A regular MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

December 20, 2022

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 9:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chambers, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Kirby Smith, Chairman; Douglas B. Shields, Vice Chairman; Sean Parks; Leslie Campione; and Josh Blake. Others present were: Jennifer Barker, County Manager; Melanie Marsh, County Attorney; Niki Booth, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; Kristy Mullane, Chief Financial Officer; and Stephanie Cash, Deputy Clerk.

INVOCATION and pledge

Commr. Smith welcomed everyone to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting, and noted that they were meeting in person and virtually via Zoom. He said that the Invocation would be given by Pastor Brooks Braswell, with First Baptist Church of Umatilla, and that the Pledge of Allegiance would be led by Mr. Anarquis Frias who was an Associate Planner for the Office of Planning and Zoning. He relayed that Mr. Frias served in the United States (U.S.) Marine Corps from 2000 to 2004 as a Radio Operator for the 3^rd Battalion 11^th Marines, and that he was stationed in Twentynine Palms, California, at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center. He elaborated that Mr. Frias was then deployed on a tour in Iraq to support Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, and that for his service, Mr. Frias was awarded a Global War on Terrorism service medal, Iraq Campaign medal, National Defense service medal, Good Conduct medal, and Combat Action Ribbon. He then thanked Mr. Frias for his service.

Pastor Braswell gave the Invocation and Mr. Frias 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 the Commission after the meeting was concluded.

special recognition

Commr. Smith commented that Mr. David Jordan, Lake County Tax Collector, was in attendance as well as Mr. Butch Hendrick, with the Lake County Water Authority (LCWA), and Mr. John Christian, with the Leesburg City Commission, and he thanked them for attending.

Agenda update

Ms. Jennifer Barker, County Manager, mentioned that since the agenda was first published, the following changes had been made: a signed interlocal agreement was added and attached to Tab 9; an updated list of priority projects was attached to Tab 20; supporting documents for the LCWA public hearing were attached to Tab 28; and Tab 37 was added as an addendum to the consent agenda.

PRESENTATION BY LAKE COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR

Mr. Jordan thanked the Board for allowing him the opportunity to give the year-end financial details in a public venue, and related that the information had met the 31 day post deadline for the 2022 Fiscal Year (FY) as noted in Florida Statute 218.36. He explained that according to the Florida Statute, each officer reported their expenditures and revenues to the BCC in detail, and that tax collectors sent excess funds back to the BCC and prorated funds back to other paying entities, splitting the difference of unspent funds. He displayed a slide that showed the funds that went into their custodial account through all collections, and elaborated that the $529.4 million was less the $12.4 million for Tax Collector fees and commissions, which included $9.8 million in total expenses and $2.6 million in net income and unexpended budget balance. He displayed a chart detailing the total commissions, fees, and distributions, and noted that the $12.4 million went towards the activities of the Tax Collector’s Office that were statutorily required. He mentioned that they did not support any programs and only collected taxes and fees, and that they also provided services to the public, such as motor vehicle activities. He relayed that there had been over 800,000 transactions and about 663,000 interactions with the public, noting that even though there were only about 403,000 residents in Lake County, there were people who came from other counties for their services, which helped increased their totals. He commented that under the Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles section, there had been about 134,000 RenewExpress and Express Lane service transactions, which were done electronically eliminating the cost of opening mail and cashiering. He displayed a slide showing the total revenues and total expenditures, and said that there was $2.6 million left, which was less than the projected amount because of various factors, including the remodeling of 5,000 square feet of the first floor of their building for County offices, which reduced their budget by $200,000, and the zero millage rate voted in by the North Lake County Hospital District (NLCHD), which reduced their budget by about $250,000. He displayed a slide showing details of capital expenses, operating expenses, and personnel expenses, and noted that it cost $9.8 million to operate the Tax Collector’s Office. He remarked that in a county by county comparison, other counties with similar populations spent more of their operating budget than Lake County, and that the closest comparison was with Osceola County, which spent 24 percent more, opining that this was attributable to his competent and efficient staff. He reiterated that the unexpended budget balance of $2.6 million would be returned to those who paid into it, and he displayed a slide showing the details of the excess fee shares. He commented that they had collected about $1.2 million more Tourist Development Tax (TDT) funds in 2022 than in 2021 without increasing taxes, noting that it created an equitable business environment. He displayed a slide showing a tax roll comparison between 2021 and 2022 ad valorem and non-ad valorem taxes, and noted that there was a 16.3 percent increase in total ad valorem funds.

Commr. Parks thanked Mr. Jordan for his focus on efficiency and for coming to present his report publicly, opining that it was good governance.

employee award

Ms. Jeannine Nelson, Human Resources and Risk Management Manager, announced that they would be recognizing an employee for 25 years of service with Lake County as well as a retirement as follows:

RETIREMENT – 25 YEARS

Daniel Miller, Battalion Fire Chief

Office of Fire Rescue

Chief Jim Dickerson, with the Office of Fire Rescue, relayed that Chief Miller started with the Office of Fire Rescue in 1996 as a volunteer firefighter, and that a year later, he became a professional full time firefighter. He elaborated that Chief Miller had many career achievements throughout his 26 years, including the following: becoming a paramedic in 2001; being promoted to the rank of lieutenant in 2002; being part of the special operations team for over 10 years; being promoted to Shift Battalion Chief in 2009; being selected for the Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Battalion Chief position in 2016 and working with Lake EMS to enhance the paramedic provisional process; creating the country’s second venom response team in 2017, which provided anti-venom to snakebite victims; and playing a vital role in transitioning the department into the patient transport business, which started in 2018. He congratulated Chief Miller on a job well done.

