june 23, 2009


The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, June 23, 2009, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida.  Commissioners present at the meeting were:  Jennifer Hill, Vice Chairman; Jimmy Conner; and Linda Stewart.  Welton G. Cadwell, Chairman and Elaine Renick were not present.  Others present were:  Sanford A. (Sandy) Minkoff, County Attorney; Cindy Hall, County Manager; Wendy Taylor, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; and Susan Boyajan, Deputy Clerk.


Pastor John Barham from the First United Methodist Church gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.


Commr. Hill stated that under her business she wanted clarification for the time certain for the Judicial Complex decision.  She also stated that she would ask to shift the adoption of the Landscape Ordinance to an August date, since the Agenda was going to be quite busy that day.  Other items under her business that she wanted to discuss were regarding the Tavares Fire Assessment that she had asked the County Manager to look into and a Senate bill.


Commr. Conner asked the County Manager to explain Tab 3 and why they had the necessity for the transfer of money.

Ms. Hall explained that it was a budget transfer from the Operations into the Personal Services line to cover the costs for administration.

Mr. Fletcher Smith, Community Services Director, stated that when they established the budget at the beginning of this budget year, they had established where their salary lines would be, but during the course of the year, they had to move some people around and add some people to be funded out of the Hurricane or Tornado Assistance Program so they would have sufficient funds in their operational fund.  He also explained that the reason they had to move the money was that they had some positions that were changed and upgraded during the year, including the budget analysis and financial analysis positions, and they also shifted some of the staff for the tornado program to regular SHIP programs when needed.  He stated that a lot of times when they have programs like that, they will have staff that would work towards one program part of the time and towards the other type another time and they split those salaries.

Ms. Hall assured the Board that she would get a memo to them explaining that in detail.

Commr. Conner asked that they not vote on Tab 3 until they get that information.

Ms. Hall stated that she would bring that back on July 7.

On a motion by Commr. Stewart, seconded by Commr. Conner and carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0, the Board approved the County Manager’s Consent Agenda, Tabs 1 through 11, pulling Tab 3, as follows:

Community Services

Request for approval for the Lake County Community Health Worker Program to apply for small grants, monetary support and donations under $10,001.00 to support programming and to allow the County Manager to sign documents associated with those requirements.

Request for approval to appoint Allison Thall or an alternate designated by her to serve as Lake County Government’s representative on the local FEMA Board.  Authorize Community Service Department to manage the program and prepare the required plans, reports and other related documents as directed by the local FEMA Board or required by FEMA as well as authorizing the submission of a direct application for funding as a local Recipient Organization or Fiscal Agent/Conduit for a Local Recipient Organization if directed by action of the local FEMA Board.

Employee Services

Request for approval of the updated Leave Accruals Policy.

Environmental Utilities

Request for approval of the FY 09/10 Detailed Work Plan Budget- Anthropod Control.


Request for approval to award ITB # 09-0029 for CR 42 Storm Water Pipe Rehabilitation in the amount of $48,650.00 to Reynolds Inliner, LLC, Lake Mary, Florida.

Public Works

Request for approval and signature of Resolution No. 2009-77 authorizing the reduction of the speed limit on CR 19A/Dora Av (4554) from Old 441/Alfred St (0500A) to David Walker Dr (4756) from 40 MPH to 35 MPH, in the City of Tavares, Commission District 3.

Request for approval and signature of Resolution No. 2009-79 authorizing the reduction of the speed limit on Lakeshore Dr (1040) from Amber Ave. south to the intersection of Hammock Ridge and Lakeshore from 40 MPH to 35 MPH.

Request for authorization to transfer $130,000 from Renewal Sales Tax – Sidewalks to Renewal Sales Tax – Infrastructure Right of Way and Construction. Tracking # SPJ03003.

Request for approval of Resolution No. 2009-80 authorizing the posting of "No Trucks", "Over 10 Tons", "Local Delivery Only" signs on Lakeshore Dr (1040) between Hammock Ridge Rd and Hooks St. Also install "No Right Turn" symbols on Hammock Ridge Rd, northbound at Lakeshore Dr and on Lakeshore Dr eastbound at Hooks St.

