A special MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

may 16, 2023

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in a special budget workshop on Tuesday, May 16, 2023 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 Josh Pearson, Deputy Clerk.

INVOCATION and pledge

Commr. Smith welcomed everyone to the meeting and noted that it was being streamed on the County website; furthermore, they were also broadcasting the meeting via Zoom.

Pastor Jim Mory, with Union Congregational Church in the City of Tavares, gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

virtual meeting instructions

Mr. Levar Cooper, Director for the Office of Communications, 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.

citizen question and comment period

No one wished to address the Board at this time.

Agenda update

Ms. Jennifer Barker, County Manager, stated that there were no updates to the agenda.

FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET presentations

office of building services

Mr. Bill Ondulich, Interim Director for the Office of Building Services, relayed that his office consisted of the following: permitting; plan review; inspections; fire prevention for new construction; license investigations; coordinating special master hearings; coordinating the Board of Building Examiners; contractor and public education; and assisting other offices within the County. He showed his office’s organizational chart, and he displayed his their accomplishments, including the following: had roughly 50,000 phone calls, which did not include the contact that their field staff had with contractors and homeowners; the amount of investigations that their licensing staff had performed; established customer service training for staff and would continue to do this; their permitting supervisor and office associate had completed their certified public manager training; their supervisors attended hurricane disaster training; their licensing investigations provided 10 community outreach sessions; their team assisted the efforts of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) disaster recovery center in Astor; building inspections and plan review staff obtained six additional licenses and were approved for three additional internships; and one of their permit technicians obtained an additional International Code Council (ICC) certificate. He indicated that his office regularly attended the Home Builders Association of Lake-Sumter (HBA-LS) meeting, and that they began being more involved with the Lake County Schools Construction Advisory Group, noting that his office was talking with executive management to see how they could better participate with children in school to assist them; additionally, his office also attended a meeting with Lake-Sumter State College (LSSC) to see what they would be looking for in a college curriculum. He then relayed the following efficiencies for his office: implemented additional auto-issued permits for electrical repair and size for size service replacements; click to enter, which was public safety access to gated communities/facilities for fire personnel; fire alarms under 20 devices; hydrant flow test; and their new customer service center renovations were completed at 320 West Main Street in the City of Tavares, which was formally the Lake County Tax Collector location. He showed some benchmarks for how his office performed as compared to surrounding Counties, which included the number of inspections per inspector and the number of permits processed per permit technician. He concluded by displaying his office’s fiscal year (FY) 2024 proposed budget of $9,429,057.

Commr. Shields asked about the increase in operating expenses.

Mr. Ondulich replied that it included $200,000 for professional services in case they needed to hire a consultant for this fiscal year regarding acquisition and implementation of software. He added that they added a business process analyst position, though this funding was earmarked in case they needed to hire a consultant to help them through this process. He mentioned that they also earmarked $300,000 for contract services for the possible renovation of the second floor of the 320 West Main Street building when the Tax Collector vacated it.

Commr. Campione inquired how this compared for General Fund versus their permit fee revenue.

Ms. Barker clarified that this was 100 percent permit fee revenue and that it was a full enterprise fund.

Commr. Campione then asked how much was in their reserves, opining that there seemed to be concerns regarding if the County was putting enough back into running the department efficiently versus holding back funds.

Ms. Barker mentioned that before the end of the meeting, she could provide information for the previous year’s reserves versus what they were projecting the reserves to be.

Commr. Parks inquired what kind of improvements and metrics the County could see from this increase. He also opined that the County was currently having a reputation of having some issues.

Mr. Ondulich said that this office constantly looked at their staffing levels and that because they were an enterprise fund, he did not want to staff up and then have to staff down in case they saw a slowdown in what was occurring. He stated that they had seen some slowing that he did not consider to be significant; however, it made them think of what was occurring. He commented that they had put together a permitting technician I, II and III position so that there was an employment ladder that the permitting technicians could climb, noting that this was so the County would not be losing them to other Cities or Counties. He relayed that his office had also done the same for their plans examiners, and he thought that they needed to strive to be competitive with surrounding Counties and the Cities within Lake County, stating that they did not want to be a training ground. He mentioned that his office currently had three contract plan review and inspection agencies, though they had not needed to use them to balance their staffing versus workload. He also said that mostly everything that his office was receiving was turned into a permit in around seven days.

Commr. Smith asked if Mr. Ondulich had a correlation between the permits reviewed compared to the permits issued versus other Counties, and how many days it took for another County to receive, review and issue a permit compared to Lake County.

Mr. Ondulich replied that the only time that Lake County would receive metrics like this was at the HBA-LS meetings, which his office attended regularly, noting that his office presented their metrics regularly at each meeting. He indicated that some of the other municipalities and some Counties would also present their metrics; additionally, he opined that they all seemed to be doing similarly. He mentioned that about a year prior before interest rates started to climb, Lake County was behind in metrics from the Cities and surrounding Counties, though his office aggressively tried to recruit staff and used the tools that they had for contract plan review and inspection to bring those numbers down. He said that there was a learning curve when his office was training contractors on how to use their computer system, and that they tried to keep them as up to date as possible by giving them projects that kept them familiar with Lake County’s computer system and the way they did things.

Commr. Smith inquired if the Board could receive these numbers, noting that he would like to see if Lake County was understaffed and where they were with everything.

Mr. Ondulich commented that his office had some vacant positions, and that he could provide these numbers.

Commr. Blake asked if there was a trigger for the use of contract services, or if it was subjective.

Mr. Ondulich explained that there were statutory requirements on certain things, such as 30 days for a single family residence. He indicated that his office recognized that this was one’s last journey before putting a project in the ground, and that if he saw things were starting to approach the 30 day mark, then they started giving their contractors a call. He added that if he saw the demand rise and continue to rise month over month, then it was time to give them a call. He opined that his office used them effectively in the previous fiscal year.

Commr. Campione said that it seemed to her that many times, a delay occurred in the period where the zoning clearance was being issued; however, she opined that a layperson saw the process as one in the same. She added that one could be waiting a long time because there would be something irregular about their lot that they did not realize when they bought it, and that if the County broke down the time it took to receive a permit, then it seemed that they would have to bifurcate this to see how many of them were fitting into the anomaly categories versus the basic buildable or subdivision lot, or a lot of record. She thought that these zoning clearances would be easy to get and happen relatively quickly, and that the others could possible throw their numbers and averages off. She then mentioned that the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) had discussed affordable housing projects, noting that the County’s ordinance indicated that they were supposed to be fast tracked; additionally, she questioned if the County knew whether they were accomplishing this goal.

Ms. Barker said that Ms. Mary Ellen Stern, Executive Director for Economic Growth, was working with staff to develop a one page checklist of what one needed to do, and that they were also working with the departments to find efficiencies and streamline the process.

Commr. Campione thought that it would be helpful for the HBA-LS and contractors to understand that the first thing to do was try to get the zoning clearance.

Commr. Parks said that the Board’s job was to set policies and goals, and to support the office. He thought that staff was doing a good job, and he opined that there was no reason why the County could not turn their reputation around and be one of the best at getting zoning clearances done. He opined that it was an issue, and he said that other Counties were also struggling; however, he thought that there was an opportunity to try to turn it around. He opined that if it required more resources for the office to do this, then it would be worth it because he did not want to have the reputation of being the worst place to try to get a permit done in the State of Florida, remarking that this was detrimental to economic development. He opined that there was no reason why simple zoning, basic zoning issues and building permits could not be done as quickly as possible, noting that Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) items took longer.

Mr. Ondulich relayed that they had a business process analyst to help them analyze their business model to see where they could achieve efficiencies. He added that they were working diligently to improve these areas.

Commr. Campione expressed appreciation for what they did, noting that they were working directly with people on issues that were important to them. She thought that it was important when staff saw things that the County could improve if they changed their ordinances, and for staff to relay this to the County Attorney’s Office and the Board.

Commr. Smith relayed that the Office of Building Services staff was busy, and he thanked Mr. Ondulich.

office of planning and zoning

Ms. Stern provided the following overview information for the Office of Planning and Zoning: managed growth and development in Lake County; processed and reviewed development applications for site plans, preliminary plats and master park plans; coordinated with the 14 municipalities on projects located within the joint planning areas (JPAs) and interlocal service boundary agreement (ISBA) areas; issued zoning permits for residential development; prepared and reviewed applications for public hearings; updated the Comp Plan and Land Development Regulations (LDR); assessed impact fees on new development; and oversaw the Mt. Plymouth-Sorrento Community Redevelopment Area (CRA). She showed the organizational chart for the office and said that they currently had 16 full-time employees (FTEs), stating that the development services program specialist was the beginning of the process improvement for this office and all the Economic Growth offices. She listed the following accomplishments for the Office of Planning and Zoning: issued approximately 5,300 zoning permits; limited walk-in development permit runners to six permit applications per day to allow the public office and lobby to flow better; provided an option to drop off additional permit applications and pick up for a later date to create some efficiency in the lobby; and collaborated with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) on the JPA initiative and conservation strategy between the County and all 14 municipalities. She then listed the following efficiencies for the office: began the process to start to automate the assessment of impact fees, commenting that if one could be told their impact fees upfront instead of when they received their building permit, they may be able to budget those impact fees; began to analyze the CD-Plus program; relocated the customer service section to 320 West Main Street in the City of Tavares; and began offering free pre-application meetings to assist prospective applicants. She displayed a benchmark with surrounding Counties for budget per capita and a chart with the number of public hearings for her office from FY 2018 to the current time, stating that the FY 2023 projected number came from them multiplying the October 1, 2022 through March 1, 2023 numbers by two. She added that the estimate for FY 2024 was basically a three percent increase moving into the next fiscal year, and that the public hearings included variances, conditional use permits (CUPs), rezonings, future land use (FLU) amendments and Comp Plan amendments. She displayed a metric for the number of zoning clearances issued, noting that the trend had decreased slightly FY 2022 and what they were projecting for FY 2023. She indicated that the next metric was development applications from FY 2018 to FY 2024, and that the last metric was in-person customers served, commenting that it was generally flat. She mentioned that in FY 2020 as a response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and trying to help as many customers as possible, the office implemented an online residential permitting system (OPRS). She commented that in FY 2021, 832 zoning permits were applied through on the OPRS system, and that in FY 2022 it was slightly less at 676; furthermore, the projected number for FY 2023 was 720. She displayed the Office of Planning and Zoning’s proposed FY 2024 budget of $1,698,483, noting that the personal services change was due to staff restructuring, wage adjustments and higher health insurance costs. She explained that the operating expenses change was because the Strong Towns commitment ended with the FY 2023 budgeted amount, and that they anticipated an increased use of third party consultants, along with having to purchase some new phones.

Commr. Parks thought that they had an issue, and that he was unsure whether this was enough based on his perception of what some of the issues were. He also thought that a significant change needed to be made.

Ms. Stern agreed, and said that it was a large focus on process improvement and training. She mentioned that the true part of customer service was letting residents know the whole process, along with making the office operations more efficient from the time the application was received, to getting it processed and either out to a consultant or a planner. She mentioned that the numbers projected for FY 2024 were based on what the office knew currently, and that they had more work to do to determine what else they needed to potentially make good changes in the office.

Commr. Parks indicated that he wanted to support them, opining that the large changes were needed. He opined that in some ways, particularly when it came to this issue, the County was still trying to run things like they were a county with only 200,000 people; however, they currently had 410,000 people and were one of the fastest growing counties in the state. He mentioned that growth had been an issue for staff, and he encouraged staff to get to the point where they were doing more long term planning; additionally, he mentioned that there were concerns from the public and businesses for delays in zoning clearances and things that could probably be done quicker. He said that they possibly needed a dashboard approach where the office could present metrics to the Board on a regular basis on how the measures were being made.

Commr. Blake agreed with Commissioner Parks’ comments, and he said that feedback he received from the community regarded these areas, along with garbage issues. He said that they wanted to ensure that they were not setting staff up to fail by adding busywork that held things up, and to ensure that the code was not part of the issue. He mentioned that he had previously proposed the possibility of automatic refunds if the process took beyond a certain period of time, which would create a financial incentive for the County to do this. He also recalled a previously mentioned item for having an expedition desk that expedited problem areas. He elaborated that as something approached a deadline, then it could be sent to a staff member whose job was just to address of items that were close to the deadline.

Commr. Campione thought that the difficult cases could possibly move to someone else who was good at figuring out how to address them, noting that it usually involved engaging with the County Attorney’s Office. She added that this was what affected the numbers and the ability to move the easy cases through, stating that one could have to spend time addressing the difficult ones. She said that the applications for the zoning changes and the Comp Plan was another category, and that the code sometimes made it challenging. She mentioned that staff was dealing with different layers of things that were put in place years prior, which could not be changed unless they did massive changes to the Comp Plan. She remarked that it could be a question of if they wanted to reinvest in relooking at these items, which would involve bringing someone in to address this.

Commr. Parks thought that this could be why there were some issues, and that they might have to change the code and Comp Plan.

Commr. Campione was unsure if there was an easy fix, noting that there were the following categories: new projects, Comp Plan applications and zoning applications; individual building lots; and people trying to create new lots. She said that staff was working hard trying to solve many of these issues, and she expressed concerns for the phone issue, being on hold, and being told that the call could not be taken. She wondered if they were close to addressing this.

Ms. Stern replied that they were close to having support from some other County staff, noting that the current Office of Planning and Zoning staff had created a frequently asked questions (FAQ) document with the goal that there would be something for someone to look at on the County website if they did not want to make a phone call or while they were on hold; additionally, the FAQ document would also help somebody who did not have planning and zoning experience to help support staff. She added that those individuals should start coming onboard as early as the following day.

Commr. Campione asked if there was any chance that the County was giving them the ability to send an email with their question so staff could begin the process of addressing it.

Ms. Stern questioned who would check those emails; therefore, staff had to address this process before giving them an email to send. She mentioned that many people were working together to bring about quick improvements as they worked on larger improvements, and to give the Board updates, noting that they were close to a few good things.

Ms. Barker said that while they were working on improving the process for the long term, they had planning staff in other departments, or staff who used to work in planning, who were able to assist. She indicated that they were starting to do some site plan reviews from their office, and were able to assist in training the County’s new planners, as well as assisting with answering phones. She said that they would give key people throughout the County access to the phone line so that they could answer the questions, and at a minimum take at least a name and a number so someone could follow up. She clarified that the immediate fix was utilizing staff from other departments, and said that Ms. Stern was working to improve the process as they moved forward.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that Ms. Stern was doing many process changes and that much training was occurring, along with comments from other departments. He mentioned that many things were occurring in the background, and opined that metrics, possible outsourcing, and using other departments would enhance the Office of Planning and Zoning. He believed that they would come out stronger and better as they worked through this, opining that Ms. Stern was doing a great job on the processes, the training and revamping the office.

Commr. Campione inquired if the goal was to have a call returned by the end of the day.

Ms. Stern said that they could make this the goal; however, it may be better to start returning a call within 48 hours. She stated that for general callbacks, they were making a central location so that no matter where someone took a call from, they would put it in a list; furthermore, staff would go in on a regular basis and return those calls.

Commr. Campione noted that there were different types of calls, and that it seemed that they needed someone who could distinguish them and get them to the person who could answer them the fastest.

Commr. Parks indicated that he would be willing to invest in the people and the training so that they were able to answer the call on the same day. He noted that this was going to be an ongoing concern, and that the County would likely have to assist people with getting their zoning clearance; therefore, he thought that there would be an investment in this. He also did not think that it was good to have someone wait two days for a call back.

Commr. Campione indicated interest in providing some type of feedback or status by the end of the day.

Commr. Blake recalled that in 2016, the County had contracted with a firm that was supposed to revamp and streamline the process, as well as go back through the Comp Plan and LDR to ensure that everything was in agreement and made sense. He indicated an understanding that the contract was pulled because the County was going to do it in house, and he wondered if the Board should invest resources and make sure that this happened to eliminate issues that created delays.

Ms. Stern relayed that the County had an agreement with a company that had merged with Kimley-Horn, who would begin the Comp Plan rewrite; additionally, she would look at the agreement and see how in depth it was, as well as ensure that they had a primary focus on the Comp Plan rewrite. She also indicated that the directors and supervisors were trying to create an atmosphere where staff felt welcome to share their ideas on how changes could be made.

Commr. Campione thought that it was key for everyone to feel comfortable bringing up their idea if they saw an issue that could potentially be addressed with a policy change or a change in the code.

Commr. Shields commented that he had recently received concerns because there was a proposal for increased density in the Green Swamp. He relayed that the proposal was getting reworked, that it seemed like there was much staff work done without taking into account the big picture. He opined that if he had been involved sooner, he could have possibly helped address the residents, opining that it had been blown out of proportion before the Board had a chance to discuss it.

Commr. Campione mentioned the possibility of having the foresight to have a conversation in the open early on, or to be able to reach out to people who were going to be concerned about something. She thought that if the County was looking at land in the Wekiva area or the Green Swamp, they always had to have a red flag go up from the start before they went any further, noting that there were certain groups that needed to be reached out to before getting too far along in the process.

Commr. Parks stated that it was the ability to say if it was consistent at a zoning level with the Comp Plan, noting that there may be some sections of the Comp Plan that had not been updated. He relayed that staff was having to ask this question, which was compounded with the daily workload of trying to get 12 to 15 zoning clearances done, opining that it was possible that a controversial issue could be overlooked.

office of code enforcement

Mr. Glen Guzman, Director for the Office of Code Enforcement, provided the following overview information for his office: responded to complaints related to County codes and LDR; provided standard housing inspections; performed conditional use permit (CUP) inspections and related billing; performed environmental inspections and investigations, noting that they were also doing electronic game room inspections, reviews and processes; conducted average setbacks, commercial landscaping, and mining inspections; conducted monthly public hearings for code enforcement and on behalf of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) for animal control; reviewed the code and amendments with the Office of Planning and Zoning and their attorneys, stating that they provided suggestions and feedback; and demolition and cleanups. He displayed his office’s organizational chart and explained that they had a director, an office associate IV, a public hearing associate, a chief code enforcement officer, a compliance and monitoring associate, a compliance and monitoring specialist, an environmental specialist, and five additional code enforcement officers. He listed the following accomplishments for his office: nearly 1,600 cases had been brought into compliance over the past year; completed roughly 4,000 inspections throughout the County; collaborated with the Office of Communications to create educational material on the code enforcement process; and pursued accreditation by the American Association of Code Enforcement, stating that upon receiving this, they would be the first County office in code enforcement to obtain this title and accreditation. He then listed the following efficiencies: continued utilization of five zones balancing their workload and population, stating that his office estimated a population about 200,000 in the county and another 200,000 for the municipalities; each officer covered over 154 square miles of travel; continued to use their mobile office to respond in under 72 hours, noting that most of the time they could respond on the same day; and cross-trained staff to assist other departments. He commented that Senate Bill (SB) 60 continued to be a significant challenge, explaining that it prevented people from providing anonymous complaints; furthermore, people were reluctant to file these for fear of retribution. He also added that Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, required them to provide this information if someone asked. He displayed several benchmarks with surrounding Counties, and said that their population per officer was in the high range but was not too far off from other Counties. He mentioned that square miles per officer versus surrounding Counties was also not too far off, and that total complaints were down because of SB 60; however, it allowed them to engage better with the residents as well. He said that across the board, surrounding Counties were generally in the 90 percent range for cases brought into compliance, noting that his office was trying to stay in the industry standard of 90 percent. He displayed his office’s FY 2024 proposed budget of $968,341, and relayed that the slight increase incorporated the healthcare cost and the additional position to support the processing of electronic game room issues.

Commr. Parks asked if Mr. Guzman felt that he had enough resources, and he asked why Osceola County was so high for total complaints.

Mr. Guzman replied that Osceola County had more officers, and he opined that his office was sufficiently staffed currently; however, it depended on what the Board decided for how they were going to proceed in the future for being complaint driven versus actively looking for issues. He commented that they currently did a hybrid, and that if someone called in a complaint and his office saw something across the street in plain sight, then they would also address that as time permitted.

Commr. Smith asked to confirm if the new position for electronic gaming inspections would go to each of the game rooms and make sure that they were in compliance.

Mr. Guzman confirmed this and clarified that his office had begun this process already. He stated that his office was going out to those facilities or meeting with them so that the facilities would know the expectations.

Commr. Shields relayed that a question came in from Four Corners regarding pop up businesses, and that residents were questioning where they came from.

Mr. Guzman responded that in the previous week he had directed staff to survey the areas regarding open air vendors, people on the side of the road, etc., and that they were starting to address them. He mentioned that it had become an issue in Four Corners, and that sometimes his office would stop someone, but they would go to another county.

Commr. Parks inquired if there was any thought to public awareness and information explaining why the County did this, noting that the Office of Code Enforcement was not out looking for issues, but at the same time there were issues if someone did something affecting everyone’s property values around them.

Mr. Guzman replied that their website was a large resource including common violations, the process, and the ability for a community association to book a presentation from his office.

Commr. Parks asked if there was something beyond this that could be done with the Office of Communications to utilize social media and the County website to explain why the Office of Code Enforcement was doing this. He opined that Mr. Guzman was doing a great job, and that this could further help.

Mr. Guzman mentioned that his office could discuss this with the Office of Communications.

Ms. Barker opined that it could be a good idea for all of their departments to possibly do a short public service announcement (PSA) on their Facebook page, and said that they would discuss this with the Office of Communications.

Commr. Campione mentioned that when she did a tour of the Pine Lakes, Lake Mack and Lake Kathryn areas, sometimes people could have a broken window, possibly with a board over it, noting that they could not afford to have it fixed. She said that this created an issue for the surrounding area, and she wondered if the County could create a code enforcement relief fund that people could utilize to help make those types of repairs. She added that they could possibly be required to pay the County back, and that there were also instances where people had accumulated a large amount of solid waste and removing it was a challenging obstacle that they were not necessarily going to overcome on their own. She stated that a relief fund could possibly help in those instances, and that it could be set up so that the County could address it, but then they would need to pay it back. She said that it seemed like it would help in some locations where many of these issues were occurring, and that it could help the neighbors significantly. She remarked that she wanted to see if this was something that staff could review, and that for larger repairs, the County could do more to connect residents with affordable housing or programs where they might be able to do a demolition and replacement, a roof replacement, etc.

Ms. Barker said that staff could review this, noting that the County had hardship assistance for fire assessment fees. She mentioned that the County could look at setting up a fund using fine revenue collected through normal operations.

Commr. Campione opined that the impact for the investment would be significant and would start to help eliminate some of the cascading of issues in certain neighborhoods. She then inquired about an update on the game room ordinance, opining that code enforcement should be zero tolerance with the goal to eliminate these facilities by attrition.

Commr. Smith believed that Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, was working on this ordinance.

Commr. Campione also relayed her understanding that the compliance specialist would be funded by the fees, and it would also be something that they could fund the LCSO’s involvement in law enforcement with.

Ms. Marsh confirmed that staff had an ordinance drafted to make some amendments, and that she was waiting for the LCSO to review it and provide comments. She elaborated that the plan would be to then send it to the Florida Gaming Control Commission for input, and that staff was hoping to bring it back in June 2023. She also said that she met with staff in the previous week about the current pending applications.

Commr. Campione asked if those applications were for renewals.

Ms. Marsh confirmed this, and believed that the County had 15 timely filed renewal applications; therefore, staff was reviewing them and ensuring that they met every part of the current code. She thought that the County had 29 issued permits; however, they currently only had 15 renewal applications.

Commr. Campione inquired if this meant that the other 14 were not coming in for renewals, noting that it would be a 50 percent reduction.

Ms. Marsh said that staff would provide this information as part of the update.

Commr. Campione asked if the proposed ordinance had a fee change, or if this was something they had to do in a separate resolution.

Ms. Marsh clarified that the fees were set by resolution, and that the County was gathering information from the LCSO regarding their costs of enforcement. She indicated that they would be adding the new position for renewal fees, and that the Board had the option to charge a fee per piece of equipment, which they had originally opted to set at zero.

Ms. Barker added that the Board would approve the fee schedule for the coming year in September 2023.

Commr. Campione inquired if there was a way to bring back the fee schedule at the same time as the ordinance.

Ms. Barker replied that she could bring back a fee schedule just for this particular area when they did the ordinance.

office of Elevate Lake

Ms. Stern stated that the Office of Elevate Lake served as a liaison between companies and government with the goal of creating a business-friendly environment and quality jobs for the citizens of Lake County. She displayed the office’s organizational chart, and said that it had three FTEs. She mentioned that Ms. Kathleen Dial, their new Economic Development Director, started on the previous Monday, and that Ms. Dial had many strong relationships in the county. She mentioned that there were two other FTEs in the office, including the workforce development specialist and a program associate. She listed the following accomplishments for the office: in Wellness Way, there were collaborations to support the implementation plan, stating that a critical infrastructure connection had been made to bring water and sewer to the mid area of Wellness Way near Project Olympus; for the Christopher C. Ford Commerce Park, there was more than 3.5 million square feet of speculative industrial space in the area that was either finished, under construction or in the planning process, remarking that the welcome center and the 26 County-owned acres had some good activity from the private world; for the City of Minneola interchange area, there was 1.4 million square feet of industrial planned, noting that Lake Economic Area Development (LEAD) had been helpful in the connection with the owners there and the City of Minneola, with Crooked Can Brewing Company announced to bring approximately 100 jobs to the area; for the Wolf Branch Innovation District, the County had a Florida Job Growth Grant for a lift station and the widening of Round Lake Road, commenting that the lift station and the design of the expansion of Round Lake Road had been completed, and that the County would be required to create 3,700 jobs as a result of the grant; and collaborations with LEAD, CareerSource Central Florida, Lake Technical College (Lake Tech), Lake-Sumter State College (LSSC), area businesses and others. She then listed the following efficiencies over the past year: the LEAD partnership regarding business attraction, business creation and business retention; the Office of Elevate Lake had relocated from the welcome center to the County Administration Building (CAB), noting that this was an efficiency because of interdepartmental collaboration; and organizational changes with the Economic Development Director, the Workforce Development Specialist and the Program Associate, commenting that this structure was different than it was prior to the LEAD partnership. She displayed a benchmark with surrounding Counties for the FY 2023 adopted budget, and said that each office had something different. She noted that this was Lake County’s first real year with a private/public partnership, and that Lake County’s number for economic investment was about $2 million, which included their incentives, though LEAD’s budget showed that they were also expecting $250,000 in partner investment in addition to the $500,000 that Lake County provided; furthermore, LEAD was expecting $156,400 from other Cities or agencies, and $12,500 in funding from a grant. She elaborated that if Lake County’s amount was added, then it was another $918,000, but if this was removed because Lake County’s $500,000 was already included in the number, then it was about $418,000. She then showed a benchmark for budget allocation per business, which took the total budget number and divided it by the number of businesses in each county. She concluded by displaying the Office of Elevate Lake’s proposed FY 2024 budget of $2,117,046.

Commr. Parks asked if the Wellness Way update would be in June 2023, and Ms. Stern clarified that it would be on June 27, 2023. Commissioner Parks then inquired about how far LEAD had come with their funding goal.

Ms. Stern replied that in the report she had from February 2023, their partner investment was budgeted for $250,000, noting that they had received $104,166. She mentioned that she could send this information to Ms. Barker to be provided to the Board, and that it compared the budgeted amount for the other municipalities and included the County; additionally, it showed what they paid so far. She was unsure about their agreements, but opined that they probably paid the same as the County, which was $125,000 per quarter out of their $500,000.

Commr. Parks stated that the dashboard approach was helpful for the Board on a regular basis so that they could tell their constituents and businesses what had been achieved.

Commr. Blake inquired about how many municipalities LEAD had gotten to buy in, and if they were meeting their dollar per capita target.

Ms. Stern was unsure about the dollar per capita, and she relayed that there were seven municipalities on the budget list where LEAD had received some portion of funding; furthermore, in no case had they received all of the budgeted amount. She specified that it include the Cities of Leesburg, Eustis, Groveland, Minneola, Mount Dora and Umatilla, and the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills.

office of Facilities Management

Mr. Wesley Jones, Director for the Office of Facilities Management, stated that his office was responsible for the maintenance and repairs of facilities, as well as overseeing most of the construction projects for the County, including the following: small renovations; new construction; design; close-out of these projects; overseeing the contracts and the contractors; and monitoring the pay applications and funds. He elaborated that they were currently helping a couple of departments with their capital improvement programs (CIPs), which included developing budgets for design, construction, furniture, equipment, and other needs that were often overlooked; additionally, they helped develop realistic timelines for these construction projects because there were deadlines for grant funds to be spent. He remarked that much of their budget consisted of funds that were earmarked for paying the County’s utilities, and said that they had 29 FTEs. He stated that some of their accomplishments included the following: sealing and striping the Judicial Center parking lot, which would add years of life to the asphalt; reupholstering the seating in the Board Chambers; removing the skylights in the CAB, which were leaking; installing new interactive touch screens for controlling the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) at eight locations, which would help them do their assessments and adjustments onsite; repurposing the old animal shelter generator for the Office of Facilities Management location, allowing them to function during power outages; repurposing the generator from the north wing of the Judicial Center to the Office of Fleet Management location, which could operate their whole facility; installing new fencing around the parking area at the Lake County Detention Center; renovating the City of Eustis Health Department Administration building, which included asbestos abatement and re-piping of the plumbing system; removing the old underground fuel storage tanks at the CAB and the LCSO; installing new above ground tanks, which would eliminate liability; modernizing one of the elevators at the Lake County Detention Center; installing a new automatic gate at the LCSO South Sub Station; replacing and upgrading air conditioning units at various locations, making them more reliable; and upgrading the HVAC system in the north wing of the Judicial Center with a variable frequency drive (VFD) to adjust the volume of air on an as needed basis. He stated that their efficiencies including the following: touchscreen monitors, which allowed them to make assessments and adjustment onsite; elevator modernization, providing greater reliability and eliminating repair costs; and skylight removal, eliminating leaks and structural issues as well as adding insulation to reduce energy costs. He displayed a graph showing benchmarks with surrounding Counties, and said that his office maintained about 77,000 square feet per staff member, which was in line with several of the neighboring Counties. He displayed a graph of their total budget, and noted that they were near the bottom of the range compared to some neighboring Counties; furthermore, the total budget per square foot was about $4, which included maintenance, repairs and utilities. He concluded that their proposed budget for FY 2024 was $9,508,812, which reflected increased costs for personnel services and fleet vehicles.

Commr. Parks expressed appreciation for the presentation, and opined that they had great employees in that department. He asked about issues regarding the Lake County Historic Courthouse, opining that over $1 million was needed to address liability issues, and that the County should budget and plan for any additional costs.

Ms. Barker replied that the County had applied for a $500,000 Florida Historical Facilities Grant, which would address the re-piping if awarded, and that the renovation of the columns would be included with the Infrastructure Sales Tax budget. She commented that this was the department’s General Fund budget, and that this would be addressed when the Infrastructure Sales Tax process was discussed.

Commr. Parks opined that there should be a backup plan in case the grant was not awarded, and that there was much competition for grants.

