A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 18, 2001
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, 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: Catherine C. Hanson, Chairman; Robert A. Pool, Vice Chairman; Welton G. Cadwell, Jennifer Hill; and Debbie Stivender Others present were: Sanford A. Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager; Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney; Wendy Taylor, Executive Office Manager, Board of County Commissioner’s Office; Barbara Lehman, Chief Deputy Clerk, County Finance; and Toni M. Riggs, Deputy Clerk.
Commr. Hanson asked that everyone stand for a moment of silence for the tragedies that our country has experienced this last week, and then she would lead the Pledge of Allegiance.
It was noted that there were no revisions to today’s Agenda.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Minutes of July 23, 2001, District Meeting, as presented.
CLERK OF COURTS’ CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Clerk of Courts’ Agenda (Items 1 through 6), as follows:
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.
Bonds - Contractor
Request to approve the Contractor Bonds, as follows:
244-03Jacob M. Vandermeer (Carpentry)
402-02Robert D. Boone/Boone Sign Erection and Service Inc. (Electric Signs)
1431-02Alfred E. Tinney dba Tinney Plumbing Company (Plumbing)
1691-02Franklin L. Russell dba Russell’s Electrical Service (Electrical)
1922-02Orin G. Cooper II/Mid-State Plumbing, Inc. (Plumbing)
4348-02Richard A. Baugh dba Baugh Mechanical Contracting
4525-02William D. Warshaw/American Electric Central Florida Inc. (Electrical)
4750-02Stan King/R.E.W. Services, Inc. (Electrical)
4917-02Richard Horn dba R & R Electrical Allstar (Electrical)
5371-02Peter E. Hetherman dba Peter E. Hetherman General Contractor (General)
5633-02Ricky Wayne Jarvis/Mechanical Refrigeration, Inc. (Class A Mechanical)
5702-02Edward C. Waters/E. C. Waters, Inc. (HVAC)
5715-01Robert C. Dietz (General)
5855-02Arthur Allen Divittorio dba A & K Signs (Sign Installation)
5856-02John Lawson dba Select Concrete Inc.
5857-03Danny D. Rhoda dba Magic Co. (Siding Installation)
5858-01Robert J. Wilkins dba Data Power Services, Inc.
5859-02Nathan P. Johnson dba Johnson Pool Upkeep (Swimming Pool Repair)
5672-00Diversified Electrical System, Inc.
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Clerk of Courts June 30, 2001 Semi Annual Investment Report.
Request to approve and authorize appropriate signatures on the following:
Release of Fine - Lee E. and Gloria Gavin - Reduction of Order of Fine in the amount of zero dollars ($0.00) dated July 19, 2001 and recorded in OR Book 1978 Pages 906-907 of the Public Records of the Clerk of Court of Lake County, Florida on the 24th day of July, 2001.
Release of Fine - Estate of Charles Thomas Baker, et al - Order of Fine in the amount of $3,700.00 dated February 7, 2001 and recorded in OR Book 1908 Pages 18 and 19 of the Public Records of the Clerk of the Circuit of Lake County, Florida on the 9th day of February, 2001.
Request to acknowledge receipt of the following:
Before the Florida Public Service Commission, Notice of Rescheduled Hearing to Florida Power Corporation, Florida Power & Light Company, Gulf Power Company, Tampa Electric Company, Florida Industrial Power Users Group, Office of Public Counsel and All Other Interested Persons, Re: Docket No. 010283-EI, Calculation of Gaines and Appropriate Regulatory Treatment for Non-Separated Wholesale Energy Sales by Investor-Owned Electric Utilities. Time and place: 9:30 a.m., Friday, August 31, 2001, 4075 Esplanade Way, Room 148, Betty Easley Conference Center, Tallahassee, Florida.
Notice of Hearing and Prehearing Conference to Florida Power Corporation, Florida Power & Light Company, Tampa Electric Company, Florida Retail Federation, Buddy L. Hansen, Sugarmill Woods Civic Association, Inc., Dynegy, Inc., Thomas P. and Genevieve E. Twomey, Florida Industrial Power Users Group, Office of Public Counsel and All Other Interested Persons, Docket No. 000824-EI; Docket No. 001148-EI; Docket No. 010577-EI. Time and place: 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, October 3, 2001, 4075 Esplanade Way, Room 148, Betty Easley Conference Center, Tallahassee, Florida. Prehearing Conference: time and place: 1:30 p.m., Monday, September 17, 2001, 4075 Esplanade Way, Room 148, Betty Easley Conference Center, Tallahassee, Florida.
Community Development Districts/Resolutions
Request to acknowledge receipt of a copy of Resolution 01-08 and the adopted budget for the Village Center Community Development District for the Fiscal Year 2001/2001 in accordance with Chapter 190.008(2)(b)(c).
Request to acknowledge receipt of a copy of Report No. 02-022 a Review of Florida Community College System Implementation of Laws and Policies Regarding Faculty Hours for the Spring 2001 Term.
Request to acknowledge receipt of a copy of the Lake County Water Authority’s DRAFT Tentative Budget for 2001-2002.
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
Commr. Hanson stated that she would like for staff to comment on Tab 12, the request for approval of the Automatic External Defibrillator (AED) Interlocal Agreement form and authorization for the County Manager to sign all future AED Agreements.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, explained that, once the agreements are signed, the fire department will be distributing the AEDs to the communities, and organizations throughout the County will be using this agreement to do that and they do have some available to distribute.
Commr. Hanson stated that this will have a big impact on the communities, and the AEDs will be available at the fire departments.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Tabs 3 through 27, for the following requests:
Request from Cultural Heritage and Natural Tourism for approval and signature on Proclamation 2001-170 proclaiming the month of October 2001 as Arts and Humanities month.
Accounts Allowed/Community Services/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Municipalities
Request from Community Services for approval and authorization for the Chairman to sign the FY 2001-2002 CDBG Partnership Agreement between the City of Tavares and the County in an amount not to exceed $101,000.00, granting the City CDBG funds to improve the Ingraham Center and to direct the Community Services Department to execute the Agreement and oversee completion of the project covered in the Scope of Services.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Municipalities
Request from Community Services for approval and authorization for the Chairman to sign the Interlocal Agreement between the County and the Town of Montverde allowing the County to use the Town's FY 2001-2002 CDBG entitlement to construct ADA-compliant restrooms in the Town Hall.
Request from Community Services for approval and signature on the State Aid to Libraries 2002 Grant Application and Agreement in the amount of $315,000.00 for Fiscal Year 2001/2002.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Libraries/Municipalities
Request from Community Services for approval and signature on amendment to extend the term of the Interlocal Agreement with Groveland relating to Provision of Library Services.
Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Grants
Request from Community Services for approval and authorization for the Chairman to sign the FY 2001-2002 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Partnership Agreement with Mid-Florida Community Services, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $20,000.00 to be used to transport homebound senior citizens to congregate meal sites and to direct the Community Services Department to execute the Agreement and oversee completion of the project covered in the Scope of Services.
Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Grants
Request from Community Services for approval and authorization for the Chairman to sign the FY 2001-2002 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Partnership Agreement with Mid-Florida Community Services, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $20,000.00, to provide delivery of meals on weekends to homebound senior citizens and to direct the Community Services Department to execute the Agreement and oversee completion of the project covered in the Scope of Services.
Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Grants
Request from Community Services for approval and authorization for the Chairman to sign the FY 2001-2002 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Agreement with the Lake County Department of Health, in an amount not to exceed $120,000.00, to cover the cost of dispensing prescriptions to low income persons and to direct the Department of Community Services to execute the Agreement and oversee completion of the project covered in the Scope of Services.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Emergency Services/Municipalities
Request from Emergency Services for approval of the Memorandum of Understanding for Special Needs Evacuation Facility between Westminster Care of Clermont and the Lake County Board of County Commissioners.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Emergency Services
Request from Emergency Services for approval of the Automatic External Defibrillator (AED) Interlocal Agreement form and authorization for the County Manager to sign all future AED Agreements.
Emergency Services/Parks & Recreation/State Agencies
Request from Emergency Services for approval to donate a surplus fire truck to Lake Louisa State Park, Department of Environmental Protection.
Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Grants/State Agencies/Emergency Services
Request from Emergency Services for approval and execution of Hazards Analysis Grant Agreement between the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs and Lake County to be used to support county hazardous materials emergency planning in the amount of $16,981.00.
Parks & Recreation/Ordinances
Request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for approval to advertise an Ordinance regarding the establishment of Park Rules and Regulations for the Lake County Park System.
Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases & Agreements
Request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for approval and execution of the renewal of the Lease Agreement between Lake County and the Lake Agriculture and Youth Fair Association, Inc. for FY 2001/2002 in the amount of $1.00.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Grants/Municipalities
Request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for approval and authorization for the Chairman to sign a First Amendment to Agreement with the City of Clermont for a 90-day Boating Improvement Grant extension, until December 31, 2001, and revision of the Boating Improvement Project.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Courts-Judges/Municipalities
Request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for approval of the renewal of the Lease Agreement for the Guardian Ad Litem Office Space in Tavares.
Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Tag Agency
Request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for approval to renew the Lease between Lake County and Strong Brothers Partnership for two years in the amount of $27,253.80 for the Leesburg Tag Agency.
Accounts Allowed/Budget Transfers
Request from Fiscal & Administrative Services for a budget transfer in the amount of $21,016.00 from Special Reserve - Greater Hills MSBU to Fiscal & Administrative Services, Contractual Services. A letter from the President of the Greater Hills Homeowners' Association requests additional funds for costly repairs and renovations in progress for some of the common assets of the subdivision.
Accounts Allowed/Budget Transfers/Transportation Disadvantaged
Request from Fiscal & Administrative Services for a budget transfer in the amount of $117,556.00 from Contingency - Public Transportation Fund to Public Transportation Fund - Contractual Services. Additional funds are needed to pay LifeStream for Transportation Disadvantaged and Transit services through the end of the year.
Accounts Allowed/Budget Transfers/Road Projects
Request from Fiscal & Administrative Services for a budget transfer in the amount of $160,226.00 from Contingency to Stormwater Management Fund, Professional Services. Additional funds are needed to replace culverts in poor condition. Culverts in the following locations are in need of replacement: Tracy Canal, Lake Nellie Road, Dwights Road and Green Swamp Road. The Tracy Canal and Green Swamp culverts will be partially funded by FEMA. Contingent upon Agenda Item 2001-749A being approved.