Request for approval to pay Lake County Soccer Club $1,600.00 for the purchase of fertilizer needed for the multipurpose sports fields. Approval to take the $1,600.00 from the 2008-2009 Youth Recreation Assistance Program which has an available balance of $66,575.00.


On a motion by Commr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0, the Board approved the County Attorney’s Consent Agenda, Tab 12, as follows:

Request for approval to advertise the Concurrency Ordinance.


community services

suspension of section 8 HOUSING assistance payments

Mr. Fletcher Smith stated that this was regarding the $130,000 shortfall in the housing assistance payments from HUD (US Department of Housing and Urban Development).  He noted that they did get a small increase in the 2009 HUD funding when the federal budget came out, but it was not sufficient to cover their costs until the end of the County’s budget year, which ends September 30.  He explained that they had five options for reducing payments for the month of September to make sure they did not overspend their budget, and those five options were outlined in the Agenda coversheet.  He summarized that they could have a random lottery, with every family that was on the voucher program included, and the names or families that were pulled would not have the rental costs for that month paid.  The second option would be to use the lottery system but exclude the elderly and disabled families.  He continued to explain that the third option was to suspend clients based on when they entered the program, with the last families added being the first suspended; and the fourth option was the same as the third, but excluding elderly and disabled families from that scenario.  He stated that staff had recommended the fifth option, which was to determine the exact amount of money that they have left after making the July and August payments and share that equally among the landlords.  He pointed out that with the fifth option, no one was singled out, and every participant would receive some type of assistance.

Commr. Hill commented that Option 5 seemed like a good option.

Commr. Conner thought Option 5 would have the least impact to everyone across the Board.  He asked what the cause of the problem was.

Mr. Smith responded that the cost to pay the rental assistance increased this year, and they had a delay in receiving their 2009 budget from HUD, but they did not receive notice of that until May.  He explained that in previous years, the increase that HUD gave them was sufficient to cover the cost, but this year they did not give them enough increase to cover it.

Commr. Conner asked if they were aggressively negotiating rents with landlords and if the federal government set those.

Mr. Smith stated that the federal government establishes fair market rent values, and the County had paid 90 percent of what the fair market rent was for a household.

Commr. Conner asked what staff would do to make sure this does not happen next year, and he suggested that an alternative would be to lower the rents that landlords could charge.

Mr. Smith responded that HUD gave them approval to only reimburse the level of 75 percent of the rental cost, and they were starting to do that now, which should solve future financial problems.

On a motion by Commr. Stewart, seconded by Commr Conner and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board moved to adopt Option 5, which would divide the share of the amount of funding left equally among the landlords.


awarding of engineering services contracts

Mr. Barnett Schwartzman, Procurement Services Director, stated that this item was for awarding of engineering services, and their selection committee followed the CCNA (Competitive Consultations Negotiation Act) process.  He specified that eight vendors responded; three were shortlisted; and two of them, Griffey Engineering and Woolpert, Inc., were being recommended for award based on specific work history.  He mentioned that it was under the departmental agenda because of the dollar amount.

On a motion by Commr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0, the Board approved Tab 14, the request from Procurement for approval to award RSQ 09-0027, Engineering Services, Continuing On-Call Contracts for Public Works, Road Operations within FY 09 budgeted funds of $202,600.00 to Griffey Engineering and Woolpert, Inc.

public safety

homeland security – fema grant for fire station construction

Mr. Gary Kaiser, Public Safety Director, explained that they were requesting a Homeland Security Grant in the amount of $3.9 million to build three fire stations in Paisley, Altoona, and Astatula.

On a motion by Commr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0, the Board approved Tab 15, the request from Public Safety, Fire Rescue Division for approval to apply for grant funds from the Homeland Security – Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for fire station construction.

public works

fee schedule for reservation of athletic fields

Mr. Bobby Bonilla, Parks Director, noted that the fees were reviewed by the Parks, Recreation and Trails Advisory Board and were believed to be fair and reasonable for the use of the County’s facilities.

