A regular MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

November 16, 2021

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, November 16, 2021 at 9:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chambers, Lake County Administration Building, 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: Jennifer Barker, Interim 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.

INVOCATION and pledge

Commr. Parks welcomed everyone to the meeting. He said that the invocation would be provided by Pastor Michael Watkins, with Friendship CME Church in the City of Tavares, and he then provided information about the veteran who would lead the Pledge of Allegiance. He explained that Mr. Scott Crabb, Network Engineer for the Office of Public Safety Support, had been with the County since July 2020, and that he had served in the United States (U.S.) Army from March 1998 until March 2001. He elaborated that Mr. Crabb completed Basic Combat Training and Advanced Individual Training at Ft. Knox, Kentucky and served as a Bradley and Recovery Mechanic with the 1st Cavalry Division; furthermore, he was assigned to the 1st Battalion - 12th Regiment, Headquarters Company at Ft. Hood, Texas. He stated that while serving a tour in Bosnia, Mr. Crabb received the Military Expandatory and NATO medals, and had the opportunity to meet the citizens of Bosnia while serving as a driver for the NATO Civil Affair. He thanked Mr. Crabb for his service to the country and the county.

Pastor Watkins gave the Invocation and Mr. Crabb led the Pledge of Allegiance.

virtual meeting instructions

Mr. Erikk Ross, Director for the Information Technology (IT) Department, explained that the current meeting was being livestreamed on the County website and 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 elaborated that anyone watching though the livestream who wished to participate could follow the directions currently being broadcast through the stream; furthermore, he relayed that during the Citizen Question and Comment Period, anyone who had joined the webinar via their phone could press *9 to virtually raise their hand, and anyone participating online could click the raise hand button to identify that they wished to speak. He said that when it was time for public comment, he would read the person’s name or phone number, unmute the appropriate line, and the speaker would be asked to provide comments. He added that everyone would have three minutes to speak, and after three minutes an alarm would sound to let them know that their time was up. He added that they previously 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 the meeting. He stated that anyone wishing to provide written comments during the meeting could visit www.lakecountyfl.gov/commissionmeeting, noting that comments sent during this meeting would be shared with each Board member following the meeting.

Agenda update

Ms. Jennifer Barker, Interim County Manager, said that the language for Tab 9 was updated on the agenda item, and she requested that Tab 20, which regarded a presentation from Mr. David Jordan, Lake County Tax Collector, be moved before the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) update. She said that Tab 21 was a presentation from Ms. Colleen Ernst, an individual representing the nonpublic hospitals in Lake County, and she also requested that this be moved before the ARPA update. She mentioned that Tab 22 regarded the year-end budget amendments and that the attachment was added after the agenda was published.

Minutes approval

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Blake, and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the minutes for the BCC meetings of July 13, 2021 (Regular Meeting) and July 27, 2021 (Regular Meeting) as presented.

Commr. Campione was absent for the vote.

presentation by lake county tax collector

Mr. Jordan presented the Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2021 financials, and he indicated interest in adding more transparency to give greater confidence to the public about their system and financial controls. He mentioned that everything that he was going to present was public record with few exceptions, and he thanked the Board and the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller, noting that he worked with the Clerk’s Office. He recognized his leadership team in attendance, and he commented that Chapter 218, Florida Statutes, indicated that every county officer, which was defined by the State Constitution, was to report to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC). He noted that with the Tax Collector, there was a method to deal with funds left over, and he added that the law did not indicate that this information had to be provided at a public meeting; however, it had officially been done and that funding had been disbursed. He relayed that the Tax Collector’s Office in the State of Florida had a unique independence of office, noting that they were overseen by many agencies but did not go through the rigors in the Board Chambers as the Lake County Sheriff, the Supervisor of Elections or the Clerk with regards to the County related aspects of their budgets. He said that he thought it would be a good idea to present this information.

Commr. Campione arrived at 9:14 a.m.

Mr. Jordan explained that $517,390,790 had been received by the Tax Collector’s Office, noting the first job for himself and the Clerk was to safeguard those funds. He mentioned that the first step was that his office took this funding, and $505 million went to many authorities, and from that point the State Legislature specified the fees and commissions for the Tax Collector for performing these duties; furthermore, operating funds came from this. He indicated that there were the following three categories of taxing authorities: the BCC; other taxing authorities such as the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD); and the agencies where he acts as an agent for State agencies. He displayed an income report and said that of the approximately $500 million, the County’s portion was $184,910,865 which was the gross for the BCC; additionally, the Tax Collector commissioned on that collection by statute, noting that the net was distributed. He pointed out the County was provided the taxable value, that staff developed a budget, and that they knew what to expect; therefore, the County knew this amount because of the quotients which derived the product that they decided would be the total budget. He displayed another income report and explained that other authorizes included the Cities, the Lake County School Board, etc., noting that at the end of each year his office received information from independent auditors from these entities which verified what he had sent to them. He showed an income report and commented that the largest collection was for Florida Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, noting that the next highest was the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS); furthermore, another significant item was the Florida Department of Revenue (FDOR) where they collected sales tax on their behalf. He gave the example of a driver’s license renewal, noting that the State-controlled software determined what had to be collected, and they withdrew from his office’s custodial account the amount which reconciled with the software report. He reviewed some duties he, the Clerk, and the Lake County Property Appraiser had to do by law, and he reviewed additional items on the report. He noted that there was a gross for each of these items, and after subtracting the commissioning, the net was about $505 million. He commented that his office fees and commissions totaled $12,160,866, and he displayed a slide showing the total number of transactions, noting that the highest numbers included motor vehicles and property tax collection; additionally, there had been about 574,000 interactions with customers, relaying that they had repeat visitors and served out of county individuals. He also noted the figures for individuals contacting his office through their website, and he mentioned that they had over 219,000 phone calls. He stated that drivers licenses were likely the most time consuming with 100,000 licenses issued, and that concealed weapons permits was the only discretionary duty of his office. He said that with the $12,160,866, the actual expenditures were $9,206,836, and he showed expense details for this. He said that they budgeted about $2 million on revenues over expense, though it turned out to be $2,954,029. He stated that when they prepared a budget for FDOR on August 1, the County and other authorities were doing their budget in the following month, along with setting their millages; therefore, his office would estimate lower on revenues and estimate slightly higher for expenditures. He stated that the law indicated that when a Tax Collector had net income or unspent budget balance which was to be distributed, this was weighted. He said that there was an entry for almost $1 million for the BCC because the Statute and administrative code from FDOR indicated that a remainder was worked out because all of the agencies that his office did work for did not pay this; rather, the taxpayers paid all of this. He explained that the rule said that whatever was left over came to a number which for the BCC was $2.6 million returned, noting that the balance for the other agencies and taxing authorities was weighted. He then showed a slide with the non-ad valorem commissions. He said that his office had partnered with Publix to provide a kiosk in two locations in Lake County to renew registrations, and that his office was originally considering building a facility in the Four Corners area for about $2 million; however, they could avoid this due to a recent statutory change where he could partner with a private firm. He praised OATA, an organization involved with vehicle registration, and said that they were licensed by a State agency, mentioning that it would be OATA’s cost to construct the building and pay property tax on it. He mentioned that they would have Saturday hours and after hours, and that it would be another option for individuals in the community; additionally, they could draw in other individuals near the Four Corners area and still receive the per-transaction statutory fees which would end up in excess fees. He said that his office’s overarching goal was how could they run a better operation and keep the expenses from increasing, but not having people lose their jobs. He mentioned their centralized operations hub, and he showed an image of this and mentioned their queuing system and number of cameras. He also mentioned that their administrative staff was involved with this and were dual purpose, and that it helped move more administrative items out of the service centers and move people in and out more quickly. He thanked the Board for the opportunity to present.

Commr. Parks praised the Constitutional Officers and noted that Mr. Jordan was trying to be transparent and accountable.

Mr. Jordan added that the Constitutional Officers’ other duty was to watch over each other, and he believed that the BCC had the power to start an investigation on any County affair or officer.

