APRIL 6, 1995

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, April 6, 1995, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Rhonda H. Gerber, Chairman; William "Bill" H. Good, Vice Chairman; Welton G. Cadwell; Catherine C. Hanson; and G. Richard Swartz, Jr. Others present were: Rolon W. Reed, Interim County Attorney; Bruce Duncan, Assistant County Attorney; Sue Whittle, Interim County Manager; Ava Kronz, BCC Office Manager; James C. Watkins, Clerk; Barbara Lehman, Chief Deputy Clerk, Finance, Audit & Budget Department; and Toni M. Riggs, Deputy Clerk.

Commr. Gerber welcomed all of the students that were present for Student Government Day.

Commr. Cadwell gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.


Discussion occurred regarding any changes to the agenda.

On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to pull Tab 26 regarding the Lake County Historical Society, which would be addressed during the mid-year budget.

On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved to withdraw Item 12. C., Mid Year Budget Amendment from the Clerk's agenda, so that adjustments could be made due to the Compensation Study.


On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Good and carried unanimously, the Board approved to postpone the following minutes until the Regular Board Meeting on April 18, 1995:

February 21, 1995 - Regular Meeting

February 22, 1995 - Special Meeting, Private/Public

Partnership for Water/Wastewater Systems

March 7, 1995 - Regular Meeting


Commr. Gerber informed the Board that Ms. Linda Sigman, Probation Officer, who had been employed by the County since 1984, recently passed away, and the flags would be lowered to half mast.



On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:

Accounts Allowed

Acknowledge receipt of the List of warrants paid prior to this meeting, pursuant to Chapter 136 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.

State Agencies/Reports/Water Resources

Acknowledge receipt of the Southwest Florida Water Management District Reports, as follows:

(a) Combined Financial Statements and other financial information dated September 30, 1994, with a report of independent auditors.

(b) State of Florida Annual Local Government Financial Report for fiscal year ending September 30, 1993.

(c) Tentative schedule of the Governing Board meetings for the remainder of calendar year 1995 showing dates, times and locations.

(d) St. Johns River Water Management District boundary map and legal descriptions.

(e) A copy of FY 94-95 Final Budget adopted September 19, 1994.

(f) District Land Acquisition Revenue Bond Series 1989.

(g) Copy of the $50,005,000 Land Acquisition Revenue Bonds, Series 1989 and $8,800,000 Land Acquisition Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1993.

Accounts Allowed/Deeds

Acknowledge receipt of the unclaimed excess proceeds for tax deeds totaling $390.32.

Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges

Acknowledge receipt and signature authorization on the following:

(a) Satisfaction of Judgment, In the Interest of Eugene Donnell Frazier, Rock Donnell and Betty Jo Frazier, Case No. 88-888-CJ, in the amount of $50.00.

(b) Satisfaction of Judgment, State of Florida vs. Ralph Mitchell Jones, Case Number 85-1018 CF, in the amount of $250.00.

(c) Satisfaction of Judgment, State of Florida vs. Ralph Mitchell Jones, Case Number 85-1018 CF, in the amount of $400.00.

Bonds - Contractor

Approve the following:


1616-96 Frank C. Vanderhoof (General)

4236-95 Hauge & Sons Plumbing & Heating Co. (Plumbing)

5367-95 Associated Piping Service

5368-95 Johnny Spencer (Roofing)

5369-95 W H Alderman Plumbing & Heating Co. Inc.

5370-95 Kenneth Roy Croft dba Croft Electric (Electrical)

5371-95 Peter E. Hetherman General Contractor (General)

5372-95 Charles S. Kennedy dba Kennedy & Sons Roofing, Inc.

5373-95 Reger Electric (Electrical)

5374-95 Charles Lalone (Heating & Air Conditioning)

Reports/Emergency Medical Services

Acknowledge receipt of the Annual Report from Florida Regional Emergency Medical Services (FREMS) for the year ended September 30, 1994.


Acknowledge receipt of the Public Facilities Report for North Lake County Hospital District/Independent Special District received from Gretchen R.H. Vose, Attorney for the Board of Trustees, North Lake County Hospital District.


Acknowledge receipt of the Reports prepared by the County's external auditors, Ernst & Young, for Lake County's 1994 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.

Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Bonds

Approved the Contract with Ernst & Young for calculation of arbitrage rebate on the $35,995,000 Sales Tax Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1992.

Utilities/State Agencies

Acknowledge receipt of the following: Before the Florida Public Service Commission, Notice of Hearing to Florida Public Utilities Company, Gainesville Regional Utilities - City of Gainesville, Jacksonville Electric Authority, Kissimmee Utility Authority, City of Lakeland, City of Ocala, Orlando Utilities Commission, City of Tallahassee, Clay Electric Cooperative, Inc., Lee County Electric Cooperative, Inc., Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc., Talquin Electric Cooperative, Inc., Withlacoochee River Electric Cooperative, Inc., Florida Keys Electric Cooperative Association, Inc., and City of Vero Beach, 9:30 a.m., Monday, April 10, 1995, 101 East Gaines Street, Room 106, Fletcher Building, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0863.

Reports/Water Resources

Acknowledge receipt of the State of Florida Annual Local Government Financial Report Fiscal Year 1993-1994 for St Johns River Water Management District.

Budget Transfers

Approved the following:

A. Budget Transfers:

Fund: General

Department: Constitutional Officers - Sheriff

From: Contingency - Sheriff $ 10,000

To: Transfer/Jail - Equipment $ 10,000

Transfer #: 95-115

Justification: Pursuant to F.S. 30.49, the Sheriff is requesting that $10,000 of the Sheriff's Contingency money be transferred to Corrections Capital Outlay.


Delegate authority from County Manager to Ava Kronz for review of Judicial and Constitutional Officer's expenditures less than $5,000.

Background: Florida Statutes require that the County pay certain expenditures of the Judiciary and Constitutional Officers, which are budgeted annually as part of the County's budget. While the Judiciary and Constitutional Officers initiates and approves these expenditures, a representative of the County has been given signature authority, in accordance with purchasing guidelines, to sign for them. In the past, this signature authority was given to the Budget Office and/or the County Manager, with the Budget Director having signature authority for up to $5,000, and the County Manager for expenses between $5,000 and $25,000. In order to simplify this process and to alleviate some of the workload from the County Manager, we propose that another Board employee, Ava Kronz, be given signature authority for purchases up to $5,000.


In accordance with Board direction, the attached items, as presented in the backup material, were approved by the County Manager based on a policy adopted by the Board on March 1, 1993, increasing the transfer limit of the County Manager from $10,000 to $25,000.