Commr. Conner mentioned that he was on the Parks, Recreation and Trails Advisory Board, and he commented that these fees were very modest and that he did not think they were onerous in any way in terms of deterring the use of the fields.  He appreciated the philosophy of making this user and community friendly.

On a motion by Commr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0, the Board approved Tab 16, the request from Public Works for approval of the attached fee schedule for the reservation of the County's athletic fields and courts for and by organized groups, outside organizations and teams and approval of Resolution No. 2009-81 amending the fee schedules for FY 2008-09 to include these fees for services provided by Parks and Trails. The request was also for approval for all fees collected to be put back into the Parks and Trails budget to help with the cost of maintenance and upkeep of the County Parks.


ordinance amending lake county code chapter 22, impact fees

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, placed the proposed ordinance on the floor for a first and final reading by title only as follows:



Commr. Hill stated that the only correction that she wanted to make was to add “retail” along with commercial and industrial regarding the deferral of impact fees.

Mr. Angi Thompson, Impact Fee Coordinator, noted that that amendment was to Section 22-10 (b), and they were taking out the exclusion of retail from their deferral program.

Commr. Conner commented that this was a good faith effort on the part of the County Commission to be business friendly to developing businesses, and he pointed out that they were not reducing their impact fee, but just deferring it to make it easier for them to get started.

The Vice-Chairman opened the public hearing.

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

On a motion by Commr. Stewart, seconded by Commr. Conner and carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0, the Board approved Ordinance No. 2009-33 amending Lake County Code Chapter 22, Impact Fees, including the change in the ordinance which includes retail regarding the waiver and deferral of impact fees.



Mr. Brian Sheahan, Director of Planning and Community Design, reported that the Agenda has been properly advertised and that they had no changes to the Agenda that morning.


The Vice-Chairman opened the public hearing regarding the Consent Rezoning Agenda.

There being no one who wished to address the Board, the Vice-Chairman closed the public hearing.

On a motion by Commr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0, the Board approved the Rezoning Consent Agenda, as follows:

Tab 1 – Ordinance No. 2009-34

Don Monn/Bob Huffstetler

Rezoning Case No. CUP #09/6/3-5

Request a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the Community Commercial (C-2) Zoning District to allow vehicular sales.

            Tab 3 – Ordinance No. 2009-35

Peter Strimenos/Bruce G. Duncan

Pine Meadows Country Club

Rezoning Case No. PH #06-09-4

Request approval to rezone property from R-6 to Agriculture to allow agricultural operations on the site and revoke Conditional Use Permit #606-5.


            Tab 4 – Ordinance No. 2009-36

            Ellis Duane Eisnor/Lake County Planning & Community Design

            Rezoning Case No. CUP#09/6/5-4

Request approval to rescind and replace ordinance to correct a scrivener’s error referencing an incorrect prior ordinance number.


Tab 5 – Ordinance No. 2009-37

Center Lake Properties, LTD, a Florida Limited Partnership

Cecelia Bonifay, Esquire

Black Grove East PUD Rezoning

Rezoning Case No. PH#03-09-3

Request to rezone approximately 117 acres from Agriculture (A) and Planned Unit Development (PUD) consisting of 114 single-family homes at a density of one (1) DU/gross acres.


Mr. Steve Greene, Chief Planner, Planning and Community Design, announced that he would present PH 04-09-4, regarding a CP amendment to Ordinance #64-88.  He explained that this particular request seeks to amend the existing CP Ordinance to allow automotive repair, since the current ordinance only allowed office activities.  He specified that the parcel was approximately one acre in size and was situated east of the SR 44and CR 44 intersection, and the land use of the property was Urban Expansion with a Neighborhood Commercial overlay.  He noted that the property was surrounded on the north side by Agriculture zoning, the south with CFD zoning and Agriculture, and the east with Agriculture.  He stated that Pebble Creek Commercial area was to the west with CP zoning, and to the southeast were the City of Eustis, a commercial automotive business, and convenience gas stations.  He reported that staff determined that the automotive repair was a permitted use within the PUD and also found the application request was consistent with the Land Development Regulations (LDR) for this type of activity in that particular zoning district.  He pointed out that staff could not find any inconsistency with the surrounding and existing land uses, especially considering the Pebble Creek commercial activity and existing commercial activities to the south and the southwest.