Commr. Smith thanked Mr. Jordan for bringing this item forward, and he said that it was important for the public to understand that the County and Mr. Jordan were there for them.

ordinance for special assessment regarding hospitals

Ms. Ernst presented information about an opportunity related to Medicaid in Lake County. She explained that Medicaid was the nation’s public health insurance program for low income individuals who had qualifying disabilities or conditions, such as being elderly or below the age of 18. She said that current estimates showed that one in five State of Florida residents was enrolled, and that the program supported the healthcare system and safety net, along with increasing the state’s capacity to address health challenges. She indicated that in addition to being jointly administered by the States and the Federal Government, it was also jointly financed, explaining that the State contributed a share of funding and the Federal Government provided matching funding. She commented that in the State of Florida, they had a requirement that the budget be balanced; therefore, there was a finite amount of general revenue that the State Legislature and taxpayers were willing to commit to this program. She added that even though the federal funding would be available to match, the State of Florida had to make decisions about how to prioritize spending; additionally, there was unused federal funding year to year. She said that currently, the amount of funding that the State contributed with the federal match meant that hospitals in the state which performed Medicaid services were reimbursed about 61 percent of their Medicaid costs; therefore, this was something that hospitals were doing at a financial loss. She stated that Lake County hospitals incurred about $22 million in unreimbursed Medicaid costs each year, and that there were many strains on hospitals in 2020 due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. She said that in November 2020, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis included in his recommended budget a directive for the Agency for Healthcare Administration (AHCA) to apply to the Federal Government for a directed payment program which would unlock some of the federal funding to help the hospitals in the state be closer to being made whole for the provision of Medicaid services. She elaborated that the State Legislature supported this, and that the Federal Government approved of this in April 2021. She clarified that the funds from this program could only be used to provide a uniform rate increase in the rate of reimbursement for Medicaid, and she said that the state was broken up into 11 Medicaid managed care regions. She stated that Lake County was part of region three, and also that allocating general revenue was not the only way to take advantage of federal funding. She stated that this program was contemplated to work through a partnership with the Counties, and that for nonpublic hospitals, the State said that the source of funds would come from non-ad valorem special assessments levied by local governments against private, for-profit and not for profit hospitals. She said that local governments that agreed to participate would pass an ordinance and collect only from the nonpublic hospitals, which was known as a provider tax and was a recognized common source of putting up the State share to draw down the federal funding. She commented that to qualify for a federal match, the following items must be true of the provider tax: must be broad-based and apply to multiple hospitals; must be uniform and be the same rate for all payers; there must not be a hold-harmless agreement; and generally, no more than six percent of net patient revenues could be used for such programs. She relayed the following steps for how the payment would work: nonpublic hospitals would pay an assessment to the County; the County then would send the funding to AHCA; AHCA would send the funding to the Federal Government; the Federal Government would provide a match; and the funding would go to the hospitals through the managed care organizations (MCOs), who were generally contracted with the State to perform Medicaid reimbursement. She noted that the five MCOs in region three which worked with the hospitals to provide reimbursement: Florida Community Care; Humana Medical Plan; Staywell; Sunshine Health; and United Healthcare. She said that since April 2021, 15 Counties had established local provider participation funds and had agreed to do similar assessments for the nonpublic hospitals, and that all 15 Counties had passed their ordinances which established the special assessment, along with passing the resolutions which triggered the invoices to go to the hospitals; furthermore, these hospitals had paid the Counties. She stated that AHCA had submitted the budget amendment request asking for authority from the State Legislature to collect the funding from the Counties, and that the State Legislature was currently considering this through 14 day consultation. She relayed that when this approval was in hand, AHCA would collect the funding from the Counties, and the Federal Government had obligated itself to fund the match; therefore, the funding would go to the State’s Medicaid providers. She indicated that the State hoped to receive approval for this program each year, noting that each year the Federal Government and the State Legislature had to reauthorize the program; additionally, there was an opportunity in the future to unlock more federal funding and bring it into the state. She said that they were looking to bring Lake County into this program, noting that other participating region three counties included Marion, Citrus and Hernando Counties, and that all three had passed their ordinances and resolutions, as well as collected funds from the hospitals. She summarized that the hospitals were asking the BCC to pass an ordinance which expressed the County’s intent to do this special assessment to allow the hospitals to participate in this program; additionally, the second item was annual passage of a resolution which would send the bill to the hospitals each year to keep the County participating. She mentioned that the resolution did not have to occur each year and that it was at the County’s discretion, giving the example that if at any point the program was no longer beneficial to the hospitals, or if there was not authorization from the State Legislature or the Federal Government, the County had no obligation to continue participation. She displayed the timeline and said that AHCA was already seeking approval for year two of the program, and that the hope was that the new Counties participating in year two would adopt ordinances at the end of 2021 or before the next legislative session which would begin in January 2022. She stated that if the State Legislature stayed on schedule, they would approve the budget in March 2022, and the next time that the hospitals would be talking to the County would be around September 2022 when there would be calculations available to indicate how much funding would need to be collected to ensure participation in the program, as well as what the pool of funds from the Federal Government would be. She explained that the annual nature of the resolution provided some protections for the County, and that the ordinance gave the hospitals the ability to object; furthermore, they would know what would be expected and required if the Board passed the resolution. She reiterated that there was nothing obligating the Board to continue participating, and she clarified that it did not really have any effect on anyone else, noting that the only entities which received a bill would be the three nonpublic hospitals. She added that the ordinance would prohibit the cost from being passed on to patients, and opined that it helped to ensure that hospitals had more resources. She said that all administrative costs could be taken out of the funding collected, and that it went through the alternative method of collection. She mentioned that the three hospitals were in attendance and in support, and she listed the following outcomes: creation of the Local Provider Participation Fund by Lake County would ensure that hospitals in the county could access needed funding in the wake of the pandemic; would help to close the $22 million reimbursement gap in Lake County; and would ensure that hospitals within the county could provide quality care to the needy and vulnerable, attract top talent, and act as good corporate citizens.

Commr. Parks thanked the hospitals in attendance, and noted that they were supportive of this. He reiterated that there was no way that this could be passed onto patients, and he asked if the Board would have to redo a resolution if a hospital wanted to get out of this.

Ms. Ernst replied that to qualify for the federal match, it was all or nothing; therefore, all of the hospitals would have to pay the invoice each year. She said that if a hospital opined that the program was no longer beneficial or if they did not want the Board to move forward, then no one would pay the assessment; furthermore, either the Board would not pass a resolution for that year, or the Board would pass a 0.0 millage resolution.

Commr. Campione inquired how it was calculated per hospital.

Ms. Ernst responded that it was not linked to property value, and the most consistent metric was some percentage of net patient revenue or gross patient revenue.

Commr. Campione questioned why this made sense for the bottom line, noting that the hospitals were nonprofits and were not paying income tax.

Ms. Ernst explained that they were nongovernmental and that it made sense because of the way that Medicaid was financed. She elaborated that the federal funding was available, and the barrier toward obtaining it was putting up funding to draw down the match. She said that the hospitals contributing a dollar resulted in them receiving their dollar back with the addition of the federal match, indicating that it was a doubled return.

Commr. Blake asked about the realistic expectation for how much of the funding gap could be closed.

Ms. Ernst stated that it varied from year to year and that currently, it could possibly be close to about 90 cents on the dollar for reimbursement, as opposed to roughly 60 cents; however, the Federal Government was currently doing an enhanced match due to COVID-19.

Commr. Shields inquired why this was not done in the previous year.

Ms. Ernst responded that it had to be fully cooperative and there were only so many priorities that hospitals could have during COVID-19.

Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, said that this item was for approval for advertise, and if the Board chose to approve it, it would come back to them on December 21, 2021 for a public hearing and adoption.

Commr. Smith asked if the County had the staff to manage this, and Ms. Marsh confirmed this.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Smith, and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to advertise an ordinance authorizing a non-ad valorem special assessment upon real property interests of hospitals within the boundaries of Lake County to help finance the non-federal share of the State of Florida's Medicaid program.

proclamations 2021-163 and 2021-164

Commr. Parks proposed to address the proclamations at the current time.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Smith, and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Proclamation 2021-163 declaring the month of November as National Hospice Month in Lake County, and Proclamation 2021-164 declaring November 13 - 21, 2021 as National Hunger and Homelessness Awareness Week in Lake County.

Commr. Parks read and presented Proclamation 2021-163 to individuals from Cornerstone Hospice.

Mr. Chuck Lee, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for Cornerstone Hospice, thanked the Board for this recognition and for their support financially. He noted that over the years, the County had supported some of their unique programs including support for bereaved children, and for veterans. He stated that they considered it a privilege to care for the citizens of Lake County, and their commitment was to be there in citizens’ hour of need.

Commr. Parks mentioned the amount of lives that Cornerstone Hospice had impacted and what they had done for the community.

Commr. Campione then read and presented Proclamation 2021-164 to individuals involved with homelessness services. She thanked them for what they did and noted that they were integral in trying to meet this need. She commented that there were also many other organizations that served this need, and that the County was appreciative of everyone who took the time to help others.

recess and reassembly

The Chairman called a recess at 10:14 a.m. for six minutes.

american rescue plan act update

Mr. Sean Beaudet, Grants Coordinator for the Office of Management and Budget, provided an update on ARPA. He relayed that on September 28, 2021, the BCC approved the displayed allocations and the project list. He showed the updated project list, noting that the only new item was the Lake County Tax Collector’s City of Leesburg office building. He mentioned that there was a new funding request from the Tax Collector’s Office regarding heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) upgrades for the purification systems at a cost of $13,000 under the public health category. He said that for the interim final rule and reports, no final rule had been issued to date, noting that it was anticipated by the end of the current year or spring 2022. He added that the deadline for the first quarterly reports, which were originally due in October 2021, was extended to January 2022. He stated that the requested action would be to approve the funding the request from the Tax Collector’s Office.

Commr. Parks said that the change was just the Tax Collector’s Office.

Mr. Beaudet added that it would come out of personal protective equipment (PPE) under the public health category; additionally, there would not be any category allocation changes.

Commr. Shields stated that since this was previously considered, the County had received $6 million for the vocational-technical (vo-tech) facility. He asked if this was included.

Ms. Barker confirmed that under the revenue replacement category, there was the Lake Technical College (Lake Tech) Transportation Training and Innovation Center for $4.3 million, noting that the funding was still identified for Lake Tech.

Commr. Campione commented that Lake Tech had asked for more funding from the State than they received, and that there were still needs for their program and facility.

Commr. Parks relayed that there would be a difference between the $4.3 million that the Board had allocated because what Lake Tech received from the State did not cover everything.

Commr. Campione said that it sounded like the Board possibly needed to revisit this and find out if the request would be based on what Lake Tech received from the State, noting that Lake Tech had scaled down their project.

Ms. Barker stated that she could work with Ms. DeAnna Thomas, Executive Director for Lake Tech, and get a new dollar amount; furthermore, on December 7, 2021, Mr. Beaudet could present a new ARPA update and identify this change.

Commr. Shields inquired if the $13,000 that the Tax Collector was asking for regarding HVAC was different than the building ventilation improvements for $3.3 million.

Mr. Beaudet confirmed this and relayed his understanding that the $3.3 million was for the County Administration Building.

Ms. Barker added that it was also for the corrections facility and possibly the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO).

Commr. Smith asked if they could add the Tax Collector’s building to this, and Ms. Barker said that they could.

Commr. Parks hoped that they could still leave what was left out of the $4.3 million as a placeholder for what Lake Tech could possibly do in South Lake at the Lincoln Park facility. He added that it would be separate from the community center and would only be for the job training portion.

Commr. Shields relayed that Mr. Mike Smith, Vice Mayor of the City of Groveland, had indicated that the new federal legislation had some matching ability that the County could possibly match with ARPA funding.

Mr. Beaudet said that this had been signed on the previous day and that he was unsure about any matching; however, they had identified funding that would come to the State of Florida, along with different projects that it could go toward. He mentioned that much of it was for roads, bridges, stormwater, etc., and that there was some crossover.

Commr. Parks asked when the second half of the funding would be received, and Ms. Barker replied that it was anticipated in May 2022. Commissioner Parks then indicated that this item was ongoing, and he believed that there was a request from LifeStream Behavioral Center.

Ms. Barker stated that she had given the Board the original request from LifeStream, noting that they had requested about $3 million for capital improvements. She elaborated that Mr. Beaudet thought that approximately $424,000 could be eligible for ARPA funding within the public health category, and that staff could possibly bring it back as a request.

Commr. Parks said that he would classify this as possibly under consideration, but not at the current time. He encouraged the Board to meet with Mr. Jon Cherry, CEO for LifeStream Behavioral Center.

Commr. Campione inquired if LifeStream was able to receive funding directly, and Mr. Beaudet clarified that it was only for local governments.

Ms. Barker requested approval of the new project request for the Tax Collector’s Office for HVAC upgrades.

Commr. Parks recognized that they would still have some questions answered regarding Lake Tech or LifeStream, noting that this was ongoing at almost every BCC meeting.

On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Smith, and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the funding request from the Tax Collector’s Office.

american rescue plan act discussion on affordable housing

Ms. Barker said that Commissioner Campione had been working with staff on some ideas for homeless mitigation and affordable housing.

Commr. Campione stated that if housing was not affordable and attainable, then there could be gaps. She commented that when addressing people who were on the verge of becoming homeless and if rent was unaffordable, then it was impossible to move them from homelessness. She added that if someone moved out of homelessness and had a job and was paying their rent, there were different needs along the way to get to permanent housing, noting that housing that was not affordable created an issue along this process. She said that she wanted to focus on homeless mitigation because over the past couple of years, the County had received many requests from the community about addressing homelessness. She recalled that there had been a previous discussion about funding a shelter or partnering with a nonprofit to have a shelter; however, she opined that there was not a significant amount of reception from the community to have a standalone shelter, noting that there were different philosophies regarding whether this worked. She relayed that it did not solve the issue of getting people who went to the shelter into housing. She stated that the Board then started considering how they could address this need without having a standalone shelter, indicating that they focused on the housing first concept where they had to have a place where people moving from homelessness could live and receive services. She mentioned that she had given the Board a roadmap to address homelessness which had been done by the Florida Housing Coalition for Lake County, and she explained that Lake County was one of four counties in a continuum of care, along with Hernando, Citrus and Sumter Counties. She elaborated that the continuums of care were the recipients of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding which was to be used for addressing homelessness and permanent supportive care. She said that some Counties would leverage the HUD funding by putting more money into their programs, noting that they were then able to apply for grants and receive additional HUD funding. She recalled that Lake County had done some of this, and that they had to put General Fund funding into it to receive funding back. She remarked that the continuum of care worked with people who were homeless and that they had social workers, along with a list of people who would like to have housing but were unable to find it because there was not inventory. She mentioned that there were vouchers and grants available for homeless individuals in Lake County, though they only allotted a certain amount of funding toward housing, noting that it would have to be subsidized or there had to be units where the cost of rent could be controlled. She said that the County had the vouchers and the people on the list who had been qualified to receive them, but they did not have the units. She then brought forward a concept to issue a request for proposal (RFP) to see whether they could find a builder or site work company to demolish the old Lake County Animal Shelter and clear the site, adding that they would also be asking for someone to propose a way to place units on that site which could be used for the in-between period when a person had received a voucher for transitional or permanent housing, but there was not a place for them. She said that her initial thought was that it should be something like a park model so that the County could possibly move the units off the property and do something different with it, and she also mentioning possibly retrofitting shipping containers as livable units. She also mentioned that a situation in the in-between period would be someone coming out of the Lake County Jail who was looking for housing but there was no place to put them; however, this could possibly require that the entire site only be used for this. She asked to go forward with the RFP to see if anyone would be willing to demolish the site and come up with a design to have detached congregate-type temporary housing. She said that it could also be used in a disaster situation where temporary housing was needed, and she recalled that at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the County had to contract with places to house homeless people who had to be quarantined. She stated that if this facility was available, it could serve multiple purposes, and it could possibly be used for another purpose at some point. She also proposed another concept in the RFP to find infill lots and build units that the County could use for rapid rehousing from three to 24 months as they got ready for a permanent housing situation. She explained that part of the RFP would be that the lots would be designed to be one, two or three bedroom homes or duplexes, and they would be owned by the County and the County would serve as the landlord; however, the County would be receiving the voucher funding to pay for the cost of housing. She explained that currently, the Mid Florida Homeless Coalition, which was Lake County’s continuum of care, had a list of landlords that they worked with when someone needed housing. She mentioned that there were not enough units, and that many landlords were no longer available after the COVID-19 pandemic where they could not evict and were not getting paid rent. She said that the County could have units for this purpose, and if they decided that they did not want to do this anymore, they could sell those units and put the funding back into affordable housing purposes or sell to a nonprofit. She also explained that if nonprofits were trying to build houses at an affordable rate, the County typically tried to help them meet their price point by giving them waivers for impact fees and by helping reduce the regulatory costs; additionally, this could be another concept that the County might possibly want to formulate an RFP for, where they could have a defined amount of funding to put toward units being built to be sold or rented to low income individuals, noting that there could also be a workforce housing category to target. She stated that in return for building these units, the County could subsidize to get them to the affordable housing point. She stated that one concept was to provide all of the construction costs, and she was thinking to provide a portion of the construction costs to bring it to an affordable level, noting that it would have to be used for low income or workforce housing. She asked the Board to consider going forward with the RFPs.

Commr. Parks thought that this was a great idea. He mentioned possibly serving those who had been released from jail, noting that this was a large issue.

Commr. Campione said that as of September 30, 2021, there were 298 homeless individuals in Lake County, with 19 being veterans. She mentioned that Lake County had a contract with four hotels in the county and that the County had HUD funding to house someone on a temporary basis. She added that when housed under this program, the individual had a social worker to help them move out of the hotel and find housing. She then gave some examples of success stories for emergency shelter participants. She mentioned trying to remove barriers and get people into housing, and she reiterated her request to see if they could do something at the Lake County Animal Shelter site, along with seeing if they received any responses for doing scattered housing.

Commr. Parks thought that the Cities of Clermont and Groveland could be interested in the third RFP request to ask those Cities to partner with the County to find a site where they could do a pocket neighborhood. He added that the County could waive fees and that there could possibly be some ARPA funding involved, and they could possibly partner with Cities to create a small pocket neighborhood with housing in the range of $150,000 to $200,000, noting that it could potentially be targeted toward a certain segment of the workforce.