Minutes approval

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the minutes for the BCC meeting of October 11, 2022 (Regular Meeting) as presented.

citizen question and comment period

Mr. Vance Jochim, a concerned citizen, expressed concern about instability in the economy, and opined that the County should defer spending as much as possible. He opined that the County could have updates on how the County has reduced and controlled costs, such as returning millage rates to the rollback rate, as an item on the agenda. He also indicated concern about the rising interest rate and other economic factors, opining that the County should be more frugal on wages and benefits.

Ms. Cindy Newton, a resident of Lake County, wished the Board a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, and expressed appreciation to the Board for their service. She opined that it had been an eventful year, and that the Board had served above their expectations.

Pastor John Christian, a resident of Lake County, expressed appreciation to the County for help in funding their affordable housing project, noting that they had used it to remodel and build several houses. He commented that they had used a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) to improve conditions in areas of the City of Leesburg, and he wished the BCC a Merry Christmas.

Commr. Campione inquired if there were owners for the houses they had built.

Pastor Christian replied that the first house built was owned by a family from the City of Miami, which included a school teacher and a security officer. He mentioned that the second house would be owned by a family that included a woman, who was working on her doctorate dissertation on education and equity, and her husband who was a security guard. He opined that affordable housing had a negative connotation; however, their church was providing customized cabinets and granite countertops, noting that they could afford to do this because of help from the County.

Commr. Campione remarked that she would like to have him come back as they continued with their project and tell the Board more about the people who were finding homes as a result of the work they were doing, opining that it could help the County create a plan to help with affordable housing and workforce housing.

Pastor Christian stated that they were inviting people to Lake County who were educated and working, opining that they would be able to pay the house off in 30 years. He relayed that they were planning to build 26 more houses near their church soon, and he thanked the Board for their support.

CLERK OF the Circuit COURT and comptroller’s CONSENT AGENDA

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

List of Warrants

Notice is hereby provided 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.

COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA

Commr. Smith stated that he wanted to pull Tabs 24 and 37 to the regular agenda for a separate vote.

Commr. Parks asked to pull Tab 6 to the regular agenda for a separate vote.

Commr. Campione said that she would like to comment on Tab 4, and that it could be pulled for a separate vote.

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Consent Agenda, Tabs 3 through 27, pulling Tabs 4, 6, 24, and 37 to the regular agenda, as follows:

PROCLAMATIONS

Recommend approval of Proclamation 2022-145 declaring January 16, 2023, as Martin Luther King Jr. Day in Lake County, per Commissioner Smith.

COUNTY ATTORNEY

Recommend approval to advertise an Ordinance creating Section 2-81, Lake County Code, to be entitled Criminal History Checks. There is no Fiscal Impact.

Recommend approval for the Christian Worship Center of Central Florida, Inc. (CWC), to sell Alternate Key 1437423 previously donated through an Affordable Housing Partnership Agreement with Lake County and allow CWC to use the funds towards another affordable housing project on Alternate Key 1232325, under the same terms and conditions. There is no fiscal impact. Commission District 1 and 5.

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

Management and Budget

Recommend approval of a Funding Agreement between Lake County and the Office of the State Attorney, Fifth Judicial Circuit, to fund certain specified positions permanently assigned to the Lake County branch.

The fiscal impact is $460,230 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget.

ECONOMIC GROWTH

Recommend approval of an Amendment to an Interlocal Agreement between the City of Clermont and Lake County for consulting services for the Wellness Way Urban Services Area. There is no fiscal impact.

Recommend approval of the First Amendment to the License Agreement with the Educational Foundation of Lake County, Inc., for their annual Lady of the Lakes Renaissance Faire. There is no fiscal impact. Commission District 3.

PUBLIC SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Facilities Management

Recommend approval:

1. Of Contracts 22-906A-D for electrical and mechanical engineering to Hanson Professional Services, Inc. (Maitland, FL), Matern Professional Engineering, Inc. (Maitland, FL), SGM Engineering, Inc. (Orlando, FL), and TLC Engineering Solutions, Inc. (Melbourne, FL); and

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

The estimated fiscal impact is $200,000 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year Budget.

Recommend approval:

1. Of Contracts 23-409 for Interior and Exterior Signs with Color Trim, Inc. dba CTI Signs (Tavares, FL), i2Visual, Inc. (Fort Myers, FL), Keeping Color, LLC (Winter Garden, FL); and

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

The estimated fiscal impact is $73,500 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year Budget.

Recommend approval:

1. Of Contract Q2023-00012 for the Astor Library Temporary Facilities to Harvest Construction LLC (Clermont, FL); and

2. Of use of Contract 19-0906C with RMS Orlando, Inc. (Orlando, FL) for roof replacement and gutter installation; and

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

The estimated fiscal impact (construction, roofing, and 15 percent contingency) is $172,650 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget. Commission District 4.

Housing and Community Services

Recommend approval of a Sub-Recipient Agreement with the City of Fruitland Park for Community Development Block Grant Fiscal Year 2022-23 funds to replace the water line on Spring Lake Road.

The fiscal impact shall not exceed $152,684 (expenditure - 100 percent CDBG funded) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget.

Recommend approval of a Sub-Recipient Agreement with the City of Leesburg and the Community Development Corporation of Leesburg for Community Development Block Grant Fiscal Year 2021-2022 for the design and construction of a sixty-nine (69) space parking lot along Pine Street.

The fiscal impact is $245,000 (100 percent CDBG funded) and is within the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget.

Recommend approval of a Sub-Recipient Agreement with LifeStream Behavioral Center for Community Development Block Grant Fiscal Year 2022-2023 to expand homeless services.

The fiscal impact shall not exceed $122,000 (expenditure - 100 percent CDBG funded) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget.

Recommend approval of the affordable housing incentive strategies recommendations submitted by the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee as required under Section 420.9076, Florida Statutes. There is no fiscal impact.