With regard to public facilities, Mr. Greene stated that this particular automotive repair business would generate additional trips and demand on SR 44, and mitigation would be to perform proportionate share when that comes through.  He related that staff has requested a traffic study, and a cross-access easement may be needed to facilitate the use of the property entrance along with the access to the property next door.  He noted that there was an existing easement on the property along the eastern property line that would have to be updated and formalized to introduce this new activity to the property.  He related that at the Zoning Board on June 3, the adjacent property owner appeared and presented some information to the Zoning Board with regard to this activity’s compliance with DEP requirements, but staff determined that this activity with conditions would be compliant with those DEP requirements, particularly storage of hazardous waste chemicals such as oil.  He reported that staff recommended approval of this zoning amendment with conditions, and that the Zoning Board also recommended approval with a vote of 5-1 with those conditions, which were underlined in strike-through fashion on the Ordinance.

Commr. Hill disclosed for the record that she met with the Applicant and his representative and corresponded with the opposition to the rezoning.

The Vice-Chairman opened the public hearing.

Ms. Leslie Campione, attorney for the owners of the subject property, informed the Board that they have received a contract offer on the property with particular uses requested for automotive repair.  In light of that request, they contacted the City of Eustis to determine the availability of utilities and were working on a proposed utility agreement after having a workshop with the City Commission of Eustis.  However, since Mr. Doug Rehman, an adjacent property owner, had indicated that he had concerns about the particular land use, she asked that the utility agreement be postponed until after this hearing.  She pointed out that the staff report was very clear about the consistency of this proposed use with the Comprehensive Plan, the Urban Expansion Land Use, the Neighborhood Commercial activity center, and with the Land Development Regulations.  She also pointed out that the Ordinance that has been proposed by staff included particular mitigation requirements with regard to noise and that the Ordinance required either a wall around the property line boundaries or that a noise study be prepared to indicate what other mitigation devices would be required.  She also noted that this ordinance provided that any automotive work must be conducted inside the building.  She brought up that there were some issues raised at the last Planning and Zoning meeting that caused some concern about DEP and EPA compliance, and she provided to Lake County staff a memorandum that she received from DEP on the question of solid waste storage, indicating that the outside dumpster would not be considered solid waste outside storage.  In addition, there were best management practices and regulatory controls in place that required the things that would be considered hazardous could not be stored in open containers of any kind outside.  She presented into the record that the site plan for Pebble Creek indicates a total of 49,800 square feet of commercial on that site, with a 4,000 square-foot retail use immediately adjacent to the subject property.  She noted that there was a wetland in the area that was protected with a conservation easement, as well as a stormwater retention area on the west boundary of the Karve’s property.  She stated that the conceptual site plan was reviewed by staff and had gone through several changes, and initially, they did not take into account the easement that was on the east side of the property that Mr. Rehman has the benefit of using.  She related that staff requested that the buffer that abuts a boundary line be put at the western portion of that easement.

Mr. Jeffrey Schaffer with Weaver Voos Consultants in Clermont, the engineer retained to develop the conceptual site plan for this property, stated that any site where there is any sort of storage of vehicles would have oils and greases that may come off vehicles.  He stated that they have consulted the Best Management Practices manual for DEP for these kind of conditions, which mentions using a dry retention area, which was a long-term, low maintenance solution that keep pollutants on site, as well as a vegetative filter on the upstream end of the retention area, which were specific plants that were designed to remove additional pollutants; and he believed they have addressed a number of issues and have included a significant amount of buffers on both the east and north side of this property.