Accounts Allowed/Transportation Disadvantaged/Resolutions
Request from Fiscal & Administrative Services for approval of Resolution 2001-171 to amend the Public Transportation Fund in order to receive unanticipated revenue for Fiscal Year 2000/2001 in the amount of $103,250.00 from Provision of Transportation Disadvantaged Trips and to provide appropriations for the disbursement of these funds to Contractual Services - LifeStream Behavioral.
Accounts Allowed/Emergency Management/Resolutions
Request from Fiscal & Administrative Services for approval of Resolution 2001-172 to amend the General Fund's Emergency Management Trust Fund in order to receive unanticipated revenue for Fiscal Year 2000/2001 in the amount of $1,050.00 and to provide appropriations for the disbursement of these funds to Machinery & Equipment for the purchase of a rapid response trailer.
Request from Fiscal & Administrative Services for approval of Resolution 2001-173 to amend the Employee Group Benefits Fund in order to receive unanticipated revenue for Fiscal Year 2000/2001 in the amount of $135,000.00 from Insurance Contributions Employer/BCC and to provide appropriations for the disbursement of these funds to Insurance Payments and Insurance Administrative Fees.
Request from Fiscal & Administrative Services for approval of Resolution 2001-174 to amend the Fleet Maintenance Fund in order to receive unanticipated revenue for Fiscal Year 2000/2001 in the amount of $150,000.00 from Fuel/Oil and from Parts, and to provide appropriations for the disbursement of these funds to Repair & Maintenance and Operating Supplies.
Request from Procurement Services for approval to authorize a change order to Hartman & Associates, Inc. to increase the scope of service and expend an additional $3,534.50 for the Contamination Assessment & Remediation at the refueling facility at the Astatula II Landfill.
Request from Procurement Services for approval and authorization to advertise through Fiscal Year 2001/2002 for Lake County's annual bids and proposals; authorization to award and/or extend the annual bids and proposals and to piggy back other governmental or cooperative bids or contracts if the award recommendation is to the lowest and best responsive and responsible bidder (bids) or highest ranked respondent (proposals) and issue blanket purchase orders or other contractual documents within budgeted funds.
Accounts Allowed/Bids/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Roads-County & State
Request from Procurement Services for approval and authorization to award RFP 01-091, encumber funds and authorize a contract, subject to County Attorney approval, to Berryman & Henigar, Inc., to provide engineering services for four culvert replacements located at Tracy Canal, Lake Nellie Road, Dwights Road and the Green Swamp Road, in the amount of $160,226.00.
Bids/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Insurance
Request from Procurement Services for approval and authorization to award RFP 01-082 Property & Casualty Insurance Program Broker, encumber funds and authorize a contract, subject to the County Attorney's approval, to Arthur J. Gallagher & Company to provide broker services for the County's property & casualty insurance program.
Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Insurance
Request from Risk Management for approval to renew the contract for claims management with Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc. in the amount of $50,122.00 effective October 1, 2001; and authorization for Chairman to execute appropriate document pending County Attorney's approval.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Building
Request from Growth Management for approval to accept and execute a Developer's Agreement with Pennbrooke Fairways to pull six building permits prior to the acceptance of the final plat.
Rights-of-Way, Roads & Easements/Deeds
Request from Public Works for approval to accept one Drainage Easement Deed, five Statutory Quitclaim Deeds and two Statutory Warranty Deeds, as follows:
Patricia M. Dragstedt - Morningside Drive - 3/4 4568 - Road Project
Statutory Quitclaim Deed
Ardith Lancaster - Central Blvd. - Deerhaven Rd. Proj.
Calvin and Lillian Rimmer - East Avenue - Deerhaven Rd. Proj.
Leslie H. and Velma Ann Sadler - Far West Ave. and South Ave. - Deerhaven Rd. Proj.
A. Michael Armaly - North West Ave. - Deerhaven Rd. Proj.
Owen and Lois Porter - North West Ave. and N. Blvd. - Deerhaven Rd. Proj.
Statutory Warranty Deed
HCN, Inc., a Florida corporation - CR 448 - Road Project
Lennar Homes, Inc. - S. Hancock Road - 2-1254 - Road Project
Commr. Hanson read into the record Resolution 2001-142 honoring Mr. James Simpson, Jr. and declaring the computer lab at the Lake County Agricultural Center be called the Jim Simpson Computer Lab and Classroom. At this time, Commr. Hill joined Commr. Hanson in presenting the Resolution to Ms. Anita Simpson, widow of Mr. James Simpson, Jr.
Ms. Simpson extended her appreciation and stated that she was very honored.
PUBLIC HEARING -
COMMUNITY SERVICES/FAIR HOUSING ACTION PLAN
Mr. Fletcher Smith, Senior Director of Community Services addressed the Board for the public hearing on the adoption and approval of the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice & Fair Housing Action Plan and stated that Ms. Liz Eginton, CDBG Director, has prepared a presentation, which is an overview of the document in the backup. Mr. Smith noted that this document was reviewed several times and passed along by the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee.
Ms. Eginton addressed the Board and stated that the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) was prepared by the Housing and Community Development Division of the Department of Community Services with assistance from the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. Ms. Eginton reviewed the participation in the analysis and stated that Section 1 introduces the Analysis; Section 2 presents relevant background information, demographics, income status, economic and employment trends, a housing profile, and discussion of the County’s fair housing legal status; Section 3 identifies public and private impediments to fair housing choice including market base limitations, lending practices, and public policies; and Section 4 summarizes the findings and conclusions and presents an action plan to address the identified impediments. She stated that today’s presentation would focus on the identified impediments and actions to address those impediments. At this time, Ms. Eginton presented a detailed review of the Analysis.
Ms. Eginton stated that she felt that the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee would be a good starting point to begin the process, because the biggest issue is housing affordability.
Commr. Cadwell stated that they would like to take the individual issues before the Affordable Housing Committee and come up with an action plan on each individual one and then come back to the Board. He noted that the Action Plan has been approved by the Affordable Housing Committee.
Ms. Eginton suggested that, if a Task Force is appointed, it include representation from Growth Management, Public Works and the County Attorney’s Office, because their expertise is sorely needed.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the request for adoption and approval of the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice & Fair Housing Action Plan.
PUBLIC HEARING -
ORDINANCE RELATED TO SHORELINE PROTECTION
Ms. Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney, placed the following proposed Ordinance on the floor, by title only, and noted that it would be Ordinance 2001-124, if approved by the Board:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA; AMENDING CHAPTER 6.02.00, ENTITLED SHORELINE PROTECTION; PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF PLANTS WITHIN AN AREA DELIMITED BY UP TO 50 PERCENT OF SHORELINE OR 50 FEET OF SHORELINE; PROVIDING THAT NOTICE OF ALL MECHANICAL CLEARING OF SHORELINE BE GIVEN TO THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE LAKE COUNTY CODE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mr. Allan Hewitt, Director of Water Resources Management, addressed the Board and stated that, pursuant to the Board’s request earlier this year, staff is bringing back the changes to Chapter 6, Shoreline Ordinance. Mr. Hewitt explained that the words in strike through will be deleted and the words underlined will be added. He directed the Board’s attention to the list of questions in the backup, which he reviewed with the Board.
Commr. Cadwell questioned whether the ordinance could be worded so that, if someone needed a variance for 150 feet, they could go to staff and try to obtain that variance and, if they could not get it from staff, they could go to the Board of Adjustments (BOA).
Ms. Fuchs explained that, if the ordinance sets forth the criteria for that decision to be based on, then someone could go to staff first according to criteria set forth therein and, if they are not successful, then they can go to the BOA to get a variance. She noted that this process should be a part of the ordinance.
Mr. Hewitt continued his discussion of the questions in the backup and stated that, in regards to businesses that may need more than 50 feet, staff recommends that businesses be exempted from this ordinance, because they are required to have appropriate State permits for anything over 50 feet. At this time, he concluded his discussion of the questions and comments in the backup. Mr. Hewitt presented a draft of a comprehensive guide that staff is in the process of developing which pertains to shoreline and stormwater protection.
Commr. Stivender stated that the proposed ordinance is a duplication of an existing law, and she does not like duplicating laws that are already in existence. She questioned what the vote was by the Planning and Development Commission.
Mr. Hewitt stated that there was a 4-3 vote by the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve the shoreline ordinance.
Ms. Fuchs clarified that the recommendation for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission was based on two amendments, to exempt out businesses and floating islands, and an amendment to Section 6.02.02, A.2. (Page 2 of the ordinance), to insert a period after “jurisdictional wetland line” and to delete “or no closer than the setback established by the existing principle structure.”
It was noted that the Environmental Protection Advisory Board (EPAB) had a split vote on the issue.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing and called for public comment.
Mr. George Hovis, Attorney, Clermont, addressed the Board and stated that he was the initial co-chairperson of the Lake Shore Ordinance Committee. Mr. Hovis explained that people from both sides of the issue worked together on this ordinance and did a great job. He does not have any problems with the proposed ordinance, and he would like to see the variance process to be a very efficient, inexpensive process.
Mr. Ed Havill, Lake County Property Appraiser, addressed the Board and stated that he has gotten a lot of phone calls in the last couple of days from waterfront property owners in the County who cannot be here today who are very concerned about this ordinance and their private property rights. Mr. Havill explained that the State has rules and regulations concerning this issue and, after talking to Mr. Hewitt yesterday, he found out that he is claiming that the ordinance being proposed is the same as the State ordinance; in case the State repeals its rules and regulations, then the County will have a local ordinance. Mr. Havill explained that the State has a process of hearings that would have to take place before they make any changes. He has a problem with legislative bodies like the Board passing laws and staff making an interpretation of those laws, with them not being interpreted on the side of the property owner, and he has a problem with them taking their orders from minority groups like Save Our Lakes Committee. Mr. Havill stated that the Board needs to stand up for the majority of this County and the people that the Board represents.
Mr. Larry Everly, Lakeshore Drive, addressed the Board in opposition to the proposed ordinance. Mr. Everly stated that he sat through all of the meetings with Mr. Hovis and it was about an even split on whether or not the County needed an ordinance. He stated that there is a State ordinance, but staff is not enforcing the State rules and regulations. He stated that this should not be heard today, because there are so many holes in the language including the section on floating islands. Mr. Everly stated that he did not feel that the Board should be passing the ordinance, and the money that has been spent on trying to write this and adopt this could have been used on the educational pamphlets, as referred to by Mr. Hewitt, and this is where they could have been concentrating their efforts.