Mr. Joe Grawet, Personnel Manager, presented information relating to each of the following individuals, as Commr. Gerber presented each with a plaque/certificate:

Presentation of Plaques to Employees with Five Years of Service

David B. Bailey, Animal Control Officer, fire and Emergency Services/Animal Control

Robert Boyette, Maintenance Worker III, Public Services/Special Services Division/Parks Services

Sharon Horton, Executive Secretary, Public Services/Special Services Division/Director's Office/Support Services

Jonathan Iannone, Fire Lieutenant/EMT, Fire and Emergency Services/Fire-Rescue Division (not present)

Louis A. LaFond, Equip Operator I, Public Services/Roads Division/Maint Area I

Lois R. Martin, Human Resources Director, Office of Human Resources/Personnel

Bobby Phillips, Equipment Operator III, Public Services/Roads Division/Maint Area III

Presentation of Plaque to Employee with Ten Years of Service

Harley E. Evans, Probation Officer, Community Services/Probation Services Division

Presentation of Plaque to Employees with Twenty-five Years

of Service

Will R. Lamond, Sign Fabricator I, Public Services/Engineering Division/Traffic Safety Services (not present)


Presentation of Certificates

Affordable Housing Advisory Committee

James Dean for his service to Lake County as a member of the Lake County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee from 1992-1995.

Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee

Merry L. Hadden for her service to Lake County as a member of the Lake County Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee from 1993-1995.

Dr. Ken Stack for his service to Lake County as a member o the Lake County Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee from 1993-1995.

Alice R. Harrington for her service to Lake County as a member of the Lake County Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee from 1993-1995. (not present)

Fire and Emergency Services Advisory Board

Duane Gorgas for his service to Lake County as a member of the Lake County Fire and Emergency Services Advisory Board from 1993-1995.

Industrial Development Authority

Claude Smoak for his service to Lake County as a member of the Lake County Industrial Development Authority from 1991-1995. (not present)

Parks and Recreation Advisory Board

Sandra T. Green for her service to Lake County as a member of the Lake County Parks and Recreation Advisory Board from 1991-1994. (not present)

Carol Schneider for her service to Lake County as a member of the Lake County Parks and Recreation Advisory Board from 1991-1995.




The Chairman announced that the advertised time had arrived for the public hearing on the amendment to the Lake County Comprehensive Plan Resolving DOAH Case Nos. 94-0378GM and 94-1209GM.

Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planner, addressed the Board and noted that the draft Ordinance had been presented to the Board with his Memorandum dated March 6, 1995. Mr. Knight referred to Page I-50, Lake County Future Land Use Element and explained that all of the underlined language pertained to the County's establishment of a variance process for older platted subdivisions that would have to aggregate lots under the Future Land Use Map to have a variance process. He noted the List of Recognized Unrecorded Subdivisions and stated that, if any other subdivision was to be recognized, it would be incorporated through a Comprehensive Plan Amendment.

Discussion occurred regarding the procedures that would be used for the Wekiva River area, with it being noted that the language included the following: "This policy shall not apply in the Core/Conservation or Rural/Conservation portion of the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern or within the Wekiva River Protection Area boundaries."

Mr. Knight explained that the County requires aggregation to five acres in the LDRs, and this was not required in the Comprehensive Plan for aggregation in the Wekiva. He felt that this problem could be addressed in the LDRs.

Mr. Knight addressed the change on Page VI-C-2, which pertained to the Stormwater Sub-Element and noted that the underlined language was a part of the Stipulated Agreement with the Department of Community Affairs (DCA).

The last change addressed by Mr. Knight was Page VII-2, Conservation Element, in regards to the completion of the Environmental Resource Management Plan.

Commr. Gerber opened the public hearing portion of the meeting. There being no public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.

On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to adopt Ordinance 1995-8, as follows by title only:



On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Good and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests, Tabs 4-20, with the exception of Tab 6, which was pulled upon request of Commr. Cadwell:

Community Services/Grants

Acceptance and signature on the Certification of Participation for the 1995-96 Federal Anti-Drug Abuse Act grant program.

Appointments-Resignations/Committees/Community Services

Approval of the appointment of Dr. Tully Patrowicz to serve as North Lake County Hospital Tax District's representative on the Lake County Comprehensive Health Care Committee for a two year term ending August 16, 1996. Dr. Patrowicz would be replacing The Rev. Dr. Terry Jackson who was appointed on an interim basis until the North Lake County Hospital Tax District made its official appointment.

Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Community Services

For your information, the Lake County Family Health Council, Inc. has submitted a letter stating that their agency was going out of business effective March 31, 1995, and that the contract between Lake County Family Health Council, Inc. and the County shall be terminated effective 12:01 a.m., April 1, 1995.

County Employees/Human Resources

Approval of Certificates for employees with one year of service.

County Employees/Human Resources

Approval of Certificates for employees with three years of service.

Resolutions/E-9-1-1/Information Services

Approval of Resolution Providing for the Imposition of a Local Option Fee for Provision "9-1-1" Service and Equipment for the Period of October 1, 1994 through September 30, 1995.

Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Zoning

Acceptance and execution of an Agreement Between the Board of County Commissioners and Brenda Kelly for a Temporary Non-Conforming Zoning Use to place a travel trailer on property located on Sahara Court in Sorrento while the conventional home is being built - Commission District 4.

Deeds/Rights-of-Way, Roads & Easements

Acceptance of a non-exclusive deed from B&W Groves-J.F. Whitt, President, for the creation of 5 lots in Agriculture zoning on an easement off Bloom Field Road - Commission District 3.

Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Recreation/Public Services

Approval for Chairman to execute an Agreement Between Lake County and The Boys and Girls Club of Lake County, Inc. Relating to Contribution of Infrastructure Sales Tax Funds for Long Term Recreational Programs.

Resolutions/Roads-County & State/Signs

Approval of Resolution to post a 35 m.p.h. speed limit on Getford Rd. (4-5970), outside the city limits and 45 m.p.h. on Hick's Ditch Rd. (4-6065), east of Eustis.

Resolutions/Roads-County & State/Signs

Approval of Resolution authorizing the posting of speed limits on the following roads in the Green Swamp area: Greater Groves Bv. (2-0159); Hamlin Tr. (2-0159A); Duncan Tr. (2-0159B); Pink Grapefruit Tr. (2-0158B); Star Tr. (2-1058); Flame Ct. (2-0158A); Onecco Tr. (2-0157D); Kiwi Tr. (2-0157) and Green Swamp Rd. (2-0439).

Deeds/Rights-of-Way, Roads & Easements

Acceptance of Temporary Non-Exclusive Easement Deed from Wendy R. and Roy Michael Clark for intersection improvements at Gray's Airport/Griffin View Intersection.


Acceptance of Statutory Warranty Deeds from the following:

Pine Island Lake Grove, Inc.

CR 35-565B

Patricia Fae Heck

Sugarloaf Mtn. #2-2350

Deeds/Roads-County & State

Approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:

Deed No.: 790

Applicant: George F. Green, Inc.

Location: Lady Lake, Sec. 3/4, Twp. 18 S. Rge. 24 E.

Recommend: Reserve 33 feet from centerline of Marion County Road #5-8010, reserve 33 feet from centerline of Haywood Grove Rd. #3-8109

Deeds/Roads-County & State

Approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:

Deed No.: 2012

Applicant: Kenneth E. and Eve L. Smithgall

Location: Lady Lake, Plat of Conant Lot 1, Block 14

Recommend: Reserve 33 feet from centerline of Griffin Avenue #5-7807, reserve 33 feet from centerline of Joseph Avenue

Solid Waste

Approval to waive disposal charges related to the Great Florida Clean-up which is occurring April 1, 1995.


Commr. Cadwell explained that he had Tab 6 pulled from the Consent Agenda, in order for the Board to act separately on the Resolution recognizing the 50th Anniversary of Lake County Veterans Service Office.

Mr. Don Priem, Director, Division of Veterans Service, was present to answer questions of the Board.

On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Resolution recognizing the 50th Anniversary of Lake County Veterans Service Office.



Mr. James C. Watkins, Clerk, addressed the Board and stated that the Clerk's Office would be making a presentation on the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. He stated that Ms. Barbara Lehman, Finance Director, and Mr. John Vodenicker, Ernst & Young, were here for the presentation, and Ms. Sarah LaMarche, Director of Budget, Mr. Kevin McDonald, Senior Budget Analyst, and Ms. Tracy Zeller, Senior Budget Analyst were present in the audience. Mr. Watkins stated that Lake County had again received the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting from the Government Finance Officers Association, with respect to the presentation of this report.

Ms. Lehman introduced Mr. John Vodenicker and Mr. Mike Murphy, both from Ernst & Young.

Mr. Vodenicker appeared before the Board to present the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 1994. He referred to Page 23 and read the following into the record:

"In our opinion, the general purpose financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Lake County, Florida, at September 30, 1994, and the results of its operations and cash flows of its proprietary fund types for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles."

Signed Ernst & Young, January 27, 1995.

Mr. Vodenicker stated that footnote 18 was being highlighted in the Report of Independent Certified Public Accountants, to note that the County had changed its method of reporting for landfill closure and post closure care costs. He proceeded to present a review of Pages 32-33, regarding the Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual, All Governmental Fund Types. Mr. Vodenicker referred to Pages 124-125 regarding the Comparative Balance Sheet, Enterprise Fund, Landfill Fund, and the Comparative Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Change in Retained Earnings Enterprise Fund - Landfill Fund and commented that the County was now beginning to set aside some money ($3,500,216) in Restricted Assets, which would be for post closure and closure costs. He referred to Page 125 and noted that there had been a significant increase in the Operating Revenues ($11,173,525) over the previous year ($8,900,579), which included a full year of the assessment program and an increase in the tipping fees. He addressed the Operating Expenditure side, which indicated costs that have increased considerably; however, he noted there had been a $5,000,000 increase over the previous year in the Landfill Closure Costs. Mr. Vodenicker explained that, in future years, as the County incurs expenses that have to do with post closure, or closure, these expenses will go directly to the liability account that has been created, and will no longer be reflected in the operating statement.

Discussion occurred regarding the Contractual Services, with it being noted that the amount consisted primarily of the Ogden Martin contract, along with a few other contracts. Mr. Vodenicker, along with Ms. Lehman, presented a more detailed explanation of the Enterprise Fund - Landfill fund, in order to answer questions of the Board.

Mr. Vodenicker provided the Board with a Financial Overview, which included the following information:

Balance Sheets

Revenues (All Governmental Fund Types and Expendable Trust Funds)


Expenditures - All Governmental Fund Types

Landfill Enterprise Fund

Comparative Data With Other U.S. Counties - Populations

Commr. Swartz referred to Page 20 of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and the paragraph pertaining to Cash Management, and requested an explanation of the investment strategy being used by Lake County to ensure that the County's funds were not being put at risk.

Mr. James C. Watkins, Clerk, explained that Lake County takes a very conservative approach to its investments; it does not have any money in derivatives. He explained that the County extensively uses the State Board of Administration (SBA). Mr. Watkins explained that he serves on a statewide committee consisting of Clerks, the Comptroller of the State, the Treasurer of the State, and many others who are looking at an investment policy statewide, and a law statewide. Mr. Watkins stated that most of the counties in the State of Florida, with the exception of possibly two, do not have the investment concerns of Orange County, California, or of the Bank in England.

Mr. Vodenicker reported to the Board that the County has a policy that, number one, primarily protects the principle of what it has invested, with yield being number two.

Mr. Watkins explained that the County looks at liquidity first, and safety, with yield being the last of the objectives. He stressed that Lake County was among those counties that have an investment policy to which Lake County adheres.

No action was needed on the presentation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.



Ms. Diane Hovencamp of the Orlando Sports Commission addressed the Board to present the background history of the Orlando Sports Commission, and to extend an invitation to Lake County to join the City of Orlando, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Orange County, who currently make up the Orlando Area Sports Commission. She stated that, not only does the Orlando Sports Commission see this as an opportunity to provide economic development opportunities to Lake County, but it also sees it as a huge opportunity for the Sports Commission to be able to expand its dimensions and scope of services and venues that are currently in place, for which offers the national governing bodies of sports to market central Florida as a number one sports destination. She presented a brief background on sports commissions, and the formation of the commissions. She then presented a marketing presentation video, which had been donated to the Sports Commission by Channel 6. Ms. Hovencamp explained that the Sports Commission was currently funded by the three counties and the City of Orlando. This year over $300,000 has been collected from combined public funding. She explained that another funding mechanism was in place, which consists of the Friends of the Sports Commission, where local organizations are contacted to financially support the Sports Commission. Today over $150,000 in cash has been brought in

from in-kind services from over 20 local corporations, and there will be fund raisers and other activities that will support some of the public funding. Ms. Hovencamp stated that the Sports Committee sees Lake County as a tremendous opportunity, and she touched on many of its resources. She stated that she would love to come back and visit with the Sports Committee and others to determine what Lake County has to offer, and how the Sports Commission can help the County to capitalize on its resources, and how the County can be brought into the mix of the Orlando Area Sports Commission.

Commr. Hanson stated that she first met with Ms. Hovencamp approximately two months ago, and since then, Mr. Dave Warren, Director of Tourist Development, has met with her. She has toured the County, and Commr. Hanson agreed that Lake County has the potential. Commr. Hanson stated that her recommendation had been, prior to going back to Tourist Development Council (TDC), the Sports Committee be reactivated, because the members are already in place, and they could look into the feasibility, and the recommendations. She felt that the dollars would come from TDC from the bed tax, and she felt it would give Lake County the opportunity to bring some events to the County that it would probably never have the opportunity to attract. Commr. Hanson stated that her recommendation would be to contact those members, in order to determine whether they would be interested in remaining on the Sports Committee and serving in this capacity.

Commr. Good stated that he had some concerns to discuss with the Board. He questioned whether any funding was being expended to the Orlando Sports Commission at this time, and whether the Resolution establishing the Lake County Sports Committee came about from a request made from citizens of the County, or was this something that the Board had decided to do.

Mr. Dave Warren, Director of Tourist Development, explained that the issue came about when the County was looking at the possibility of spring training, and when it was determined that was

not the direction that the County wanted to go, the scope was broadened when the triathlon was considered. It was broadened to encompass all sports, and not just baseball.

Commr. Hanson explained her meetings with Ms. Hovencamp, and her decision to have Ms. Hovencamp make a presentation to the Board, in order to determine the direction that the Board wanted to take, as to whether it wanted to reactivate the Lake County Sports Committee who would consider the feasibility of joining the Orlando Sports Commission and make a recommendation to the TDC, to see whether they would endorse it, and then come back to the Board.

Commr. Cadwell explained that the Board needed to decide whether it wanted to reactivate the Lake County Sports Committee, and one of the issues to be considered by the Committee would be whether Lake County should join the Orlando Sports Commission. He stated that, even if the County chose not to join them, there were enough issues for the Sports Committee to consider.

Discussion occurred regarding the original establishment of the Resolution, and whether the action being requested to reactivate the Sports Committee had been based on citizen interest and been brought forward to the Board, or it was due to an interest of the Board.

Mr. Warren explained that the Sports Committee was established, so that if any opportunities came to Lake County, the Committee could review it and bring a decision to the TDC.

Commr. Hanson stated that she had received only a positive response from the public on the issue of joining the Orlando Sports Commission. She stated that the Board may wish to direct, in the interest of time, TDC to review the issue of joining the Orlando Sports Commission and come forward with its evaluation.

Commr. Good explained that he felt it was not the government's role to promote business, even though the Board had taken this type of action, and noted that he was very conservative in this area. He liked there to be a separation between government promoted

activities and what the private sector undertakes. He expressed that he had a concern when the Commission decided to promote activities, as opposed to a group of citizens coming together.

Commr. Hanson explained that the funding for the joint effort would most likely come from the bed tax, and it would have to be approved by the TDC.

Commr. Swartz stated that the Board may want to look at the Resolution, with it being brought to the Board at the next meeting, April 18, 1995, to make sure it implies what had been discussed today, in dealing with all aspects of sports. The Board could then review it and determine whether any modifications needed to be made, and the Board could make a decision whether or not it wanted to reinstate those that were willing and have previously served, or if the Board wanted to consider other individuals. He stated that the real question was if the Board felt it would be worthwhile to have a citizens group look at whether it would be beneficial to Lake County and its citizens to become a part of the Orlando Sport Commission. Commr. Swartz suggested that the Resolution be brought back to the Board on April 18, 1995, for the Board to consider, and for the Board to consider the group that was needed to review this possibility.

Commr. Hanson made a motion, to have the Resolution brought back to the Board on April 18, 1995, and to direct Mr. Warren to contact those individuals who originally served on the Committee, to determine whether they would be willing to serve.

Commr. Cadwell suggested that the Board have the Resolution brought back for consideration before any individual was contacted.

Commr. Hanson stated that her motion stood as presented, with Mr. Warren contacting the individuals who have currently served on the Sports Committee.

Commr. Good seconded the motion.

Under discussion, Commr. Swartz explained that the motion simply brings the Resolution back to the Board and, during the interim, Mr. Warren would contact the previous members to determine their willingness to serve on the Sports Committee.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously.


At 10:40 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would take a ten minute recess.


Ms. Mary Mericle appeared before the Board and explained that she and her husband had visited the Planning Department this week to see what was needed for them to open a bed and breakfast in their home, which was located on the Wekiva River. She stated that a Planner explained to her that, because they lived on the Wekiva River, it would be impossible to have a bed and breakfast, even though they do not plan any changes to their home. The Planner had explained that, because it was in the Wekiva Area, there were no commercial endeavors allowed and no exceptions. At this time, Ms. Mericle explained the hardships she and her husband have endured over the last year, and the need to supplement their income. She stated that she hoped common sense would prevail, and the Board would consider changing the rule which would prohibit them from having a bed and breakfast.

Commr. Hanson addressed the issue of no more new commercial being allowed in the Wekiva Basin, and stated that, if the County was to allow it in the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) for residential, it would be acceptable. She stated that bed and breakfasts were the logical route to tie together the bike trails, and to allow the public to enjoy the area that the County would be preserving.

Mr. Greg Stubbs, Director, Development Regulation Services Division, addressed the Board and explained that currently staff was creating a new matrix that would be coming to the Board at future public hearings on this specific item. Direction had been

given to staff approximately 1 1/2 years ago, with regard to a bed and breakfast that was approved in the Lake Jem area, to take bed and breakfasts out of the hotel/motel arrangement, and to try and provide some type of special use permit for them in Lake County. Mr. Stubbs stated that, at the present, the Wekiva does not allow commercial uses. He noted that the Board had approved a CUP in AR zoning for the bed and breakfast in Lake Jem. Mr. Stubbs explained that staff had obtained ordinances that pertain to bed and breakfasts from other areas and would be bringing a proposed ordinance to the Board for Lake County.

Ms. Mericle explained that her property was zoned rural residential and was called North Harbor Acres, Lot 13.

Commr. Swartz explained that, if bed and breakfasts were done as an accessory use of a residential dwelling, and it was not turned into a commercial use, he would not view it as strictly a commercial use. He stated that the County needed to have a bed and breakfast ordinance. Commr. Swartz requested that staff look at it in similar terms that were used for the Lake Jem property, as an accessory use, or a conditional use in a residential district, and to make sure it goes through the public hearing process.

Mr. Stubbs stated that some minimum standards could be brought back to the Board in the first round to the LDR amendments, with the Board being able to make the ordinance more strict at a later date, but putting the safeguards in it to where the adjacent property owners would not be hindered or affected by the bed and breakfast. He noted that all of the pertinent areas have been advertised of the LDRs.

Discussion occurred regarding the appropriate time for the Mericles to make application for the bed and breakfast.

Commr. Swartz suggested that the Mericles wait until the Board goes through the LDR amendment review process, which would take place at the end of April and the first part of May.



Commr. Gerber suggested that the Board move to the section entitled Reports, because of the number of individuals that were present in the audience for a particular issue.

Commr. Good moved Tab 27 for discussion at this time. He explained that the proposed Resolution addressed the four-laning that was being proposed in the future of State Road (SR) 40 in the Ocala National Forest area. Commr. Good explained that he had the opportunity to look at the Surface Transportation 2010 Plan while he was in Tallahassee, which was a 50 year visioning activity that was undertaken by a multi-county group. He noted that there had been concern and discussion expressed by interested individuals in the County about SR 40 and how that area would be altered in the future with the County's Transportation Plan. Commr. Good displayed a copy of the Future Land Use Map for Lake County, and stated that, in the County's Comprehensive Plan, a portion of SR 40 has been designated to be four-laned. He referred to the SR 40 Environmental Impact Statement, which he had provided copies to the Board, which showed SR 40 bisecting the Ocala National Forest. The Forest Service had raised questions about whether this would be the best thing to do. Commr. Good stated that he was concerned that it had the potential to become a four-lane truck route across the National Forest, and that he was very concerned that it would not be in the best management of this area, nor have the most positive impact on the micro-economy of Lake County to pursue this part of the Plan. Commr. Good stated that he would be interested in knowing how the Board members felt about this issue, and that his Resolution would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that he would work to make the Plan consistent with what has been filed with the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), but there were opportunities with the Plan to provide better management plans and improve on the Plan. He stated that the Resolution was

being brought forward for discussion, and he did not necessarily expect action on it, as it was currently written, but would be amenable to some modification to the wording. Commr. Good stated that it was being brought forward to discuss what would be best for the micro-economy of Lake County and the environment. He had discussed, with State representatives, his concerns with planning that was being brought forward, which appeared to be big by-passes through Lake County.

Commr. Cadwell stated that, as the Resolution was currently written, he would not support it, but he would with a couple of minor changes.

Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Services, addressed the Board and stated that, in 1992, he met with the Volusia County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and the Marion County MPO, to discuss Lake County's problems with traffic along the State Road (SR) 44 and Highway 441 corridor. This was the same time that the Intra-State Highway System came out, and SR 40 was addressed. Mr. Stivender stated that SR 40 did not really affect how traffic flowed in Lake County, but he did look at County Road (CR) 42 as an east-west, along with SR 44 in Volusia County, as a continuation of the east-west to the coast, and extending CR 42 through Marion County and continuing west all the way to I-75, as a potential future expansion to the turnpike. At this time, Mr. Stivender explained the route that had been considered by the County that would go south of the National Forest.

Commr. Cadwell stated that the Board was not conceding in the Resolution that there was a need for an east-west route in Central Florida and suggested that language be added that states "we concede that there are needs, but we would prefer that you look somewhere else other than there", and offer the east-west route with SR 44 and CR 42 being considered.

Commr. Good stated that he would be amenable to take the Resolution back and insert some wording to the effect that southern routes be considered, especially CR 42, and SR 44 where there are already disturbed natural areas.

Mr. Jim Barker, Director of Environmental Management, addressed the Board and stated that a great amount of the CR 42 corridor had been designated as a wildlife corridor, and it lies directly between a lot of the acquisitions that were taking place for the Water Management District, Department of Natural Resources and the Forest Service, as well as the CR 42 bridge over the Oklawaha. Those particular areas are sensitive, and because of the bear tunnel under 46, those would be major considerations in any of those routes.

Commr. Gerber called for public comment on the issue before the Board.

Ms. Nadine Foley, President, Lake County Conservation Council, appeared before the Board to support the Resolution to keep SR 40 as a two-lane highway. Ms. Foley noted that she had attended the Focus Group Meeting of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) on April 4, 1995, as a representative of the Lake County Conservation Council. She explained that the Focus Group Meetings were developed to bring people together that can bring information back to the communities. Ms. Foley presented a summary of the information that was presented at the meeting regarding the SR 40 Environmental Impact Statement Study, as well as alternative plans.

Ms. Margie Bielling, Ft. McCoy, Marion County, Save Our Scenic Authority Group, addressed the Board and explained that there were representatives of environmental groups from all over the State that attended the meeting. Ms. Bielling stated that a lot of money and a lot of time were being invested in putting aside preservation areas in the State, and she felt that FDOT looked at these areas as already purchased inexpensive land to be used for right-of-way purposes. She emphasized that, by four-laning, it would be jeopardizing the entire eco-system by fragmenting the Ocala National Forest. She explained that the decision to four-lane

would come from the Forest Service and that they were also attending the Focus Group Meetings, and she felt that the Resolution being proposed would encourage them to say "no" to the issue. Ms. Bielling stated that she would like to see FDOT address the safety problems, but she felt there were some creative things that could be done, and she would like to see underpasses put under certain places of the two-lane highway that currently exists.

Ms. Darlene Wisener, Marion County, appeared before the Board and discussed the plans that have been discussed for the area south of Marion County including the Cross Florida Green Way. She explained that there were already great transportation problems in Marion County, but plans for a scenic road and Green Way program were already taking place, with the heart of the Green Way being in Marion County. She explained that people have the choice, at this time, to focus on either building more roads and polluting more air and ruining more areas and having more suburban sprawl, or to make a choice to do an economically sound, less costly, much more environmentally friendly and public interest effort in connecting Green Ways with communities. Ms. Wisener stated that it would be in everyone's interest to deny completely any of these four-lane plans.

Ms. Gerry Baldwin, Marion County, addressed the Board to discuss the proposed Resolution for SR 40. She informed the Board that over $300 million have been spent by Green groups of the State to try and save, preserve and restore green space, and then through another State agency, comes a proposal to turn around and spend $100 million to take away several thousand acres of that preserved green space. Ms. Baldwin asked that the Board remember that this section of the State of Florida was the center of green space of this State, and it has the opportunity to be the premier green space of the State. She informed the Board that the Marion County Commissioners have not taken any action on widening any section of SR 40, but the MPO of Marion County has taken the position that

they favor widening the highway. She explained that the Marion County Comprehensive Plan designates SR 40 as a future four-lane artery and part of the intra-state highway system.

Ms. Christine Small, Senior Coordinator for the Habitat for Bears Campaign, addressed the Board and explained that her interest in SR 40 involved the bear populations. The Ocala National Forest was one of five major bear populations remaining in the State of Florida. The State had spent approximately $100 million on land purchases to connect the Wekiva Basin to the Ocala National Forest. She explained that the State was buying land to connect the Wekiva Geo-park in two "arms" up to the Ocala National Forest. The State was doing this, in part, to protect the Florida Black Bear. Ms. Small stated that the bears cross SR 40, CR 42, SR 44, and SR 46, and that Lake County had the new bear underpass on SR 46, which had shown to be successful. She stated that the crossing of these roads was not such a problem for the bears, as it was for smaller organisms. She further stated that FDOT had proposed the widening of SR 40 and CR 42, and SR 44 as four-lane highways, along with SR 46, which was also proposed in the long-range plans for widening to four-lanes. Four major roads through the conservation areas, proposed and existing, forms fragmentation. Ms. Small stated that she felt the Board was moving in a visionary direction as indicated today. She stated that it would be more feasible to put bear underpasses on the "arms" that were going up to the Wekiva and from the Wekiva to the Ocala National Forest. She further stated that there was a need for underpasses on SR 40, as it existed right now, but perhaps another alternative would be to widen or consider an east-west route from I-75 to I-95, which might be CR 42.

Mr. Edd Holder addressed the Board and stated that environmental issues were quality of life issues. Mr. Holder explained that people not having jobs would be a very serious quality of life issue, and the County was losing sight of this issue. The Federal Government owns the property that runs through

the Ocala National Forest, and the surrounding counties have Comprehensive Plans that would dictate what could be constructed in the area. He stated that transportation was needed, so that people could get to work, and Lake County had not had a major road built in 30 years. He further stated that someone has to pay the price and it has to be done by employment. Mr. Holder addressed the roads that have been abandoned as proposed east-west routes and stated that he was in favor of saving all of the animals, but questioned what should be done about the people who have jobs and need to get to the coast. Mr. Holder explained that he was concerned that Lake County would be isolating itself from Orlando, which would hurt the County, because 18% of its work force commutes to Orlando. He stated that the County was not creating good enough jobs for Lake County, and the Board had committed to work very hard on this issue. He emphasized that the environment was a quality of life issue, but he put the quality of life of people having jobs above, for instance, a bear getting killed. Mr. Holder explained that he pays taxes in Lake County, he was born and raised here, and had seen what was going on, and he does not mind sharing it with other people. He was not in favor of people stopping things for their own personal reasons, and who do not have alternative options to offer.

Mr. Robert Griffin, Fruitland Park, appeared before the Board to speak against the four-laning of SR 40. He stated that he and his wife were present at the Focus Group Meeting in Ocala. Mr. Griffin stated that roads can continue to be built, but if an individual travels south to see what had happened in the south of the State, Lake County may want to try and avoid some of the "overkill" that was already here. He felt that SR 40 was a very delicate area to put a high speed road through and stated that he has interest at heart, but not only ecological interest and environmental interest, but people's interest as far as jobs are concerned. He explained that people that have the jobs that use

the forest include the hunters, fishermen, campers, and hikers, and safety needed to be considered where four-lane highways were concerned. Mr. Griffin stated that the forest was attracting more and more people, and he was in favor of more people being here, but in a responsible way.

Ms. Wisener addressed the Board and explained that FDOT had explained that SR 40 was being proposed, in order to have an evacuation route from the coast, but she did not feel this would feasible, because, in the forest area, there were no public accommodations, or large buildings. Therefore, she did not see this as a rational reason. She agreed that people needed to be thought of first, but if the communities were developed in the proper manner, people would not have to drive an hour to get to work. She felt it would not have a bearing on people's jobs, because new jobs would be created at home, such as bed and breakfasts, as mentioned earlier in the meeting. These kinds of things and the recreational industry would expand, but they would have little impact on the environment. She stated that a huge highway would bring in all types of law enforcement problems.

Commr. Hanson commented that the eco-systems around CR 42, SR 44, and SR 46 were equally as fragile as those on SR 40, and probably much less protected. Her concern was that, the Resolution as it was written, would be somewhat premature, because the members do not have the study behind it. She stated that she was not opposed to looking into this area and trying to develop a plan, but to approve it today, or any modifications, would be somewhat premature. She did not mind looking into a resolution and coming back with a recommendation on the direction that the Board would like to go. She pointed out that a road going east-west would help alleviate the traffic problems in Tavares, Leesburg, and Eustis.

Commr. Swartz thought that some type of extension of SR 42 from interstate through the southern side of the forest might be a way to relieve traffic on the Highway 441 corridor in Lake County,

and if this could be shown, he might be supportive of considering this possibility. He stated that some of the count data had indicated a large majority being local traffic, and not the pass through traffic that was causing the congestion. He did not feel there was any road building project, or road widening project, that ever improved the quality of life anywhere. Commr. Swartz stated that the only way he would support bringing a "circle" around and through Lake County would be if it would not destroy the quality of life in Lake County. He could not foresee taking Orange County traffic and letting them destroy Lake County. He understood that the comments made today involved asking the Board to be more efficient and sensible about how the public's money was spent, and to do a better job of planning. Commr. Swartz stated that, at some point, the Board was going to have to take a position on an issue such as SR 40. It was clear from the County's Comprehensive Plan, that the section that runs through the forest was designated as a two-lane road, so any widening to a four-lane would be inconsistent with the Plan, and without changing the Plan, the Board would have to oppose it. He stated that he was not ready to sign anything that would indicate a definite "no", because the impacts needed to be studied, but he was of the opinion that he could sign the proposed Resolution with little change, because it was very much limited to the SR 40 issue.

Commr. Good understood that Commr. Cadwell wanted additional language added to the proposed Resolution that says that FDOT should consider alternate routes to SR 40. He further understood that Commr. Swartz wanted to ask, in the Resolution, that FDOT consider the real impacts of regional impacts on the roadway today. He stated that he would like to take this Resolution back for input from the other Commissioners and include both sets of language.

Commr. Good made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Swartz, to bring the Resolution back to the Commission at

the next Board meeting, and for it to be placed on the agenda, with those language changes.

Under discussion, Commr. Hanson stated that she would like to have staff come back with their comments on the issue.

Commr. Swartz understood that the motion was to take the Resolution before the Board today and massage it from both sides from what Commr. Cadwell had indicated, which was to look at other alternatives, but to also look at those alternatives in light of whether or not they are going to improve traffic conditions on other roads in Lake County.

Ms. Sue Whittle, Interim County Manager, noted that two items were coming back to the Board on April 18, 1995. She pointed out that they were past the agenda deadline for that meeting, so they would have to come back as Addendum items.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously.



Mr. Tim Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney, addressed the Board and explained the request from staff for clarification of the term "parish", with regards to Zoning Ordinance #52-86, St. Matthias Episcopal Parish. Mr. Hoban stated that, in 1986, the Commission rezoned the property to the current CFD for the purpose of a church, parish and office facility. He further stated that, this past fall, he, as well as Mr. Greg Stubbs, Director, Development Regulation Services, issued opinions that a church, parish, and office facility do not include a school. There had been a request to put a school on the property, and it had been pointed out to him and Mr. Stubbs that the word "parish" could be construed very strongly to mean a school. In addition, when the property was rezoned in 1986, it was the intent to move the church from downtown Clermont, with all of its current operations, to this facility. The current operations in Clermont include A Mom's Day

Out, a day care operation, a kinder-care, and a first and second grade. Mr. Hoban stated that this could become a quasi-judicial proceeding and public comment would not be appropriate today. Staff was merely requesting from the Commission the proper interpretation of a Board of County Commissioner's Resolution for the rezoning of a piece of property.

It was noted that Mr. Hoban's Agenda Item Cover Sheet dated March 15, 1995, presented the following explanation:

The consequence of interpreting the word "parish" to not include "parochial school" is that the applicant would have to amend Ordinance No. 52-86 through the public hearing process to specifically include a parochial school The consequence of interpreting the word "parish" to include a parochial school is that the applicant would merely have to have an amended site place approved by the Technical Review Committee (TRC).

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, addressed the Board and stated that the operation included the church and day care, which had been there for approximately ten years, and the plans for the school, which started approximately two years ago. He explained that, under Clermont's zoning, church and accessory uses are allowed.

Discussion occurred regarding the actual wording in the zoning Ordinance #52-86.

Mr. Richey explained that parish included all of the church related activities, the church, the fellowship hall, the day care center. Mr. Richey explained that he did not represent the individuals of the St. Matthias Episcopal Parish at that time, but it was the understanding of the priest that his activities of his church, and his community service were included in parish. He noted that the County's Land Development Regulations (LDRs) define "church" as a place of worship. Mr. Richey stated that this church envisioned "parish" to be in the broad sense of all the community activities.

Commr. Swartz suggested, as a course of action, that the issue should revolve around whether the actions of the County Commissioners in 1986 were intended to approve a school. If those actions were intended, and either the minutes or the tape of that

meeting could show that a school was intended, it would be clear that staff would have direction to provide for a school. If the minutes and/or the tapes do not clearly show that the request, and the approval of the Board of County Commissioners, were for a school and necessary appurtenances, then it would be clear that the proper direction would be to come through a public hearing process. He suggested that the Board direct staff to go back and listen to the actual tapes of the minutes, if it could be ascertained that approval was for a school, then the administrative process that was in place would stand. If staff had questions as to whether it was approved, then it should go through the public hearing process.

On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved to direct staff to pull the tapes and access what the actual words indicate, as to what the use of the land should be, and make the decision on the wording, and if staff was clear that was what was intended, they proceed to do what was approved by the Board in 1986; if there was doubt, then the issue should go through the public hearing.


At 1 p.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for lunch and reconvene at 2 p.m.



Mr. Bruce Thorburn, Director, Information Services, appeared before the Board to discuss the following concerns expressed by the Board regarding certain services provided or desired of CableVision Industries (CVI) operating a cable franchise in south Lake County:

1. Utilization of the Franchise-authorized Government or Public Access Channel.

2. Charges for multiple outlets by CVI.

3. Standardization of collection of the franchise fee to FCC maximum of 5% upon acceptance of franchise transfer from CVI to Time Warner-Advanced Newhouse when their agreement is completed.

Mr. Thorburn stated that Mr. Mark Mayhook, General Manager, CVI, was present to answer questions of the Board. He noted that written responses from CVI were in the member's backup material.

Mr. Thorburn explained that he and Mr. Bruce Duncan, Assistant County Attorney, attended a seminar on March 21, 1995, in Tampa, regarding cable television regulation and re-regulation. He stated that the County had been officially notified of the acquisition of CableVision Industries (CVI) by Time Warner Entertainment Advanced Newhouse. Under the refranchising of a franchise agreement there are very strict rules and regulations that need to be applied on the Federal level. Under transfers, you would have considerable more authority and power to negotiate.

Discussion occurred regarding, once the testing was completed and access granted for the government and educational channel, an expenditure of $1,400 would be required for a specialized antenna, a down converter, amplifier and processor. It was noted that Lake Sumter Community College does not have the funds available at this time. Mr. Thorburn explained that the Cable Television Consumer Protection Act of 1992 states that, any fiscal impact that you impose upon a cablevision franchise over and above the 5% can either be charged back against the franchise fee, or passed through to the customers, but it cannot exceed 5%.

Mr. Mayhook addressed the Board and clarified that he was not present to negotiate the transfer in regard to Time Warner. Mr. Mayhook stated that, taking the transfer issue aside, as long as it was under CVI, a one time contribution would be made in the amount of $1,400, in order to put the Lake County community television on the system, and he did not see this as an issue. He also noted that the addition of the honor channel lineup was clearly based on the channel being able to send a signal that meets the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requirements.

Commr. Swartz addressed the concerns that had been presented and stated that the current franchise agreement that the County had

requires that its franchise providers be competitive, which he felt included charges, which would include the multiple outlet charges. He noted that the County's largest franchise provider does not charge for the multiple outlets, and that there was a need for the other franchise providers to be competitive in providing service and costs.

Mr. Mayhook stated that he stood very firm that the quality that CVI offers its approximate 1,100 customers meets, or exceeds the quality of any other cable operator within Lake County. He explained that the Federal Government would prohibit him from comparing his prices with any other company, and that he had no control over 95% of the costs. Mr. Mayhook discussed what happened to CVI when re-regulation occurred and stated that, since 1992, the rates have not been adjusted, although the costs have continued to go up.

Commr. Swartz stated that he felt that the charges for multiple outlets by CVI was certainly an area that was not competitive, since Lake County Cablevision was not charging for the outlets, and the people in south Lake County do not appreciate having to pay for those outlets.

Mr. Thorburn explained that Time Warner does not charge for additional outlets in Seminole County at this time, so this may be an issue that can resolve itself, or the Board can make it stipulative to the transfer agreement.

Commr. Swartz stated that he would like to see the County work with CVI and be able to continue down the road that has included re-regulation, and the County's ability to have some input, and merge these issues with the new cable franchise ordinance. He appreciated the direction that had been taken with Lake Sumter Community College, and the Board and staff working together on the transfer.

Mr. Thorburn stated that the recommendation of a 5% fee, which was the maximum allowable by the FCC, was the recommendation of the

Cablevision Television Committee, which had been meeting with Lake County Cable to try and organize a countywide franchise under Lake County Cable.

Mr. Thorburn explained that he understood that the Board was directing him to get with the city representatives for all the cities affected by CVI service and try and get some kind of idea from them whether or not the idea of unification under a single franchise with the new company, Time Warner, and for staff to proceed to take the necessary steps in dealing with the transition.

Mr. Mayhook stated that CVI was requesting that the franchises that it holds be transferred to Time Warner. He stated that CVI was not seeking to re-write a new franchise agreement at this point, but simply looking at transferring the existing agreements.

Mr. Thorburn explained that he was not making a recommendation, but merely letting the Board know that, under the transfer system, the Board has considerable more latitude. He stated that the second item that the Board asked him to do was a comparison of basic rates of the seven cablevision franchises, to include equipment costs.


Mr. John Cento, Planner II, addressed the Board to discuss the proposed Resolution that amends the Lake County Housing Assistance Plan. The revisions were the product of staff and the Lake County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee and reflected the Committee's recommendations. Mr. Cento proceeded to discuss the revisions, which were to extend the life of the Plan. The current Plan would expire June 30, 1995, but would now be extended to June 30, 1997. The revisions were also to formalize procedures between the County's partners, and to adjust to different circumstances and reflect what the County has learned by operating the program over the year and a half. At this time, Mr. Cento reviewed the changes with the Board.

Discussion occurred regarding Page 13, the SHIP Program funds, with the differences between the Extension Service and the Consumer Credit Counseling being explained by staff. The Board directed that this issue be monitored, with the best use of the funds being made.

Mr. Cento continued his discussion of the revisions in the Plan and presented a brief explanation for each change.

Commr. Hanson and Commr. Good commended Mr. Cento for an outstanding job of putting together the proposed Resolution.

On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to accept the Resolution Amending the Lake County Housing Assistance Plan, which implements the Lake County Affordable Housing Assistance Program.


Mr. Greg Stubbs, Director, Development Regulation Services, addressed the Board to discuss the initiation of an emergency amendment to Section 3.01.03 of the Lake County Land Development Regulations (LDRs) regarding the establishment of towers within Lake County. He noted that towers are currently permitted uses within the Agricultural Zoning District as well as C1, C2, C3, CP, LM, HM, MP, and CFD. Mr. Stubbs explained that he wanted to put the Board on notice that there was a potential tower coming in an agricultural zoning today. He did not feel that the existing zoning matrix should be the sole reason for permitting towers in the zoning district, even though this has been pointed out to him many times by attorneys. He noted that there were inconsistencies with the existing zoning matrix, and he had hoped that this issue could have been addressed and revised before the LDRs were adopted. He hoped that the chart could be amended during the LDR amendment hearing in May, 1995.

Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planner, addressed the Board and explained that there were two Comprehensive Plan policies about public facilities, which indicate that these facilities shall be located in urban areas, if at all possible, and when not compatible with urban areas, they be located in rural areas of the County.

Mr. Stubbs explained that staff was currently covered by the policies in the Comprehensive Plan, and the language in the existing LDRs, under the utilities major on this specific issue.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Good and carried unanimously, the Board directed the County Attorney's Office to provide clarification for staff, with regard to the issue of towers in agriculture zoned districts, and with the issue being included in the LDR amendments to be heard by the Board on May 2, 1995.

Mr. Tim Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney, addressed the Board and stated that, if the Board reviewed the zoning charts for non-intensive agriculture, it is only permitted in certain districts. It has been argued that the County should be excluding it in other districts, such as industrial. Mr. Hoban requested Board permission to amend the chart to clarify that a permitted use would be in all zoning districts, particularly groves, pine trees, and hay growing.

Mr. Rolon Reed, Interim County Attorney, explained that the issue came up in a Circuit Court case where the County was involved with the Property Appraiser, Mr. Ed Havill. He explained that the situation involved an individual, who had a burned out grove for many years, and had his property rezoned light manufacturing. The individual, after two years, wanted to develop the grove again, and was denied the agriculture exemption. Mr. Reed stated that the LDRs prohibit agriculture in light manufacturing, which the County was trying to correct. He stated that staff was not recommending that any type of agriculture be allowed, but limit it to non-offensive uses.

Mr. Hoban noted that the issue could be included in the first round of the LDR amendments on April 18, 1995, with the final public hearing on May 2, 1995.

Discussion occurred regarding the need to review the non-intensive agriculture definition.

Mr. Knight stated that an interpretation was made that an LDR amendment could be made to include a clause regarding "termination of non-conforming uses".

The Board directed staff to bring back corrected LDRs on the termination of non-conforming uses, with this being included in the LDR amendments, which have a final public hearing on May 2, 1995, and with a study of the areas being done in a workshop on the LDRs.



On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved the execution of the Revised Consolidated Annual Contributions Contract, Section 8 Rental Certificate, and Rental Voucher Programs.


Mr. Jim Barker, Director, Environmental Management, addressed the Board and stated that the Natural Resources Advisory Committee (NRAC) was approached about the Natural Lands and Open Space Map. The Committee made a recommendation to go forward with the Map, and Mr. Barker stated that Mr. Will Davis, Executive Director, Lake County Water Authority, was present in the audience to discuss the subject. Mr. Barker stated that he and Mr. Davis have started looking at the some of the attributes necessary to overlay on the GIS information, in order to produce the Map. Mr. Barker identified information that was available including the Florida Natural Areas (FNA) inventory, wetlands information, and the recharge maps from the Water Management District, the Wildlife Corridor information, Public Land Acquisition mapping, and Green Swamp, Wekiva, and Natural Forest information.

Commr. Good referred to the letter from Mr. Joseph Branham, Acting Chairman, NRAC, which raised the issue of a time frame for

when this would actually materialize in the form of a map, and what information would be on the map.

Commr. Gerber addressed the comment in Mr. Branham's letter regarding a mapping workshop and stated that she did not know what could accomplished in a workshop, but would ask Mr. Davis what could be done inter-agency wise.

Mr. Will Davis, Executive Director, Lake County Water Authority, addressed the Board to discuss the proposed Natural Lands and Open Space Map. He stated that the intended use of the map needed to be determined, and well as the information for the map. Mr. Davis explained that there was a specific element in the Conservation Element related to GIS information to be compiled as part of the Comprehensive Plan. There are three phases to the Comprehensive Plan that relates to 40 separate items that are supposed to be a part of the geographic information system. There are several elements in there that are not defined, for example, a definition for a natural resource planning area map. Mr. Davis stated that the workshop would be very helpful to determine the information intended for the map, and who was going to use it, how it was going to be used, and the costs involved.

Commr. Gerber suggested that Mr. Barker and Mr. Davis attend the NRAC meeting, which was scheduled for April 24, 1995, to talk to the Committee, to get direction on the issue.

Mr. Davis discussed the information provided on the draft copy of the Countywide Florida Natural Areas Inventory Map.

Discussion occurred regarding the Committee expressing that the main purpose of the map being land acquisition, with it being noted that the County wanted to make sure that a duplication was not made of something that was already available.

Commr. Good stated that he had brought forward the letter from Mr. Branham to help expedite the process for the map, and reiterated the recommendation of the Chairman, which was that

everyone try and attend the NRAC meeting on April 24, 1995, with staff and this Committee assessing the Committee's request.



Mr. Rolon Reed, Interim County Attorney, informed the Board that there had not been any major changes, to the best of his knowledge, to the Agreement Between Lake County and The Greater Construction Corporation.

On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the execution of the Agreement Between Lake County and The Greater Construction Corporation for the Provision of Maintenance Services Within the Greater Pines Municipal Service Benefit Unit.


Discussion occurred regarding the appointment of individuals to the Lake County Solid Waste Study Committee.

Commr. Cadwell informed the Board that he still needed one more representative from his district. He then noted a letter he had received from Mr. Joseph Woodnick requesting that Mr. Robert (Bud) Grantham not serve on the Committee, and questioned whether anyone had addressed the letter.

Mr. Rolon Reed, Interim County Attorney, stated that the mere fact that Mr. Grantham had been cited for a code violation that has something to do with solid waste did not preclude him from sitting on a Committee that has nothing to do with code or code enforcement, or recommendation. He had reviewed the Resolution, which created the Committee and saw no relationship between the design of the Committee and the charge made against Mr. Grantham.

Commr. Hanson explained that Mr. Grantham was placed on the Committee as a representative of private landfills in the County.

Commr. Swartz stated that he served as Chairman of the Committee when it was re-established, and he served with Mr. Grantham at that time. Commr. Swartz noted that Mr. Grantham

had a difficult time making meetings regularly. He stated that one of Commr. Cadwell's previous appointees had been an employee of one of the County's franchise haulers, which created problems during the course of time that the Committee was dealing with certain issues. He was afraid that the same thing would happen, aside from the pending possible code action in this case. Aside from this, some of the issues that were going to be dealt with by the Committee may involve flow control, construction and debris (C&D), etc., and from this perspective, the other individuals appointed were not running businesses that were related to the subject that the County was dealing with. Commr. Swartz respectfully asked Commr. Hanson to consider, based on this point of view, to provide a citizen representative that would not have an interest in the subject area from a business point of view.

Commr. Hanson stated that she would talk with Mr. Grantham, and if he could not make the meetings, he may want to step down, but if he agreed to stay on the Committee, he would need to be at the meetings. She stated that the C&D landfills needed to be a part of the County's solid waste. Commr. Hanson stated that, unless the County Attorney advised her to remove Mr. Grantham from the Committee, she was not willing to take him off, unless he chose to step down because he could not make it to the meetings.

On a motion by Commr. Good, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried, the Board approved the following members to the Lake County Solid Waste Study Committee:

Rachael Smith John E. Burris, Sr.

Laura Bushwitz Arthur M. Elder

Joseph E. Woodnick Charles Fedunak

Robert Grantham Donald Sallee

Matt A. Newby Jim Myers

Preston Davis Chuck Langley

The motion was carried by a 4-1 vote, with Commr. Swartz voting "no".


Commr. Hanson suggested that a resolution be prepared for Mr. John Pringle for his recent Jeffersonian Award, with it being brought back to the Board for consideration.


Discussion occurred regarding the membership in the United Chambers of Lake County.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board authorized the Chairman to thank the United Chambers of Lake County for the opportunity to join them, but the Board's policy is that the members are only members of the Lake County League of Cities, and that the members be encouraged to join individually, if they so desired.

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m.