drafting, they had to do their due diligence about how statutes affected other statutes; furthermore, it would then go into committees and items could be changed or amended before going to the floor.

Commr. Campione wondered about the marine patrol, which was being done by the LCWA, noting that they had contracts with at least one City to do marine patrol work. She relayed her understanding that if this was included in the current mission and if it was currently an allowable use, then it could continue to be funded via a contract between the BCC or the LCWA and the Lake County Sheriff.

public comment

The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.

Mr. Farner relayed his understanding of the proposed legislation that would eliminate the LCWA and make it an appointed board. He recalled that he had met with Representative Truenow and indicated his understanding that Representative Truenow wanted to turn the LCWA into a three member appointed board run by the County, and he recalled that the LCWA used to be an appointed board; furthermore, he opined that their lakes were eutrophic and polluted with the appointed board. He elaborated that after the board became elected and accountable to the residents of Lake County, the water quality in the lakes improved. He opined that the SJRWMD was an appointed board that was accountable to no one, and that the SJRWMD did not really help Lake County. He opined that Lake County’s lakes had improved dramatically and that they were now the bass fishing capital of the world, noting that other boats were also using the lakes, including rentals from people making a living on the chain of lakes. He expressed concerns for the lakes going back to being eutrophic and polluted, and for individuals breathing blue-green algae. He indicated concerns for this threatening the economic health of Lake County, opining that lakes were the economic driver of the county aside from development, and for this affecting personal health. He expressed interest in an Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability (OPPAGA) review for the LCWA and seeing what the State said, commenting that he would support whatever decision they made about the LCWA. He also expressed interest in coming up with solutions before discussing eliminating a special tax district that was accountable and getting the job done. He said that the LCWA’s treasurer was the Lake County Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller, and that they used the Lake County Office of Human Resources and Risk Management for their personnel department. He opined that the NuRF project was not outdated, noting that they just received a $2.2 million grant from FDEP to upgrade and rebuild it. He opined that this legislation took restoration efforts away from Lake County and turned it over to a State agency. He also opined that the SJRWMD was turning the restoration of Lake Apopka into a career project, noting that it was the second largest freshwater lake in the state at 35,000 acres, and said that it currently had 15,000 acres of hydrilla on it. He questioned what the plan was, opining that hydrilla was coming to lakes in Lake County and that this was about a $40 million issue that the SJRWMD had let go on Lake Apopka. He questioned who would fund this.

Commr. Campione thought that no matter what happened with the legislation, this gave them an opportunity to delve into the focuses of the LCWA, how much tax funding were they receiving, and to see if it would make sense to move some of the park items and have the LCWA just be focused on water quality issues.

Mr. Farner said that the LCWA had 7,000 acres and that many of those properties were arbitration or mediation properties, or wetlands donated to the LCWA, which the County could have accepted at the time; however, they would have to maintain them. He said that when the LCWA accepted them, they usually had to be contiguous to one of their nature preserves, noting that they had 30 nature preserves with 25 of them being open to the public for passive recreation. He said that if there was a property issue, then the BCC could consider if the LCWA should have these properties. He noted that some other properties were held in trusts and that the LCWA did not own them; however, the LCWA would own the property forever as long as they took care of it.

Commr. Campione stated that the conservation lands and how they were managed was critical, and that it might be good to delve into this and make sure that it was an efficient use of tax dollars, along with the water quality conservation and treatment purposes having the needed impact. She commented that there might be an opportunity with the active parks for funding, and that efforts going into them could be better served from the taxpayer standpoint if they were in the County park system. She mentioned that this gave them an opportunity to consider how they were getting the job done and if they could work together better to get more done.

Mr. Farner assured that they could work together to get the job done, noting that the LCWA’s job was to clean up the water so that people could recreate. He expressed concerns for something going to the Florida Legislature to jeopardize this effort.

Commr. Campione did not think that anyone had interest in going backwards, noting that they wanted the lakes to be better.

Mr. Farner recalled that the LCWA had reduced their taxes each year, except for one year when the county was affected by hydrilla. He elaborated that this was the year when they doubled their millage rate to give their lakes, taxpayers and businesspeople some relief; furthermore, in the following year, they reduced taxes even lower. He questioned if there was another board that was this responsible with taxpayer funds.

Mr. Peter Tuite, a resident of the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, relayed his understanding that the budget for law enforcement had been increased by at least $500,000, and that the LCWA supplied a boat to the Lake County Sheriff every two years; additionally, he was unsure why the LCWA was involved in law enforcement. He said that he was an advocate for the LCWA and opined that someone was needed to provide information to get something done, and he expressed concern for the former LCWA Executive Director being fired. He thought that the LCWA Board should be replaced, but he was unsure if it should be taken away from the people who elected them.

Ms. Linda Stewart, a concerned citizen, opined that once the Board became appointed, it would become politicized, which she opined was not good. She opined that the LCWA had done an excellent job, and relayed that she would rather have someone living locally looking out for them rather than the SJRWMD; furthermore, she also opined that the SJRWMD had not proven themselves to be adequate in this area. She thought that the LCWA could continue to look out for them, and she supported keeping politics out of it.

Ms. Sherry Chester, with the Ocklawaha Valley Audubon Society, said that her organization had concerns and objected to any effort to replace the elected LCWA Board with a committee. She opined that the independence of the LCWA Board was important, relaying her understanding that the LCWA Board had made efforts to unify, and that they did not duplicate other agencies’ efforts, opining that coordination and efficiency had not been much of an issue to date. She said that the LCWA Board protected local interests in maintaining a focus on the activities within and adjacent to Lake County, and she opined that residents needed this independent tax district to continue.