Mr. Steve Vaughn, Mount Dora, addressed the Board and stated that he also attended the meetings and it was a split group on the issue. Mr. Vaughn stated that there is a subdivision across from the Country Club of Mount Dora where he has Lot 11, and he has a permit from the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) saying what they can do with their lake front lots. They also have a permit from the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). A lot of their lots in this area are 200 to 300 feet from the buildable lot on the lakefront out to the open water of Lot 11, and those individuals have approval to clear a 50 foot strip out to the lake for the boat dock and that is why they pay $165,000 to $180,000 a lot, so they can put a boat there. He questioned whether the County is going to reimburse those individuals who have bought these high priced lots that had State, County, and city approval. Mr. Vaughn explained that he has gotten many calls about the proposed ordinance with questions about why people were not notified as to when it would be coming to the Board for discussion. He referred to 369.20(8), Florida Statutes and stated that an individual can cut out up to four inches of trees in this 50 feet; this is also in the DEP and the SJRWMD regulations. Mr. Vaughn stated that, if the Board passes this ordinance, it will mean that a lot of people are now going to have to get a permit from the County to cut a tree in this designated area, and he questioned who was going to be overseeing this task, as well as what the cost is going to be to police such action. Mr. Vaughn felt that the Board will be trampling on something that the Supreme Court of the United States has passed and that is property rights. He feels that there is a serious problem when a person buys a piece of land and gets approval from the County, the SJRWMD, and DEP to do certain things, and then the County comes along and develops a new regulation that retracts that approval. Mr. Vaughn stated that he likes about three-fourths of the ordinance including the creation of upland buffers. He discussed the pollution from road runoff and stated that people need to be educated, and he feels that the Board needs to be very careful in trying to pass something that staff has put together that he feels is not going to work.
Ms. Rhoda Apfelbeck stated that she is a Board member of the Save Our Lakes Committee, which cares about Lake County, its people, and its lakes. Ms. Apfelbeck stated, for the record, that the Save Our Lakes Committee is requesting that the Board consider the shoreline ordinance as presented. She stated that they trust that the Board will do what is right for their lakes and the County.
Mr. Roy Hunter stated that he is with the Northeast Lake Chamber of Commerce and, over the last year, he has been promoting a mirror image of the State regulations. Mr. Hunter stated that it was obvious today that he and Mr. Hovis have changed their minds, and he feels that the best thing to do is leave the whole thing alone. He feels that a lot of these issues were brought forth because of two so called violations that were addressed and found to be legal, and as far as he knows there have been no other violations, because people who live on the lakes take care of the lakes. He explained that, if a road is not County maintained, the County stays away from it; shorelines are not County maintained, so he was suggesting that the County stay away from them and let the State ordinance stay the way it is today. He referred to the following language found in a book written by a Professor of Florida Atlantic University and who was the Secretary to the Department of Community Affairs in the 1980s, which stated that “in those areas of more than local impact, state and regional agencies do have an important roll and one that can ultimately result in an overriding of local government action.” He feels that, in regards to Lake Lowery and Polk County, the Board should talk to them about what he just read, because he feels it would solve the problem of Polk County diverting all that water from Lake Lowery that is starving the Clermont lakes and Harris lakes. Mr. Hunter noted that this is the position of the Northeast Lake Chamber of Commerce.
Ms. Elaine Renick addressed the Board and stated that she wanted to respond to Commr. Stivender’s concern and remind the Board what initially prompted the desire to have the extra level. Ms. Renick referred to action being taken by Representative Argenziano, Citrus County, to eliminate all restrictions on shorelines and stated that, even though this may not harm Citrus County, it would seriously and negatively impact Lake County, and that is the reason for the extra level. If they were confident that the State level was going to stay there and Representative Argenziano was not going to keep trying to eradicate it, it would be a different story. In response to the comments made by Mr. Havill, Ms. Renick stated that there are lake front property owners who think this is a good thing. She owns lakeshore property and she does not feel that she has the right to do anything that would in any way harm the lakes, because the lakes belong to everyone. She feels this is a public interest issue, not a property right issue, and she feels they have an inherent responsibility to protect the environment. In terms of this ordinance being an overreaction, she stated that it was more pointing out the need. Mr. Renick stated that she was at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and, although the vote was 4 to 3, the people who voted against it were not specifically voting against the ordinance per say. One person wanted to postpone it for further information; another person had a concern about whether or not there would be the cost of hiring additional people to enforce it. They did not argue the merits of having something in place. She noted that it was not as controversial that day as maybe the vote suggests.
Commr. Hanson called for further public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Commr. Pool disclosed that he would be unable to vote, due to a Commission of Ethics’ recommendation that he not take part in the voting of this issue because of the disproportionate fair share of waterfront property that his family holds and, based on the Commission of Ethics, he stated that he was going to follow that guidance and recommendation and not vote on this issue today. It was noted that Commr. Pool filed a Conflict of Interest with the Deputy Clerk.
Commr. Cadwell questioned whether the Board has the power to enact an ordinance that only becomes effective if the State ordinance is revoked.
Ms. Fuchs explained that the Board has the power to do that but it would have to be very clear in the ordinance. She further explained that the Board would have to make sure that they have notice to the citizens what the law actually is in place at the time, and that would leave it up to them to check and verify that the State law has not be revoked. She stated that it puts the burden on the citizens to beware of what the law is currently on the books.
Commr. Cadwell clarified that the Board could add language to this ordinance to say that this ordinance will become effective at the revocation of any State Statute covering the same and noting the House Bill that is currently on the books. He stated that this would take care of one of the concerns that was brought forward, that they do not need two sets of rules, but it would also not leave them out there without anything, in the event the State would change or revoke the Statute.
Commr. Stivender questioned whether the Board could come back in an emergency situation and create a resolution, if the State should revoke the Statute.
Ms. Fuchs stated that, as long as the Board found that an emergency existed, it could do an emergency ordinance.
Commr. Hanson stated that she was on the Board at the time they eliminated the ordinance a year ago, when the requirement was 25 feet, and it did not come back as an issue, but their intent was to eliminate duplication and that was the reason that they eliminated it, because the State had the regulations in place.
Commr. Cadwell made a motion for an amendment to add additional language that would make this ordinance become effective if and when the State Statute (quote number) is revoked by the State of Florida.
Upon the request of Commr. Hanson, Mr. Hewitt explained the language that was completely new in the ordinance and not contained in the State Statutes.
Commr. Hanson stated that the intent is to make it easy to get a variance, and she questioned whether there was another area in the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) that these two items (150 foot waterward and notice of mechanical harvesting) could be included as an amendment. She stated that she sees an important aspect of having the notification of mechanical harvesting, but not a permit.
Mr. Hewitt stated that they are talking strictly aquatic vegetation and whatever happens in the upland in the buffers is governed under other rules.
Commr. Stivender stated that, if this paragraph is in a document somewhere, it is going to be up to the interpretation of the Code Enforcement Officer, or staff, to determine whether someone is mechanically harvesting. So then the citizen is going to be harassed, and he is not doing anything wrong, and that is her concern with just the notification.
Commr. Hill stated that there is already an ordinance on the books, and these are revisions that are addressed elsewhere, and they are addressed by two State agencies, as well as by the County. There are State Statutes that provide for everything that is being revised here. Commr. Hill thought the Board had asked Mr. Hewitt to come back and address education, and he believes that Mr. Hewitt is on the right track with the pamphlet, not only for new homeowners, but for all homeowners on shorelines, or anybody else. She stated that this is what the Board brought forward and asked him to do, not to revise a whole new LDR and redo what the State is doing on two different levels. She stated that they really need to address the education aspect of it, and the only thing that she would change is a provision for education component within this ordinance. Commr. Hill stated that it would be her recommendation to leave the LDRs as they are and that the Board concentrate on educating the people on how shorelines should be protected. She did not know if this would need to be in an ordinance, or maybe just staff driven.
Commr. Cadwell questioned what the downside would be of having an ordinance that would become effective, if the State does change the law and those rules are not there anymore.
Commr. Hill stated that she would want to see what the State does with the law, in terms of being more or less restrictive, because they do not know what the State is going to change, and it may not be the things that the Board is addressing today.
Commr. Hanson passed the gavel to Commr. Stivender and seconded Commr. Cadwell’s motion to approve an amendment to add additional language that would make this ordinance become effective if and when the State Statute (quote number) is revoked by the State of Florida.
Commr. Stivender called for the vote on the motion, which failed by a 2-2 vote. Commrs. Cadwell and Hanson voted for the motion. Commrs. Stivender and Hill voted against the motion. Commr. Pool declared a conflict of interest and did not discuss or vote on the issue.
Commr. Stivender returned the gavel to Commr. Hanson, Chairman.
Commr. Hill made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Stivender, to approve to leave the LDRs as in place and direct staff to educate the public as far as shoreline.
Commr. Hanson called for a vote on the motion, which failed by a 2-2 vote. Commrs. Hill and Stivender voted for the motion. Commrs. Cadwell and Hanson voted against the motion. Commr. Pool declared a conflict of interest and did not discuss or vote on the issue.
Ms. Fuchs clarified that the motions failed, which means that there was no action taken so the ordinance is not passed.
Mr. Hewitt noted that staff will be making changes to the pamphlet, and it will be ready for publication, as soon as they can find a print shop. They will start with 2,000 copies.
Commr. Stivender stated that the Legislative Task Force that has been created for the Chain of Lakes has a meeting on Thursday at 10 a.m., and she asked that Mr. Hewitt attend the meeting to discuss this issue with them.
Mr. Hovis stated that, if the Board will concentrate on getting the brochures out to the public, it will cover a lot of ground.
Mr. Vaughn asked that the public be notified, if this issue ever comes up again.
CITIZEN QUESTION AND COMMENT PERIOD
Ms. R. D. Burlingham, Deland, stated that she is here today and accompanied by her mother, Vivian Burlingham. Ms. Burlingham presented the Board with a copy of a Release of Fine for Louis J. Deni and Candice Deni Johnson, et al, as well as other documentation pertaining to a code enforcement issue.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, explained that this was a code case, and there were a large amount of fines on this property that the Burlinghams purchased at a tax deed sale. The property was brought into compliance, and the Code Enforcement Board released all of the code enforcement liens, about $12,000. There is one mowing lien in the amount of $274.85 and Code Enforcement does not have the authority to release that lien. Ms. Burlingham is asking that this lien be released by the Board. Mr. Minkoff stated that the title work that was done during the tax lien process did not show the lien, so they were not aware of it when they purchased it. He explained that normally staff would get a letter, or they would come to the Board, and Ms. Melanie Marsh, Assistant County Attorney, wrote to them and said a good way to do this would be to come under citizen comment and make a request to the Board.