Recommend approval to advertise an Ordinance creating Section 11-38, Lake County Code, to be entitled Homeless Mitigation Advisory Council. There is no fiscal impact.

Parks and Trails

Recommend approval of Escrow Agreement between St. Johns River Water Management District, Lake County, and the State of Florida Department of Financial Services, regarding the Blackwater Creek Mitigation Bank. The fiscal impact is estimated at $1,285,056.17 (restricted cash). Commission District 4.

Public Works

Recommend approval of Resolution 2022-155 supporting the Lake County list of projects to be included on the Lake-Sumter Metropolitan Planning Organization's (MPO) List of Priority Projects (LOPP). There is no fiscal impact.

Recommend adoption of Resolution 2022-156 to establish a speed limit on West Altoona Road from Lakeview Terrace Drive to County Road 42 in the Altoona area.

The fiscal impact is estimated at $150 (expenditure - sign materials) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget. Commission District 4.

Recommend approval:

1. To allow county-wide usage of Contracts 21-0519 for road, drainage, and sidewalk construction services by adjusting maximum job values and the allowable annual fiscal impact; and

2. To utilize Contracts 21-0519 for the repair of the existing Fairgrounds parking lot; and

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

The estimated annual fiscal impact will increase from $350,000 (expenditure) to $1,000,000 (expenditure) plus a one-time expenditure not to exceed $300,000. The fiscal impacts are within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget.

Recommend approval:

1. To utilize Contract 22-935A for the demolition of county-owned properties for the CR 455 Extension to Champion Services of Florida, LLC (Apopka, FL); and

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

The fiscal impact is $79,523 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget. Commission District 1.

Recommend approval and execution of the release of a portion of a drainage easement needed for platted development by Hills of Minneola Community Development District and Jen Florida 30, LLC. There is no fiscal impact. Commissioner District 2.

Recommend approval to accept public Right of Way and Easement Deeds that have been secured in conjunction with development, roadway, and stormwater projects.

The fiscal impact is $766.30 (expenditure – recording fees) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget.

Transit Services

Recommend approval:

1. To apply to the Florida Department of Transportation under the Section 5310 Operating Grant Program for Fiscal Year 2024; and

2. To adopt the Supporting Resolution 2022-158 authorizing signing and submission of Grant Application and Supporting Documents and Assurances to the Florida Department of Transportation; and

3. To accept and implement the grant if awarded; and

4. To procure vehicles under the State’s bid list through the Transit Research Inspection Procurement Services (TRIPS) program.

The fiscal impact is $1,053,000 (revenue/expenditure - $707,700 grant funded and $345,300 in County funding) and will be included in the Fiscal Year 2024 Budget.

Tab 4: Lake county agricultural center office space

Commr. Campione recalled that Representative Keith Truenow had approached the County about creating an office in the Lake County Agricultural Center, and she opined that this had been a good location for making him accessible to the community.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the First Amendment to Lease Agreement with State Representative Keith Truenow for Office Space within the Lake County Agricultural Center.

Tab 6: johns lake landing PUD impact fee deferral agreement

Commr. Parks related that this developer had asked for a $218,000 deferred impact fee payment, noting that it was rare for the County to give impact fee deferrals of this size. He inquired why the request had been made.

Ms. Angie Langley, a representative of Parkway Development, explained that the property was located in south Lake County and was within the joint planning agreement (JPA), and that this property would be annexed into the City of Clermont. She relayed her understanding that the reason for this request was to avoid paying double impact fees to the County and to the City.

Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, elaborated that according to Ms. Tara Tedrow, an attorney representing this developer, they had several contracts in place to sell various parcels for mixed use development, which included commercial, multifamily, and residential homes. She related that they had an agreement with the City of Clermont to annex the property, and that the City was requiring them to annex at the current time, which would not be conducive to the timing of their third party contracts. She mentioned that they had already submitted paperwork for acquiring building permits to meet the requirements of those third party contracts, and that the City of Clermont would only give an extension to annexation if they agreed to pay the park and fire impact fees for the City, noting that when obtaining a building permit from the County, those fees would be paid to the County. She stated that the differential was about $218,000 in addition to about $700,000 for the same fees they would pay to the City of Clermont in order to obtain an extension for the annexation while working through the building permit process to meet the contractual obligations of their third party contracts. She explained that this agreement would allow them to give the County the $218,000 to hold in escrow, and that if they did not complete their annexation within one year, the County would keep those impact fees regardless of when they annexed thereafter. She commented that if they annexed within the year, then the County would refund the $218,000 to them, noting that the County code did allow the Board to enter into impact fee deferral agreements, which were only done sparingly under rare circumstances.

Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that the developer would not be paying less, and that they were waiting for the annexation process to be completed.

Ms. Marsh indicated that this was correct, and remarked that they would proceed to annex once they had completed construction; furthermore, they would be paying about $700,000 in impact fees to the City of Clermont and possibly an additional $218,000 to the County for the limited amount of time they would be in unincorporated Lake County. She relayed her understanding that it would be a cash escrow held by the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller, and that if they annexed within the year, it would be refunded.

Commr. Parks commented that it was very rare to do this, and that he wanted the reasons to be clear.

Commr. Campione wondered if the County would receive a higher payment if the development was not annexed and the impact fee rates had changed.

Ms. Marsh replied that the rate was locked in at the time they paid the fees for the building permit.

Commr. Campione pointed out that the County did not ordinarily accept prepayments.

Ms. Marsh indicated that this was correct; however, they had already applied for the building permits.

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved an Impact Fee Deferral Agreement for Johns Lake Landing Planned Unit Development (PUD).

Tab 24: county right of way at Lake May Preserve

Mr. Fred Schneider, Assistant County Manager, explained that the County Attorney had been working on dedicating conservation land at the Lake May Preserve with an entity to manage it, and that the County wanted to define where the road right of way was before it was dedicated. He commented that this was a standard road right of way for that classification of roadway, which was 50 feet from the centerline, and that once the road right of way was defined, anything outside that could be dedicated as conservation.