Mr. Doug Rehman, the adjacent property owner, opined that the rights of those residents who were already there and how the rezoning would impact them were not always taken into consideration, and that this project was not in compliance with numerous places in the Comp Plan and the LDR’s.  He presented a handout, including a map which showed the use of all the surrounding land, and he pointed out that almost everything to the east, south, and north of that parcel was agricultural or residential and that this was a fully developed neighborhood of residents who wanted to live on acreage.  He commented that Agristarts was not a retail business, and was a very low-impact, quiet, and agricultural enterprise that fit in well with the neighborhood.  He related that the parcel immediately to the north was his residence, which was located about 60 feet from the property line with the bays of the planned site facing his bedrooms, and he did not think that was compatible with a neighborhood.  He also pointed out that all the existing commercial in the area was to the west of this site, including Pebble Creek, denoted by a defining woods line.  He stated that the problem with changing this parcel from the current zoning to wide open commercial, even if limited to C1, means that they would be introducing commercial in the middle of homes.  He commented that the real estate office that was supposed to be built on the parcel would better fit into the area, because it would have been very low impact, produce less noise, and would be a much lower risk to a wetland.  He pointed out that auto repair places have major issues with the environment, necessitating a lengthy workbook of things that have to be considered, and that it would be dangerous to put one next to a wetland. 

Mr. Rehman went over some County and Comp Plan policies and how he believed the proposed zoning was inconsistent with them.  He read the County’s zoning requirement 9.06.00 regarding stormwater management, which stated “to prevent individuals, business entities and governmental entities from causing harm to the community by activities which adversely affect water resources”, and he thought that this was a significant potential threat.  He commented that, according to Chapter 1 of the Future Land Use Element, they were supposed to consider “the minimization of detrimental impacts to health, safety, and welfare caused by environmental degradation, nuisances, and incompatible land uses”, and he stated that an auto repair shop next to a home was an incompatible use.  He referred to Policy 1-1.3 of the Comp Plan regarding mitigation of impacts, which stated that “Residential areas shall be protected from the encroachment of incompatible non-residential development,” and commented that while the woods line currently protects the residences from Pebble Creek, this business would cross over the woods line and come into the residential and agricultural area.  He also stated that since there was already an auto repair shop at the intersection, the placement of this business would be inconsistent with Policy 1-1.14 of the Comp Plan requiring a diverse range of commercial uses.  He commented that he did not think there was a justifying condition for the rezoning.  He expressed concern about the potential for hazardous waste which would result in significant impacts on the nearby wetland and the possibility of the business leaving the area instead of taking care of the problem.  He was also concerned that living behind a car repair shop would affect his property value.  Another concern that he expressed was that the wall for noise mitigation might not be required, which could result in inadequate noise reduction.  Taking into account small business failure rates, he was concerned about what would happen if the proposed business abandoned the property, which would result in blight of an undeveloped property.  He concluded that he believed that it was a bad idea to site a business like this next to a wetland.

Mr. Mike Rinck, owner of AgriStarts III, stated that this was a rural area that involves residential and agriculture, and he thought that the City needed to stop somewhere.  He mentioned that Pebble Creek was still not built, and if it did happen to be built, they would be surrounding the wetlands with commercial property.  He commented that this was a very quiet neighborhood, and they would like to see it stay that way.

There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Vice Chairman closed the public hearing.

Ms. Campione directed the Board to the site plan and the distance between the proposed building and Mr. Rehman’s property, and noted that they situated the building as close as they could get to State Road 44.  She emphasized that Mr. Rehman owned the two acres immediately adjacent to this property, and he did not have to use that easement as his driveway.  She pointed out that if that easement were to be released by Mr. Rehman, they could flip the building so that the bays run east to west, not north to south, which would have a positive impact in that the bays would not have to face his bedroom.  However, they believed that they could negate any noise impacts, and she related that they have spoken to noise experts and explored various options for sound attenuation.  She also mentioned that the owners wanted to put that particular business in that location because there was a built-in clientele for those services in the area.

Commr. Conner asked that staff address the concerns about the wetlands.

Mr. Greene stated that as part of the site plan review during the development review process, an environmental study would be required.  Part of that would be an assessment of any wetland bodies situated on the property, and the application of protective measures would be required at that time before site plan approval for the activity, which was stipulated in the ordinance.

Commr. Conner asked if he saw any adverse impacts to the wetlands by allowing this use.

Mr. Greene responded that at this point in the rezoning process, that type of scientific data does not come forward, but based on the information from their GIS, it appeared that there was a wetlands stream that transmits on the northwest portion of the property.  However, the Pebble Creek project to the west has a conservation easement essentially overlaying that wetland area.

Commr Hill pointed out that they would have to go through an extensive approval process with St. Johns and the DEP.

Commr Stewart was concerned about approving a rezoning that they would find out later would have an impact to the wetlands.

Mr. Sheahan explained that the distance to the building was over 200 feet from the wetlands, and their code requires a minimum of 50 foot vegetative wetland buffer, with all the stormwater to be directed away from the wetlands.  He pointed out that on top of these regulations, automotive industries are strictly regulated by the Department of Environmental Protection to make sure there were no wetland impacts from hazardous materials.  He emphasized that no development was being approved at this stage, and this is only approving the ability to apply.  He further explained that the impact will be evaluated at the time of the site plan to ensure there were no impacts.  He added that based on the conceptual site plan, no wetland impacts were anticipated.

Commr. Stewart stated that she agreed with Mr. Rehman in wishing that the whole area remain rural with no commercial, and she believed in the rights of the people already living there. However, she noted that commercial was already set and developed in that area, and this fit in with the neighborhood.  She felt that the applicant was taking extra steps to mitigate the noise, and she realized that there was strict regulation for the hazardous waste.  She pointed out that there would be parked cars whether it was a real estate office or an auto shop.  She also commented that it fit in with their Comp Plan and LDR’s.

On a motion by Commr. Stewart, seconded by Commr. Conner and carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0, the Board approved Rezoning Case PH#04-09-4, Ashish N. and Chaitrali Karve, to amend Ordinance #64-88 to allow automotive repair and service uses within the Planned Commercial (CP) District, and Ordinance No. 2009-38, with the conditions specified in that ordinance.

recess and reassembly

At 10:30, the Chairman announced that there would be a 5 minute recess.


appointment to children’s services council

On a motion by Commr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0, the Board approved the appointment of Ms. Kendra Akers as representative from District 1 to the Children’s Services Council to serve a two-year term ending May 14, 2011.

reports – county attorney

purchase agreement for right of way for cr 466 road project

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, stated that Tab 19 was approval for the purchase of some property located at the intersection of US 27 and CR 466, which was the Kangaroo 7-11 store.  He reported that its appraised value was approximately $61,000, and the purchase price was $105,000, which includes any business damages that the owners would have.  He related that staff recommended approval of this Purchase Agreement.

On a motion by Commr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0, the Board approved Tab 19, the Purchase Agreement with Convenience Center Development Associates, LLP needed for right-of-way regarding the CR 466 Road Widening Project.  Commission District 5.

reports – county manager

holiday closings

Ms. Cindy Hall, County Manager, related that they would be closed July 3 in observance of the July 4, holiday, but the Building Department wanted to close on Wednesday, July 1 instead, since they were already closed on Fridays.  She clarified that the residential drop-off stations and solid waste services would be open on Friday, July 3, but closed on Saturday, July 4.

Commr. Hill stated that they would make sure that was printed on the web site.


DATE FOR discussion of final vote for judicial center financing

Commr. Hill wanted to clarify whether a decision was made regarding the time for the final vote on the Judicial Center financing.

Ms. Hall answered that it was at time certain 9:00 a.m. on July 7.