Mr. Minkoff noted that staff does not oppose the request.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to place the above request from Ms. Burlingham on the agenda.
Ms. Burlingham explained that the mowing was done before they had ownership of the property. They had a title search on July 1, 1999, and it showed no liens of any kind. She explained that they paid taxes on the property for seven years and were not interested in buying it, but no one else wanted it, so they were the high bidder on December 14, 1999. It was noted that the property is in compliance
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to release a Special Assessment lien (for mowing) in the amount of $274.85. (Resolution 2001-186)
Mr. Robert Curry addressed the Board and stated that he was here last month asking whether the Board could look at a voter initiated referendum in the County on issues of concern to the voters. He questioned whether the Board has had the opportunity to review this possibility. He explained that this involves the issue that there is no mechanism for citizen initiated referendums to be placed on a ballot within the County
Ms. Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney, stated that there is no mechanism for voter initiative referendums.
The Board and legal staff informed Mr. Curry that a committee was put together about four years ago to look at the possibility of forming a charter government for Lake County, which did not take place, and the only way that such a mechanism could be developed would be under a Charter government, or a change in the Florida Statutes or Constitution.
Commr. Hanson explained that the process today would be for someone to come to the Board under public comment with whatever signatures, or backing, the item had at that moment.
COUNTY MANAGER’S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
Mr. Bruce Thorburn, Communications Systems Director, addressed the Board to discuss the requests for approval of a Resolution renaming a portion of CR-561 in the Clermont area of Lake County. Mr. Thorburn explained that, on August 21, 2001, staff brought a consent item to the Board for the renaming of a portion of CR-561. It was postponed for 30 days. Of the original 104 petitions that were sent to property owners, about 70 of them were ignored, or there was no response; there were 34 votes cast for the three proposed street names. With the extension of time, there has been an additional 10 people respond, with the final vote being three property owners requesting Regal View Drive; 20 requested Minneola View Drive; and 21 requested Shore Breeze Drive.
Commr. Pool stated that he has had a number of calls on this issue, and there was a lot of confusion about the process, as he explained. He stated that residents are wanting to name the road Lake Minneola Shores, but there was no way they could write this name on the form, or start a petition among the homeowners. He further stated that Ms. Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney, has explained to him that the letter will have to be sent back out or adopted as it is being presented today.
Mr. Thorburn explained that initially staff sent blank forms requesting that the citizens give staff three names for the road, and they never replied. After the required 45 days, staff developed three names and sent another 103 petitions and this is what came to the August 21, 2001 Board meeting. He noted that he had $150 in his budget for mailing, and he has overspent his budget on this one issue.
Ms. Fuchs explained the way that the citizens could do it, as discussed, but the Board does have total discretion, at this time, to choose the name for the street.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to rename a portion of CR-561A as Lake Minneola Shores, Resolution 2001-175.
ROADS-COUNTY & STATE/RESOLUTIONS/SIGNS-SIGNALS
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, was present to discuss the request to install a traffic signal at the Intersection of SR-46 and Round Lake Road.
It was noted that the request was in Commr. Hanson’s district, and she had no problem with it.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution 2001-176 endorsing the installation of traffic signal at the Intersection of SR-46 and Round Lake Road.
CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS/STATE AGENCIES/RESOLUTIONS
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, addressed the Board to discuss the request for approval of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) for the 5311 Grant.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the request for approval of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) for the 5311 Grant and approval of Resolution 2001-177 of Support from the Lake County Board of County Commissioners.
ROADS-COUNTY & STATE/SIGNS/RESOLUTIONS
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, addressed the Board to discuss the request to lower the speed limit on Old Highway 441 (4-0500A) from 40-MPH to 35-MPH located 150 feet east of Lucerne Drive (3-4267) and extending east to 750 feet west of N. McDonald Street in the Mount Dora area. Mr. Stivender noted that there has been a request for 30 MPH and there are some studies that show certain areas at 30 MPH. The map shows an advisory speed of 30 MPH. He stated that there is a speeding issue in this area, and staff wants to lower it to 35 MPH and come back during the winter season when the area has higher traffic and do a more thorough study.
Commr. Hanson noted that the request is in her district, and she supports it.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the request for approval of Resolution 2001-178 authorizing to lower the speed limit on Old Highway 441 (4-0500A) from 40-MPH to 35-MPH located 150 feet east of Lucerne Drive (3-4267) and extending east to 750 feet west of N. McDonald Street in the Mount Dora area.
In response to a question from Commr. Stivender, Mr. Stivender noted that staff is looking at Old 441 and all the way back into Tavares as a road improvement.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 10:45 a.m., Commr. Hanson noted that staff would recess until 11 a.m.
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENT/MUNICIPALITIES/RESOLUTIONS
Mr. Bill Gilley, Senior Director of Solid Waste Management, stated that, before he addressed Tabs 36 and 37, he would like to give the Board a short presentation on what has occurred with the waste disposal fees up to this date. Mr. Gilley stated that, on September 4, 2001, the Board made the decision to set the assessment rate at $107.50 for all residential units in the unincorporated area. From that decision, staff developed a program or plan to bring forward to the Board for consideration and approval today. He stated that the amount of $107.50 supports the solid waste system, which includes the cost of Covanta and operational costs such as household hazardous waste collection and landfill costs. It does not support the costs to operate the residential drop off. During earlier discussion of this issue, staff informed the Board that, while 19,500 selected the self haul option and paid that option on their tax bill, only 4,900 people, or less than one-third, actually applied for and picked up a self haul card. The previous fee for self haul was $13.06 which generated approximately $250,000 in revenue; however, the actual costs to operate the drop offs were closer to $475,000. He reminded the Board that they needed to keep in mind that the revenue generated in the past for the self haul program was also placed on the tax bill. The self haul fee, as proposed today, will now have to be collected by staff. To compute the cost of the self haul card, staff divided the full cost to operate the drop offs ($475,000) by the entire number of self haul customers for the current year (19,500), which came to $25.00 per self haul customer. Along with the $107.50, the total cost for the self haul waste services in Lake County will be $132.50 as staff is proposing today. However, if the same number of customers apply for the card that have applied in the past (4,900), this number would generate only $122,000 and there will be a shortfall in revenue of approximately $350,000. Mr. Gilley pointed out that, if the self haul card fee was based on the actual number of customers (4,900) using the drop offs, the actual cost would be approximately $97.00 per card, for a total cost of $204.50. Mr. Gilley stated that is was also important to know that only the $107.50 fee, as shown on the tax bill, will be eligible for the hardship exemption.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, clarified that it was never a requirement to get a drop off card, because the County has always allowed people to come in and pay. Mr. Minkoff explained that he drop off card allows you to dispose at the transfer stations without paying a fee. The fees that were collected were relatively modest, so they know that those 15,000 people are not coming every week, or every two weeks, and paying the fee.
Mr. Gilley stated that last year the department collected less than $100,000 at the drop off stations. He noted that those people did not have cards. Staff made the determination that, if 4,900 people actually get a card, it would generate about $122,000.
Mr. Minkoff explained that, if the people do not get a card and pay every time they come to the transfer station, staff would have to assume the revenue would be about the same as it was last year.
Mr. Gilley continued his presentation by stating that staff is anticipating a $350,000 revenue shortfall for the drop off operation; an increased number of people not applying for or using the cards; the possibility of increased illegal dumping; added expenses such as increased supplies for applications and cards, postage and envelopes; and increased cost of the notice. He stated that, once the Board takes action today, staff will send out another 53,000 notices to the customers who previously got the notice of $195.00. In addition, the department has about 20,000 recycling bins at the Astatula landfill that were purchased in anticipation of going to universal collection. Mr. Gilley stated that, since there is no longer an option of universal collection, all customers who desire to have hauler collection will now contract directly with their hauler and will be billed by their hauler for service on a quarterly basis.
The Board was presented with a Solid Waste Financial Review chart, and Mr. Gilley noted that the $107.50 disposal rate represents an 18.8% increase. The self haul fee went from $13.06 to $25, which is a 91.4% increase, and the total self haul rate is $132.50, which represents an overall increase of 28%. Mr. Gilley reviewed the other figures in Chart 1 noting the twice-a-week collection rates and the once-a-week collection rates.
Mr. Gilley stated that, along with the change in the waste materials assessment fee, and the self haul card fee, other changes had to be made to generate revenues for the next two years. He stated that the tipping fee has been increased from $91.37 to $95.00 and all of the municipalities have been notified via letters and/or phone calls, because this will have a major impact on their budgets. Staff also developed a more define cash fee structure for the residential waste at the drop offs. These charges range in price from $3 a car to $20 a load. The other significant change included in the fee schedule is the practice of bringing a load in for free, which will no longer be allowed, and there is no more free yard waste for the customers in the unincorporated area who are not self haul.
Mr. Gilley stated that he would now like to review the financial impact that the change will have on the Enterprise Fund. He referred to Chart 2, Total Operating Costs, which showed the costs for the 2002 budget to be approximately $18 million. The following year shows a projection of $19 million and this includes the cost of Covanta as well as other costs to the rest of the solid waste system. He referred to Chart 3, 2001-2002 Covanta Costs, and stated that a major influence on the increased cost to Covanta is due to the inability to separate yard waste from the tonnage that is delivered to the incinerator without universal collection. He stated that Chart 3 shows that the total tonnage delivered to Covanta was 130,000 tons per year. Based on the current trends for this contract year, staff believes that the delivered tons will be 161,880, which means that the County will spend approximately $1.6 million more than they would have if they had paid just for 130,000 tons. At this time, Mr. Gilley explained the impact in costs, which is based on the contract with Covanta.
Mr. Gilley referred to Chart 4, which depicts the Personnel Costs and shows that the costs increased from $2,368,802 (2002) to $2,606,939 (2003), which is based on about a 4 1/2% increase and budgeting on the high side for retirement contributions; Chart 5, Operating & Capital Costs Minus Covanta, shows the projected costs decreased from $3.6 million (2001) to $2.5 million primarily based on one time capital costs being incurred in the first two years; Chart 6, Revenue Projections, shows that, even with the increased tipping fees and the increased assessment fee, the projected revenues indicate a shortfall of $1.9 million in 2002 and an additional shortfall of $1.9 million in 2003. Mr. Gilley clarified that this is based on what they are actually going to spend versus what they are bringing in, so basically they will be using some of their Contingency funds for the next two years. He stated that Chart 7, Contingency Balance, shows that, because there is a shortfall in revenue, they will need to utilize monies from their Contingency fund to make up the discrepancy, because since they are an enterprise fund, they have to pay their own way. He asked the Board to please note that the balances include $1.5 million in disputed costs to Covanta, therefore, if and when those fees are paid, the Contingency balance will be less than $1.5 million (2002), and then there will be no money left in the Operating Contingency Fund by 2003, if all of the projections are accurate. He also noted that this does not include approximately $1 million in attorney’s fees, if the County should lose the case.