Ms. Barker remarked that if the grant was not awarded, then the funds would come from the Infrastructure Sales Tax budget, which would be discussed in June and July 2023.

office of Fleet management

Mr. Joseph Blackwell, Director for the Office of Fleet Management, said that his office provided a full range of fleet services to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and other Constitutional Offices of Lake County, which included repairs and preventative maintenance on the following: light, medium, and heavy-duty vehicles; tractors; fire trucks; and generators. He commented that his office maintained four fuel facilities, and that they had 14 FTEs. He mentioned that some of their accomplishments included the following: increased mechanic productivity from 73 percent in 2021 to 90 percent in 2022; the completion of 1,793 work orders in 2022; and recognition as one of the National Association of Fleet Administrators (NAFA) 100 Best Fleets in the Americas for two years in a row. He related that some of the office’s efficiencies included the following: partnering with Lake Tech for minor accident repairs and body work; establishing the preventative maintenance (PM) services, which were scheduled in advance for a faster turnaround for customers; setting up a workstation in the waiting area for employee use while waiting for their vehicles to be serviced; establishing a flat rate fee for services such as PM, tires, brakes and many other repairs; installing a kiosk so customers could sign in electronically for services and rate the services they received; and continually monitoring fuel prices in order to direct employees to locations with the best value. He displayed a graph showing the labor rate comparison between neighboring Counties for light and heavy vehicles, which was comparatively similar, noting that the Lake County rate was slightly higher for heavy duty vehicles. He then displayed graphs for the cost comparison for the labor rate with outside vendors for light and heavy duty vehicles, and noted that Lake County had much lower rates, which was why he encouraged employees to bring vehicles to the Office of Fleet Management servicing areas instead of to an outside vendor. He concluded that the FY 2024 proposed budget of $3,878,995 was increased from the FY 2023 adopted budget because of the increased costs of personnel services and operating expenses.

Commr. Smith pointed out that they had a good amount in their reserves.

Mr. Blackwell added that their reserves were at about $168,000.

Commr. Parks inquired if the kiosk was for rating the services.

Mr. Blackwell answered that it was for the departments to type in service needs when vehicles were dropped off for servicing instead of filling out paperwork, and that the information was sent to four terminals for work orders, which helped them service vehicles quickly. He mentioned that the vehicles could also be signed out at the kiosk, which allowed the tracking of who picked up the vehicle and at what time, and that the level of service could then be rated.

Commr. Parks opined that this was a great system, including the rating system.

Mr. Blackwell commented that they wanted to ensure quality service, and that if something was not satisfactory, it would be seen and addressed.

office of transit services

Ms. Jill Brown, Director for the Office of Transit Services, said that her office’s mission statement was to provide safe, accessible, efficient and cost-effective public transportation that met the needs of residents and visitors of Lake County. She relayed that their fixed route service was the LakeXpress, which currently had eight routes that were operated by 12 buses, and that they provided services Monday through Friday from 5:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. She mentioned that fares were $1 each way, and that seniors, veterans and disabled residents could ride for half of the fare. She added that students rode for free, and that they also offered free transfers with LakeXpress and LYNX in the area of the City of Orlando. She displayed a graph showing the LakeXpress ridership, and said that Lake County had historically experienced increased ridership except during the years of the COVID-19 pandemic. She elaborated that ridership had dropped 50 percent due to business and school closures, as well as the need to limit unnecessary travel, and that the FY 2021 numbers depicted a full year of low ridership; however, there was an increase of eight percent in FY 2022 and a trend for another increase of eight percent in FY 2023. She explained that the paratransit service, the Lake County Connection, was a countywide door-to-door service for eligible individuals who were unable to purchase or access other forms of transportation, and that individuals must fill out an application and meet eligibility criteria to qualify for this service and recertify every two years. She stated that the fares were $2 each way for in-county trips, $5 for trips to the City of Orlando, and $10 each way for trips going to the City of Gainesville. She added that regular services operated Monday through Friday, and that there was Saturday service for dialysis centers only. She noted that their Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) service must mirror their fixed route operating days and hours; therefore, it operated the same days and hours as the LakeXpress service. She displayed a graph showing ridership for the paratransit service, and remarked that it showed the same decreases as the fixed routes. She stated that the FY 2022 ridership increased by four percent, and that the FY 2023 ridership was trending even more with a seven percent increase. She commented that they had six FTEs overseeing the transit services in Lake County, and that some of their accomplishments included mobility week which was sponsored by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), which provided opportunities to explore how walking, biking, riding transit or carpooling reduced traffic congestion, benefited the environment and improved community health. She added that the events also promoted pedestrian and cycling safety, and that their team attended multiple Mobility Week events, answering questions and distributing information about LakeXpress and Lake County Connection. She relayed that they sponsored an annual Stuff the Bus event during Mobility Week, and that they partnered with Lake Cares and Publix, noting that they collected over 1,000 pounds of non-perishable food and over $800 in cash. She explained that Lake Cares and Sun Harvest Food Bank used the cash to purchase over 4,000 pounds of food, which was over 900 pounds more than the previous year, and opined that it was a fun event and had good participation. She related that on December 12, 2022, the LakeXpress service expanded to the Four Corners area in south Lake County, and that they operated Route 55 on weekdays, with LYNX providing the route on weekends. She relayed that they launched an express commuter route that connected the Four Corners area to Route 50, which operated from the City of Mascotte to the City of Winter Garden, and that the 50 West and 50 East Routes were merged into one Route 50, eliminating the need for customers to transfer buses. She commented that her office worked closely with the Office of Emergency Management to provide transportation assistance during weather events, and that they provided 35 trips to and from hurricane shelters during the 2022 hurricane season, including a two-week fixed route shuttle serving the Astor Disaster Relief Center following Hurricane Ian; additionally, during the winter months they provided 84 trips to and from cold weather sheltering. She remarked that during the 2023 Leesburg BikeFest event, LakeXpress operated four shuttle routes to encourage safe travel to and from the event, and that three of the routes ran as late as 2:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday. She elaborated that passengers could catch the bus at any of the designated stops along the LakeXpress route, and that shuttles went to The Villages, the Cities of Eustis, Tavares, and Mount Dora, and the Gator Harley Davidson in the City of Leesburg which ran every 20 minutes. She added that Lake Square Mall served as a park-and-ride location for the event, and that the service was open to the public with a $1 fare. She mentioned that the LakeXpress had 496 bus stops, and that their bus stop improvement schedule was underway with 68 improvements scheduled for the current year. She said that the bus stop improvements were 100 percent grant funded through federal capital grants, and that once the current year’s improvements were completed, about 30 percent of the bus stops would be fully ADA accessible, noting that the goal was to have them all ADA accessible. She relayed that once the new 27 Express Route was implemented, it would be a commuter fixed route connecting the park-and-ride in the City of Clermont with the Citizens Transfer Station in the City of Leesburg, and that this connectivity would allow customers to travel from the Four Corners area in the south of Lake County to the Altoona area in the north of Lake County for just $1. She displayed a chart showing the fixed route trips per capita based on the FY 2021 National Transit Database (NTD) data, and noted that Lake County was similar to Marion County due to the similar size of the fixed route system and the population; furthermore, Lake County’s fixed route expenses per capita from FY 2021 were comparable to Polk and Marion Counties. She remarked that their paratransit trips per capita were also based on the FY 2021 NTD data, and that during that time period several agencies were not providing full services except for Lake and Volusia Counties; additionally, their paratransit expenses per capita for FY 2021 were comparable to the other County services. She explained that their fixed route costs had increased by about 15 percent from FY 2022 to FY 2023 due to Lake County going out to bid in 2022, and that the final negotiated contract agreement with their service provider was considerably higher from the last time they went out to bid which was in 2017. She explained that this was expected, and that it was more expensive for contractors to hire and retain drivers, maintenance staff, and customer service staff; additionally, the cost for parts and maintenance had also increased, which affected the paratransit costs per trip. She mentioned that their proposed budget was influenced by the following reasons: the personal services increase due to anticipated wage adjustments and the increase to employer health insurance contributions; the operating expense increase of 13.4 percent due to an expansion of services and the increase in contracted service costs; and the capital outlay costs, which included the purchase of new scheduling software and bus stop improvements. She concluded that their proposed budget for FY 2024 was $12,486,518.

Commr. Parks opined that services continued to improve each year, and that the key to increasing ridership was the first-mile/last-mile solutions and plans. He wondered if this would be addressed at a future BCC meeting.

Ms. Brown commented that it would be part of the update to their transit development plan, and that they were exploring those options.

Commr. Parks opined that it would be a good investment, and that he would be supportive of any decisions required.

Commr. Shields mentioned that many areas were struggling with traffic on the roads, and that the first-mile/last-mile plan could be a solution to that. He added that some Cities had no fee, opining that free bus rides would promote public transportation.

Commr. Smith opined that if residents used public transportation more often, it would reduce congestion on the roadways.

public works department

Mr. Fred Schneider, Assistant County Manager, said that the Public Works Department included the following: engineering, construction, road operations and maintenance, traffic systems, stormwater systems, sidewalks, etc.; solid waste collection and disposal; mosquito and aquatic plant management; and a role in development services for permitting that came through their Engineering Division. He mentioned that the department included the Operations Division and the Engineering Direction.

Mr. Jeff Earhart, Engineering Manager for the Public Works Department, showed images of work being done in the Wellness Way area, noting that these projects showed everything that the Engineering Division did, which included the following: project development and environment (PD&E) studies; development review; design; permitting; acquiring right of way; working with Conserv II; and working with local workers. He also indicated that the Engineering Division covered the following items: construction and inspection groups; installed and maintained traffic signals; safety improvements; coordinated with State agencies regarding project permitting and funding; and involving the public as much as they could. He showed images of a roundabout in the Town of Montverde, as well as in Wellness Way coming toward United States (U.S.) Highway 27. He also pointed out images of projects regarding Hancock Road, Schofield Road and Wellness Way. He displayed the organizational chart for the Engineering Division and said that they had about 49 FTEs throughout the following groups: engineering; construction inspection; right of way; survey; and traffic operations. He commented that the development review section worked with the Office of Planning and Zoning, and they had seen an increase in variances; additionally, the number of Comp Plan amendments increased from seven to 19 from FY 2021 to FY 2022, and that the number of municipal developments went from 337 to 546. He said that the right of way section acquired about 16 acres in the previous year and around 69 acres in the current year, and that the dollars went from about $380,000 to about $1.6 million, also noting that the number of road vacations increased from three to 11; additionally, the number of development reviews increased from 53 to 68. He mentioned that their survey group assisted the County and did all the legal descriptions for the Wellness Way municipal service benefit units (MSBUs), as well as the legal descriptions for the west impact fee district near The Villages; furthermore, the group also gave the County many cost saving measures because they did much of the surveying related to their projects. He relayed that the design section designed the right turn lane for Britt Road, and that FDOT was doing the signal and the work on the main road. He mentioned that they also designed a right turn lane in the City of Groveland, and that his division negotiated with developers on agreements to try to get roads constructed and help them get impact fee credits to further the County’s goals. He said that the number of right of way utilization permits processed by the construction section increased from 767 to over 1,100 in the current year, and that they also had an increase in residential driveway and right of way use permits. He mentioned that the number of subdivision approvals decreased from 12 to four, and that the number of commercial site inspections increased from 116 to 589. He showed an image of Hancock Road where a trail toward Sugarloaf Mountain would go, and he mentioned that they had completed the full depth reclamation of the repaving on County Road (CR) 437, noting that the same repaving should start in the next month or two on CR 435. He then indicated that the traffic operations section maintained 227 signals and 300 beacons, that they worked with FDOT, and that they had done about 28 miles of striping, noting that they were trying to change their signals out from being loop detection to being more camera detection to make them more resilient. He relayed some traffic signals that they were working on, and said that they also had several PD&E studies occurring, including the Wekiva Trail and the North Lake Trail. He pointed out an image of where they had placed lights in pavement, which cost about $30,000 to $50,000 to install; therefore, a developer had funded this. He listed the following efficiencies for the Engineering Division: did much work in house; the Maravilla Road turn lane; surveyed and did conceptual design for the two roundabouts at Hammock Ridge Road and Lakeshore Drive, as well as CR 561 and Lakeshore Drive; all of the construction inspection on their resurfacing had been done in house, which was likely an over $800,000 savings; and savings also included their right of way staff doing different sidewalk projects, noting that they installed a sidewalk at the Umatilla Community Center. He displayed benchmarks with surrounding Counties and opined that Lake County almost had the best traffic signal maintenance, noting that they looked at 50 percent of their signals each month and 50 percent throughout the year compared to other Counties. He added that Lake County was similar to Seminole and Osceola Counties for the number of signals and beacons within the county, and that each of Lake County’s technicians maintained about 37 of their signals, which was pretty average throughout the industry in the region.

Ms. Mary Hamilton, Operations Director for the Public Works Department, indicated that the Operations Division was responsible for road and drainage maintenance, stormwater CIPs, the floodplain management program, mosquito and aquatic plant management, and their solid waste program. She displayed the Operations Division organizational chart and said that they had 120 full-time positions, along with 15 part time positions within mosquito control, solid waste and the Keep Lake Beautiful (KLB) program. She relayed that solid waste had collected about 4,000 more tons of trash over FY 2021, and that they added about 1,000 units in the previous year. She displayed a residential service convenience center table, and said that these numbers had decreased slightly, noting that more people had come to the convenience centers during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, they were now putting things in their curbside carts. She displayed information for mosquito control and pointed out that they had almost 4,000 service requests over the past year, and that they were shifting more toward larviciding to reduce the night spray as part time positions were challenging to fill and people generally did not like to see the spray, noting that it was more biologically effective and environmentally friendly. She displayed information for aquatic plant management, relating that they predominantly worked with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and addressed hydrilla treatments, in addition to cross training with mosquito control. She showed images of in house paving that they did on Ridgewood Avenue, noting that road operations completed 47 miles of resurfacing in FY 2023. She then listed the following accomplishments for road operations: many base repairs; pothole repairs; drainage system work; and mowing, noting that about 50 percent of their work was being contracted out. She mentioned that their water lab was able to acquire some pieces of equipment, and that they were able to batch larger amounts of samples in a quicker time so that their limited staff of three could be doing other things. She commented that their Adopt-a-Lake program had many volunteer hours collecting water samples and doing community outreach and cleanup events; furthermore, they had combined this program with KLB, relaying that they worked together and with other organizations. She listed efficiencies for the Operations Division and relayed that for solid waste, they leased an excavator which allowed them to move piles of materials easier for their grinding contractor to eliminate it more quickly. She said that mosquito control was doing work with different State labs, and that they provided samples for them to test and determine if Lake County had different mosquito vectors and if they were becoming immune to chemicals. She reiterated that aquatic plant management cross trained on the mosquito side, and that they were working with the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and FWC to combine some tasks to treat areas more efficiently. She listed several road operations efficiencies and commented that they kept small projects in house and allowed the more complicated work to be contracted out so that staff could be responding to day to day complaints more quickly. She related that stormwater staff cross trained with the water lab and KLB, and that they could reach across all the personnel for community events such as marking storm drains. She recalled that in March 2023, their solid waste consultant discussed what was trending around the State of Florida, noting that generally, the increases were substantial for anyone who had gone out to bid in three years or less. She displayed their proposed solid waste assessment increase for FY 2024, clarifying that in FY 2023 the County was essentially able to use American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds so that customers did not incur the cost; however, this increase was what it would take for the County to continue paying the contracted rates that they signed off on in December 2022 and to keep the haulers going. She displayed benchmarks with surrounding Counties and said that Lake County was around the middle for their current year buy down rate, and that labor rates, insurance and equipment were expensive, which was impacting the solid waste industry. She remarked that Lake County’s mosquito control did very well and that they were a tier two community; therefore, Lake County received about $50,000 to $70,000 per year from the State. She mentioned that aquatic plant management was similar, and that Lake County’s number looked lower than surrounding Counties because the FWC hydrilla funding did not pass through the County’s budget. She mentioned that for paved road miles maintained, Lake County fell in about the middle of surrounding Counties, and that this was also similar for dirt roads, which were graded on a two week cycle. She relayed that Lake County’s stormwater expenditures per capital benchmark had their stormwater project carryforward, which was why it was slightly higher in the current year. She displayed their proposed FY 2024 gas tax budget of $20,318,045, noting that the increase in personal services was due to anticipated wages and the health insurance contributions; additionally, the change in operating expenses reflected completion of some FDOT projects. She added that the change in capital outlay was reflecting the resurfacing number, and that their reserve would be about $477,000 in the following year. She then showed the stormwater municipal service taxing unit (MSTU) FY 2024 proposed budget of $3,138,604, and said that there was the same impact on personal services, assuming the wages and the insurance; additionally, their capital outlay reflected projects that they completed or were going to be completing in FY 2023. She added that they would also have about $600,000 in reserves in the following year. She displayed the General Fund FY 2024 proposed budget of $2,223,363 and stated that this was for mosquito, aquatic plant management, fuel remediation and the water lab. She relayed that it was the same as the other proposed budgets for personal services, and that they would be purchasing less equipment. She then showed the solid waste fund FY 2024 proposed budget of $34,346,174, remarking that it was a combination of funds and that they had a special assessment in addition to Infrastructure Sales Tax and the General Fund for their other programs which were not collection and disposal. She commented that the impact to operating expenses was the disposal contracts and their fleet and fuel costs, and that for capital outlay, they were currently in phase three of the cell closure which would be finished in the end of July 2023.

Commr. Parks hoped that the County would utilize four percent from the General Fund for resurfacing and some related projects.

Ms. Barker said that the County was waiting on the Constitutional Officers’ budgets, and that they would try to do what they could. She also indicated that staff was currently using some of the General Fund reserves to do some work, and that they would have a slight amount left over at the end of the year which would roll over into October in the new budget year. She added that as they looked at budgeting new funds for road resurfacing, they would apply those funds as well. She clarified that the County needed to know what the property values were going to be, as well as the Constitutional Officers’ budgets.

Commr. Campione inquired when the Board would hear about the recycling education.

Ms. Barker replied that staff was working on this survey at the current time, and that they would send it to the Board for review before the survey went out. She indicated that this should be done in the next couple of weeks, explaining that the survey regarded how to use recycling, how often did one use it, was curbside recycling a priority, etc. She indicated that staff was also working on getting a recycling compositions study done at the direction of the Board from the workshop in March 2023.

Commr. Campione remarked that she had used the County’s Britt Road turn lane, and she noticed that it looked like the poles were going up for the traffic signal. She wondered if staff could review their speed signage or any other type of warning signage they needed to give people as they turned onto Britt Road to know the conditions to expect. She said that it was a narrow road, and she relayed that it looked like a resident there had their property for sale. She elaborated that the resident had a fence along the road and had placed red markers, and she opined that most people who traveled that road understood what they were getting into when they made that turn; however, she indicated that it was almost like the County had invited them to use Britt Road with the turn lane. She opined that the County should review the speeds on the road and if there was any right of way where they could place signage to warn of a narrow road and to use caution.

Commr. Smith thanked staff for their budget presentations.

commissioners reports

commissioner parks – district 2

Leadership lake county

Commr. Parks thanked Ms. Barker for helping and doing a great job regarding a mock budget session with Leadership Lake County.

COMMISSIONER BLAKE – DISTRICT 5

medical examiner advisory committee meeting

Commr. Blake said that he had a Medical Examiner Advisory Committee meeting.

commissioner smith – chairman and district 3

Do Something Good for Your Neighbor Day

Commr. Smith relayed that it was Do Something Good for Your Neighbor Day.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:41 a.m.

_________________________________

kirby smith, chairman

ATTEST:

________________________________

GARY J COONEY, CLERK