Ms. Jane Hepting, a resident of Lake County, opined that the LCWA was well respected in this area, and she did not think that the voters would take kindly if something changed. She relayed her understanding that if a future BCC did not like what the LCWA did, they could set a low millage and increase the millage for other Lake County projects; therefore, she opined that the funding would not be protected under this proposal. She expressed concerns for power being taken away from voters, and she thought that the LCWA’s management of funding and projects was complicated; additionally, she did not think that the BCC had time to keep track of water quality, and she hoped that they would keep the LCWA as it was currently.

Ms. Pam Jennelle, a resident of unincorporated City of Eustis, said that she was impressed with how low the numbers were on her tax bill, and she opined that she received good value when paying her tax bill each year. She stated that she knew the people who were making the decisions for where the taxes were paid, noting that they were accountable to her; however, she opined that if those people were accountable to the BCC, then they would not be accountable to her anymore. She also relayed that she often had to make multiple phone calls to reach the right person, noting that when she reached the right person at the LCWA, that person was pleasant and cheerful.

Ms. Susan Fetter, a resident of the City of Leesburg, submitted an email update from Representative Truenow, noting that there were no records of water quality projects in Lake County, nor were there references to the current meeting or the draft bill. She questioned this, and she asked about which committees the bill would go through if it was accepted, stating that it could possibly be included in an omnibus bill as a consent agenda item. She opined that if preserved properties came at risk over this change, then they would lose “Real Florida, Real Close.” She opined that the LCWA was efficient and that they already worked under an agreement with the County to provide some items that could be seen as excess from an environmental-focused agency. She questioned what would happen for conservation lands, and she urged the BCC to oppose this change.

A concerned resident of the City of Tavares expressed support for the way the LCWA had conducted themselves, and he praised a presentation given by Mr. Mike Perry, former Executive Director for the LCWA, regarding an investigation on septic systems around the Harris Chain of Lakes. He opined that they could not let the LCWA go under the wing of another organization.

Ms. Lavon Silvernell, a resident of Lake County, said that she heard that the County was trying to balance the budget and that if American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds had not been received in the current year, then they would have had to raise the millage rates. She also relayed her understanding that the County had used funding from the public lands-voted debt.

Commr. Campione clarified that this was debt service and that the County had enough to cover the debt service for that year; therefore, they were able to reduce the millage slightly. She added that they would not have moved funding from public lands to somewhere else.

Ms. Silvernell opined that if the BCC indicated to the Florida Legislature that they did not want this change, then they could make it stop. She relayed her understanding that the BCC would not have ARPA funding in the following year, and she expressed a concern that the BCC was looking for access to another funding source.

Ms. Cristi Susewitt, a resident of unincorporated Lake County, commented that on September 27, 2021, Representative Truenow filed an appropriations bill for 2022 for the $4.5 million Lake Technical College (Lake Tech) building. She indicated that this was currently in the BCC’s ARPA funding for revenue replacement, and that if this bill went through, the BCC could have the use of the funds at their discretion. She asked if the BCC could consider and review this issue. She recalled that in a previous situation with the North Lake County Hospital District (NLCHD), the County had indicated that they had other things to work on with the legislator, opining that there could have been a workshop.

Commr. Parks stated that the NLCHD had reduced their millage rate, and that the BCC did not do this. He added that it was done by local elected officials.

Ms. Andrea Burr, representing the Mount Dora Friends of the Environment, said that her organization had been carrying forward environmental efforts, and that their community was concerned about environmental resources because they represented economic resources. She indicated that they would like to see the LCWA continue to be an elected board, and to explore ways to bring activities together that would not cause duplication. She noted that lakes were not the only purview of the LCWA, and she questioned if the BCC could work with Representative Truenow to keep the LCWA elected at the local level, noting that many people were concerned about home rule and representation.

Ms. Cindy Newton, a resident near the City of Eustis, expressed concerns about losing rights as a voter. She wondered that if the BCC decided to take the LCWA, then would the LCWA be dissolved.

Ms. Deborah Shelley, a resident of unincorporated Lake County, said that she preferred to vote for members on the LCWA Board, noting that water resources were complicated. She felt that the LCWA Board and staff had expertise and focused on water issues. She also opined that the LCWA did partnerships well, and relayed that based on a recent survey she conducted at an event in the City of Groveland, every person wanted to continue to vote for the LCWA Board. She submitted a petition for the record.

There being no one else who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the floor for public comment.

Commr. Parks said that it sounded like there were some key questions that the Board needed to have answered. He said that Representative Truenow meant well and that he loved the state and the environment, and that he appreciated him asking the question about doing something better. He believed that they could possibly schedule more discussion time at a BCC meeting, noting that this would be advertised. He stated that if the audience was concerned about growth management in general, he encouraged them to follow the BCC meetings, noting that they were trying to address growth and that they understood that they were growing quickly. He remarked that there were some discussions that they would have with all of the mayors around Lake County to discuss areas on the fringe of the cities, specifically rural, semi-rural and areas that abutted environmentally sensitive areas. He hoped that they could put a plan in place soon to address a conservation strategy for Lake County, to identify areas where land acquisition could possibly take place, to acquire new easements to protect environmentally sensitive lands, to address the transfer of development rights, and to partner with Cities to respect some of the rural areas. He thanked the audience for attending.

A member of the audience asked if there was a bill number assigned yet.

Commissioner Parks replied that there was not, and that the bill was still being drafted.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m.

_________________________________

SEAN PARKS, chairman

ATTEST:

________________________________

GARY J COONEY, CLERK