Mr. Gilley addressed Tab 36 and stated that, along with the changes in the fee structure, staff is recommending that the Interlocal Agreements with Eustis, Fruitland Park, Howey-in-the-Hills, Mount Dora, and Umatilla not be renewed. These cites are assessed for solid waste based on the assessment rate of the unincorporated area rather than the actual number of tons that are delivered across the scales. He stated that this has resulted in a significant loss of revenues to the County and has forced the County to subsidize the tonnages credited to the haulers. Staff is recommending that all municipalities pay the tipping fee rate of $95 per ton for municipal solid waste deliveries and that previous interlocal agreements not be extended, due to the excessive shortfall staff anticipates in the enterprise fund for the next two years.
Mr. Gilley stated that staff recommends approval of the revised fee schedule for solid waste and recommends nonrenewal and no extension of the interlocal agreements at this time.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he has been asked on numerous occasions whether there was any way that the Board could readdress the universal collection until next year.
Ms. Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney, stated that it is correct that the Board cannot address the universal collection issue again until next year. The Florida Statutes sets forth time frames, which is September 15th for the assessments, so the Board will have to wait until the next year process.
Commr. Cadwell questioned whether staff had an estimated cost of staff time and mailing that was put into the universal collection process, so if the Board decides to reconsider this type of system, the Board will know what kind of costs the County would incur.
Mr. Gilley explained that, as part of the assessment process, staff had to do the work anyway. He noted that, over the past year, he has probably spent 25% of his time trying to establish the universal collection system. It was noted that staff did not have specific numbers, in terms of costs or staff time, but it was a considerable amount.
Commr. Cadwell questioned what type of impact it would have on the bottom line fiscally for 2003, if the Board readdressed universal collection next year.
Mr. Gilley explained that the County would be reallocating resources and devoting a lot more of them to addressing the implementation of universal collection. At this time, Mr. Gilley explained the process that has been developed for the self haul system and noted that information that will be provided to the people beginning in October at the drop off locations, which outlines the entire procedure.
Mr. Minkoff explained that staff will be requesting another closed session with the Board to discuss the Covanta case. He has indicated to the Board members that part of the lawsuit with Covanta has been decided in the County’s favor, that being the public records portion. Although Covanta has appealed it, it gets an expedited appeal, so perhaps in four to six months, they will have an answer. As far as the rest of the case, it will be well into next year before the case actually goes to trial, or possibly the year after before that portion is totally decided.
Comm. Pool stated that, during the discussions, he has voiced his concerns, in terms of people living in Lake County for six months and paying for only six months, but there is an opportunity here to bring back the universal collection option, the sooner the better, so they do not get hit with a deadline like last time
Ms. Fuchs explained that the process starts in January with the intent resolution, and the time frame to adopt the assessment roll is from June to September 15th.
Commr. Cadwell explained that there was no sense of emergency to do something different because the Board had unanimously supported the universal collection process from day one.
Commr. Hill stated that it is her understanding that the Board was going to the universal collection to shore up their billing options and streamline what the County was doing in the billing process. She has no problem with what has been presented today. She wanted to try and cut down the options and make it a little more streamlined.
Mr. Gilley explained that the once-a-week is currently in place in the northeast section of the County where they have once a week garbage collection and once a week recycling. He noted that this option is not available in other areas of the County.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the true cost in universal collection is to remove the yard waste and expand the recycling and cut down those costs at the incinerator and the only way to do that is by universal collection.
In regards to Tab 36 and the interlocal agreements with the cities, Mr. Minkoff explained that the County has already issued the notice indicating that it would not renew these agreements. Several of the cities have requested that their agreement be extended and those are before the Board today.
Mr. Lewis Stone, Attorney for the City of Eustis, addressed the Board and stated that the City of Eustis would like some sense of stability as they negotiate their contracts with their trash haulers. Mr. Stone stated that they would like their contract and the numbers contained in the contract to be good through the end of this calendar year. He stated that this will give them time to do some fiscal planning. He noted that their contract will expire October 1, 2001 with the County, and he was requesting a three month extension, until January 1.
Commr. Cadwell stated that, in the initial talks with the cities, the County had indicated that a three month extension was not going to be a problem, but there was a large assumption that the County was going to have additional revenues with the universal collection.
Mr. Gilley brought to the Board’s attention that the numbers presented to the Board do assume a three month extension, so it will not affect the bottom line. They accounted for the possibility of a three month extension to all of the cities.
Mr. Minkoff explained that some of the cities have agreements with the County to bring all of their waste, Eustis in particular, and they have made a request for the County to cancel those agreements, and staff is evaluating that request. He noted that their request will be brought to the Board in the future.
Mr. Wayne Saunders, City Manager, City of Clermont, stated that he knows that this Board has been handed a real problem, and they were not here when it started, but there have been two big issues of concern. Mr. Saunders stated that one is how the whole deal has been structured, and he appreciates the Board working so hard to try and make that right. The other issue that directly affects the cities is that, once the deal is there, how the different components are structured, and for the City of Clermont, they do not have an interlocal agreement. They pay the tipping fees as they go across the scales. Mr. Saunders stated that Clermont, along with the other cities, are developing their budgets and rates for the upcoming year, based on the action that the Board took previously that there would be a universal system and $90 per ton tipping fee, and now they are hit with almost a 5% increase in the tipping fees. He stated that this is a difficult situation for them to handle at the last minute, since most of them have already gone through their first public hearings for their budgets and, to implement that type of a change with this short of a notice is a major impact on all of the cities and their budgets. Mr. Saunders stated that hopefully the Board did get a letter yesterday from the League of Cities that took action on Friday requesting that any increase in a tipping fee would be postponed until next year, so that they could not only look at a way to make this whole system more equitable, but to also give the cities an opportunity to plan for any possible increase they may have in a tipping fee. He reminded the Board that, when this first started, a large number of the cities withheld money from their tipping fees every month and would not pay the County, because it was obvious, under the scenario, that the tipping fees were subsidizing other services that the cities were not receiving, and it is obvious that this is the same situation that they are in now, because under the plan, there is a $350,000 loss for the drop offs and the people going across the scales, which should not be subsidized by the other people. Mr. Saunders was requesting, on behalf of the City of Clermont, that any proposed tipping fee change be postponed, as long as possible, to give them an opportunity to work with that and then allow some way to work together over the next year, and hopefully the universal system will be back. He felt that the universal system was a major step, and he applauded the Board for going in that direction.
Ms. Dottie Keedy, City Administrator, City of Tavares, addressed the Board and stated that the City of Tavares is in the same situation as Clermont, because they do not have an interlocal agreement. She stated that the Council has not had a chance to discuss this increase, but she has let them know about it. She further stated that tomorrow is their final hearing for the budget, and the increase will definitely affect their budget. Ms. Keedy stated that the City of Tavares has withheld a portion of the tipping fee, so she was sure that this was something that they were going to consider. She has always urged them not to consider taking it out of the County, because she feels like they are all in this together. Ms. Keedy requested that the Board hold off on the increase at this time.
Mr. Murphy Cameron addressed the Board and stated that it took a lot of money for staff to present this to the Board, and the Board was all for universal collection, but the figures that were given to the Board originally were skewed, because they were projections, not firm figures. Mr. Cameron stated that the figures that were just presented to the Board indicated that there were over 4,000 people that use the self haul cards, and he discussed how staff arrived at that figure through a survey. He stated that the point staff is making is that the non-universal collection, self haul people are the problem, but if somebody is going to be blamed for this, and they cannot blame the Board, because they did not have the right information to start with, then staff is to be blamed, because there had to be something wrong with the way that they arrived at the figures. Mr. Cameron stated that there must be a way to send 19,000 people, people who should pay their fair share and are willing to pay their share fair, a notice that this is not a bill, but a notice to pay the $25, so that the blame for littering on the sides of the road, the blame for solid waste shortfalls, this year, next year, and every year thereafter, cannot be placed on those few people who want to live in the country and not the city. Mr. Cameron stated that the Board set the $195 rate for universal collection, and the majority of costs went up, but they are still claiming a huge shortfall. The Board should not be blaming the people, because it was staff who put those numbers together, and the Board approved them and put them in the form of taxes. He stated that, when the universal collection issue comes back, staff should have correct figures and not projections.
Ms. Linda Rodrick, City Manager, City of Fruitland Park, stated that their Commission decided to take their garbage out of the County, and she believes that the decision will be effective the end of October, and therefore, they will not need an extension on their interlocal agreement.
Commr. Cadwell stated that, in regards to the monies that were put aside for the cities in the interlocal agreements, there was no money put aside for the cities that do not have interlocal agreements with the County.
Commr. Cadwell made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Hill, to approve the extension of the interlocal agreements with the cities, for Solid Waste Disposal fees, for 90 days.
Under discussion, Commr. Pool discussed the possibility of everything conceivably changing in six months, based on agreements, or negotiations, or other opportunities.
Mr. Minkoff stated that there have been discussions involving the litigation, which theoretically could change this and six months would probably be optimistic, but it is possible within a year’s time frame.
Commr. Pool stated that all of these projections are based on a 90 day extension, and anything beyond that would give the cities a better opportunity to make some arrangements, and he thinks that universal collection will come back, and it will be more equitable and fair as the Board goes forward, because there are some opportunities here to get this corrected and do things without having the eleventh hour upon them. He suggested that the Board allow the cities a six month extension.
Commr. Cadwell clarified that the 90 day extension is only for the cities that have contracts with the County, and it does not address Clermont or Tavares, and that issue needs to be discussed by the Board. He stated that the cities with the contracts have not requested more than 90 days.
Mr. Minkoff reminded the Board that every month costs the system about $35,000 or $40,000 to extend the five interlocal agreements.
Ms. Rodrick, Fruitland Park, addressed the Board again and corrected her earlier statements by requesting at least a 30 day extension for the City of Fruitland Park.
Commr. Hanson called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
Mr. Minkoff clarified that the interlocal agreements are in effect until September 30, 2001, so the motion was to offer a three month extension to those cities that wanted three more months, so staff will need to do simple letter agreements extending those contracts.