Commr. Conner expressed concern about the reliability of some of the information that they have received from their financial advisors, including the interest rate given which he felt could change in the future, and he believed that the financial advisors should show them what the debt service would be at varying interest rates.  He also mentioned that he believed they made a commitment to an evening meeting for the final vote regarding the Judicial Center expansion at some point in time in the process.

Commr. Stewart commented that she also thought they agreed that they would have a night meeting when this came up for a vote.  She opined that the citizens had a stake in it and should be allowed to speak on the issue.

Commr. Hill stated that at the last meeting, the consensus was that they agreed to a time certain of 9:00 a.m.  She also mentioned that they did not know if the other two Commissioners who were not currently present would be available in the evening.

Commr. Conner stated that at the Board of County Commission meeting on February 24, the Board voted to have a night meeting if they considered going into debt more than $47 million.

Mr. Minkoff suggested that if they wanted to direct a night meeting, to let them work with the calendars since they did not know who was available that evening, and he stated that it might have to be later in July.

Commr. Conner commented that he did not want to delay the decision too long, since the contractors were waiting to hear from them.

Commr. Hill stated that she thought they should leave it at the time certain of 9:00 a.m. that they had already set.

Commr. Stewart opined that she believed it should be at night, since the Board previously stated there would be a night meeting regarding this issue.

Ms. Hall stated that she would be glad to look at the calendars and get back to them.

date for discussion of landscape ordinance

Commr. Hill stated that the landscape ordinance was scheduled to be discussed on the July 7 meeting also, and due to the busy agenda, she thought it might be best if they move it to an August meeting date so that they could give the ordinance their full attention. She asked if they could re-advertise it for the August meeting.

Mr. Sheahan related that they have set that for time certain on July 7, but they would re-advertise for possibly the August 25 meeting.


Commr. Hill related that the City of Tavares had tentatively scheduled a public hearing on July 15 for their fire assessment fee.   She noted that she did not think that currently the County has been taxed, since they were tax exempt, but the newspaper indicated that the City was looking at proposing to tax the County for the fire assessment fee.  She asked Ms. Hall or Mr. Minkoff to look into the legal and financial aspects of that and to possibly discuss that with the Tavares City Manager.

Commr. Conner asked Mr. Minkoff if the County was subject to fire assessments.

Mr. Minkoff responded that he would have to look specifically into what the City was doing, and there were some assessments that the County would pay and others that they would not have to pay.

Mr. Minkoff stated that they would bring a report back on July 7 regarding that.

Commr. Conner stated that as a citizen of Tavares he was opposed to the fee, because he felt that a fee of $153 in a recession and economic downturn was not a good idea.  He also believed that the fee would be a hardship for businesses, who would be hit substantially more.  He hoped the public would let the City Council members know how they feel about it, and he wanted this issue put on an agenda so that Mr. Minkoff could give them a report.  He commented that when they see what the financial ramifications were, they could take a stand on it.


Commr. Hill inquired about Senate Bill 2108.

Ms. Hall related that they would be able to look into that more at the Florida Association of Counties conference that was currently taking place and that she did not know if it was signed yet.  She explained that it would give the County the ability to collect some fees attached to non-criminal traffic violations to use for courthouse facilities.


business friendly policy

Commr. Conner stated that he was working on a business-friendly policy with the County Manager and staff, and they would be bringing something forward.  He mentioned that he also forwarded what was sent by the Chamber Alliance to the County Manager.  He related that he had an idea to have a symposium or seminar put together by their Economic Growth and Redevelopment Department for staff to get educated about the importance of keeping dollars local.

Ms. Hall stated that she would be glad to talk to their staff about those ideas.  She noted that the selection committees currently follow their processes and procedure, and the people that were chosen for the committees were deemed to be well-qualified to make those selections.

Commr. Stewart commented that she thought staff already realized the importance of keeping their dollars local and added that they could discuss additional ways that they could make it more business friendly and easier for local businesses during procurement as well as level the playing field for all the vendors that were interested in dealing with the County.


There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:45 a.m.