A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

JANUARY 4, 2000

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, January 4, 2000, 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: Welton G. Cadwell, Chairman; Catherine C. Hanson, Vice Chairman; G. Richard Swartz, Jr.; Rhonda H. Gerber; and Robert A. Pool. Others present were: Sue Whittle, County Manager; Sanford (Sandy) A. Minkoff, County Attorney; Wendy Taylor, Administrative Supervisor, Board of County Commissioner's Office; Barbara Lehman, Chief Deputy Clerk, County Finance; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.

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

COMMISSIONERS

Commr. Pool announced that he was the proud grandfather of Eric Ryan Jensen, born December 27, 1999, and noted that everyone was doing well.

AGENDA UPDATE

Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, requested that Tab 18, a presentation by Mr. Ed Taylor, President, Save Rodman Reservoir, Inc., concerning the Kirkpatrick Dam and Rodman Reservoir, be pulled, as well as Tab 27, a request for approval of a Resolution in support of the restoration of the Ocklawaha River, to be rescheduled for the January 18, 2000 Board Meeting.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, requested approval to add two items to the Agenda, both requiring a vote, one being a lease between The Villages and the County, on behalf of the Sheriff's Office; and the other being a request for a time extension, with regard to an agreement involving the St. Johns River Water Management District, Polk County, and the Lake County Water Authority, in order to allow some additional time to finish a study that is currently under way regarding Lake Lowery.

On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to place said items on the Agenda.

MINUTES

Regarding the Minutes of November 16, 1999, the following change was requested:

On Page 8, Line 3, change 436 to 46.

On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Minutes of November 16, 1999 (Regular Meeting), as corrected.





Regarding the Minutes of November 23, 1999, the following change was requested:

On Page 19, Line 8, change evasive to invasive.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Minutes of November 23, 1999 (Regular Meeting), as corrected.

On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Minutes of December 7, 1999 (Regular Meeting), as presented.

CLERK OF COURTS' CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the following requests:

Bonds - Contractor



Request for approval of Contractor Bonds - New and Cancellations, as follows:



NEW



5303-2000 Jeffery Ray Hammond (Electrical)

5577-2000 Jonathan D. Mills d/b/a Innovative Concrete Texturing

5692-2000 Timothy J. Fox d/b/a Total Construction Management, Inc.

5748-2000 Frank Oliver d/b/a Oliver Productions

5749-2000 Michael Anderson d/b/a Anderson Gas Service and Trucking Company

5750-2000 Robert D. Brewer d/b/a Climate Design, Inc.

5751-2000 Anthony L. Torri (Plumbing)

5752-2000 Debra Lynn/Allen Damron d/b/a Allen Damron Construction Company

5753-2000 Don Henry d/b/a Midtown Mechanical, Inc.

5754-2000 Douglas Waldrop/Waldrop Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a AAA Signs



CANCELLATIONS



1032-97 C. Glen Pelfrey

1140-99 Robert L. Hamel

1388-99 David Weis

5673-99 Christopher Dixon Homes

5747-2000 Donald Bowman d/b/a Alltype Marine Construction



Accounts Allowed



Request to acknowledge receipt of Monthly Distribution of Revenue Traffic/Criminal Cases, for the month ending November 30, 1999, in the amount of $115,532.09. Same period, last year: $131,208.33.



Accounts Allowed/Reports

Request to acknowledge receipt of 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.



Accounts Allowed/Clerk



Request to acknowledge receipt of unclaimed excess proceeds for tax deeds totaling $3,617.90.





Municipalities/Ordinances



Request to acknowledge receipt of Town of Lady Lake Ordinances that were passed and ordained by the Town of Lady Lake on September 20, 1999 and October 18, 1999, as follows:



Ordinance No. 99-29 Ordinance No. 99-30 Ordinance No. 99-31

Ordinance No. 99-32 Ordinance No. 99-33 Ordinance No. 99-36

Ordinance No. 99-37



Florida Public Service Commission/Utilities



Request to acknowledge receipt of Notice Before the Florida Public Service Commission: In Regard to Application for Transfer of Certificate Nos. 560-W and 488-S, in Lake County, from Lake Yale Corporation d/b/a Lake Yale Utility Company to Lake Yale Treatment Associates, Inc.; Docket No. 990194-W; Order No. PSC-99-2190-PAA-WS; Order Approving Transfer, Requiring Provision of Long Term Lease, and Declining to Initiate Show Cause Proceeding; and Notice of Proposed Agency Action Order Establishing Rate Base for Purposes of the Transfer, and Approving a Maximum Gallonage CAP on Residential Wastewater Service.



COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA

Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, informed the Board that there was an Addendum No. 1 to the Agenda, containing two consent items. She stated that, with regard to Tab 9, a request for approval of the increase of annual hours for two positions and the addition of 31 new positions, the annual cost for the additional Library Services Finance Coordinator should be corrected to read $41,773.00, which she noted would change the total fiscal impact from $771,284.00 to $773,372.00, a difference of $2,088.00.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the following requests:

Contracts, Leases and Agreements/Economic Development

Industrial Development Authority



Request from Economic Development for approval of agreements between Lake County and the Economic Development Commission of Mid-Florida, Inc. - Master Agreement and Agreement to Service an Industrial Development Authority, in the amount of $190,000.00.



Contracts, Leases and Agreements/Facilities and Capital Improvements/Grants

Municipalities



Request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for approval for the Chairman to execute First Amendment to Interlocal Agreement between Lake County and City of Tavares, Florida, Relating to Contribution of Boating Improvement Funds for Boating Related Facilities for FY 98/99 - Recipients of the grant for FY 98/00. This extension shall continue through March 31, 2000.



Accounts Allowed/Budgets/Fiscal and Administrative Services - Budget

Facilities and Capital Improvements/Sheriff



Request from Fiscal and Administrative Services - Budget, for approval of the following:



Budget transfer from Contingency to Facilities and Capital Improvements, Machinery and Equipment, in the amount of $12,245.00. The Parks Service vehicle stolen late last year needs replacement. Insurance reimbursement will be $7,350.00. The difference needed is $12,245.00. The insurance check is processed and receipt was anticipated the week of December 13, 1999, for deposit into this account.



Budget transfer from Sheriff - Contingency to Constitutional Offices - Sheriff, Law Enforcement Operating Account, in the amount of $10,000.00. Pursuant to F.S. 30.49, the Sheriff is requesting a transfer in this amount from Sheriff's Contingency to the Law Enforcement Operating Account.



Fiscal and Administrative Services - Risk Management



Request from Fiscal and Administrative Services - Risk Management, for approval and acceptance of Summary Plan Documents (SPDs) for Medical Plans.



Assessments/Growth Management/Resolutions



Request from Growth Management for approval of Resolution No. 2000-3, imposing a special assessment for nuisance abatement costs, in abating the excessive vegetation on Lot 8, Block 6, Unit 1, according to unrecorded plat of Astor Forest Campsites, in the amount of $274.85.

County Employees/Personnel



Request from Personnel for approval and execution of Certificates for employees with one and three years of service to the County.



County Employees/Personnel



Request from Personnel for approval of the increase of annual hours for two positions and the addition of thirty-one new positions (22 full time and 9 part time).



Assessments/Public Works/Roads-County and State



Request from Public Works for approval and authorization for Chairman to execute satisfaction of liens for ten road assessments, as follows:



Assess. No. Name Date Paid



684004 Voncille Calhoun 10/29/99

685081 Jennifer Worrell 11/10/99

685082 Jennifer Worrell 11/10/99

686011 Clarence Middlebrooks 11/15/99

686012 Clarence Middlebrooks 11/15/99

686013 Clarence Middlebrooks 11/15/99

689060 Elmer and Joan Albritton 11/23/99

691069 Tony and Hope Pawlak 11/02/99

692014 Russell and Dawn Bush 11/16/99

757138 Barbara Bowers 06/25/87



Accounts Allowed/Public Works/Road Projects/Roads-County and State



Request from Public Works for approval to award Church Street (5-7265) and Mills Street (5-7264) Paving Project No. 6-99, Bid No. 00-010, to Professional Dirt Service, Inc.; and to encumber and expend funds, in the amount of $225,720.00, from the Transportation Trust Fund - Commission District 5.



Accounts Allowed/Public Works/Road Projects/Roads - County and State

Request from Public Works for approval to award Robbins Road, Peebles Drive, and Carolyn Lane Paving Project No.1-00, Bid No. 00-011, to Professional Dirt Service, Inc.; and to encumber and expend funds, in the amount of $408,767.00, from the Transportation Trust Fund - Commission District 3.



Assessments/Public Works/Resolutions/Road Projects/Roads-County and State



Request from Public Works for approval to authorize and execute Resolution No. 2000-4, for Special Assessment Project No. SA-91, accepting Lake Eustis Drive "Part"(3-4938) into the County Road Maintenance System.



Public Works/Subdivisions



Request from Public Works for authorization to accept the final plat for Village at Black Bear Subdivision. Subdivision consists of 32 lots - Commission District 4.





Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases and Agreements/Public Works/Resolutions

Roads-County and State/Subdivisions



Request from Public Works for authorization to accept the final plat for Summit Lakes Subdivision; execute a Developer's Agreement between Lake County and Hubbard Development Company, for Maintenance of Improvements; accept a Letter of Credit, for Maintenance, in the amount of $26,930.00; and execute Resolution No. 2000-5, accepting the following roads into the County Road Maintenance System: Summit Lakes Lane "Part" (2-0936G), Sterling View Court (2-0936H), Summit View Way (2-0936J), Crystal View Court (2-0936K), and Lake Tree Court(2-0936L). Subdivision consists of 45 lots - Commission District 2.



Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases and Agreements/Public Works/Resolutions

Roads-County and State/Subdivisions

Request from Public Works for authorization to accept the final plat for Sunburst Estates Phase II Subdivision; execute a Developer's Agreement between Lake County and McDermott/Ladd Land Trust, for Maintenance of Improvements; accept a Letter of Credit, for Maintenance, in the amount of $26,216.83; and execute Resolution No. 2000-6, accepting the following roads into the County Road Maintenance System: Windhill Court (2-0846A) and Lakewind Drive (2-0847D). Subdivision consists of 42 lots - Commission District 2.



Accounts Allowed/Bids/Public Works/Road Projects



Request from Public Works for authorization to advertise for bids for Countywide Resurfacing and Restriping Project No. 3-00, at an estimated cost of $457,058.50, from the Transportation Trust Fund.



ADDENDUM NO. 1

COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA



Bonds/Community Services/Resolutions



Request from Community Services for approval and execution of Resolution No. 2000-2, for the issuance of Homeowner Revenue Bonds and Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds, to be issued by the Orange County Housing Finance Authority, for financing assistance for first time homeowners of single family residences and/or refund indebtedness incurred for such purpose.



Contracts, Leases and Agreements/Municipalities/Public Works/Utilities

Rights-of-Way, Roads and Easements



Request from Public Works for approval to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Groveland, to allow utility lines to be placed on Sampey Road for Water and Wastewater Transmission. Existing right-of-way is prescriptive.



PERSONAL APPEARANCES/PUBLIC HEARINGS

PERSONAL APPEARANCES

EMPLOYEE AWARDS

Commr. Cadwell presented Employee Awards, as follows:



Plaque to Employee with Five Years of Service to the County



Joseph D. Ellis, Environmental Technician I, Solid Waste/WMFO



Plaque to Employees with Ten Years of Service to the County



Harryette Hannah, Database Coordinator, Communication Systems, E-911



Kathleen Padgett, Licensing and Building Technician, Growth Management/Building Services



Plaque to Employee with Fifteen Years of Service to the County



Ava K. Kronz, Director, Continuous Quality Improvement, County Outreach Development



Plaque to Employee with Twenty Years of Service to the County



David Walker, Maintenance Specialist II, Facilities and Capital Improvements, Building Maintenance



PERSONAL APPEARANCES/PUBLIC HEARINGS

PERSONAL APPEARANCES

PRESENTATION

SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS

Ms. Emogene Stegall, Lake County Supervisor of Elections, addressed the Board and requested approval to change the precinct boundaries for Precinct Nos. 47 and 79 and create Precinct No. 84, by taking Sections 24 S and 26 E to Hwy. 474 on the west side and to the County line on the east side. She stated that 1,270 people will be moved into the new precinct, leaving 3,700 in Precinct No. 47 and 1,159 in Precinct No. 79.

On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved a request from Ms. Emogene Stegall, Lake County Supervisor of Elections, to change the precinct boundaries for Precinct Nos. 47 and 79 and create Precinct No. 84.

CITIZEN QUESTION AND COMMENT PERIOD

Mr. Edward Jackson, a resident of Groveland, addressed the Board regarding the widening and resurfacing of Lake Emma Road, which runs between SR 19 and Villa City Road. He presented, for the record, a petition containing signatures of various residents in the area who are opposed to the widening of said road, due to their fear of increased traffic, especially heavy truck traffic, and an increase in the speed of vehicles traveling the road. He stated that the residents are not opposed to the road being resurfaced; however, they feel that widening the road will have a negative impact on their quality of life. He asked the Board to take another look at the project, before it is put out for bid.

Commr. Swartz suggested that the County not propose 10 foot drive lanes, but to stay with 9 foot lanes and then add three foot paved shoulders, rather than two foot shoulders, to see if that allays the concerns the residents have about the project.

It was noted that Commr. Pool, the District Commissioner for Groveland, would have staff research the matter and, if necessary, hold a meeting with the residents in the area, to obtain their input about the matter and allay any concerns they may have.

RECESS AND REASSEMBLY

At 10:15 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for 10 minutes.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES/PUBLIC HEARINGS

PUBLIC HEARING

TRANSMITTAL AND ADOPTION OF THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT OF THE LAKE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

GROWTH MANAGEMENT/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/ZONING

Commr. Cadwell informed those present that the Board had reviewed a worksheet that was prepared by staff and distributed to them at a Worksession held on December 7, 1999, regarding the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), in which they tried to address the amendments recommended by the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Committee, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and Commr. Swartz, however, noted that there were some items that they needed to readdress.

Mr. Jim Smith, Director of Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, addressed the Board and reviewed a new handout that staff had prepared regarding the EAR, which was distributed to the Board for their perusal, dated December 14, 1999. He stated that the Board directed that Policy 2-1.1: Unincorporated Area Minimum Operating Level of Service Standards; Policy 2-1.2: General Roadway Minimum Operating Level of Service Standards; and a New Policy be clarified by the County's Director of Engineering, Mr. Fred Schneider. He stated that Mr. Schneider was present in the audience to explain research that he conducted regarding whether the County could maintain a Level of Service (LOS) B into the future and not let it drop to a lower Level C or D. He stated that Mr. Schneider attempted to look at what those roadway segments were, however, noted that the best staff can do at this point is look at the data contained in the 2020 Transportation Plan, which shows those roadway segments that currently have LOS B. He suggested that wording be added to the EAR that all efforts be made to retain LOS B in the future on any segment that has it at the present time. He stated that it would have to be done in conjunction with the establishment of urban service area boundaries that were discussed at the worksession held on December 7, 1999. He stated that staff could not give the Board an accurate list of all those roadway segments that could be maintained at LOS B at this time, because they will have to go back and look at the urban service area boundaries and see which ones would fall out of that level and which ones have the potential to be raised to LOS B. He stated that doing so would have an impact on Policy 2-1.1, however, he did not feel it would impact Policy 2-1.2.

Mr. Fred Schneider, Director of Engineering, Public Works, addressed the Board stating that he would recommend revising the New Policy, before the Board this date, to state "Create a policy to require no decrease in current LOS on designated roadway segments.", rather than "Create a policy to require no net decrease in current LOS on designated roadway segments." He stated that the County needs to look at what the 14 municipalities are doing in their Comprehensive Plans and compare it to the County's current roadways and the County could then use that information as a base line to move forward and try to identify those roadways and defer to those segments of roadways where the County could adopt LOS B.

It was noted that whether the County creates a new policy regarding the LOS B issue, or changes Policy 2-1.1, the effect would be the same.

Commr. Hanson stated that she felt the issue still needed to be clarified for the amendment process.

Mr. Smith referred to Objective 7-5A, Policy 7-5.3, and Policy 7-5.7, relating to silviculture activities, on Page 9 of the handout, stating that it was staff's intention to recognize that silviculture falls under the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Best Management Practices and that the County is just trying to keep a system and data base, to allow it to know where mining activities are occurring and the impact that it is having on land use throughout the County. He stated that, just as the County monitors other types of uses, silviculture is something it would like to have a better handle on.

Mr. Smith referred to Policy 7-10.7: Airshed Protection Zones, on Page 9 of the handout, stating that staff rethought their original recommendation regarding same and feel that this issue would be better addressed in the Land Development Regulations (LDRs), through the County's landscape requirements.

Mr. Smith referred to Policy 7-13.5: Protection of Mining from Urban Encroachment and informed the Board that said policy was deleted from the EAR, per a discussion regarding same at the December 7, 1999 worksession. He stated that staff revised Policy 7-13.8: Preservation of Hydrological Integrity at Reclaimed Mining Sites and changed the wording to read, "Amend policy to require that when a horizontal impervious layer exists, it shall not be penetrated or breached by the mining operation. In the event a horizontal impervious layer does not exist above the aquifer, a sufficient portion of the resource being mined may remain intact to serve as a barrier."

It was noted that the word may should be changed to shall, in the last sentence of the Nature of Amendment.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

Mr. Doug Doudney, a resident of Orlando, addressed the Board stating that he felt he represented many Lake County landowners when he stated that he feared not only the consequences of this amendment process, but the unintended consequences of it, as well. He discussed the timeliness criteria, noting that he was part owner and agent for a parcel of property that he was representing, consisting of 120 acres, located on Hartwood Marsh Road, in south Lake County. He stated that it was highly developable land, noting that it was 100% usable and nothing about it was environmentally sensitive. He stated that sewer and water are available to the property and it is currently market ready; however, it most likely will not meet the County's timeliness criteria for approximately 30 years, if ever. He stated that he felt it should be eliminated.

Commr. Cadwell stated that one of the objectives of the Board is to look at what areas should be urban and urban expansion and probably do away with suburban and the timeliness issue.

Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, Akerman, Senterfitt & Eidson, addressed the Board stating that she was representing a number of clients who are affected by the County's Comprehensive Plan, as well as a consortium of mining clients in the County, consisting of Florida Rock Industries, Inc., Tarmac, Jahna E. R. Industries, Inc., and CSR Rinker Materials. She stated that she was concerned about the fact that the EAR being discussed this date was due in March of 1998 and, as a result, Lake County has effectively been under a defacto moratorium, which has prevented any major comprehensive plan amendments to come through, during that time. She stated that, if part of it was to deter growth, the County has succeeded. She stated that it is one of the few locals that she is aware of that has gone this far and not had an EAR done; therefore, she is hoping, for better or worse, that the Board will move it forward and at least begin the amendment process. She stated that the County will be eligible for comprehensive plan amendments large scale, once it is found to be sufficient.

Ms. Bonifay stated that she was also concerned about the fact that the County has been working on the EAR for so long, as well as the fact that Commr. Swartz gave the Board some objectives and policies that he would like to see implemented after the Board had closed the last hearing that was held regarding the EAR. She stated that none of those recommendations came forward early on, therefore, felt the timing was beneficial to Commr. Swartz. She discussed some concerns she had about the issue of Joint Planning Areas (JPAs), which she noted Commr. Swartz had listed as an area of concern, as well.

Ms. Bonifay stated that she was glad to see the County wants to get into, or is looking at being involved in, the water and sewer business. She stated that the County started out that way in 1991, however, did not move forward with it. She stated that, if the County does not move forward with it, at this time, she feels it will have to re-look at its land use category, in terms of what it is going to be able to serve. She stated that, with regard to the issue of level of service, she is very concerned, on behalf of her commercial and residential developers, about the County going back to LOS B, noting that she does not think it makes sense in today's market and economy, or in a growing area like Lake County. She stated that, from a planning standpoint, the thing that concerns her is the fact that this is a major land use policy that is directing the County's growth and development. She stated that the Board just spent a lot of money and energy doing its 2020 Transportation Plan and used the County's current comprehensive plan as a basis for it. She questioned why, if the Board wanted to re-skew the whole thing and make it different, they did not put those objectives on the table when the County did its transportation plan, rather than having a 2020 Transportation Plan that works off data, analysis, and land use concepts that are in the County's Future Land Use Plan and Element. She stated that the County is turning it upside down, by going backwards and trying to revert to LOS B. She stated that, if the County is going to keep the roads at that level, it means that there will not be any development, or it is going to have to do major modifications to the roads, to keep them at LOS B, which she stated the people do not want. She stated that, if the County does not even know where those roads are and what the impact is, then that is a big concern to her. She stated that that would have been the predicate for looking at a plan, not as an afterthought, from the date of the adoption hearing, to say that they are going to go back in time and go counter to what every other local government in the State seems to be doing.

Ms. Bonifay addressed some concerns she had about the mining issue, noting that she spent a lot of time with county staff and a lot of time at the Planning and Zoning Commission

Meetings talking to people, trying to become involved in it, and she feels that they have a good approach to trying to get rid of some things in the Comprehensive Plan that are not defined. She stated that she has gone back through Rule 9J-5 and, contrary to a prior statement that was made, there is no definition in 9J-5 of "prime" and "very high" recharge areas, noting that it has a very generalized definition and she feels the County needs to look at them and establish some policies. She stated that she feels county staff is trying to use terminology that has been adopted by the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD), so that the County will be consistent with what they have, however, noted that it still puts everything on a case-by-case basis.

Ms. Bonifay stated that a question was raised about Policy 7-13.8 and why the Board is even looking at it. She stated that it is because those issues arose when the Planning and Zoning Commission was discussing the matter, in terms of what "feasible" means and whether every area has an impervious layer. She stated that she feels what county staff is recommending says that where it exist it is not going to be penetrated, or breached, however, where one may not exist, based on what the technical studies that are presented and evaluated by county staff indicate, they will determine how much of that material should remain in place, to act as a confining layer. She stated that the mining industry sees no need for the policy at all, because they do not think there is a problem with what they are doing.

Ms. Bonifay stated that she hopes to see more interaction with the cities, noting that she feels the County has seen a shift in the focus of development activity to the cities. She stated that she feels, if the Board adopts Rule 9J-5 in total, it may preclude some definitions that the County would like to give more flexibility or weight to, in evaluating residential development. She stated that, with regard to the revisions to Policies 7-13.1; 7-13.3; 7-13.5; and 7-13.8, two are in the second cycle and two in the first cycle. She recommended that they all be in the first cycle, because they are inter-dependent, and to move them forward should not be problematic.

Mr. Michael O'Berry, Manager, Environmental Permitting Services, Florida Rock Industries, addressed the Board stating that his firm is not adverse to regulation; however, they want fairness and consistency and consistency from the standpoint of how rules and regulations are applied in individual counties and how rules and regulations are applied to the mining industry throughout the State. He referred to Policy 7-13.8: Preservation of Hydrological Integrity at Reclaimed Mining Sites, on Page 10 of the handout, noting that his firm is at a loss as to why the policy is even necessary. He stated that his firm operates throughout the State, as well as the southeast United States, with a lot of differing regulations. He stated that, as a mining operation, he does not feel his firm represents a threat to groundwater quality. He stated that he felt a more important issue would be how the mining sites are used, as post mining land uses, noting that a chemical plant, for example, would create a greater threat to groundwater resources than what a mining operation would create. He stated that chemicals are not used at mining facilities, therefore, nothing is being introduced into the groundwater that would represent a problem. He stated that the real issue would be agriculture, because of the use of various chemicals for agricultural purposes, and golf courses, because of the number of chemicals that have to be used to maintain them. He stated that a mining operation, such as a sand mine, does not have the degree of risk associated with it that warrants this type of policy. He asked the Board to have staff critically evaluate the need for such a policy. He stated that it is not consistent with what is done elsewhere and there is no scientific basis for requiring it.

Mr. O'Berry referred to Policy 7-13.1: Prohibition of Mining in Specified Areas and Policy 7-13.3: Mining in Prime and High Aquifer Recharge Areas, stating that he feels the language contained in each policy needs to be clarified. He stated that they have caused his industry major fits, because of inconsistencies, which he elaborated on. He referred to Policy 7-13.5: Protection of Mining from Urban Encroachment, stating that the policy previously stated that new residential developments should be restricted in the vicinity of operating mines. He stated that it seems only fair, from a compatibility standpoint, if the County has an operating mine it would not want to permit a development next to it, or if there is an existing residential development, the County would not want to permit a mine next to it. He stated that his firm had a mine denied, based on the compatibility issue, and there was no residential development next to it, the development was down the road some distance from the proposed site. He stated that his firm would like to have fairness and consistency in how these things are applied and fairness and consistency between their type of operation and residential development, or any other type of operation, zoning classification, etc. He asked the Board to look at those issues and come up with a solution that is workable for everybody.

Mr. Thomas Leara, Planner, Tarmac, addressed the Board stating that he has been a planner in Florida for 25 years, with a substantial portion of it as a city planner, so he is very sensitive to what the Board is trying to accomplish. He stated that his primary concern is Policy 7-13.8: Preservation of Hydrological Integrity at Reclaimed Mining Sites, on Page 10 of the handout. He stated that his type of industry relies very heavily on consultants, noting that his firm has a full time geology and environmental staff, which coordinates their consultants on investigations. He stated that his firm relies on their information, just as the County's staff relies on their reports. He stated that there are no guarantees, one has to rely on the expertise that is available.

Ms. Nadine Foley, who served on the County's Future Land Use Element Committee during the EAR process, as well as the Executive Committee, addressed the Board, stating that she was present on behalf of the citizens who served on the County's committees. She stated that they were gratified that a lot of their ideas have surfaced, after they thought they might have disappeared. She stated that their main criteria was that their ideas be presented to the Board, for consideration, and they feel that, in a lot of cases, that has come to pass. She stated that they feel the concept of an urban service area and putting expected development into those areas is with what the committees had talked about. She stated that her committee thought, in some cases, the joint planning areas were unrealistically large and, in other cases, may have been too small and no longer reflect where water and sewer had been extended. She stated that they feel, if the County can work more closely with the cities, in the urban service areas, everybody will have a better idea as to where they can expect to develop and put more of the County's growth.

Ms. Foley addressed the issue of open space, stating that she feels both the Conservation Committee and the Future Land Use Element Committee felt that golf courses should not get a full allowance for open space, because it is an area that is not accessible to all residents, at all times. She stated that the Future Land Use Element Committee would like to see an encouragement of the conservation style of planning, in which case there would be larger open space areas that would be protected with conservation easements and open to all the residents of a development. She stated that, hopefully, in some cases, those open spaces can preserve natural lands. She referred to Policy 6D-1.8: Establishment of a Regional Water Supply Authority, stating that, where the policy discusses the distribution of water outside Lake County, she felt the Board may want to consider language that would not preclude importing water or utilizing the best distribution concept. She stated that the citizens who served on the committees she alluded to were very grateful to have their input into this process and many of them have followed it with a great deal of attention and will continue to do so, as the amendment process takes place.

Ms. Debbie Stivender, City Council, City of Tavares, addressed the Board and expressed the Council's, as well as the City staff's, concern that the City of Tavares be involved in the EAR process and that they be kept apprized of it. She stated that the cities need to be more involved in the process, especially with regard to the Joint Planning Areas.

Ms. Nancy Fullerton, Save Our Lakes Committee, addressed the Board stating that she served on the Planning and Zoning Commission during the time that they reviewed the EAR. She requested the Board to review the letters that were written to them on November 18, 1999 and December 12, 1999 and the suggestions that were made regarding the issue. She stated that, between September 9, 1999 and September 23, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission deleted quite a few Conservation amendments and she would like the Board to consider that fact. She asked the Board to not consider those requests for deletion, noting that the votes on the Commission at that time were mostly 5-4. She asked the Board to put most of the deletions back in the EAR. She stated that all the Boards and mining interests worked very hard on this issue and she thanked them for doing so.

Mr. Alton Roane, Director of Development Services, City of Eustis, addressed the Board and questioned whether a recommendation would be going forward, in the EAR, that the County's Comprehensive Plan be amended to include a provision for Joint Planning Areas.

Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director, Growth Management, stated that there is existing language to that effect and noted that staff has added, under Nature of Amendment, the Urban Service Boundaries (USBs), in conjunction with the cities and their Joint Planning Areas.

Commr. Swartz interjected that what it makes reference to is urban service areas, which he noted are contained on Pages 5, 6 and 7 of the handout. He stated that it is basically in the Comprehensive Plan and that is going to be implemented through actions by the Board and the cities, where they can agree on USBs/JPAs. He stated that they may be the same thing, therefore, feels that it will be handled on an individual basis.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, informed the Board that what was being approved this date was the big document, not the handout, which he noted was just being used to show the Board those issues that are still under discussion.

Mr. Clyde Stevens, a resident of Lake County, addressed the Board and discussed some concerns he had about the mining industry, noting that he felt mining was such a desecration of the landscape. He stated that he was concerned about the mining that is going on in Lake County and feels that the County needs to redefine what it permits on the steep hillsides going on in certain parts of the County. He stated that developers are only interested in one thing, making money. He stated that he was concerned about the disturbance and loss of habitat in the Everglades, in Lee County, and questioned whether the Board was going to allow that to be applied to Lake County, as well, just based on landowners' rights. He questioned whether one or two individuals, or a company, have the right to have such a major impact on soils, watersheds, percolation, etc. He stated that he did not represent any special interest group, however, noted that he does belong to the Lake County Conservation Council.

Ms. Diane Ryan, a property owner in Lake County, addressed the Board stating that she owns a commercial piece of property, located south of CR 561. She stated that her property has been commercial since 1968 and she is concerned about the use of her property in the future and whether or not she is located within the "dot". She stated that she has not been able to get an answer as to what the "dot" is, noting that she has been told that it is one-half mile across, 1,320 feet south of the intersection and north of the intersection, and that her property is not located within the "dot". She stated that her general concern was whether the County was taking away her property value.

Commr. Cadwell stated that he hopes some of the items that will be addressed during the public hearing will make things a lot clearer for the public. He stated that, in some areas, people will lose what they perceive they have and, in other areas, they will not.

Commr. Swartz stated that nobody knows how big the "dot" was intended to be, noting that, when it was adopted, there was no indication of how big it was - it was just put on the map. He stated that it means nothing, in terms of its size. He stated that how big the "dot" appears on the map is just how big somebody drew it, based on the scale of the map.

Commr. Gerber interjected that issues are currently being handled on a case-by-case basis and noted that a Special Master will be brought in, if necessary. She suggested that Ms. Ryan meet with Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director, Growth Management, about her particular case.

The Chairman closed the public hearing.

Commr. Hanson questioned whether staff had addressed the issue of the definitions for

"recharge" and "open space".

Ms. Farrell stated that, with regard to the definition for "recharge", the nature of the amendment is to replace it with "significant", when the St. Johns River Water Management District adopts the definition for it.

Commr. Hanson stated that she did not know that the requirement for "open space" would be that the public have use of it, noting that even state owned property that is a conservation area is not necessarily open to all the public. She stated that it was mentioned that golf courses should not be open space, because they are not available freely to all the public, but she did not know that that was necessarily the direction the County was going in, with regard to a definition for "open space" for golf courses.

Ms. Farrell stated that what is under Nature of Amendment at the present time is to incorporate Rule 9J-5 definitions, except in the Wekiva River Protection Area, because that is one of the few areas that already has specific definitions.

Commr. Hanson questioned whether golf courses are still being left as open space.

Ms. Farrell stated that she feels, when the County gets to that 9J-5 definition, there will be a great debate as to whether the County will go with the 9J-5 definition, or go in another direction; however, at the present time, the EAR reads to incorporate the 9J-5 definitions.

Commr. Hanson referred to Policy 1-1.6A: Water and Sewer Service Requirements for Developments Within Urban and Urban Expansion Areas, stating that she was not sure the County should not allow wells in the urban expansion areas. She stated that the County allows for septic tanks, if it is feasible, however, feels that it may be that the densities are low enough to allow wells. She stated that it may be appropriate to have wells in a small development, where it is not feasible to put in a central water system, if the water is not already in place. She stated that there is no allowance for wells in this policy and she feels that, where feasible, wells should be allowed. She stated that she had no problem with eliminating the requirement for the commercial locational criteria in the urban service areas and the urban compact nodes, however, feels that that requirement should not be eliminated in the other rural areas. She stated that the limitations will still be in place, but it will provide some needs for many of the neighborhoods in the rural areas. She stated that she agreed with staff on Policy 1-21.9: Protection of Aquatic and Wetland-dependent Wildlife Species Associated with the Wekiva River System, on Page 2 of the handout, but that, with regard to Policy 2-1.1: Unincorporated Area Minimum Operating Level of Service Standards, she feels the County has beat to death the idea of moving the level of service to B on the local roadways. She stated that it was addressed in the 2020 Transportation Plan and the Board agreed to leave it as is. She stated that she does not feel it can be dealt with fairly, therefore; she is not in favor of leaving it in the EAR.

It was noted that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that it be deleted, as well.

Commr. Hanson stated that she felt the mining industry had the right to have the recharge definitions clarified, noting that there have been several meetings where the definitions were not clear. She stated that it is a double-edged sword that can go either way.

Commr. Cadwell suggested addressing the four amendments dealing with the issue of mining, listed on Page 10 of the handout, at the same time.

It was the consensus of the Board to do so.

RECESS AND REASSEMBLY

At 11:15 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess until 11:30 a.m.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES/PUBLIC HEARINGS

PUBLIC HEARING

TRANSMITTAL AND ADOPTION OF THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT OF THE LAKE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

GROWTH MANAGEMENT/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/ZONING (CONT'D.)

Commr. Cadwell informed those present that the Board would be reviewing the EAR handout, in its entirety, once again, to make sure that the entire Board agrees with the language contained within the report. He noted that there will be public hearings on all the amendments contained within it.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, interjected that this meeting was the end result of the EAR process, therefore, it would be adopted this date and become the County's report. He stated that it will be used in the future, as comprehensive plan amendments go through the process, however, noted that it is not cast in stone. He stated that, if circumstances change, the County can do an amendment that may differ from what is contained within the EAR, if it can be justified.

Commr. Cadwell stated that he would like to have the Board act on the items addressed by consensus, rather than taking individual votes, however, noted that there may be some items that a Board member feels strongly enough about that they may want to cast a vote.

Mr. Minkoff stated that the Board only needed to take one vote, a vote on the EAR document as a whole.

At this time, the Board reviewed those items contained within the EAR handout that needed further discussion, or clarification, from the previous discussion that was held regarding it, at the December 7, 1999 worksession, as follows:

Mr. Smith, Director, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, informed the Board that staff was recommending that the Definitions be incorporated in the LDRs and that Commr. Swartz was recommending that Rule 9J-5 be made a part of the Comprehensive Plan.

Commr. Cadwell stated that his concern with putting the Definitions in the Comprehensive Plan was what it would take to make a change. He stated that he felt the Board should, instead, commit itself to go back through the Definitions and strengthen and clarify them, by policy.

Commrs. Hanson and Pool concurred, at which time it was noted that they felt the Definitions should be in the Land Development Regulations.

Commr. Gerber stated that she felt the Definitions should be in the Comprehensive Plan.

Commr. Cadwell stated that the Board could do an amendment stating that the County will amend its LDRs to incorporate 9J-5 definitions.

Mr. Minkoff, County Attorney, suggested having language to state "review the terminology in the Comprehensive Plan and adopt Definitions where necessary". He stated that there may be definitions in 9J-5 that the Board may not like, or may conflict with other definitions that are currently used in the Comprehensive Plan, or the LDRs, but without looking at the complete list and comparing them, it would be hard to mandate the County to 9J-5.

It was the consensus of the Board to utilize the language suggested by the County Attorney, with regard to the issue of the Definitions.

Commr. Cadwell referred to Policy 7-2.20: Regional Water Utilities, on Page 8 of the handout, stating that he would prefer to see the following language: Amend policy to create utility standards.

Commr. Gerber questioned how the Board was going to determine when it would be feasible to have a Joint Planning Area, or Urban Service Area, and how the County was going to deal with issues of fairness. She questioned how these issues would be addressed, if the wording "where feasible" is left in the Definitions.

Commr. Cadwell stated that the wording "where feasible" may not be in the Definitions, once the amendment is done.

Commr. Swartz stated that he felt the wording "where feasible" was more related to working with the cities, however, noted that he was not sure it needed to be in the Definitions.

He stated that the urban service boundary was something that the County and the unincorporated area had the ability to designate and then, hopefully, the County would enter into joint planning agreements with the cities. He stated that there could be urban service boundaries without ever being able to reach an agreement with any particular city and he felt that was where the "where feasible" was aimed.

It was the consensus of the Board to approve the policies contained on Pages 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the handout, as stated, deleting the words "where feasible" and changing the language contained in Nature of Amendment, for Policy 7-2.20: Regional Water Utilities, on Page 8, as indicated by Commr. Cadwell.

Commr. Swartz referred to the policies pertaining to commercial development, contained on Page 2 of the handout, stating that he felt staff needed to comment on the matter. He stated that he felt one aspect of the commercial issue was somehow left out of said policies. He stated that the concept of allowing commercial in the urban service boundaries, which is now included in the Comprehensive Plan, and to allow commercial in the urban nodes and rural villages was intended to do away with commercial locational criteria.

Mr. Smith clarified the fact that the Board wished to have the Nature of Amendment, for Policy 1-3A.1: Commercial Development in Land Use Classification, indicate that commercial locational criteria would be eliminated.

Commr. Swartz stated that the only place where commercial will be allowed will be in the rural villages and urban nodes and in the urban service boundary areas.

Commr. Cadwell stated that the County needs to have something different than what it currently has, with regard to commercial locational criteria, and he feels that this a vehicle to let the County do it.

Commr. Swartz stated that the whole purpose, originally, of commercial locational criteria was to avoid flooding the County's roadways with commercial. He stated that what is before the Board this date states to do away with it and put commercial in the urban nodes and rural villages. He stated that that is where it principally occurs and should occur.

It was the consensus of the Board to move forward with said recommendation.

Commr. Swartz referred to Policy 2-1.1: Unincorporated Area Minimum Operating Level of Service Standards, on Page 3 of the handout, stating that new language was created to require no decrease of existing LOS on the designated roadway segments. He stated that it replaces Policy 2-1.1 with said language, however, noted that Policy 2-1.2: General Roadway Minimum Operating Level of Service Standards would be left in, because it deals with state roads.

Mr. Smith informed the Board that staff would like to keep the policy language dealing with state roads in the EAR. He clarified the fact that the Board was deleting the New Policy language under Nature of Amendment and, instead, were revising the language under Policy

2-1.1: Unincorporated Area Minimum Operating Level of Service Standards, to reflect no decrease in the current LOS on designated roadway segments.

Commr. Swartz stated that no matter what the capacity is on a roadway segment, if the Board adopts this policy, it is saying that the County is not going to allow the road to degrade from its current level of service, without making improvements, which he noted may mean widening the road.

It was the consensus of the Board, excluding Commr. Hanson, to move forward with said recommendation.

Commr. Cadwell referred to Policy 7-10.7: Airshed Protection Zones, on Page 9 of the handout, noting that it was the consensus of the Board to delete said policy from the EAR, because it will be addressed in the LDRs, through the County's landscape requirements. He noted that, for the policies listed on Page 10 of the handout, the Amendment Cycle would be changed from AC-2 to AC-1. He clarified that all the policies dealing with land use changes and commercial locational criteria are to be addressed at the same time, preferably AC-1.

Mr. Smith noted that the word may was changed to shall in Policy 7-13.8: Preservation of Hydrological Integrity at Reclaimed Mining Sites, on Page 10 of the handout.

Commr. Swartz referred to Policy 7-13.8: Preservation of Hydrological Integrity at Reclaimed Mining Sites, on Page 10 of the handout, stating that it is an example of where the County probably needs to use the definition that says that "high" and "prime" are the same and that, if the SJRWMD determines that they are going to use "significant", when referring to "high" and "prime", the County should use it.

Mr. Alan Hewitt, Water Resource Specialist, Growth Management, addressed the Board stating that the SJRWMD is working in each and every county to ensure that "significant" is the primary term.

Commr. Swartz informed the Board that that same definition needed to be in Policy

7-13.3: Mining in Prime and High Aquifer Recharge Areas.

Mr. Smith informed the Board that the intent of the amendment was to clarify that it is permitted in "high" and "prime" recharge areas. He stated that the way the policy is written, it can be interpreted both ways. He stated that staff's recommendation was to allow it when enough investigation would indicate that it would not cause any environmental impact.

Commr. Swartz stated that, to adopt the provisions that are proposed in Policies 7-13.3 and 7-13.8, one would be able to mine in "high", "prime" and "significant" recharge areas.

Commr. Pool questioned what the problem would be with doing so, if the mines could prove that what they do does not affect the volume of recharge, or water quality.

Commr. Cadwell questioned whether there are areas that are "high" or "prime" recharge areas, where one can mine and not reduce the volume of recharge, or water quality.

Mr. Hewitt stated that staff has not seen any impact in either the quality or quantity of water or recharge at the sand mines in the County. He stated that the County gets detailed reports on every one of the mines and has not had one instance where the recharge or water quality has been affected. He stated that the County's mining ordinance is probably as tough as it gets, in fact, noted that the State requested a copy of it approximately two years ago.

A motion was made by Commr. Swartz and seconded by Commr. Gerber to clarify and use the "high","prime", and "significant" language, contained in Policy 7-13.1: Prohibition of Mining in Specified Areas, if it is adopted by the SJRWMD; in Policy 7-13.3: Mining in Prime and High Aquifer Recharge Areas, to not strike the language contained in said policy, but to strike the proposed amendment instead; and in Policy 7-13.8: Preservation of Hydrological Integrity at Reclaimed Mining Sites, to return to the Conservation Element Committee's recommendation, which was to strike "where feasible" in said language.

Under discussion, Commr. Cadwell clarified that the language under Nature of Amendment, for Policy 7-13.8, would read, "Revise to require preservation of hydrologic integrity". It was noted that the remainder of the language would be struck.

Commr. Pool questioned how the designation of "significant" would interchange with how "prime" and "high"is currently used.

Mr. Hewitt stated that "significant" would be 13 inches or greater and "high" and "prime" would be deleted.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried, by a 3-2 vote.

Commrs. Hanson and Pool voted "No".

On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution No. 2000-7, for the transmittal and adoption of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the Lake County Comprehensive Plan, as amended.

The Board informed staff that they were very impressed with their work, as it pertained to the EAR document, and the time and effort they put into it.

COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS

GROWTH MANAGEMENT/MUNICIPALITIES/ZONING

On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved a request from Growth Management for approval to charge 50% of the Day Care Facility Transportation Impact Fee, for day care developed according to the Site Plan approved by the City of Clermont, with the City of Clermont zoning clearance, issued on October 30, 1999, and to use interest accumulated via other transportation impact fees collected by the County for payment of the other 50% required, via the adopted Fee Schedule.

OTHER BUSINESS

APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES

On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board appointed the following individuals to vacant positions on the Board of Adjustments:

At-Large Members

Mr. R. J. (Bob) Fegers

Mr. Ron Hart



APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES

On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board appointed the following individuals to vacant positions on the Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee:

Ms. Ann Hawthorne

Ms. Kristin C. Kalwara

Mr. Roger Hansen

Ms. Bernice Joyce



APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES



On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously,



by a 5-0 vote, the Board appointed the following individuals to the Lake County Transportation



Disadvantaged Coordinating Board:



Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security's Representative



Ms. Cheryl L. Peer



Alternate Representative



Ms. Marvine Nelams



REPORTS

COUNTY ATTORNEY

DEEDS/COUNTY PROPERTY/SHERIFF'S OFFICE

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved a request from the County Attorney for acceptance of a Quit Claim Deed for property located at 31236 Anna Street, in Lake Mack; and authorization to sell the property, utilizing statutory bidding requirements.

REPORTS

COUNTY ATTORNEY

CONTRACTS, LEASES AND AGREEMENTS/CODE ENFORCEMENT

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved a request from the County Attorney for approval of a Settlement Agreement and approval of a Satisfaction and Release of Fine on a Code Enforcement Lien against Marian and Timothy Edwards (CEB No. 25-98).

REPORTS

COUNTY ATTORNEY

CONTRACTS, LEASES AND AGREEMENTS/STATE AGENCIES

On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved a request from the County Attorney to extend the time frame from January of 2000 to November of 2000, with regard to an agreement that the County is involved in with Polk County and the St. Johns River Water Management District, regarding Lake Lowery, because a study that is currently being conducted on the lake has not been completed.

REPORTS

COUNTY ATTORNEY

ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/CONTRACTS, LEASES AND AGREEMENTS

COUNTY PROPERTY/SHERIFF'S OFFICE

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved a request from the County Attorney for approval of a lease, in the amount of $14,700.00 per year, for rental space for the Sheriff's Office in The Villages, in Lady Lake.

REPORTS

COUNTY ATTORNEY

ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/TAX COLLECTOR

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, informed the Board that Mr. Bob McKee, Lake County Tax Collector, was successful in collecting all the past due taxes from All Seasons Resort. He stated that Mr. McKee worked very hard to collect said monies and noted that the County recently received almost $800,000.00 from the resort, bringing its taxes current. He noted that the monies will be distributed to all the taxing agencies involved.

The Board commended Mr. McKee for his efforts in collecting said monies.

It was noted that the Chairman would write Mr. McKee a letter, on behalf of the Board, thanking him for his efforts.

REPORTS

COUNTY MANAGER

ASSESSMENTS/SOLID WASTE

Ms. Sue Whittle, County Manager, reported to the Board what occurred regarding the recent solid waste assessment billing issue and what the County was doing to correct the problem. She stated that there were two issues involved - fire and solid waste. She stated that, when the problem first occurred, in November of this year, she reported to the Board that staff had identified 1,074 emergency services assessments with erroneous billing information, out of 53,347 parcels on the certified roll. She stated that the corrections were made, the data tapes were sent to the Tax Collector's Office, and the remainder of the revised bills were scheduled to be sent out toward the end of November. She stated that that was done and, to her knowledge, there has been no further problem with the fire assessment issue.

Ms. Whittle stated that, with regard to the solid waste assessment billing issue, she asked staff to bring her a factual, straight-forward, easy to understand synopsis of what occurred, which she read into the record, indicating that the errors that required corrections fell into two categories . She stated that those property owners that were billed too much on the tax bill required revised tax bills, to reduce the amount, and those property owners that were billed less than the amount actually due required a separate invoice, for the increase in fees, since an increase in the tax bill was not possible. She stated that the 1,142 tax bills that included solid waste assessments that were too high and have already been paid by the property owners, have been processed for refunds, amounting to $135,889.99. She stated that the property owners should receive their refunds within two weeks. She stated that those property owners who are to receive refunds due to overpayments on the invoices are being processed as the payments come in. She stated that she regrets the inconvenience that this problem has caused and that, since the problem occurred, staff has been working diligently to correct the data base and the billing and to process the refunds. She stated that staff received wonderful cooperation from the offices of the Tax Collector and the Property Appraiser, as well as Perconti Data Systems. She apologized to Mr. Bob McKee, Tax Collector, for the problems with the tax bills, noting that it was not his fault.

REPORTS

COMMISSIONER GERBER - DISTRICT 1

ORDINANCES

Commr. Gerber requested the County Attorney, Mr. Sandy Minkoff, to bring back to the Board the ordinance dealing with cigarettes being sold in convenience stores, to make it a countywide ordinance, noting that it was the consensus of the Board to do so, at a previous meeting.

REPORTS

COMMISSIONER POOL - DISTRICT 2

RESOLUTIONS

On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Proclamation No. 2000-1, proclaiming that Monday, January 17, 2000, shall be observed as a day to celebrate the life and dreams of Martin Luther King, Jr.

REPORTS

COMMISSIONER POOL - DISTRICT 2

MISCELLANEOUS

Commr. Pool thanked those individuals who participated in the County's Y2-K celebration New Year's Eve, noting that it was not fun, but was something that had to be done.

REPORTS

COMMISSIONER CADWELL - CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT 5

COMMISSIONERS/COMMITTEES

Commr. Cadwell distributed the selection list of Liaison/Membership Appointments for 2000 and asked the Commissioners to get them back to him as soon as possible, so that it could be placed on the Agenda for the January 18, 2000 Board Meeting.

MEETINGS

It was noted that a Space Workshop and Joint Workshop with the Parks and Recreation Committee has been scheduled for Tuesday, January 11, 2000, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 1:15 p.m.



__________________________________ WELTON G. CADWELL, CHAIRMAN



ATTEST:







_________________________________

JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK



sec/1-4-2000/1-12-2000/boardmin