Mr. Jeff Cooper, Solid Waste, explained that the interlocal agreements require that the cities all be charged the same disposal rate as the County, which is $107.50, unless the Board decides differently.
Mr. Minkoff stated that it will still result in a significant reduction to them because those tonnages are actually greater than what the County assumed that they would be producing, so they would still be getting that subsidy for three months.
Mr. Gilley addressed Tab 37, the request for approval of the Fee Schedule and Resolution for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 for services provided by the Department of Solid Waste Management Services. He reminded the Board that staff is recommending a $95.00 tipping fee and yard waste will continue to be $35 a ton. At this time, he reviewed the disposal fee schedule in the backup.
Mr. Roy Hunter, Northeast Lake Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Board and noted that, from a local newspaper, he found out that Golden Gem Growers has filed bankruptcy. Mr. Hunter stated that the economy is truly being affected in Lake County and, when the Board asks people to pay, they need to think about not only the County budget, but also the individual budget. He stated that, in year 1999-2000, the disposal fee was $91 and, with a 3% inflation, the amount would be $93.73, not $107.50 which is approximately 14%. The self hauling fee was approximately $12.52 and now it is going to be $23 to $25 which is a 100% increase. A 3% inflation should bring the self hauling fee to $12.90. From the discussion today, Mr. Hunter stated that he realized that there was not a chance for the Board to proceed with the universal collection system, as approved on September 4, 2001, or to address any other option. He addressed the Covanta issue and noted that the attorney’s fees are now $900,000. Mr. Hunter stated that he and others in northeast Lake County have a problem with the recycling companies who are saying that, because it is more economical for them, they will be using the largest trucks on rural roads, because they are the greatest distance from the incinerator. He addressed the tape that was made of his television discussion with staff on September 11, 2001 noting that he is still waiting for an answer from Mr. Gilley about how staff is really going to assure the Board that they can collect the $23 or $25 self hauling fee. The proposal today will strictly be a bill mailed to individuals and is not compulsory to be paid and, even if it was compulsory, he questioned how the County could afford to go to court over this type of issue. Mr. Hunter felt that the County was going to have more cheating and more billing problems than ever before with the new system. He requested an explanation as to why, in the last three months, since May 15, 2001, Mr. Gilley has come to the Board and gotten $519,000 over the original proposal. He noted that approximately $73,000 was for overtime pay. He feels that motivation has a lot to do with keeping help, and the $519,000 would completely pay the self hauling fee for all 19,000 self haulers for 12 months, not meaning that they should not be paying anything. He feels that the County needs to tighten the budget and see the Solid Waste Department do more economizing with their department.
Commr. Hanson noted that Mr. Hunter has provided her with information, and he has raised some important issues including some dealing with management. She stated that the Board can take this information to the Solid Waste Department and get answers, and she commended Mr. Hunter for his efforts in bringing these issues forward.
Commr. Cadwell made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Stivender, to approve the request for approval of Fee Schedule and Resolution 2001-179 for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 for services provided by the Department of Solid Waste Management Services.
Under discussion, Commr. Cadwell stated that there are four cities that pay their costs through the haulers and five cities that have interlocal agreements with the County. He questioned whether the Board wanted to address all of the cities that are left or just the two cities that made a request today.
Commr. Pool felt that, to be fair, the Board should include everyone, so that everyone will have a similar time line of trying to adjust their budgets as they go forward. He realized that, in terms of costs, they were all in this together, and he would like to recommend a 90 day (three month) extension for all of the cities.
In response to Commr. Stivender’s questions concerning the actual costs to the cities, Mr. Minkoff explained that the interlocal agreements say that, instead of the cities paying on their actual tonnage, they would pay based on the number of customers and the County will assume a tonnage. He explained that the tonnages that came from those cities with interlocals were greater than the assumed tonnage, so the County had to make up the shortfall. So the people with interlocals are paying less by virtue of the fact that they are just getting an assumed tonnage, which is less than the garbage they are producing. He noted that it is likely that the cities will continue bringing in more waste than what the contract assumes will be their waste.
Commr. Cadwell amended his motion to include a 90 day extension of the interlocal agreements with the cities, and Commr. Stivender amended her second to the motion.
Under discussion, Mr. Gilley stated that he was of the understanding that the Board staff to put the implementation of $95 back to January 1st for the cities who do not have interlocal agreements. He questioned what the Board wanted to do with commercial, because the commercial in the unincorporated area will be paying the $95 a ton, and the residential and commercial from the other cities who are not getting the extension of the interlocal for 90 days, and they will be charged $91.37 a ton for three months.
Mr. Minkoff explained that Mr. Gilley is making the point that a business outside of Tavares, for example, would be paying $95 during that three month time instead of $91.37.
Commr. Cadwell stated that his motion stands as stated.
Under discussion, Mr. Minkoff asked for clarification as to whether or not the motion included commercial.
After further discussion about whether the haulers can delineate between residential and commercial, and Mr. Gilley suggesting that the $95 tipping fee not take effect until January 1, 2002 for everybody, Commr. Cadwell withdrew his amended motion and Commr. Stivender withdrew her second to the amended motion.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Fee Schedule and Resolution 2001-179 for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 for services provided by the Department of Solid Waste Management Services, with the $95 tipping fee not taking effect until January 1, 2002.
Mr. Gilley stated that he will be back in a week to discuss the Chapter 21 revisions that were necessitated because of the vote on September 4, 2001 as well as the hauler contract amendments based on the actions that were taken then.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 12:15 p.m., Commr. Hanson noted that the Board would recess for lunch and reconvene at 1 p.m.
PRESENTATION BY THE ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY CONCERNING THE NORTHERN EXTENSION PROJECT OF STATE ROAD 429 AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Commr. Hanson stated that this is the workshop presentation for the Northern Extension Project for State Road 429 and for public comment.
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, addressed the Board and stated that staff has a very short slide presentation that will show where Lake County is today in regards to growth and transportation. At this time, the presentation was shown on the monitors, with Ms. Farrell providing detailed information about population from 1960 to 2000; growth by sub-area; municipal population growth over the last 20 years; unincorporated population growth trend 1980 through 2000; unincorporated vs. incorporated growth; and trends in incorporated and unincorporated populations.
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, addressed the Board and stated that he wanted to bring to everyone’s attention the existing road system today and what staff predicts over the next 20 years. Mr. Stivender referred to the slide presentation and addressed the information provided that showed that growth has been and continues to be significant and this significant growth and prosperity is placing greater demands on the road maintenance and improvement needs. Mr. Stivender stated that staff had developed some definitions explaining saturation index (a county-wide measurement of overall congestion that a given driver will experience on any given day) and VMT (vehicle miles of travel) (1 car traveling 1 mile). He stated that, since 1990, the population has grown by 36% or more based on the 2000 census, as shown by Ms. Farrell. He stated that, even with expanding the existing road system to four lanes and six lanes, there is still not enough room for what staff sees as happening over the next 20 years. He stated that the saturation point is about 72%, when considering the State and County roads within the jurisdiction of Lake County and the cities and, if the growth trends continue in the same direction, the population will be well over 300,000 by 2020, and the saturation point will be more like 88%. He discussed the impacts on major roads noting the increase in travel from 424,900 Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) in 1995, to 773,800 VMT in 2020, and stated that these are the reasons for looking at alternatives including different modes of transportation. At this time, Mr. Stivender reviewed the Needs Highway Plan noting that the thick red lines are all of the six lane projects that staff predicts the need for in the next 20 years. He stated that the entire 441 corridor is in the next ten year program with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). He further stated that there are County roads and State roads that are in need to go from two lanes to four lanes, and those are based on traffic flow analyses. He stated that by 2020, Highway 441 is going to be worse than it is today, even with it being six laned.
Mr. Stivender concluded the presentation by noting that growth is putting an increasing demand on the existing infrastructure and, to avoid loss of quality of life resulting from road congestion, we need to make the investment now. He stated that planning and proactive construction of roads will be crucial to maintaining our quality of life. Mr. Stivender stated that it is his responsibility to bring this information to the Board and let them know their concerns with the highways and to develop ideas to lessen the burden.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, explained that the Board had asked, when Mr. Stivender was making his presentations to them, that staff contact all of the central Florida transportation agencies and about a year ago, staff had meetings with the Expressway Authority, the Turnpike Authority, and Lynx for bus transportation, and the Metro-Plan in Orlando, as well as all of the MPOs around them, to begin discussing transportation issues in Lake County. Some time last year, the Expressway Authority came to the Board and made a presentation and requested that they be allowed to conduct a study in Lake County, not only in the northeast portion of the County, but also in south Lake County. The Board was agreeable and the Expressway Authority sent an agreement, which was changed somewhat, because all the Board wanted to do at the time was to have the study done, before any final decisions were made, and the agreement was signed some time in May by the Board. Mr. Minkoff explained that the contract that the Board has with the Expressway Authority allows them only to do study work in Lake County, and it requires that, before they make any plans to construct any roads, the Board would agree to them, and then they would have to negotiate a contract at that time.
Mr. Hal Worrall, Executive Director of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority, addressed the Board and stated that he is here to make a presentation on the 429 northern extension update. Mr. Worrall stated that their staff will be staying through this entire meeting, because they want to hear what the public has to say, and it will all be taken into account when they go through the process. He stated that today they want to make a presentation and give an overview of this project; identify the project need in terms of fatalities and other statistics; discuss the concept study that was done and completed on the northwest; and discuss the preliminary design and environmental (PD&E) study that is now under way; the current status; the next steps; and then a summary. He will be asking Mr. Mark Callahan, Project Manager to go through a lot of this, but he will be available at the end of the presentation for any questions of the Board.
Mr. Worrall explained that Lake County staff came to them and talked about the need that they presented here. When they did the study on SR 429 Part A, which is now open from Apopka to Ocoee, they recognized that the corridor of 441 had a tremendous amount of traffic in the design 20 years out. They requested consideration of SR 429 extension, and the Expressway Authority staff briefed the Board in February, 2000 and, in May, 2000, they worked with the County on the interlocal agreement and the prepared the concept study for this project as well as the one that is still going on down south, and then they started the PD&E study on this project in May, 2001. Mr. Worrall clarified that the only way that this Expressway Authority can be in Lake County is defined by Chapter 348(5), Florida Statutes, which clearly states that they can operate in other counties in the State of Florida at their request. Mr. Worrall stated that this Board clearly makes the decision about anything that happens in Lake County. At this time, Mr. Worral explained what a PD&E study involves and stated that the Expressway Authority will determine whether this project should continue at least in Orange County, and the Lake County Board of County Commissioners will decide what happens in Lake County.