Commr. Campione thought that the County could work on an RFP concept for this, understanding that there could possibly be other funding sources that they could use for this. She added that they could potentially find a nonprofit that could partner with the County and the City, noting that fees could be waived. She also said that they had to have the requirements in place so that the people getting the housing met the requirements for their income level. She stated that the County also had to decide if they would be rental or privately owned units, and that they did not want to create an artificial situation that impacted the private market and did more harm in the long run. She said that from the County’s standpoint, she was only trying to focus on the initial parts of moving someone off the street and into temporary and transitional housing.

Commr. Smith said that he was amicable with going out for an RFP.

Commr. Blake agreed, and stated that he did not think that the government was ideally situated to be in the housing business. He asked about the current value of the animal shelter property.

Commr. Campione relayed that the building could not be used and that it needed to be torn down; additionally, it backed up to the landfill, and was not a site where they could find people to do much.

Commr. Blake inquired about the cost of shipping container conversions. He also mentioned the possibility of having local churches sponsor the units and raising funding in this way.

Commr. Campione relayed her understanding that the small model was around $12,000, and the other model was around $25,000. She said that this could be one of the proposals, and she hoped that the Lake 100 or the Coalition for Housing and Economic Development of Lake County (CHED) could possibly come forward with an idea. She remarked that the County provided RFP opportunities for this where they could draw upon donated goods or services; however, the funding needed to be spent and they needed to make it be for the most impactful uses. She said that she was partial to a park model because they could place and remove it, and she mentioned a tiny home concept which was not meant to be permanent. She reiterated that they were trying to meet the in-between need.

Commr. Blake thought that Lennar Homes in Austin, Texas was doing a 100 unit three dimensional (3D) printed housing development, which he opined was an interesting option.

Commr. Parks relayed that there was direction to move forward, and that they could also consider the pocket neighborhood concept.

Commr. Campione said that if the County indicated the concept and the price point, they could see if someone could give them a way to do this.

Ms. Barker remarked that staff could start working on an RFP for the pocket neighborhood concept and bring it back on December 7, 2021. She said that staff could also proceed with the original RFPs from the current meeting.

citizen question and comment period

Ms. Kathy Smith, Executive Director for the Community Foundation of South Lake, asked the BCC to consider funding affordable housing as part of the ARPA funds. She noted that individuals who would benefit from affordable housing were entry level police officers, teachers, and families who were working multiple jobs. She opined that this was a national issue that needed to be addressed by their leaders, including the BCC. She relayed that there were nonprofit organizations with essential projects ready to go, who needed the BCC’s help in directing a portion of ARPA funds to those projects. She opined that the organizations had a successful track record and that their projects were attractive examples of affordable housing. She said that these developments had been in existence for a number of years, and she opined that claims that the developments would be a place for drug addicts or cause blight in those locations had proven to be false.

Ms. Linda Smith, a co-founder of New Beginnings of Central Florida and also the Live Well Foundation, said that City Managers and nonprofits had asked for funding from her organization, noting that organizations had to make the decision between healthcare, housing and trails; however, she opined that trails generally came last. She also relayed concerns she had heard about the disparity of funding for North Lake versus South Lake. She indicated an understanding that only three workforce/affordable housing projects had been approved in 25 years in South Lake, noting that she had continuously heard about the need in Four Corners.

Ms. Myrna Mojica, a resident of the City of Clermont and an advocate for affordable housing, said that according to the University of Florida (UF) annual housing study, Lake County currently lacked 9,150 affordable housing units. She opined that companies would not locate there unless they had a workforce that lived there, and that many employees of larger companies did not live in Lake County because they could not afford it. She opined that affordable housing was the economic driver of every community, and that it increased the economic impact of the community and lessened the burden on government programs such as childcare, food, and medical and dental care. She also opined that affordable housing increased quality of life, and she asked the Board to consider allocating this funding to affordable housing.

Mr. Brian Broadway, with Find, Feed and Restore, advocated for funds to be used for affordable housing. He relayed that his organization currently had multiple projects and that an issue was that affordable housing currently had a two to three year waiting list, noting that individuals with vouchers could not use them. He said that his organization had been approved to build affordable housing projects including seven duplexes, which would be a blended community with 50 percent of units for law enforcement officers and educators who lived inside the county, and the other 50 percent being for individuals who were 60 percent under the area median income (AMI). He opined that these blended communities avoided becoming a blight, and said that each person inside the community would have a home ownership pathway. He indicated that they would also offer educational earned credits for residents taking a financial literacy class, which could be applied to rent. He explained that they were building communities like this in the Cities of Leesburg and Groveland, and that they had another seven acres that they would like to place transitional housing on. He noted that they owned the land and had done engineering services, and he asked the Board to consider funding affordable housing, noting that they were asking for $10 million for four projects and that the Board could also utilize nonprofits. He opined that going to a builder that was not a nonprofit could be teaching people how to get assets without education, noting that Find, Feed and Restore had a 74 percent success rate for people going into permanent housing.

Commr. Campione asked if the duplex was a rental.

Mr. Broadway confirmed this, and opined that many people were not ready to own a home yet because they did not have financial literacy. He explained that it accepted individuals who had a voucher or who did not have good credit, and that they could move into a place where their credit did not matter and where they would still be accepted with low income. He added that it would be $291 per month less than HUD pricing.

Commr. Campione if these units were already filled.

Mr. Broadway clarified that they owned the land and had finished the engineering services; however, they needed funding to build, noting that the project was $2.5 million. He elaborated that it would fund 14 three bedroom, 2.5 bathroom units.

Commr. Campione asked if he was proposing that half of them be for firefighters or law enforcement.

Mr. Broadway said that it would be for law enforcement and educators, noting that they wanted a blended community.

Commr. Campione inquired that if individuals went through the continuum of care and had vouchers, could they be used for Mr. Broadway’s units, and Mr. Broadway confirmed this. Commissioner Campione then asked that if the County reached an agreement with him, could it include that he would set aside a certain number of units for the County’s purposes.

Mr. Broadway said that this was correct.

Commr. Campione asked if any of his projects were homeownership or if they were only for transition or preparation.

Mr. Broadway clarified that currently, they were for transition, preparation and financial literacy.

Commr. Campione mentioned that for the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, the County had more funding than they had in the past from the State which could be used for down payment assistance, noting that this was a path for people going to the next stage of homeownership.

Commr. Parks noted that the County needed transition currently, and that Mr. Broadway had individuals on the path to homeownership; however, there was currently nothing in the $150,000 to $200,000 range.

Mr. Broadway confirmed this, opining that housing was expensive in most areas, and he mentioned the possibility of having tiny home communities with mortgages and park model homes.

Commr. Campione noted that State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP) funds could help with the down payment for a new home, and that the County had more of this funding than they had in the past. She added that one of the requirements for the SHIP down payment assistance was that one had to complete a financial literacy program.

Mr. Steve Smith, speaking on behalf of Housing for All Lake County, opined that affordable housing should be their top priority, reiterating that a UF study indicated that Lake County was currently lacking 9,150 affordable housing units. He relayed his understanding that Kroger was having a challenging time finding workers because people did not want to live in Lake County due to the high cost, and that it was challenging for establishments to find and retain people. He opined that affordable housing would free up government burdens, and that people could save money for emergencies, home ownership and education for their children. He relayed that a recent study indicated that the average median price of a home in Lake County was $317,000 currently, and he also commented that at the current time, a two bedroom apartment could cost $1,800 per month. He questioned where starter homes were in Lake County, and where law enforcement officers and teachers were living. He commented that they had requested $10 million and that three projects had been identified, including one in Four Corners. He added that Habitat for Humanity had a project to build 55 homeownership houses typically under $200,000, though they needed funding for construction. He commented that if people lived on the streets, then this would be a public health issue, opining that affordable housing could be placed in the public health category. He also opined that affordable housing also contributed to infrastructure and economic impact.

Commr. Parks asked Mr. Broadway if he could submit for one of the RFPs.

Mr. Broadway confirmed this and said that he would be willing to split the units, noting that they could use seven units for officers and educators, and seven units would be for Lake County for those who came with vouchers.

Commr. Campione stated that the County could possibly bring back an RFP concept asking for this, where they would have a scenario similar to what Mr. Broadway described. She said that they might also want to include a homeownership concept. She thought that they could bring back some concepts at the next BCC meeting.

Mr. Broadway added that there could be partnerships between multiple nonprofits.

Ms. Barker commented that staff could bring this back on December 7, 2021.

Commr. Shields relayed his understanding that they would never get to 9,000 units without the Cities being onboard.

Commr. Campione stated that 1,000 people were moving to the State of Florida per day, and she mentioned that a residency requirement had been discussed, noting that they had previously discussed six months; furthermore, she wondered if this needed to be a longer period. She expressed concerns for creating a magnet for people coming there to reap the benefits of the work to address their current needs.

Commr. Shields asked if individuals needed to work inside Lake County.

Commr. Campione thought that Mr. Broadway’s proposal had a residency requirement for at least six months, and they had to work in Lake County. She also thought that the community would appreciate that the Board was thinking in these terms.

Mr. Broadway opined that it should be 18 months or longer to ensure that it would strictly be Lake County residents who had invested into the County.

Commr. Campione noted that they could start more restrictive and then possibly back off.

Commr. Parks mentioned that Infrastructure Sales Tax funding, which was freed up by ARPA funding, could also benefit South Lake.

Commr. Campione asked if staff could consider if the HOME Investment Partnerships American Rescue Plan Program (HOME-ARP) funding could work for the project that Mr. Broadway was describing.

Ms. Barker indicated that staff could consider the project scope and see if it would qualify for these funds.

Commr. Campione said that the County balanced many needs and priorities, and that this list was not indicative of everything going on at one time in the County. She opined that this had to be looked at holistically, and if they could have some good pilots or examples, then this could possibly be the template for other projects, including involvement with the Cities. She then inquired if Mr. Smith’s project could go through the Florida Housing Finance Corporation (FHFC) or if the County could possibly assist with a match.

Mr. Smith said that with the FHFC, there were many applications throughout the state, and they only approved 10 applications. He opined that it was challenging, but now that they had alternate financing, they could use the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) as a source if they could have the subsidies for $2.5 million to cover infrastructure and the land cost. He added that Habitat for Humanity also had a project for 55 units of home ownership.

Ms. Deborah Shelley, a concerned citizen, expressed support for the County’s hospice initiative, and she also appreciated the homelessness awareness. She opined that a presentation by Mr. Randall Arendt at a previous BCC meeting was good, and she hoped that conservation design concepts could be incorporated into County and City land development regulations (LDR). She opined that they were not seeing transition zone densities proposed in the transition zones adjacent to the Yalaha-Lake Apopka and Wekiva Rural Protection Areas (RPAs), and that high densities were being proposed for those areas. She opined that many residents in these RPAs continued to have concerns about growth management and maintaining the integrity of their rural areas. She also expressed concerns about the City of Leesburg interlocal service boundary agreement (ISBA) and development proposals within the RPA, noting that the Hodges Reserve and Whispering Hills developments were coming up for their second hearing and potential final approval in December 2021; furthermore, combined, this would be almost 3,500 homes, commercial uses, a hotel, and intense activities that she opined were not appropriate for the RPA. She commented that she had sent the Board a map of another project approved in 2018 via the City of Leesburg ISBA process, explaining that a portion of this project was on the east side of United States (U.S.) 27 in the transition area with concept densities of eight units per acre. She also mentioned another development in the transition area which proposed 184 homes on 70 acres, opining that they were seeing a domino effect in the transition area. She asked about the status of the ISBA review and if the County could do anything more to better control growth in their RPAs and the adjacent transition areas.

Commr. Parks mentioned that there was a countywide conservation strategy and a review of joint planning areas (JPAs), along with a meeting in January 2022.

Ms. Barker stated that staff was completing a draft of a letter regarding the review of ISBAs, and that it would be sent to the Board for their comments before the December 7, 2021 BCC meeting.

CLERK OF the Circuit COURT and comptroller’s CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller’s Consent Agenda, Items 1 through 9, as follows:

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.

SJRWMD Draft 2022 Annual Five-Year Water Resource Development Work Program

Notice is hereby provided of having received the draft 2022 Annual Five-Year Water Resource Development Work Program from the St. Johns River Water Management District, pursuant to Section 373.536(6)(a)4, Florida Statutes.

Oakridge Condominium Association Board of Directors’ Budget Meeting Notice/Agenda

Notice is hereby provided of having received the Oakridge Condominium Association, Inc. Board of Directors’ Budget Meeting notice and agenda for November 8, 2021.

City of Clermont CRA Resolution 22

Notice is hereby provided of having received the City of Clermont Community Redevelopment Agency Resolution 22 adopting the budget for the 2021-2022 Fiscal Year.

SWFWMD Draft 2022 Annual Five-Year Water Resource Development Work Program

Notice is hereby provided of having received the proposed 2022 Five-Year Water Resource Development Work Program from the Southwest Florida Water Management District, pursuant to Section 373.536(6)(a)(4), Florida Statutes.

City of Fruitland Park Ordinance 2021-010

Notice is hereby provided of having received Comprehensive Plan Amendment Ordinance 2021-010 from the City of Fruitland Park.

Gibson Place Utility Company Notice of Application

Notice is hereby provided of having received from Gibson Place Utility Company, LLC a Notice of Application for Amendment to Certificate of Authorization to Delete Service Area in Sumter and Lake Counties pursuant to Section 367.045, Florida Statutes, and Section 25-30.036(4), Florida Administrative Code, regarding tracts of land lying in of Sections 1, 12, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21 & 22, Township 20 South, Range 23 East, in Sumter County, and in Section 7, Township 20 South, Range 24 East, in Lake County, Florida.

Town of Lady Lake Items

Notice is hereby provided of having received the following from the Town of Lady Lake: Ordinance 2021-03; Ordinance 2021-04; Ordinance 2021-05; Ordinance 2021-06; Ordinance 2021-07; Ordinance 2021-08; Ordinance 2021-09; Ordinance 2021-11; Ordinance 2021-12; Ordinance 2021-16; Resolution 2021-106; Resolution 2021-108; Resolution 2021-110.

City of Eustis Items

Notice is hereby provided of having received the following items from the City of Eustis: Annexation Ordinance 21-15, corresponding Future Land Use Ordinance 21-16, and corresponding Design District Amendment Ordinance 21-17; Annexation Ordinance 21-18, corresponding Future Land Use Ordinance 21-19, and corresponding Design District Amendment Ordinance 21-20; Annexation Ordinance 21-24, corresponding Future Land Use Ordinance 21-25, and corresponding Design District Amendment Ordinance 21-26; and Annexation Ordinance 21-27, corresponding Future Land Use Ordinance 21-28, and corresponding Design District Amendment Ordinance 21-29.

COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Consent Agenda, Tabs 5 through 19, pulling Tab 17 for discussion, as follows:

PROCLAMATIONS

Recommend approval of Proclamation 2021-165 declaring January 17, 2022, as Martin Luther King Jr. Day in Lake County.

COUNTY ATTORNEY

Recommend approval regarding the following County-owned properties:

1. Award bid to the highest bidder for purchasing Alternate Keys 1607019, 2928956, 3558961, 3558987, 3559002, 3559029, 3559053, 3777819 and 3777820.

2. Authorize the Chairman to execute any necessary closing documents.

The total fiscal impact is $13,792.00 (revenue). Commission District 5.

Recommend approval for the County Attorney, or designee, to execute a Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement Agreement to Respondent’s Motion for Enforcement in Circuit Court Case No. 2018-CA-1984, Lake County, Florida v. Christopher McCarthy, et al., (Citrus Grove Road, Parcel Number: CG-06). The fiscal impact is $167,539.13 (Expenditure). Commission District 2.

Recommend approval to conduct a Closed Session of the Board of County Commissioners to be held on December 7, 2021, to discuss Blackwater Creek Wetlands Mitigation, LLC, et al., vs. Lake County, Florida, which is pending in the Circuit Court of the Fifth Judicial Circuit in and for Lake County, Florida, Case Number 2020-CA-001656.

COUNTY MANAGER

Recommend approval to amend the LCC-59 Grant Policy to authorize the County Manager or designee to execute and accept grants with a dollar value up to $75,000.

PUBLIC SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Fleet Management

Recommend approval to utilize Florida Sheriff's Association Contract 21-0703 - BID FSA20 -VEH18 to purchase a fleet service vehicle.

The fiscal impact is $130,171 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget.

Parks and Trails

Recommend approval of the fifth amendment to the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Fruitland Park to provide funding for the purchase and installation of restroom facilities at the soccer field site within the Northwest Lake Community Park.

The fiscal impact of $150,000 (expenditure) is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget. Commission District 5.

Recommend approval:

1. Of Contract 21-0939 for construction of Lake Idamere Park Pavilions to Sloan Builders, Inc. (Orlando, FL); and

2. To authorize the Office of Procurement Services to execute all supporting documentation.

The fiscal impact of $168,807 (expenditure) is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget. Commission District 3.

Public Works

Recommend adoption of Resolution 2021-166 to advertise a public hearing to vacate and annul a platted tract located in the Clermont area.

The fiscal impact is $2,295 (revenue - vacation application fee). Commission District 1.

Recommend adoption of Resolution 2021-167 to reduce the speed limit on County Road (CR) 46A from 50 MPH to 45 MPH from Sahara Court to approximately 0.4 miles north of Sorrento Avenue, in the Sorrento area.

The fiscal impact is estimated at $200 (expenditure - sign materials) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget. Commission District 4.

Recommend approval to accept the final plat for Seasons at Silver Basin and all areas dedicated to the public as shown on the Seasons at Silver Basin final plat, located off Radio Road in Leesburg.

The fiscal impact is $1,551 (revenue - final plat application fee). Commission District 3.

Recommend approval to accept the final plat for Serenoa Lakes Phase 2 and all areas dedicated to the public as shown on the Serenoa Lakes Phase 2 final plat, located south of Clermont.

The fiscal impact is $1,551 (revenue - final plat application fee). Commission District 1.

Recommend:

1. Approval of Supplemental Amendment Number one for the Lake Woodward Pump Station Improvements Joint Participation Agreement with the State of Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT); and

2. Adoption of Resolution 2021-168 authorizing the Chairman to make, execute and deliver the amendment.

The Supplemental Amendment allows the study to be performed concurrently or after the rehabilitation of the Lake Woodward Pump Station. There is no fiscal impact. Commission District 4.

Recommend approval of the Roadway Improvement Agreement for Legends Way and Citrus Tower Boulevard with South Lake Hospital, Inc. for the construction of a traffic signal. The fiscal impact is $152,459.50 from the South Transportation Benefit District, as impact fee credits. Commission District 2.

tab 17: maintenance agreement for ridgeview subdivision

Commr. Smith said that this language was dealing with the homeowners association (HOA) paying for the street lights in the Ridgeview subdivision. He stated that he would like to add the language that if the HOA defaulted on the payment for the lights, it would go to an automatic municipal service benefit unit (MSBU), and to let the residents who bought houses there understand this upfront.

Commr. Parks expressed support for this.

Ms. Marsh said that they could add this language so that it could be approved at the current meeting with this change; however, it would not be automatic and would have to come back to the Board for a public hearing and approval.

Commr. Campione noted that the Board would still have to authorize it, but it was their intent that this is what they would do if the HOA defaulted.

Ms. Marsh added that the County would have to include a notification provision so that the HOA would have to provide this information at the time they closed any properties.

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Blake, and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved a Maintenance Agreement between Hanover Ridgeview LLC and Lake County for the Ridgeview Subdivision, located near Clermont, with the modification to add language that if the HOA defaulted on the payment for street lights, it would come back to the Board for a public hearing to go to an MSBU, and to include a notification provision for future homeowners.

public hearing: Fiscal Year 2021 Year-End budget adjustments

Ms. Allison Teslia, Director for the Office of Management and Budget, said that the purpose of this presentation was to reconcile the FY 2021 final budgeted revenues and expenditures, and she indicated that at the end of each fiscal year, all of the budgeted revenues and expenditures were reconciled based on actual transactions throughout the year; furthermore, budget adjustments were necessary to account for any unanticipated revenues and expenditures. She displayed the FY 2021 excess fees which were returned to the County by the Constitutional Offices, noting that this was essentially the amount that they saved over their budgeted expenses. She stated that for the General Fund, there was a total reduction of $35.6 million which was the reallocation of ARPA funds from the General Fund to the Coronavirus State Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (CSLFRF) and other various adjustments as necessary. She mentioned that another significant adjustment was due to a new requirement from the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GSAB) Statement No. 84, where the County had to report certain fiduciary funds in the basic financial statements, which included custodial funds. She elaborated that the County had to recognize the pass-through of the school impact fees, and they would be making this adjustment annually going forward. She indicated that in the Section 8 Fund, they were recognizing grant revenues received for housing assistance payments, along with various adjustments in other funds.

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.

Ms. Teslia requested approval of budget adjustments for the year-end closeout of FY 2021 in accordance with County policy LCC-36, and Administrative Procedure pursuant to Section 129.06 (2)(a), Florida Statutes.

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Shields, and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved budget adjustments for the year-end closeout of FY 2021 in accordance with County policy LCC-36, and Administrative Procedure pursuant to Section 129.06 (2)(a), Florida Statutes.

SECOND public hearing: COMMISSION DISTRICT BOUNDARIES

Ms. Marsh recalled that at the prior public meeting, the BCC discussed the map that they had previously approved to be published. She said that there were some suggestions for changes based on a request from the City of Eustis, but the City withdrew the request; therefore, the Board was back to their basic map. She stated that if there were not any comments or changes that the Board would like staff to make, then staff would move the final adoption hearing to December 21, 2021 because the surveyor needed more time to write the legal descriptions.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

Dr. Christine Harris, a resident of the City of Mount Dora, expressed concerns for confusion that there had been with representation in Congressional District 3 with regards to concerns about 30 years prior. She opined that residents were promised that there would not be any more changes to the boundaries, and that there would be a focus on rural protection. She also opined that residents who lived there were without repairs to their homes. She expressed concerns for water and other utilities which were strained due to the number of people in the state, and she thought that affordable housing needed to be considered for new buildings.

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

On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Smith, and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to move forward with the proposed map for their final adoption on December 21, 2021.

public hearing: ORDINANCE 2021-48 LOCAL VENDOR PREFERENCE

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; AMENDING SECTION 2-222, LAKE COUNTY CODE, ENTITLED LOCAL VENDOR PREFERENCE; PROHIBITING LOCAL VENDOR PREFERENCE FOR STATE FUNDED PROJECTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Ms. Marsh noted that this was a requirement of Section 255.0991, Florida Statutes.

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. Smith, seconded by Commr. Blake, and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved adoption and execution of Ordinance 2021-48 to amend 2-222, Lake County Code, entitled Local Vendor Preference, to ensure local vendor preference does not apply to projects funded by the State of Florida. This amendment is required to comply with Section 255.0991, Florida Statutes, which became effective July 1, 2021.

regular agenda

agreement for supervisor of elections and sheriff facilities

Ms. Marsh recalled that there was previous discussion about getting a new location for the Lake County Supervisor of Elections facility, noting that he currently had a leased facility on U.S. Highway 441 but needed more space. She said that the County had entered into a purchase agreement for property located off Lane Park Road and State Road (SR) 19 on June 10, 2021, and that it had an anticipated closing date of June 5, 2022. She elaborated that the purchase price was $1 million and that it was approximately 13 acres. She stated that the property had to be rezoned by the City of Tavares and that it was going to the City’s planning board on November 18, 2021, noting that the first and second readings would be on December 1, 2021 and December 15, 2021, respectively. She mentioned that if the Board chose not to move forward with this purchase and make that decision after the rezoning, the County would have to pay to have it rezoned back. She commented that there was a slight title issue and that there was a blanket easement from SECO across the property, noting that the County was working with them to narrow it down to where their lines currently were or would be in the future; furthermore, this cost was estimated at $2,000 to address the legal descriptions. She added that there was also a survey gap between Lane Park Road and the property line, and the County was going to have to have the seller quit claim them any interest to it. She said that the phase one environmental assessment found that the past uses on the property included citrus and agricultural uses, which triggered the County to do a phase two assessment. She explained that the phase two assessment showed copper and arsenic above allowable levels on a small portion of the property, and their environmentalist was recommending that the County do a phase three study to see if the copper and arsenic had impacted the groundwater. She said that staff wanted to see if the Board wanted to move forward with this, noting that the cost would be around $11,000. She also indicated that the County had been notified by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) that this property was prime habitat for sand skinks, and the County would have to do this study if they moved forward; however, it could not be done until the March to April 2022 timeframe. She stated that if sand skinks were noted on the property, the County would have to buy two mitigation credits per acre of the property, indicating that the credits cost about $25,000 to $30,000 each for a potential impact of approximately $600,000 based on the acreage. She said that the property was prime habitat for gopher tortoises as well, though this count could not be done until they were closer to construction; additionally, she believed that it cost $3,000 to $5,000 per gopher tortoise on the property to mitigate them. She mentioned that the County had currently spent about $34,000 in due diligence costs, and they had additional due diligence to do if the Board chose to move forward. She stated that the purchase agreement was set so that staff had to bring it back to the Board to give them the final approval if they wanted to move forward to closing in terms of if they wanted to accept these issues, knowing that they may have some additional costs to incur. She commented that the seller agreed to reduce the purchase price by $500 per day, up to a maximum of $90,000, for each day that they closed early; additionally, to get the maximum $90,000, the County would have to close this property by December 7, 2021. She noted that this could not be done until the rezoning was completed, but they could receive the majority of the purchase price reduction if they closed it after the City approved the rezoning. She said that staff wanted to make the Board aware that there were environmental issues, additional costs they would incur in developing this property, and they were seeking the Board’s approval to waive these conditions and move forward to closing, or the Board could authorize staff to terminate the purchase agreement. She added that the Board could also wait to see the phase three addendum to determine whether the copper and arsenic were affecting the groundwater. She relayed that the environmental consultant believed that it was surficial and was not going to affect the groundwater, but the County would need to do the study to know for sure.

Commr. Parks opined that it was not uncommon to find arsenic and copper on an old citrus grove and being that the water and sewer would be supplied by utilities, it would not matter significantly if it was contained to the property; however, since the County was a public entity and since this was a concern, they would need to get an assessment on if it had affected the surface water or if it was in the groundwater below the property. He mentioned that gopher tortoises could cost up to $8,000 each, and surveys could not be done until about 90 days before construction; furthermore, there could possibly be 20 gopher tortoises on a site of this size. He added that sand skinks could cost up to $600,000.

Ms. Marsh said that if the County moved forward with the phase three environmental study, it would take their consultant about three weeks to complete the study and provide results.

Commr. Parks proposed to see what the phase three assessment indicated, noting that the Board would have to make a decision within that three week period of time. He mentioned considering other government owned property where it could possibly work.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that this property would also be for the LCSO.

Ms. Marsh confirmed this and said that the design would include a building for the Sheriff at some point.

Commr. Smith stated that he was not willing to move forward without having at least the phase three environmental study done, noting that they could possibly be liable for groundwater damage leaking into someone else’s well.

Ms. Marsh indicated that they would authorize the consultant to perform the phase three study, and would bring that information back to the Board for a final decision.

Commr. Parks said that the Board needed to consider the cost, noting that it could be a significant amount of money.

Commr. Campione mentioned the potential for gopher tortoises and sand skinks, along with the time. She noted that there was not any design or architecture at the current time.

Ms. Barker stated that this was the time to make a decision because the County was in the selection committee stage for the design.

Commr. Parks said that a few sightings of sand skinks could affect the entire site.

Commr. Shields inquired if the Board would be better off finding a new site.

Commr. Parks relayed that they could consider which other properties were available, and he mentioned the possibility of a Lake County School Board property.

Commr. Smith noted that it had to be in the City of Tavares.

Ms. Barker stated that she could contact the Lake County School Board and inquire about land available in the area.

comprehensive plan and rezoning changes

Mr. Tim McClendon, Director for the Office of Planning and Zoning, said that the purpose of this presentation was to provide an overview of the criteria used to make recommendations for Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) amendments, rezonings, and conditional use permits (CUPs), as well as to seek direction on potential changes to staff reports regarding those cases. He explained that the standards for review were located within Chapter XIV of the Land Development Regulations (LDR), and that each public hearing type had different review standards. He indicated that Chapter XIV also contained the procedural criteria for those public hearing cases, noting that the criteria was established in 1992. He displayed the standards of review for Comp Plan amendments and said that applications had generally failed to provide information regarding whether the proposed amendment would affect the property values in the area; additionally, there had been cell phone tower cases where this information had been provided by a cell phone company, though this may not be applicable or verifiable from a staff point of view. He said that CUPs had slightly different standards of review, noting that one criteria was if it would have adverse impacts upon neighboring properties. He commented that surrounding Counties provided broader criteria for their public hearing cases, noting that it mainly regarded whether a Comp Plan amendment, a rezoning, a CUP or a special exception were consistent with surrounding land uses and whether they were consistent with the Comp Plans and LDR of those Counties. He explained that for staff reports, when staff received an application, they provided it to the development review staff, as well as external entities including the Lake County School Board, the Bugg Spring Naval Base and the Pinecastle Bombing Range. He stated that internal reviews included the Public Works Department, the Offices of Public Safety Support and Parks and Trails, solid waste, transportation concurrency, and the Florida Department of Health (FDOH). He mentioned that supplemental documents included as part of the application included transportation studies and noise studies, which were readily available for the Board and the public. He said that these items had been removed from the staff reports due to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance issues, and for budgetary constraints for printing staff report books. He remarked that staff reviewed these applications for consistency and compliance with the Comp Plan and LDR to ensure that they met the standards for review, and they presented the findings to the Planning and Zoning Board. He added that the Planning and Zoning Board made recommendations that the BCC heard and considered at those public hearings. He requested direction and Board discussion regarding any modifications with regard to review criteria or staff reports, and he said that any changes would have to be taken to the Planning and Zoning Board and go through the process to modify the code.

Commr. Parks recalled that he had previously asked if there was a process examination that the Board could go through to see if they could change the reports received prior to the zoning hearings. He said that he had inquired about which evidence and facts they wanted submitted when an applicant was claiming something, and he expressed interest in making it more objective.

Commr. Campione said that the review standard for effects on property values had always been an issue because the County could not hire a real estate appraiser to provide testimony on an issue like this, relaying her understanding that they were not allowed to state opinions from a professional standpoint unless they had actually appraised property. She asked if the other Counties had this requirement.

Mr. McClendon replied that staff had found that it was broad, and the only other review criteria the Counties or other jurisdictions had was whether it was consistent with the Comp Plan and the surrounding land uses.

Commr. Campione said that it seemed that Mr. McClendon’s opinion was that residential was compatible with residential, and Mr. McClendon confirmed this in most instances. Commissioner Campione noted that there was subjective criteria, and she relayed that she had appreciated the criteria regarding demands on public facilities. She said that the Board could use safety as a reason, but not capacity; furthermore, they could not deny a case based on schools, but could use it as one of the reasons why it was not a good fit. She mentioned the standard for a case being in harmony with the purpose and the intent of regulations, and asked if there was a statement of purpose and intent of the regulations.

Mr. McClendon responded that it was subjective in nature and that harmony generally turned into compatibility and consistency with surrounding areas.

Commr. Campione relayed her understanding that there could be enough capacity on the road, but the additional traffic could create an issue for an adjacent property.

Commr. Smith said that before giving direction, he would like to meet with staff one on one to review this. He added that the Board could then bring the item back.

Mr. McClendon stated that he could also bring back what staff reports from other Counties would be for one of Lake County’s zoning cases, and vice-versa.

Ms. Marsh mentioned that the Board would start seeing a chart with what the applicant could do under the current zoning and future land use (FLU) on the staff reports, versus what the applicant was requesting.

Commr. Shields remarked that it could be interesting to know why the Planning and Zoning Board approved something that the BCC denied, opining that they should be on the same page for the facts of the case.

Commr. Blake thought that one reason why there were discrepancies between the Planning and Zoning Board’s decisions and the BCC’s was often that the Planning and Zoning Board was politically insulated.

Commr. Campione stated that everyone came to these decision making processes with certain biases, and that she would not agree that it was this simple. She added that the BCC had to look at the whole picture and other considerations, while the Planning and Zoning Board may be strictly focused on certain criteria. She specified that the BCC was considering economic development and quality of life, and she mentioned that the section on CUPs had an item about the effect on adjacent properties, noting that it was subjective; however, if it was not written to be subjective, there could be a situation where they could not make judgment calls. She recalled seeing jurisdictions with variance requirements that made it impossible to give a variance, opining that this did not serve the public purpose; additionally, they did not want it to be so lenient that there was no reasonable expectation of what one could and could not do. She thought that the criteria was something that the Board would want to consider as valid when they were looking at a zoning case, such as if reasonable steps had been taken to minimize adverse effects of the use on the immediate vicinity through design, landscaping and screening. She also mentioned the criteria of if the use was compatible with the existing or planned character of the neighborhood where it would be located, noting that they were looking at the development patterns and if there was a way to make it consistent or mitigate the impacts. She opined that it was impossible to say whether something would impact a property value, but there was a criteria for if it was an undue adverse effect such that one was losing use and enjoyment of their property as a result of what was happening on a neighboring property. She thought that the Board may want to consider these types of items for zoning cases, and she opined that they should always have a criteria for the impact on public facilities because it was an opportunity to consider if items needed to be done offsite or if things could be done by the developer to mitigate impacts.

Commr. Parks said that the Board could meet individually with Ms. Marsh, Ms. Barker and Mr. McClendon.

Ms. Barker stated that staff would plan on bringing this item back possibly in January 2022.

reports

county attorney

FIRE UNION NEGOTIATIONS

Ms. Marsh said that they were conducting fire union negotiations and that they had met on the previous day; furthermore, staff needed to have a closed session with the Board to discuss the recent proposals. She commented that they would schedule this closed session for December 7, 2021.

county manager

HAPPY THANKSGIVING AND OFFICE CLOSURES

Ms. Barker wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving, noting that County Offices would be closed on November 25 and 26, 2021.

commissioners reports

commissioner shields – district 1

EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL MEETING

Commr. Shields mentioned that he had attended an East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) meeting and that it was great.

VETERAN’S DAY CELEBRATION IN GROVELAND

Commr. Shields stated that he had attended a Veteran’s Day celebration in the City of Groveland and that each of the services spoke on when they were formed and what their purpose was.

TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL WORKSHOP

Commr. Shields commented that he had a Tourist Development Council (TDC) workshop on the previous day regarding marketing with Madden Media for what the message was to leisure travelers. He noted that Madden Media had asked each of the TDC members what they thought of when thinking of Lake County, and that responses included wide open spaces, lakes, being able to drive without many traffic lights, etc.; however, he mentioned recent discussions regarding pressure on the County and the Cities for growth.

SUPERMAJORITY VOTE FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS

Commr. Shields recalled a proposal to require a supermajority vote to amend the Comp Plan for protected areas such as the Green Swamp and the Wekiva River Basin, noting that the Board could possibly place this on the ballot.

Commr. Campione expressed concerns for voters not getting to hear why the Board members who were against it thought that it was not a good idea. She opined that referendums should be used sparingly; however, she was not opposed to making it challenging to make changes in the protected areas. She expressed interest in an education campaign to let residents know how much land in Lake County was publically owned and protected by additional regulations, along with what those regulations required, and to do a better job getting information to residents about restrictions already in the code for those areas being developed or the Comp Plan being changed. She questioned how often the Board had amended the Comp Plan in protected areas.

Commr. Parks opined that he was previously supportive of this, but that he said that it needed to be refined to some specific areas with more detail. He questioned how much of a threat would be in those areas if they were defined.

Commr. Campione proposed that the Board could possibly have a workshop to review the map of the Green Swamp and the Wekiva River Basin, and look at what had been changed over the past five years. She commented that when trying to change a land use in the Green Swamp, it went to the State for review, and she was unsure if anything had ever been changed in the Wekiva River Basin.

Commr. Shields said that there had been a request to modify the Comp Plan by one of the large industries to remove more material.

Commr. Blake stated that he could not recall any major issue since he had been on the Board. He recalled that when an issue of a sand mine in the Green Swamp came before the Board, it was really a clarification because at the time that those rules were put into place, they did not think that it needed to be clarified. He opined that if there was a negative impact, it was occurring in the majority of the Green Swamp in Polk County, noting that Polk County did not have those rules which were placed on the mine in Lake County.

Commr. Parks opined that there were also some other concerns, and he relayed his understanding that Commissioner Shields was concerned about development in general. He thought that all of the Board members were concerned about this, and he noted that Commissioner Shields could craft a proposal for a referendum and present it to the Board.

Commr. Campione opined that if the concern was about growth management, then meeting with the Cities, considering how they could map greenways, and considering how they could promote rural conservation and a conservation based design template for subdivisions were the types of things that could be impactful and have a long term positive effect on the county. She also opined that the sand mine had been blown out of proportion, noting that there were some opportunities to do some things which could be better for the environment if the Board had been able to address it.

Commr. Parks indicated that he would be supportive of a proposal from Commissioner Shields, but noted that some of the wording could be worked on. He asked if Ms. Marsh would review the process for it to be placed on the ballot, and Ms. Marsh confirmed this.

Commr. Campione stated that it would have to have a majority vote from the Board to be placed on the ballot.

commissioner smith – vice chairman and district 3

VETERAN’S DAY PARADE IN EUSTIS

Commr. Smith said that he had a great time in the City of Eustis visiting the Veteran’s Day parade, noting that they did a great job and that he saw several of the Commissioners at the parade.

PARKS, RECREATION AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD MEETING

Commr. Smith relayed that he recently had a Parks, Recreation and Trails Advisory Board meeting.

FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES MEETING

Commr. Smith said that he would be attending a Florida Association of Counties (FAC) meeting on the current evening in the City of Fort Walton Beach.

commissioner campione –district 4

TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED COORDINATING BOARD MEETING

Commr. Campione relayed that she had recently participated in a Transportation Disadvantaged Coordinating Board meeting.

WEKIVA RIVER BASIN COMMISSION MEETING

Commr. Campione said that she also had a Wekiva River Basin Commission meeting, mentioning that on the Wekiva Parkway over to Seminole County, there were large lime rock boulders underneath the overpasses; however, many people did not like this. She elaborated that it appeared that they were going to remove all of the rocks and use native plants. She also said that there was a presentation for the Wekiva Parkway and that it looked like spring 2022 was when segment six would be completed, and the County could then possibly have some discussions about getting some surplus land on the river.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

Commr. Campione mentioned that she had a recent Affordable Housing Advisory Committee meeting and that it was a good discussion. She relayed that they were doing a significant amount of demolition and rebuilding due to State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) funding.

ORLANDO ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP MEETING

Commr. Campione commented that she had attended an Orlando Economic Partnership (OEP) meeting and that they were moving their offices to the SunTrust building; additionally, they would have a projected display of metro Orlando. She added that they were also working on a campaign to brand the region as a technology hub; however, Lake County did not have the same presence, and she would possibly bring this up in the future, noting that Lake County did its own marketing and promotion but also wanted to be included in this brand.

COMMISSIONER BLAKE – DISTRICT 5

comments about rocks under wekiva parkway overpass

Commr. Blake wondered how the decision regarding large lime rocks under a Wekiva Parkway overpass which Commissioner Campione referenced came about, noting how labor intensive it was.

Commr. Campione clarified that they thought that it was natural and low maintenance, and that they would not have to worry about there being enough light for plants.

MEDICAL EXAMINER’S BOARD MEETING

Commr. Blake said that in the previous week, he visited the City of Brooksville for a Medical Examiner’s Board meeting, recalling that capacity issues were agreed upon; therefore, they were going to suspend the RFP on a new building likely for at least two years. He added that they thought that they had bought enough time and capacity to allow them to renovate the property in the City of Leesburg.

commissioner parks – Chairman and district 2

FLORIDA’S TURNPIKE ENTERPRISE MEETING

Commr. Parks stated that on the previous day, he was at a great meeting with Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE) and County staff. He added that they met with HOA leadership from neighborhoods around the turnpike in the South Lake area where construction was being done; furthermore, the County and FTE would meet regularly with the HOAs.

COASTAL CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION DINNER

Commr. Parks commented that in the previous week, he attended the Coastal Conservation Association dinner in the City of Clermont, noting that almost 400 people attended. He said that they were thankful for the County’s efforts where they used the landfill space for oyster shells.

POTENTIAL OF CRYPTOCURRENCY AS PAYMENT OPTION

Commr. Parks remarked that he would like for staff to evaluate the potential use of cryptocurrency, specifically Bitcoin, on a limited basis as a payment option. He stated that there were Cities in the state that were doing this or considering it, and he believed that this was a good question for the County to vet to consider every option and be small business friendly. He also believed that there were platforms that would essentially guarantee that the County would not lose money if someone was paying with Bitcoin.

Commr. Shields said that possibly the larger item that the County could learn from this was understanding blockchain technology, noting that many governments had started using it.

Commr. Blake expressed support for the idea, adding that the City of Miami had a native cryptocurrency. He elaborated that 30 percent of the minted Miamicoin went to the City of Miami for projects, and he said when having conversations about finding permanent funding sources for items such as trails in Lake County, he had thought about the possibility of all of the chambers of commerce in Lake County being onboard and encouraging their members to accept something like this and help mint it. He also said that 30 percent of the cryptocurrency could possibly fund trails.

Commr. Parks mentioned that a challenge could be finding someone who could relay the pros and cons.

Ms. Barker said that staff could research this and reach out to the City of Miami.

HAPPY THANKSGIVING

Commr. Parks wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.

DISCUSSION REGARDING WOMEN’S HALL OF FAME POLICY CHANGES

Commr. Parks proposed to move this item to the following BCC meeting.

recess and reassembly

The Chairman called a recess at 1:11 p.m. for five minutes.

Closed session

Ms. Marsh relayed that she had previously acknowledged the need for a closed session, which was authorized under Section 286.011, Florida Statutes, to discuss pending litigation against the County. She elaborated that once the closed session started, it would be confined to settlement negotiations or strategy sessions related to litigation and its expenditures. She commented that once they started, the court reporter would record the entire session from when they began until they ended, and would include all discussions in those proceedings, including the names of all persons present at any time and whoever spoke. She added that none of the session could be off the record, and that the court reporter’s notes would be transcribed and be made public once the litigation was concluded. She noted that at the beginning of this session, the entity was required to give notice of who was going to be in attendance, and that the County was required to produce an advertisement, of which she had a copy in her possession. She noted that the advertisement was published on November 5, 2021 in the Daily Commercial newspaper. She specified that the she would be present along with the following: the BCC; the Interim County Manager, Ms. Jennifer Barker; and herself. She anticipated that as much as an hour would be spent in the closed session, and said that they were ready to begin. She then asked for the recording to be turned off and for the clerk to leave.

recess and reassembly

At 2:00 p.m., the Chairman announced that the Closed Session had ended and that the Board Meeting was reconvened.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m.

_________________________________

SEAN PARKS, chairman

ATTEST:

________________________________

GARY J COONEY, CLERK