The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.

Ms. Newton said that her question had been answered.

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

Commr. Campione mentioned that a property owner living on the opposite side of the street had reached out to her about this item to ensure that the right of way was only coming off the centerline going in the direction of the County’s property line.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Resolution 2022-157 declaring a linear portion of county-owned property as right of way for CR 44A (#6286) and North CR 44A (#6678), increasing the existing right of way width to 50 feet from the centerline of the roadways. The property affected is the Lake May Preserve lying within Section 5, Township 19S, Range 27E and Section 32, Township 18S, Range 27E.

Commr. Blake was not present for the vote.

tab 37: Waste Connections and Waste Pro Contract Amendments

The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.

Mr. Jochim mentioned that several Cities had merged recycling and general waste hauling trips, and that the County could also do that, opining that it would reduce hauling costs. He recalled that there had been issues with the new hauler, and opined that combining the two services could help. He remarked that he had not seen a report about where the recycling was going, and he suggested adding a workshop item to review that.

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

Ms. Barker commented that the County was scheduling a workshop for the following spring, and that their consultant was looking for efficiencies and areas of improvement for the overall system.

Commr. Campione agreed that this was an issue, and that other places were looking for savings. She remarked that the County wanted something that would not interfere with a legitimate recycling program; however, if the recycling was all going to the same place, it would make sense to use one truck.

Ms. Barker remarked that this would be one of the topics of discussion in the workshop.

Commr. Parks pointed out that this issue was not unique to Lake County, and that this was a statewide issue. He relayed his understanding that Polk County had issued a state of emergency because of their solid waste issues.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that the State of Georgia was having these issues as well.

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the following items: Waste Connections Second Amended and Restated Contract for Area 2; ARPA funding in the amount of $2,000,000 to Waste Connections; Waste Pro Second Amended and Restated Contract for Area 3; and ARPA funding in the amount of $2,000,000 to WastePro.

Commr. Blake was not present for the vote.

public hearing: lcwa final budget and millage resolutions

Ms. Allison Teslia, Director for the Office of Management and Budget, presented the LCWA final millage rate and amended final budget resolutions for FY 2023 for the Board’s approval in a public hearing. She stated that on December 14, 2022, the LCWA approved a final millage of 0.3083 mills and an amended final budget of $22,436,045, noting that there was no change from their previously approved budget.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

Mr. Jochim opined that the LCWA should relegate non-water quality functions to the County, such as Hickory Point Park, and that it should go to the Office of Parks and Trails where there was existing management and staff, eliminating the duplication of services. He expressed concern about the LCWA managing and purchasing land, opining that there was already too much public land.

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

Ms. Teslia stated that the first requested action was approval of the LCWA final millage rate Resolution 2022-153 of 0.3083 mills, and that the second requested action was adoption of the LCWA amended final budget Resolution 2022-154 for FY 2023 totaling $22,436,045.

On a motion by Commr. Shields, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Lake County Water Authority Fiscal Year 2023 final millage Resolution 2022-153 and amended budget Resolution 2022-154.

public hearing: Ordinance 2022-58 Distributed Wastewater

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; CREATING ARTICLE V, CHAPTER 21, LAKE COUNTY CODE, TO BE ENTITLED DISTRIBUTED WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES; ESTABLISHING A MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING/BENEFIT UNIT PROCESS FOR INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF DISTRIBUTED WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

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

Commr. Campione relayed her understanding that this item would allow payment of the sewer treatment fees for a developer as part of a zoning process or pilot project.

Commr. Parks opined that it was a good alternative to a traditional utility system, and that it was an effective tool to reduce pollution.

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Ordinance 2022-58 creating Article V, Chapter 21, Lake County Code, to be entitled Distributed Wastewater Treatment System Assessment Procedures.

public hearing: Ordinance 2022-59 Temporary Signs

Ms. Marsh, placed the proposed ordinance on the floor for reading by title only as follows:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA; REPEALING SECTIONS 11.02.01.C, 11.02.02.E, 11.02.03.C.2, 11.02.04.F, 11.02.05.B, AND 11.01.07, LAKE COUNTY CODE, APPENDIX E, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, ENTITLED TEMPORARY SIGNS; AMENDING SECTION 11.01.04, LAKE COUNTY CODE, APPENDIX E, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, ENTITLED SIGNS SHALL BE AN ACCESSORY USE; AMENDING SECTION 11.01.06, LAKE COUNTY CODE, APPENDIX E, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, ENTITLED EXEMPT SIGNS; TO CLARIFY THE ACREAGE REQUIREMENT; AMENDING CHAPTER II, LAKE COUNTY CODE, APPENDIX E, ENTITLED DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Ms. Marsh noted that this would remove conflicting provisions of the code regarding temporary signs.

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. Parks, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Ordinance 2022-59 repealing Section 11.01.07, Lake County Code, Appendix E, Land Development Regulations, entitled Temporary Signs, and associated references and amending Section 11.01.06, entitled Exempt Signs.

public hearing: Ordinance 2022-60 Trespass Notices

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; CREATING SECTION 2-4, LAKE COUNTY CODE, TO BE ENTITLED TRESPASS NOTICES FOR PUBLIC PROPERTY, TO ESTABLISH A PROCEDURE FOR ISSUING AND CONTESTING TRESPASS NOTICES FOR COUNTY-OWNED PUBLIC PROPERTY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

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

Commr. Smith commented that this ordinance had been requested by the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO).

On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Ordinance 2022-60 creating Section 2-4, Lake County Code, to be entitled Trespass Notices For Public Property.

presentation from the Greater Orlando Sports Commission

Mr. Ryan Ritchie, Director for the Office of Visit Lake, related that the Greater Orlando Sports Commission (GOSports) had partnered with Lake County for over 25 years supporting and managing sports related events in Lake County, such as the International Waterski & Wakeboard Federation (IWWF) World Waterski Championships, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division III Golf Championships, several championship fishing events, and the Florida High School Athletic Association (FHSAA) State Golf Championships. He then introduced Mr. Jason Siegel, Chief Executive Officer for GOSports.

Mr. Siegel stated that GOSports, formerly the Central Florida Sports Commission, was established in 1992, and that their partnership with Lake County had been established in 1996. He stated that their target markets included marquee, collegiate, Olympic/international, youth/amateur, and Esports, and that they were under contract with Lake County through 2025. He elaborated that they had a staff of 10 employees working with the community, and that their organization was involved with local, regional, national, and international companies providing domestic and international opportunities as well as community work. He displayed a slide showing the economic impact they had brought to Lake County over the previous five years, and commented that the State of Florida saw many opportunities because it was open for business when other states were not, which was shown by the escalation of room nights in the prior two years. He showed a slide picturing many of the recent sporting events they had been involved with in Lake County and another slide detailing many upcoming events, noting that even though some of the events were not being hosted in Lake County, they did offer opportunities to do business in Lake County by providing housing and other services. He mentioned that they were meeting on a consistent basis with national governing bodies for the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee (OPC) in preparation for the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles, California, and opined that there would be opportunities to bring qualifying events or actual Olympic events into Central Florida in 2027 and 2028.

regular agenda

request to install video cameras in the Town of Montverde

Mr. Schneider explained that this was a request from the Town of Montverde for approval to install video recording cameras and license plate readers at intersections with county roads within the town limits, noting that the Board had previously approved license plate readers for the LCSO and the City of Clermont. He stated that the Town of Montverde was requesting approval from the Board to place surveillance cameras and license plate reader cameras for public safety reasons, weather emergencies, fire, flood, and other emergencies. He commented that the cameras would be placed facing public right of way and public gathering areas, and that they would not be facing individual homes or other areas. He mentioned that the recording of the surveillance cameras would be kept on a hard drive and automatically erased after 120 days, and that it would be subject to Florida Sunshine Law. He listed the locations the cameras would be installed on public right of ways, and said that the Town would provide full maintenance and operational repair of the camera systems including a separate power supply, internet communication, and mounting pedestals. He relayed his understanding that the Town already had about 50 cameras there, and that this request was to put cameras within County right of way in the specified locations.

Commr. Shields questioned how this related to what the LCSO was already doing.

Mr. Paul Larino, Montverde Town Manager, explained that the Town did not have their own police department and relied on alternative resources for public safety. He mentioned that they worked with the LCSO who actively responded to calls, and that they contracted with the Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) for traffic enforcement within the town limits; additionally, they used cameras within the town limits which passively recorded public activities. He explained that they used it as a resource for law enforcement and as a deterrent, and he gave an example of a burglary that was solved by the LCSO with information provided from a camera.

Commr. Parks inquired how many cameras would be out there.

Mr. Larino answered that they currently had about 50 cameras in parks, on streets, and in town public buildings, such as Town Hall.

Commr. Smith asked how they were similar to the license plate readers.

Mr. Larino relayed his understanding that the LCSO and the City of Clermont had active scanners that scanned license plates and sent the information to a database that could inform them of someone with an active warrant; however, the Town cameras, which took snapshots of the license plates and the fronts of vehicles, were passive and did not look for warrants. He commented that if there was a crime in town, they would give the LCSO access to the camera information showing the license plate and a video of who was driving the car, and that they would have to run the license plate number themselves. He mentioned that there were four visits from the LCSO over the past year, and opined that the cameras helped when there was a crime in town.

Commr. Smith inquired where the servers were being stored.

Mr. Larino replied that they were currently locked in a separate room in his office, and that they had planned to expand into a portion of Town Hall and create a separate IT server.

Commr. Blake questioned what the auditing process would be.

Mr. Larino answered that because they were not law enforcement cameras, they were just Town cameras, which were subject to Florida Sunshine Law, and that there was not an audit process. He relayed his understanding that Florida Sunshine Law allowed 30 days for surveillance cameras, and then they could be erased. He mentioned that their cameras automatically recorded over the hard drive after 120 days, and that if there was a public records request or a law enforcement request, they would supply a flash drive to be issued as part of that public records request.

Commr. Campione asked if there were other municipalities in Lake County who had made a similar request.

Mr. Larino answered that he was not aware of any other municipalities in Lake County, other than the City of Clermont, with this type of a request; however, he relayed his understanding that other municipalities had cameras throughout their public areas. He opined that since most of the roads that went through the Town of Montverde were county roads, it would be beneficial to have cameras on the right of way.

Commr. Parks said that it was his understanding that many municipalities had cameras in their public spaces, which were subject to Florida Sunshine Law.

Commr. Smith inquired if he had asked the residents if they would allow the Town to put cameras on their property. He opined that this was not the same situation as the license plate readers for the LCSO, and said that he had issues with it.

Mr. Larino opined that their cameras were less intrusive than the license plate readers for the LCSO, and remarked that there was an opportunity to put the cameras on private property; however, the angle was not as accurate.

Commr. Blake stated that he was not in favor of this, and that the LCSO had a three year audit from an outside entity to ensure it was managed correctly. He opined that privacy was important, and said that he did not approve of the cameras.

Commr. Campione indicated that she was not in favor of this, and commented that the LCSO had a right to use the license plate cameras authorized by the Board for specific purposes with parameters, limitations, and audit requirements. She opined that this was more like surveillance, and asked if there was any dissonance over this issue at their Town meetings.

Mr. Larino relayed his understanding that everyone at the public meeting was supportive of it, and that it was unanimously approved by the Montverde Town Council. He mentioned that there had been discussion about privacy; however, they kept it secure and did not allow the public to watch it and access it, noting that there were already cameras in many places, such as doorbells, cars, and parking lots. He stated that the Montverde Town Council was trying to keep their taxes as low as possible, which was at 2.83 mills, and that they wanted to keep their community safe and had found this to be effective. He relayed his understanding that since putting the cameras up and working with FHP, their crime was low, opining that it was because when there was a crime, people knew they would be caught. He reiterated that they were using technology to keep their citizens safe and their taxes low.

Commr. Parks suggested that Mr. Larino could work with Ms. Marsh and Mr. Schneider to propose an audit plan and address some of the other concerns that were expressed by the Board, and opined that this item could be tabled until a future BCC meeting.

Mr. Larino said that this would be agreeable, noting that they were partners with the County and had a good relationship with the County Manager. He opined that both the County and the Montverde Town Council wanted to keep taxes low and keep citizens safe, and that there were different means of accomplishing it.

Commr. Campione inquired how long they had operated cameras in their Town, and if they had received any public records requests to look at them.

Mr. Larino answered that it had been about a year and a half, and that they had received one public records request.

Commr. Campione asked if it had been requested by a citizen.

Mr. Larino replied that it was, and that this citizen had accused one of their public officials of assaulting them near a public building. He related that when the citizen had tried to file charges, the Town was able find the camera footage showing that there was no assault, noting that this citizen requested the public record of that film.

Commr. Blake inquired how much the citizen was charged for this request.

Mr. Larino replied that they charged the citizen for the flash drive and the search according to Florida Sunshine Law, and relayed his understanding that it was about $15.

Commr. Smith mentioned that the Board could either table this item, approve it, or deny it.

Commr. Blake made a motion to deny Tab 33, but the motion failed due to the lack of a second.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board tabled this item to the January 24, 2023 BCC meeting.

Lake County Water Authority ordinance

Ms. Marsh recalled that two months prior, an ordinance came forward which would allow the BCC to adjust the salary requirements for the LCWA Board to be consistent with whatever they approved in their budget and to add language allowing the BCC to issue administrative or operational directives to the LCWA by resolution. She commented that those items were pulled out of the ordinance leaving only the section dealing with the conveyance of real property by the LCWA, which was approved, and that she was adding these items for the purpose of seeing if the Board wished to move forward with these two changes, or if they should remain tabled until after further meetings with the LCWA.

Commr. Campione commented that even though they had met with the LCWA, they had not specifically discussed these items; however, during the budget hearings, they had discussed compensation for the LCWA Board and the obsolete language in the charter, which stated they could receive $25 per day for when they performed activities. She wondered how the LCWA was going to handle compensation, such as tracking hours of specific duties performed, and opined that if it was left the way it was currently, then they would have to know what it meant to receive $25 per day for compensation, which could be interpreted many ways. She commented that the other item was a mechanism that would allow for making modifications through resolutions, noting that it would enable them to implement operational changes.

Commr. Smith mentioned that Mr. Marty Proctor, Chairman of the LCWA Board, had requested to speak on this item on behalf of the LCWA.

Commr. Campione noted that there were two other members of the LCWA Board present, and relayed her understanding that they would not be able to say anything, according to Florida Sunshine Law.

Ms. Marsh clarified that the Florida Sunshine Law would only apply if they were going to vote on an issue, and that as long as this did not come before the LCWA Board for discussion and a vote, then they could all speak. She commented that the BCC advertised their meetings to cover other elected officials attending; however, this was not adequate protection for them.

Commr. Campione opined that the ordinance could come before the LCWA Board as a business item to discuss compensation preferences.

Ms. Marsh remarked that if it was pertaining to providing comments on this ordinance before adopting it, then they would not want to all speak at this meeting.

Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that if the BCC asked them to consider what a fair salary would be for serving on the LCWA Board, then they would not want to speak at the current BCC meeting.

Ms. Marsh pointed out the she did not represent the LCWA Board; however, a conservative approach would be to not all speak on these items on the current day because it was not advertised as a LCWA meeting.

Commr. Parks questioned if the BCC should discuss this, since the LCWA Board was invited to make a recommendation for their salary.

Ms. Marsh commented that if the Board wanted a recommendation from the LCWA, then this item should be tabled until the joint meeting; however, the Board could move it forward as it was drafted or with agreed upon alterations.

Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that the budget would allow for each LCWA Board member to receive a $25,000 prorated salary.

Ms. Marsh remarked that for the current year, it could be prorated, being an annual allocation in their budget for the LCWA Board salaries; however, the language could be adjusted to clarify that it would be prorated for the current year. She stated that going forward, whatever was included in their budget would have to be approved by the BCC, and that it could be adjusted in future years.

Commr. Smith commented that if Mr. Proctor wanted to speak on behalf of the LCWA, he would need to abstain from speaking at the current BCC meeting.

Mr. Proctor said that he would defer from commenting on this item.

Ms. Marsh inquired if the annual ethics requirement would be added to the ordinance, noting that it was discussed at the previous joint meeting and could be added if the Board chose to move forward with the ordinance.

Commr. Campione asked when the two Boards would be meeting again, and Ms. Barker answered that it would be on February 6, 2023. Commissioner Campione opined that the wording of how they would receive compensation should be updated.

Commr. Smith reiterated that it could be discussed at the following joint meeting, and relayed his understanding that the LCWA Board was currently rearranging some of their duties. He opined that it would be good to have their perspective before the BCC made this judgement.

Commr. Parks recalled that there had been concern expressed about the $25,000 per year compensation at a previous BCC meeting. He relayed his understanding that the LCWA Board invested much of their time into this responsibility, and opined that there should be motivation to keep them coming to meetings and to compensate the cost of gas and the time away from work.

Commr. Campione opined that the LCWA Board would have to make that decision as opposed to the BCC telling them what that decision should be, and that there should be generic language for compensation in the amount set forth in their budget. She also opined that the ethics requirements were important and should be included, and that it did not need to be discussed in the joint meeting.

Commr. Blake agreed, and related that he had recently completed his ethics requirement. He opined that it was good to have that information, and that the State of Florida had robust public records laws; additionally, there could be land acquisitions that could apply.

Commr. Campione stated that regardless of the result of the workshops, she was in favor of the directives in the ordinance. She commented that County ordinances could be adopted to amend the charter; however, this ordinance would allow the BCC to issue operational and administrative directives by resolution. She mentioned that a resolution would still be an item on the agenda for discussion, which could be done without having an advertised public hearing for an ordinance.

Ms. Barker suggested that staff could add the compensation discussion to the February 6, 2023 joint meeting agenda, and that this ordinance amendment could keep the resolution language as well as adding the ethics class requirement.

Commr. Blake indicated that he was in favor of this, and opined that even though the compensation would be decided by the LCWA Board, the BCC would be accountable for it.

Commr. Campione remarked that the LCWA Board could discuss this issue before the joint meeting, and that they could be prepared to present their position on the policy.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to pull Chapter 24-8 and to approve Chapter 24-19, along with requiring the LCWA Board to complete four hours of ethics training annually.

Lake County Water Authority easement

Mr. Chuck Hiott, with Halff Engineering, recalled that in November 2022, they had presented a planned unit development (PUD) zoning item to the Board, and that it was denied for public safety reasons. He related that the LCWA owned the property adjacent to their property, and that if the LCWA deeded right of way to the County, there would be more than one access for the residents there, the developer could develop their project, and the LCWA could gain paved access to their property. He stated that the LCWA Board approved to forward this item to the BCC to consider 1.39 acres of right of way being deeded to the County, and that the developer would install the roads for the second access point. He recommended that the deed be placed in an escrow account, noting that once all the approvals were in place and the contractor was building the road, then that deed could come out of escrow and be recorded. He displayed a map showing the road that connected to County Road (CR) 44, providing the only access to the proposed development, and said that if the development was approved and they received right of way from the LCWA, then they would construct a road up to Goose Creek Road, providing a second access to CR 44.

Commr. Shields inquired if he had a copy of the draft contract.

Mr. Hiott replied that they did not, and that they wanted to ensure that the County approved this deed for right of way, noting that the LCWA could present the deed to the County.

Commr. Parks asked if they were proposing any improvements along Shelley Drive and Goose Creek Road.

Mr. Hiott answered that the only improvement they were proposing was to connect with Goose Creek Road; however, without proper right of way they were limited as to what they could do. He commented that they would provide a full road right of way going from the end of Goose Creek Road to Eagle Point Court.

Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that they would construct a County standard road through the proposed development to Goose Creek Road, and opined that the road north of that was not a County standard road.

Mr. Hiott commented that the road was not a standard 24 foot wide road; however, based on the traffic, the County did allow for 20 foot roads.

Commr. Parks expressed his concern that the proposed development would create more traffic from the 180 proposed units.

Mr. Hiott remarked that the zoning would allow for that; however, the PUD they proposed would be 145 lots.

Commr. Parks opined that it would add about 1,800 trips per day, and that the right of way would not alleviate any safety concerns along Goose Creek Road and Shelley Road.

Mr. Hiott pointed out that it would provide a second point of access to CR 44 for all the other residents there.

Commr. Smith noted that this discussion was not for the road, the design, or the PUD, and that the discussion was about approving the request for the LCWA to convey a strip of land to the County.

Commr. Parks expressed concern that granting the easement without seeing what was proposed could imply some entitlement for them in the future, and opined that a possible solution could be to hear this item at the same time as the hearing for the proposed development.

Ms. Marsh commented that the Board could authorize the LCWA to move forward with the negotiations and reserve the right to approve the final easement and conditions that might be associated with that. She relayed her understanding that the Board was hearing this issue on the current day because the LCWA did not want to spend time attempting to negotiate something if the Board was not interested in it.

Commr. Campione noted that the negotiations would be between the County and the developer, and that the conditions which the BCC would require were related to the PUD. She commented that the conveyance of the property from the LCWA to the County could be held in escrow until there were agreeable conditions reached with the developer, and if those conditions could not be met, then the deed could be returned to the LCWA.

Ms. Marsh stated that the deed could be prepared and held in escrow until there was an agreement negotiated with the developer. She pointed out that the County had res judicata provisions, and that when the BCC denied the rezoning, it was not done without prejudice. She explained that because of the res judicata, they could not bring this item before the Board for a minimum of one year, and that there had to be a substantial change in circumstances. She elaborated that she had been asked to draft an amendment to that provision which would allow one of the Commissioners who voted in favor of the item to request to revisit a project if there was a significant difference about it, and that the one year requirement would no longer apply. She relayed that the approval to advertise could be an item on the agenda at the following BCC meeting, and if it was approved, the public hearing would be soon thereafter.

Commr. Campione recalled that other development applications which had been denied had seen changed circumstances, and opined that it would be a good ordinance amendment.

Ms. Marsh commented that currently there was a one year minimum delay, and that once an application had been denied, it could return after a year only with changed circumstances.

Commr. Shields questioned if this item could be tabled until the details were addressed.

Commr. Parks stated that he was in favor of tabling this item or waiting until the BCC heard the proposed application.

Commr. Campione opined that the BCC could make some progress without being locked into a position. She reiterated that if the LCWA prepared a deed going to the County, it could be held in escrow, and that if the County wanted to give it back to the LCWA, it could be done. She agreed that there were issues that needed to be addressed with the projects; however, there were zonings on these properties that allowed for development to occur without this alternate access. She opined that the BCC should go forward with the conveyance of the deed to be held in escrow.

Commr. Shields asked if the County would incur any costs from this action.

Ms. Marsh relayed her understanding that the developer would provide the legal description; otherwise, there could be a small surveying cost.

Mr. Hiott indicated that they would provide the legal description.

Commr. Parks expressed concern that this action could imply approval for this development, even though the County may be legally protected.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried by a vote of 3-2, the Board approved to accept a conveyance in escrow if the LCWA chose to deed this property to the County.

Commr. Parks and Commr. Shields voted no.

Lake-Sumter mpo appointment

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the appointment of Mr. Kenneth Daniels to the Lake-Sumter Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Community Advisory Committee, to serve an unexpired primary member term ending December 31, 2023.

Commr. Campione was not present for the vote.

reports

county manager

Holiday office closures

Ms. Barker commented that the County Offices would be closed on December 26, 2022 and January 2, 2023 in observance of Christmas and New Year’s Day, and she wished everyone a happy holiday.

commissioners reports

commissioner shields – vice chairman and district 1

school concurrency meeting

Commr. Shields mentioned that he had attended an annual school concurrency meeting, and that there was a five-year plan that he had shared with the Board.

Lake-sumter MPO meeting

Commr. Shields relayed that he had attended the Lake-Sumter MPO meeting.

League of Cities meeting

Commr. Shields related that he had attended a League of Cities meeting.

new bus line in south lake

Commr. Shields said that the new bus line had been dedicated in south Lake County connecting the Four Corners area to the City of Clermont, and that he had attended the ribbon cutting event.

Value Adjustment Board meeting

Commr. Shields mentioned that he had attended a Value Adjustment Board (VAB) meeting.

commissioner parks – district 2

South Lake Express

Commr. Parks relayed that he had attended the ribbon cutting event for the South Lake Express.

road issues

Commr. Parks related that he drove around with Mr. Schneider, and Mr. Jeff Earhart, with the Public Works Department, and he thanked them for their time. He noted that there were many issues with the roads, and that the need for resurfacing was becoming more urgent, opining that it would take more than $6 million per year to keep up with resurfacing. He wondered if the countywide planning efforts could be publicized more, opining that the residents and the Cities should be involved in this effort.

Hanukkah celebration

Commr. Parks stated that he had attended a Hanukkah celebration on the previous Sunday in the City of Clermont, and opined that Rabbi Moshe Dubinsky, from Chabad of South Lake County, did a good job.

Merry christmas

Commr. Parks wished everyone a Merry Christmas, and said that he was looking forward to another great year.

commissioner campione –district 4

LCWA property in the Okahumpka area

Commr. Campione commented that she, Mr. Butch Hendrick, a LCWA Board member, Mr. Bobby Bonilla, Director for the Office of Parks and Trails, and other staff had visited the LCWA property in the Okahumpka area and had met with the developer there. She explained that they went there to determine if it was a navigable water body that should be open to the public, and relayed her understanding that the developer could provide a few lots in a cul-de-sac for parking along with access to the location.

Eustis City Council meeting

Commr. Campione related that she had attended the Eustis City Council meeting in the prior week, and that they had voted to postpone transmitting their Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) amendment, opining that it would have been detrimental to the areas east of the City of Eustis. She remarked that there had been efforts for joint planning.

Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that the City of Groveland would be negotiating a JPA with the County soon, and opined that it was time for the City of Eustis to do that as well.

Commr. Campione indicated her understanding that the City of Eustis did not want to wait indefinitely, and said that she was willing to draft some language that could be presented, opining that the County could reach an agreement with them.

Commr. Parks opined that the City of Eustis JPA could be done within a couple of months, however, the conservation strategy countywide could take more time.

Commr. Campione remarked that the City of Eustis could have transmitted their Comp Plan amendment at the previous meeting, and that they could have moved Map 19, which was the map that defined what the appropriate land uses were, and replaced it with two or three units per acre with a PUD in areas which were only supposed to have one unit per five acres or one unit per acre with 50 percent open space; furthermore, the City of Eustis could choose to transmit in January 2023. She hoped that the County could recommend a JPA for their consideration as the City moved forward with this workshop and their new City Commissioner. She opined that the County could create a pilot of the transfer of development rights (TDRs) within that zone, and that there was land there which could be retained for low density or farming purposes in a JPA.

Commr. Parks opined that any area that was in a rural protection area (RPA) which could be annexed by the City would be fine with the County’s subdivision criteria.

Commr. Campione said that this was what she had asked for from the City, and that they had only postponed the decision. She opined that the County could continue to petition the City and draft some language that they could consider, and hoped that an agreement could be reached.

COMMISSIONER BLAKE – DISTRICT 5

5 Mile Road

Commr. Blake remarked that he had traveled on 5 Mile Road through south Lake County, opining that it was a beautiful area.

Merry Christmas

Commr. Blake wished everyone a Merry Christmas, sharing a quote from A Christmas Carol and hoping that people would treat each other decently.

commissioner smith –chairman and district 3

City of Tallahassee visit

Commr. Smith mentioned that he had visited the City of Tallahassee in the previous week to meet with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD), and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) concerning Lake County’s natural resources and lakes, and that he had met some of the legislators there, such as Representative Taylor Yarkosky, noting that Representative Keith Truenow had accompanied him in the meetings as well as Ms. Barker.

Early Learning Coalition meeting

Commr. Smith commented that he had attended an Early Learning Coalition meeting.

National Go Caroling Day

Commr. Smith stated that it was National Go Caroling Day.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

Commr. Smith wished everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:01 a.m.

_________________________________

kirby smith, chairman

ATTEST:

________________________________

GARY J COONEY, CLERK