Mr. Mark Callahan, Project Director, CH2MHill, stated that they are conducting the study for the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority for the SR 429 extension. Mr. Callahan stated that there is a transportation need based on some studies by Lake County, Orange County, FDOT, etc., and those needs stem from some population growth that is occurring in east Lake County, as well as northwest Orange County. There have been some significant increases in traffic, and there is a limited roadway network and deficient roadways, which Mr. Callahan explained. He stated that there are several roadways today that are operating at unacceptable levels of service. They looked at the traffic projections out to the year 2020 and included all the planned and programed transportation improvements that were cost feasible, and with that, the situation is still getting worse and the traffic growth is going to continue. Mr. Callahan addressed the number of fatalities that have occurred in this area and the need to look at opportunities to address such issues. From a local road option, Lake County and Orange County could undertake roadway widenings in improving the existing system; FDOT could undertake improving the existing system; and somebody could develop new roads to help improve the transportation situation, but there is a funding shortfall. So the Expressway Authority, in coordination with Lake County staff, Orange County staff, and FDOT, recognized this need and decided to look at options to address these problems and constraints. They performed a concept study, with the objective of that study being to determine whether the extension of SR 429 would help serve some of the transportation needs in northwest Orange and east Lake County. Mr. Callahan stated that they are talking about a high capacity roadway, with access only at interchanges. They are also talking about a facility that is user financed through the use of tolls, which would provide them some additional funding mechanisms.
Mr. Callahan stated that the concept study performed by the Expressway Authority Board did have some significant findings. Depending on where the roadway might be located within the study area, the SR 429 extension could carry as many as 48,000 vehicles by 2020, which would otherwise be on the local network. The conclusions of that concept study indicated that the SR 429 extension could help serve some of the transportation needs by providing some additional travel capacity, increasing travel safety, reducing travel times of the drivers, and relieving the existing roadway network. With those conclusions, the Expressway Authority Board authorized moving into a PD&E study, with the purpose of the study being to assemble information and assess potential design and location options; to provide opportunities for public input; to prepare comparative assessments; and to provide facts and evaluations to the decision makers relative to this project. At this time, Mr. Callahan reviewed a simplified process outline of a PD&E study.
Mr. Callahan stated that their key component is their public involvement program, in terms of soliciting information and comments from the public regarding the design and location of this project.
Mr. Callahan stated that, with respect to the project today, they have identified the need and an purpose related to the project, in terms of serving some of the transportation deficiencies and they are completing their data collection activities, which he shared with the Board. He reviewed information that showed the wetlands and habitat areas, the natural issues relative to flood plains, the aquifer, conservation easements, public lands, and many of the existing land uses. He stated that all of this is leading them into defining their initial corridor alternatives, which the consultant team has put together, and over the next several weeks, they will be refining those corridors, and then they will initiate development of conceptual alternatives.
To summarize, Mr. Callahan stated that he wanted to hit a few key points relative to their presentation. From Lake County, Orange County and FDOT, and through the concept study performed by the Expressway Authority, studies have confirmed that there is a transportation need in northwest Orange County and east Lake County. Secondly, the concept study by the Expressway Authority shows that an extension of SR 429 could help meet transportation needs, and it provides a funding option that otherwise may not be available. Also the PD&E study will assess the design and location of where the extension might go; actively seek public input; and provide facts and evaluations to decision makers to help direct them on how to move forward. At the conclusion of the PD&E study, the Expressway Authority Board will determine if this project continues and moves forward in the subsequent steps. If they do decide to move it forward and part of the recommended project goes into Lake County, then the Board of County Commissioners will determine whether that Authority project extends into Lake County.
Mr. Worrall reminded the Board that staff will be staying to hear the public input and they are delighted to see that there is a lot of public involvement in this project.
Commr. Cadwell wanted it to be clear that the Board sought out the Expressway Authority as an avenue to assist them with their transportation concerns and, in the future, the extension may possibly happen, because they cannot turn their backs on the County’s transportation needs. He stated that it has been apparent to him, over the last several months, that answering those needs, while balancing and relieving the concerns over the explosive growth in Lake County, is something that this Board is not prepared to do at this time. Also concerns over the possible routes, and the perceived intent to reduce reasonable transportation problems utilizing Lake County and an environmentally sensitive area, has also killed any widespread community support. He would like to have staff continue to look at the transportation needs of Lake County, but to add to the agenda today, the termination of the contract with the Expressway Authority and ask staff to negotiate a mutual termination of that contract. He hoped that, from this point forward, they can all look to those needs together and try to find a mutual way to do that while they balance what they are trying to protect here.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to place on the agenda the discussion of the termination of the contract with the Expressway Authority.
Commr. Cadwell made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Hill, to approve to terminate the Board contract with the Expressway Authority and ask staff to negotiate that termination, hopefully, as a mutual termination, and any costs involved with the actual contents of the termination be brought back to this Board for approval.
Commr. Cadwell clarified that the Board sought out the Expressway Authority as a way to try and relieve some of those transportation problems, and they still may, at some point, have a partnership where they can work together.
Under discussion, Commr. Pool felt that it was obvious today that there was not support for the SR 429 extension, but he felt that perhaps some of the public comments may have been important for the Board to go forward and find out the issues of concern. He stressed that transportation will be a vitally important ingredient to the quality of life in Lake County, and there is a need to plan for the future and, even though there is a group here today that opposes the issue, there are probably the same amount of individuals who care about equally important issues of transportation throughout the County. Commr. Pool stated that he is going to support the motion with the point being that, as elected officials, they have to look to the future, and it will be a difficult problem to address in the future.
Commr. Cadwell clarified that the motion did include for staff to continue to work on the transportation needs in the entire County and look for alternatives.
Commr. Hanson called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 1:50 p.m., Commr. Hanson announced that the Board would recess for ten minutes.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the request to set Student Government Day for November 6, 2001.
Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote.
Commr. Hanson addressed the request for the appointment of an individual to a position on the County-wide Solid Waste Study Committee and noted that there was one application from Ms. Patricia Congdon, but they had also received an application from Mr. Roy Hunter.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, explained that it is a District 5 position, but if the Board cannot find someone they wish to appoint from District 5, the Resolution says that they can find someone from anywhere else in the County.
Commr. Hanson stated that, as another option, the Board might want to wait until the redistricting has occurred to fill that position.
It was the consensus of the Board to postpone this item until later in the meeting.
Commr. Hill addressed the request for the appointment of individuals to vacant positions on the Agricultural Advisory Committee and explained that, for this committee to be active again, these positions have been readvertised and all of these will be new members.
Commr. Hill made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Stivender, to accept the committee, as presented (and as noted in the backup).
Under discussion, Commr. Hanson stated that ten members were needed for Commercial Agriculturists, and there were more than ten members listed.
After some discussion, the Board decided to postpone action on this item, until the end of the meeting, to give Commr. Hill an opportunity to make the necessary selections.
Commr. Hill withdrew her motion, and Commr. Stivender withdrew her second to the motion.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved one appointment and six reappointments to fill seven vacancies on the Cultural Affairs Council for terms October 1, 2001 through September 30, 2005, as follows:
Elmer B. James (reappointment)
Dorothy Keedy (reappontment)
Barbara J. Mittermaier (reappointment)
Elizabeth “Betsy” Reed (reappointment)
Mary Jane Townsend (reappointment)
Dorothy J. Vedder (reappointment)
Jonathan Cherry (new appointment)
Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote.
At 2:10 p.m., it was noted that Commr. Cadwell had returned to the meeting.
REPORTS - COUNTY ATTORNEY
CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS
Ms. Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney, explained the recommendation for approval of Settlement Agreement and approval of Satisfaction and Release of Lien between Lake County vs. Frazier, County Court Case #01-197CC, in the amount of $130.50.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Satisfaction of Lien, as stated above.
Ms. Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney, informed the Board that the County Attorney’s Office is going to seek the advise of the Board regarding the ongoing litigation involving the Ogden incinerator, and staff will be setting a closed session on September 25, 2001 to take place at 11 a.m.
REPORTS - COUNTY MANAGER
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, explained that, after their last discussion, they had a Team that looked at the district maps, and they are now making a recommendation to the Board, which is the first map (Proposed Redistricting - Draft) in the backup material.
Mr. Minkoff addressed the recommended map and explained that all of the districts are pretty much even except for south Lake, which has less people in it, but staff is using the 2000 Census. The Team members felt it would be best to put fewer people in District 2, because they thought the growth there was greater. This particular map removes both Groveland and Mascotte and moves those into District 3, and it also changes Districts 4 and 5 back to the historical division, as they were prior to 1990, when Astor and Umatilla were always in the same district. He noted that there were other alternatives for the Board to review, which he explained in detail.
Mr. Minkoff stated that staff has given copies of the maps to the School Board slightly modified, because they show the current School Board districts rather than County Commission districts, and they also located schools on them. His goals would be to have the County Commission districts and the School Board districts identical, and they seem willing to work towards that and they are even looking at seeing if they can renumber theirs to make the numbers the same. He explained that the School Board tends to identify with high school boundaries and the County tends to identify more with communities.
Mr. Minkoff stated that staff would like today, on the four alternatives, some direction and they will do final maps and set a public hearing in October for adoption.
Commr. Cadwell stated that historically Paisley and Umatilla and Astor and Umatilla have had a connection, because of the schools and other things, so the very first proposal is fine with him.
Commr. Hanson stated that one of her goals has been all along to split the rural area a little better, so that there is more support among the Commissioners on some of the rural concerns. She feels that this map will do that and the other benefit is that Eustis is under one Commissioner. She noted that she has mixed feelings about losing these areas, but she feels it will be better for them to have more Commissioners that face the same challenges.
Commr. Hanson and Commr. Cadwell stated that the proposed map for Districts 4 and 5 would be their recommendation.
Commr. Pool felt that it would work better to keep Groveland and Mascotte together, because they are so closely aligned.
It was noted that Commr. Stivender and Commr. Pool were agreeable on the recommended proposal.
Commr. Hill felt that the Bassville Park area to the east of Silver Lake would probably work real well together, because they do pull towards Leesburg High School. The south part of Leesburg is more of a retirement area, so if you go with the theory of trying to keep the community together, she would not have a problem with either proposal.
It was the consensus of the Board for staff to proceed with the recommended County Commission redistricting map, as discussed.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, stated that he will communicate with the School Board and, if they are agreeable with this map, he will go ahead and schedule it for public hearing. If they have some suggestions, he will bring them back to the Board. He noted that hopefully this item will be brought back for Board action in the middle of October.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, discussed the request to purchase the Ivotronic DRE System (Touch Screen) for Lake County. Mr. Minkoff stated that he talked to Ms. Emogene Stegall, Supervisor of Elections, and she indicated that she was not planning on attending the meeting today, because she has made a recommendation to the Board, as noted in the backup. She is recommending the touch screen system, because of concerns she has about litigation. He noted that the FAC has sent notices to the Board in the last couple of weeks about some possible litigation. Mr. Minkoff stated that the County will be using the sales tax to purchase the system.
Commr. Hanson stated that, when she talked to Ms. Stegall, her main concerns were those of the visually impaired and other such problems, and those problems were going to continue with the less expensive system.
Commr. Stivender made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Cadwell, to approve the request to purchase the Ivotronic DRE System (Touch Screen) for Lake County, in the amount of $3,051,641 with the State contributing $322,500 toward the cost, as recommended by Ms. Stegall.
Under discussion, Commr. Pool stated that the public needs to understand that the Board is trying to help by having a modern and accurate system, and he believes that this system is one that will not be obsolete in five or ten years.
Commr. Hanson called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, discussed the possible meeting date changes for November and December due to holidays.
After some discussion, the Board directed staff to adjust the meeting dates during November and December due to holidays, as follows:
November 27 (zoning)
December 18 (zoning)
OTHER BUSINESS (CONTINUED)
Commr. Cadwell asked that the Board table the request for the appointment of an individual to the vacant position on the County-wide Solid Waste Study Committee.
It was noted that this item is to be brought back at the time that the Board schedules the request for approval of the redistricting map.
Commr. Hill requested that the Board postpone the request to appoint individuals to vacant positions on the Agricultural Advisory Committee. It was noted that this item will be brought back at the next Board meeting.
ROADS-COUNTY & STATE/PUBLIC WORKS
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, informed the Board that, over the weekend, there was serious flooding in Astor, with Alco Road being washed out. Mr. Minkoff stated that the river is rising and they have water threatening homes. The Public Works Department, as well as other staff, are working with the Sheriff’s Department and the Fire Department filling sandbags to see what they can do to protect these homes. They have also taken some additional security measures with some of their County vehicles.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER HILL - DISTRICT #1
ROADS-COUNTY & STATE/PUBLIC WORKS
Commr. Hill stated that she wanted to thank Public Works, because they were in her area filling potholes Saturday evening.
In response to the question from Commr. Hanson regarding whether staff was able to address the potholes on CR46A that were caused by the rain, Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, stated that it will be a couple of weeks before staff can get to all of them, because they are all bad. They will be putting out bids for the replacement of pipes.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER POOL - DISTRICT #2
Commr. Pool asked that the Board and staff continue to keep their country, their leaders, and New York City in their prayers.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER STIVENDER - DISTRICT #3
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the request for the removal of Jennifer Welch from the Citizens Commission for Children Committee.
ADDENDUM NO. 1
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER STIVENDER - DISTRICT #3
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the request for approval and execution of Resolution 2001-180 supporting the passage of Senate Bill 100 and any other similar proposals that will increase the Transportation Disadvantaged Trust Fund during the 2002 legislative session.
ADDENDUM NO. 1
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER HANSON - CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT #4
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the request for approval and execution of Resolution 2001-181 condemning the cowardly and deadly actions of these terrorists.
Commr. Hanson brought up for the discussion the idea of donating a specific amount of money to the efforts in New York.
After some discussion, it was the feeling of the Board that the members be encouraged individually to make their personal donations, and it was noted that the County’s resources have already been offered.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER HANSON - CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT #4
Commr. Hanson noted that the County Attorney’s annual performance evaluation was on the agenda for discussion. She noted that she has not had the opportunity to meet with the County Attorney to discuss any compensation to him for serving in the capacity of County Manager.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, stated that a couple of years ago, the Board put the County Attorney and County Manager to the same standards as the other employees, so they are graded just like the other employees on the compensation chart.
Commr. Cadwell made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Hill, to accept the annual performance evaluation for Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, and that he receive a 4.07% raise, and to include that the Chairman meet with him to discuss additional compensation for the time that he has served in both capacities, as County Manager and County Attorney, and bring that back to the Board.
Under discussion, Ms. Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney, stated that, just for clarification, the 4.07% is the final rating on the scores, and now the Board will equate that to percentage, which is about 6%.
Commr. Cadwell clarified that the motion should reflect the clarification, as follows:
a percentage rate that is equivalent to the 4.07% rating.
Commr. Hanson called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
The Board members extended their appreciation to Mr. Minkoff for an outstanding job.
Mr. Minkoff stated that the County has great employees, and it has been a great experience.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 2:45 p.m., Commr. Hanson stated that the Board will recess until 5:05 p.m. for the final budget hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING -
It was noted that the following staff members were present: Mr. Sarah LaMarche, Senior Director of Fiscal & Administrative Services; Ms. Evonne Heitzner, Budget Analyst, Fiscal & Administrative Services, Ms. Julia Wilson, Senior Budget Analyst, Fiscal & Administrative Services; Ms. Mary Gillis, Budget Analyst, Fiscal & Administrative Services; Mr. Bob Blackberg, Budget Analyst, Fiscal & Administrative Services; and Mr. Kevin McDonald, Senior Budget Analyst, Clerk’s Office, County Finance.
At 5:05 p.m., Commr. Hanson called to order the final budget meeting. She stated that the purpose is to amend and adopt the final budget, recomputing the proposed millage rate, if necessary, and publicly announce the percent by which the recomputed proposed millage exceeds the rolled-back rate. The increase in this budget over the prior year’s budget provides continuing and additional services in the areas of public safety, health care, libraries, recreational and cultural affairs, stormwater management, and a fast and reliable response to emergency situations. At this time, Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing and called for public comment.
Mr. Roy Hunter stated that he is representing the Elder Committee that has been created by the Board, by Resolution, to study the needs of the elderly in Lake County. Mr. Hunter stated that there was a commitment in the preliminary budget for the next two years, 2001-2003, and they understand, as a Committee, that in the September 4, 2001 budget draft, the funding was eliminated. As a representative of this Committee, he read Ms. Nancy Lamb’s letter of August 22, 2001, into the record, which requested that the Board immediately consider restoring funds for elderly services to the 2002-2003 budget, and the Committee members feel that the budget should reflect the commitment shown by the Commissioners. Mr. Hunter stated that, with the positive structure of finances in Lake County, this is an opportunity to show their elders that the Board cares about their problems and needs and restoring the $146,000 for two years would restore faith in the elderly, and the Committee.
Commr. Hanson stated that, from her perspective, by the time the plan is put together and a person is actually hired, it will probably be half a year. She has talked to Mr. Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, and the funds are there. She thought the Board had talked about $50,000 and she felt that this would be adequate for half of a year to hire a director and get the program underway.
Commr. Pool questioned whether, if the County should participate, there other agencies that would be willing to partner with their contributions.
Mr. Fletcher Smith, Senior Director of Community Services, stated that, if the Board elects to create a position to oversee Elder Affairs, staff could look at various grants available to provide levels of service to the senior services, and some of those grant dollars could be used for administrative costs. Mr. Smith stated that they would be looking at trying to get support from all of the agencies who are doing these programs. He stated that $70,000 or $72,000 was the original amount and that one of the reasons for eliminating the request was due to the fact that it may be March or April before the Study Committee comes back with a recommendation.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, stated that there is some money budgeted in this year’s budget with almost none of which has been spent.
Mr. Sal Galluli stated that he is overwhelmed that the County is going to increase the budget by $10,715,924.
Commr. Pool explained that the 5.117 millage rate will be the same rate as last year, even though Mr. Galluli’s assessment may change.
Ms. Sarah LaMarche, Senior Director of Fiscal and Administrative Services, explained that, in response to Mr. Galluli’s question about an increase in his taxes, it depends on the reappraisal of his property. If the value of his property stays the same as last year, then his taxes will be the same as last year. If the value of his property goes up, then his taxes will go up, but the percent that will be taxed is the same. She clarified that the variable is the assessed value of his property, as determined by the Property Appraiser’s Office. Ms. LaMarche explained the three millage rates at this time.
Commr. Hanson called for further public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Mr. Minkoff explained that the Board is required by the law to publicly announce the percent by which the recomputed proposed millage rate exceeds the rolled-back rate. The County’s proposed aggregate rolled-back rate is 5.565 mills and the aggregate tentative rate is 5.826 mills, which results in an increase over the aggregate rolled-back rate of 4.69%. At this time, the Board is to consider the three resolutions to adopt the millage for the three funds.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution No. 2001 - 182 Adopting a Final Millage Rate of 5.117 for Lake County for Fiscal Year 2001-2002.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution No. 2001- 183 Adopting a Final Millage Rate of 0.5289 for the Lake County Municipal Service Taxing Unit for Ambulance and Emergency Medical Services for the Unincorporated and Incorporated Area of Lake County, Florida for Fiscal Year 2001-2002.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution No. 2001- 184 Adopting a Final Millage Rate of 0.300 for the Stormwater Management Municipal Services Taxing Unit for the Unincorporated Area of Lake County, Florida for Fiscal Year 2001-2002.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to amend the budget in the amount of $35,000 for the Elder Affairs program and take that out of Contingency.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution No. 2001- 185 Adopting a Final Budget in the amount of $269,004,663 for Lake County for Fiscal Year 2001-2002.
Commr. Cadwell noted that, in a time when there was no County Manager, he really appreciated Mr. Minkoff and Ms. LaMarche and her staff and the job that they did this year in presenting a smooth budget process.
Commr. Hanson extended her appreciation to the Constitutional Officers for their efforts in helping to establish the adopted budget, and to staff and Mr. Minkoff.
Commr. Stivender stated that this was her first budget, and in working with Ms. LaMarche and Mr. Minkoff, she received both sides to everything, and contrary to what the public thinks, Ms. LaMarche watches every penny, which she found to be admirable.
Commr. Hill extended her thanks to staff.
Mr. Roy Hunter addressed the Board to let them know that he was collecting donations for the policemen, emergency medical technicians, and firemen in New York City.
Commr. Stivender encouraged the other Commissioners to get involved with the one cent sales tax meetings and noted that she will be forwarding to them a schedule of those meetings.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
CATHERINE C. HANSON, CHAIRMAN
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK