A regular MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
November 17, 2020
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, November 17, 2020 at 9:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chambers, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Leslie Campione, Chairman; Douglas B. Shields; Sean Parks; Kirby Smith; and Josh Blake. Others present were: Jeff Cole, County Manager; Melanie Marsh, County Attorney; Niki Booth, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; Gary J. Cooney, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller; Kristy Mullane, Chief Financial Officer; and Josh Pearson, Deputy Clerk.
welcome
Commr. Campione welcomed everyone to the meeting and said that the Board was welcoming two new Commissioners, Commissioner Shields from District 1 and Commissioner Smith from District 3. She welcomed them to the Board and congratulated them on their elections, and said that once they were sworn in, there would be time for them to make comments. She also congratulated Commissioner Blake for his reelection for his second term, and noted that he was attending via Zoom Webinar; furthermore, Commissioner Blake’s investiture would be held at the first Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting in December 2020. She commented that in addition to meeting in person, they were also streaming live on the County’s website, and they had a Zoom Webinar feature for members of the public who wished to provide input but who did not attend. She added that Mr. Erikk Ross, Director for the Information Technology (IT) Department, would explain how this process would work.
INVOCATION and pledge
Commr. Campione said that they had a tradition of having a veteran lead the Pledge of Allegiance, and she introduced Reverend Isaac Deas from Cornerstone Hospice to lead the Invocation.
Commr. Campione introduced Sergeant Ryan Midtun, with the Office of Code Enforcement, and said that he had served in the United States Air Force from 2002 until he retired in 2016 as a Technical Sergeant. She relayed that he trained and worked as a Security Forces Specialist and held the title of Flight Chief, overseeing command and control of over 60 personnel, and directing response to major incidents on base; furthermore, during his time on active duty, he was selected to work for the Naval Criminal Investigative Services to conduct security and protection missions for dignitaries such as the President of the United States, Secretary of the Navy, Secretary of Defense, and other foreign dignitaries around the globe, traveling to more than 30 countries. She commented that he was deployed six times throughout his career in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom and Horn of Africa operations. She thanked Mr. Midtun for his service.
Reverend Deas gave the Invocation, and Sergeant Midtun led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Commr. Campione recognized several individuals in the audience, including Lake County Sheriff Peyton Grinnell, Mr. Michael Graves, Fifth Circuit Public Defender, Senator Alan Hays, Lake County Supervisor of Elections, Mr. Butch Hendrick, with the Lake County Water Authority, Mr. David Colby, with the South Lake Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Jimmy Conner, former Lake County Commissioner, Mr. John Drury, Tavares City Administrator, and Judge Jason Nimeth, with the Fifth Circuit Court. She also recognized new Eustis City Commissioners Willie Hopkins and Nan Cobb, along with Councilmember Lou Buigas, with the City of Tavares, and representatives from the City of Groveland.
investiture
Commr. Campione commented that they would now have the newly elected Commissioners take their oaths of office.
Sheriff Grinnell administered the oath of office to Commissioner Shields on his election as Commissioner to District 1.
Commr. Shields thanked everyone and recognized his team for encouraging him to do this. He also thanked his wife and the voters, and he hoped that he would do well on their behalf.
Mr. Graves administered the oath of office to Commissioner Smith on his election as Commissioner to District 3.
Commr. Smith said that he could not have done this without the support of his team, his friends, his family, and everyone. He hoped that he could do well for the county, and he promised that he would do the best he could on each decision he made.
recess and reassembly
The Chairman called a recess at 9:15 a.m. for 15 minutes.
virtual meeting instructions
Mr. Ross explained that this meeting was being livestreamed on the County website and was also being made available through a Zoom Webinar for members of the public who were unable to attend in person but wished to provide comments during the Citizen Question and Comment Period later in the agenda. He elaborated that anyone watching though the livestream who wished to participate in the meeting could follow the directions currently being broadcast through the stream; furthermore, he relayed that during the Citizen Question and Comment Period, anyone who had joined the Zoom Webinar on their phone could press *9 to virtually raise their hand and anyone participating online could click the raise hand button to identify that they wished to speak. He said that when it was time for public comment, he would then read the person’s name or phone number, unmute the appropriate line, and the speaker would be asked to provide comments. He stated that everyone would have three minutes to speak, and after three minutes an alarm would sound, letting them know that their time was up. He remarked that they previously notified the public that comments could be emailed through 5:00 p.m. on the previous day, and those commented were shared with the Board prior to the current meeting. He said that anyone wishing to provide written comments could visit www.lakecountyfl.gov/commissionmeeting, and any written comments submitted during this meeting would be shared with each Board member following the meeting.
Agenda update
Commr. Campione noted that Mr. Jeff Cole, County Manager, was participating virtually.
Mr. Cole said that since the agenda was first published, staff added Tab 12 in the previous week at Commissioner Campione’s request, commenting that each Board member was notified of this on the previous Friday.
covid-19 update
Mr. Tommy Carpenter, Director for the Office of Emergency Management, mentioned that the County’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC) was at a level three monitoring, with their focus being the County’s response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the hurricane season. He indicated that the Lake County Citizens Information Line (CIL) at 352-253-9999 was not staffed, but they had recorded information for the Florida Department of Health (DOH) and COVID-19 questions, the Lake Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) resident assistance grant program, and the County’s CARES Act program. He stated that the DOH had a COVID-19 hotline open Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. at 352-742-4830. He then shared these statistics from the DOH from November 10, 2020 through the previous day: there were 9,665 total positive tests in Lake County, noting that one week prior it was 9,195, with an increase of 470; there were currently 845 positive cases in quarantine and being monitored by the DOH, with 153 currently under investigation and being monitored; total number tested was 108,187, while one week ago it was 103,485, with a difference of 4,702 tests; Lake County’s overall positivity rate from the previous Tuesday to the previous day was 7.6 percent, noting that his report one week prior for the previous two week period was 6.5 percent; and the total cumulative percentage was 8.9 percent, with the State looking at 10 percent and below being optimal. He indicated that when compared to surrounding counties, Lake County had the lowest overall positivity rate. He said that another number they considered was the percentage of estimated population tested, noting that Lake County was at 29.7 percent; additionally, two counties were in front of Lake County, with Orange County testing 33.8 percent, and Osceola County testing 31.1 percent. He also noted that Orange and Osceola Counties had State-sponsored testing sites, whereas Lake County no longer did. He indicated that the number one age group for those testing positive was still 25-34 years old, the second most affected age group was individuals 45-54 years old, the third most affected age group was 35-44, and the fourth age bracket was the ages of 15-24; furthermore, Lake County’s median age for COVID-19 cases was still 44, with him previously reporting it to be 43. He then reported information on the county’s three local hospitals as follows: there were a total of 906 beds available with 731 currently being utilized, 175 remaining available, and a 19.3 percent available bed capacity; there were 104 total intensive care unit (ICU) beds available with 68 being used, 36 available, and a 34.6 percent available bed capacity; and there were 40 COVID-19 patients admitted, with six of those in ICU and none on ventilators. He commented that since April 27, 2020, the County had issued 872,304 pieces of personal protective equipment (PPE). He said in regards to the county’s long-term care facilities, the total cumulative number was 730 total positive COVID-19 cases to date, including staff and patients, with 13 positive patients, 95 residents transported to other facilities where they could be better managed, 27 positive staff, and 99 deaths. He then relayed that deaths to date reported as of the previous day was 243, with him previously reporting 236 in the previous week. He commented that for the County’s facemask distribution which began on July 7, 2020, over 80,000 masks had been distributed. He also said that Lake Support and Emergency Recovery (LASER), which was the County’s long term recovery organization, had assisted 62 businesses and churches with over 58,000 cloth masks, 1,300 procedure masks, hand sanitizer and gloves, along with having over 323,000 volunteer hours. He indicated that for Lake County schools from November 7, 2020 through November 13, 2020, there had been 24 positive cases including 16 students and eight employees, with 263 people being under investigation including 241 students and 22 employees. He then provided a tropical weather update, noting that he previously reported that Tropical Storm Eta was forecasted to make a Florida Panhandle-State of Alabama area landfall, though the forecast moved 200 miles east, and Lake County was forecasted to receive 25-35 miles per hour (MPH) winds, 45 MPH gusts, and up to 60 MPH gusts in squally weather. He added that there was a wind gust of 44 MPH at the Leesburg Airport, and less than 4,000 power outages which were restored quickly; additionally, there were numerous traffic lights out, though there was no damage and it was just a power issue. He also noted that a tree was down in the Town of Lady Lake, though no one was injured. He mentioned that the 2020 hurricane season had been record setting, with 31 cyclones to date, 30 named storms, 16 hurricanes, and six major hurricanes. He reminded everyone that 2005 was the last hurricane season where they used the Greek alphabet, and that the hurricane season did not end until November 30, 2020. He then shared information regarding COVID-19 testing locations throughout the county. He said that surrounding counties were offering rapid testing due to gatherings in the current time of year, and that Adult Medicine of Lake County could offer rapid testing in partnership with Lake County for $7 per test. He added that they could start on the following day with the County’s cost share being $7, and they thought they could perform 1,500 tests per day for about $10,500 per day. He said that in talking to Mr. Matt Cady, with Adult Medicine of Lake County, they typically did between 2,100 and 2,400 tests per week, Tuesday through Saturday, and he said that he wanted to present this option to do this rapid testing as a finger stick with only 15 minutes until results were received. He added that they could do this on the following day through the Wednesday before Thanksgiving, though Mr. Cady had also indicated that they could optimally start on Thursday, November 19, 2020, with messaging going out.
Commr. Campione asked if CARES Act funding could be used, and Mr. Carpenter confirmed this and said that the question would be if the Board wanted to use the funding for this. Commissioner Campione remarked that Osceola, Seminole and Orange Counties were doing this and providing testing for residents. She recalled that Lake County did this early on when they did not have State pop up sites, and that they were able to provide testing by working with Adult Medicine of Lake County. She said that if the County did not offer it, then people could still go, pay, and submit to their insurance, but she thought that this would be a valuable service for residents as they moved towards the week of Thanksgiving. She mentioned that the County wanted people to be able to get together, and that being tested could give them some assurance that they could be around family members and to help the county not have an outbreak.
Commr. Parks asked about the cost for this.
Mr. Carpenter replied that the County’s cost share would be $7, and any resident could be tested with a finger stick. He added that results took 15 minutes, and it would be the County’s cost share if they did not have insurance.
Commr. Parks inquired if they would take this funding out of the contingency funds discussed in the previous week, and Mr. Carpenter confirmed this.
Commr. Campione recalled that Mr. Cady had indicated they could perform the nasal swab as well, and Mr. Carpenter said that Mr. Cady was thinking it would be about 36 hours to get results for that test.
Commr. Campione asked if they tested on Saturday.
Mr. Carpenter said that they would, and if they started testing this week, they could test through Wednesday of the following week, with Sunday off.
Commr. Campione noted that nasal swab tests were more accurate but also took more time to get results. She then said that Mount Dora Centra Care was performing rapid testing, though a patient had to pay or submit to insurance.
Mr. Carpenter commented that this would be an opportunity for residents to get a free test and peace of mind; however, they would still have to be mindful of social distancing, wearing a mask and being careful prior to the holidays.
Commr. Smith asked how many tests Adult Medicine of Lake County performed per week.
Mr. Carpenter said that currently, they were conducting 2,100 to 2,400 per week, and Mr. Cady had thought that they could do up to 1,500 per day with this testing. He added that it would be six days of testing if they started on the following Thursday.
Commr. Campione mentioned that it could possibly be between 6,000 to 10,000 tests.
Commr. Smith inquired if it could be stopped at any time.
Mr. Carpenter said this was correct and that it would be an agreement between the County and Adult Medicine of Lake County for the time period of when the Board wanted it to start and end; additionally, if they did not do the 1,500 tests, the County would not be billed for it.
Mr. Cole remarked that the County had slightly over $3 million in the CARES Act contingency fund that they would be looking for opportunities to expend. He said that if the Board wanted to put some of that funding toward this, it would be helpful for staff to set a limit, such as up to $100,000, along with a closing date.
Commr. Campione expressed support for anything the Board could do to prevent having an uptick in cases from Thanksgiving going into Christmas. She also opined that testing was one of the most impactful things they could do.
Commr. Smith thought that they should do this at least until the end of the year.
Mr. Carpenter relayed that Mr. Cady mentioned there might be other opportunities after Thanksgiving.
Commr. Parks stated that at the current meeting, the Board could approve $100,000 for about 10,000 tests, then staff could come back in two weeks with a report and the Board could possibly continue it through Christmas.
Mr. Carpenter said that he would provide information about the volume of tests performed for an estimate between Thanksgiving and Christmas.
Commr. Smith asked about the cost for a citizen to have this done on their own, and Mr. Carpenter replied that it was $20 for the nasal swab or the finger stick rapid test.
Commr. Campione thought many people would go if they did not have to pay for it out of pocket. She opined that the test results were helpful, and mentioned that Lake County would be at a disadvantage if they did not keep up their testing when compared to surrounding counties, because it would start to show up in their positivity rate and indicate something that was not necessarily accurate.
Mr. Carpenter relayed that the demand for testing had decreased, and this was affecting the county’s positivity rate.
Mr. Cole mentioned that the next BCC meeting was on December 8, 2020; therefore, if they wanted to continue testing up to that meeting, staff would need authorization to expend more than $100,000.
Commr. Smith commented that $200,000 was about 28,500 tests.
Commr. Campione expressed support for this and noted that the County may not get this response.
Mr. Carpenter said that currently, Mr. Cady was performing 2,100 and 2,400 per week from Tuesday through Saturday at Lake Square Mall. He commented that he could come back on December 8, 2020, and provide an update, along with sending information from Mr. Cady to the Board.
Commr. Smith also requested to know how much of the $200,000 was spent.
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Smith, and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved to allocate $200,000 in CARES Act funding for Adult Medicine of Lake County to conduct COVID-19 rapid testing through December 8, 2020.
Commr. Campione noted that Commissioner Blake was present using Zoom Webinar but that he could not vote.
Commr. Blake said that this action was fine with him, and confirmed that he could not vote until he provided his signed oath later on the current day.
Commr. Campione asked about the BinaxNOW tests for 55+ communities.
Mr. Carpenter indicated that in the beginning of October, 2020, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis announced BinaxNOW rapid tests for 55+ communities, and individuals could communicate directly with the State to receive these tests. He elaborated that Lake County was asked to get a list of its 55+ communities, and they sent the list of 92 communities to the State; furthermore, six communities had requested tests. He said that the communities had the tests but were unsure of how to use them, and the County was working with the DOH and the communities to conduct those tests. He mentioned that these tests were for symptomatic people only, and he said that the communities were being worked with to get the testing done before the holidays.
Commr. Campione asked if it was an instant result.
Mr. Carpenter commented that it took 15 minutes. He added that in addition to the 55+ communities, he had also ordered 1,000 tests from the State to give to the DOH, who were going to start appointments for 55+ residents who did not live in one of those communities. He said that his office was also working with the Office of Emergency Medical Services (EMS), who had created a training program and protocol, along with the Office of Fire Rescue. He said that long term care facilities had the BinaxNOW tests, and that some used them and wanted more. He relayed that his office was helping to get them more, and returned tests would be given to the DOH. He believed that the DOH was also doing testing in charter and private schools for their staff.
Mr. Aaron Kissler, Administrator/Director/Health Officer for the DOH in Lake County, displayed COVID-19 data and said that Lake County was doing fairly good in its region and comparatively to the nation. He commented that they had an increase in cases and their positivity rate, though it was not as high as it was in some areas. He explained that one reason why the positivity rate was doing well in Lake County was the supplemental testing with other groups, along with testing at the DOH. He stated that they had been working together to provide a good amount of tests per capita over the summer, which helped to identify cases early and break the chain of transmission. He mentioned that they had the BinaxNOW tests and that they were testing teachers from private, public and charter schools at their locations by appointment, along with BinaxNOW tests being sent to schools. He noted that with the BinaxNOW test, the person needed to be symptomatic when being tested and that this limited it to some extent. He commented that they were also working with the schools to limit infection and identify contacts, and he mentioned that they were sending testing teams to areas that had outbreaks. He said that the numbers at hospitals were elevated but were not as high as in the summer, and he asked that individuals continue public health measures. He commented that they just received 20,000 masks that were being distributed, and that they had worked with the County to provide over 300,000 masks to county residents. He mentioned that the Pfizer vaccine looked effective and that the safety data from phase two looked promising. He elaborated that soon after phase three, it would be developed and sent to hospitals, first responders and individuals in long term care facilities; however, the ultra-cold storage could impact logistics. He also said that they were working with hospitals and the County to try to solve any logistical issues with the storage. He said that the Moderna vaccine looked to be stored like the chicken pox vaccine, and he noted that both vaccines would take two doses. He remarked that other vaccines were close to the end, and that some of them did not require ultra-cold storage and would be going though pharmaceutical routes in 2021. He added that it was important to limit the spread of COVID-19 with masks, social distancing, and public health measures. He explained that the less of a chance that the virus had of spreading, the less variation there would be in it, and the antibody treatments and vaccine could be more effective.
Commr. Parks asked Mr. Kissler to keep the Board apprised of the ultra-cold storage situation. He noted that that they had some contingency funding, and he mentioned the possibility that they could potentially help expedite vaccine distribution for residents.
Commr. Campione said that the hospitals indicated that they had sufficient storage; though some Counties had purchased them. She thought that it was a good idea for Mr. Kissler to keep the Board informed.
Mr. Kissler said that his organization would be working with Mr. Carpenter on this. He stated that some hospitals would have those resources, and that it may have to be delivered to the ultra-cold storage, though then they could potentially be able to keep it out of that storage for up to 15 days and three refreshes on dry ice. He commented that they would ensure that the storage was not a limitation.
Commr. Campione relayed her understanding that one needed to receive a flu shot two weeks prior to receiving the vaccine, and she encouraged residents who could receive the vaccine to have gotten their flu shot.
Mr. Kissler remarked that it was recommended to keep a two week difference, and he opined that it was a good idea to receive a flu shot because of the deadliness of that virus as well.
Commr. Campione requested for him to send an email to each Commissioner so that they could ask questions directly.
Commr. Parks said that seeing people’s attitudes had been positive, and that individuals in Lake County wanted to be responsible while also wanting to persevere and keep the economy moving. He stated that he wanted to compliment residents on this.
Minutes approval
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Shields, and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the minutes for the BCC meeting of August 25, 2020 (Regular Meeting) as presented.
citizen question and comment period
Ms. Diana Aten, surviving spouse to Sergeant First Class Michael C. Aten, said that she was present to seek support for designating Lane Park Road to her husband on State Road (SR) 19 going toward the Town of Howey-in-the Hills and Mission Inn. She stated that the City of Tavares and the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills had approved a resolution in her support. She explained that her husband was born in Lake County and had graduated from Mount Dora High School in 1984, commenting that he was an avid outdoorsman and that in July 1986, he joined the United States (US) Army in which he became an Airborne Ranger and received a diploma to wear the black beret. She elaborated that he served many tours in Korea as military police in the joint security area of the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). She relayed that in 1990, he suffered a severe injury where he had to reclassify into food operations. She said that he received a Bronze Star in Iraq for his actions in 2005, noting that he had a recommendation for an Army Commendation with Valor where he had been honored as a natural combat leader. She said that he had served his community and his neighbors, along with serving others with the Combat Veterans Motorcycle Association. She stated that he had helped combat veterans in need, and she hoped that she had the Board’s support for the road designation in his honor.
Ms. Velma Dawson, Sergeant Aten’s mother, requested a resolution from the County, and expressed appreciation for everything the Board could do in support. She thought that Sergeant Aten deserved attention with a sign on the road that would remind people that there were army rangers who loved the country and served the nation with pride.
Commr. Campione thanked her for attending today, and said she would imagine that everyone was in agreement that they could bring a resolution back at their next meeting to help facilitate this.
Mr. Ronald Moore, a former paramedic with the Lake County Office of EMS, expressed concerns about the circumstances of his resignation and his experience with the Lake County Office of Human Resources and Risk Management. He also indicated that he had sent an email regarding this matter to the Board but had not received a response.
Mr. Cole said that the Board had delegated all workforce decisions to the County Manager, and that he was aware of the issues, extenuating circumstances, and reasons relating to the items that Mr. Moore had raised. He commented that if the Board members wanted a briefing on this individually, then Mr. Jim Kovacs, Director for the Office of Human Resources and Risk Management, Mr. John Molenda, Deputy County Manager, and himself could do this. He opined that it was the appropriate decision.
Commr. Campione stated that the Board’s lack of response was not a lack of caring, and that they had to be careful to follow their protocols. She said that they appreciated Mr. Moore attending and sharing his side of the story.
Ms. Lee Conger, a resident on County Road (CR) 44A, thanked the Board for considering the interests of unincorporated county residents with regards to the City of Eustis annexation issue for property located on Eldorado Lake Drive and Thrill Hill Road. She mentioned that residents had attended the Eustis City Commission meeting and that it was unclear how services would be provided to this area; additionally, she opined that the density and the contiguity were also unclear. She relayed that the unincorporated residents felt dismissed at the City meeting and that they looked to the BCC to investigate this issue. She requested that the Board approve that there be a 25 foot strip on the Lake May Preserve conveyed to the Elaine Berol Taylor and Scott Bevan Taylor Foundation to create a way to have dialogue and collaboration between the County and the City of Eustis. She relayed her understanding that the City did not want to discuss it, but opined that there needed to be planning.
Mr. Rick Ault, a concerned citizen, expressed concerns about Mr. Moore’s experience with the County. He also welcomed Commissioner Shields and Commissioner Smith to the Board.
Commr. Campione said that when personnel matters were at hand, the Board had to be careful how they answered those types of issues. She added that they could not communicate in those situations, that this was what County staff was for, and that staff had spent a lot of time on this issue.
Mr. Vance Jochim, a concerned citizen, asked if the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) could be expanded to include mobile home parks. He said that he had been investigating mobile home park abuses by their owners, and that he had four witnesses to an abuse of elderly individuals being evicted from these parks. He hoped that the Board would add direction to the AHAC to review mobile home park owner practices, and he expressed concerns that the state agency which governed this was not taking any action. He also requested that the Board consider setting up a task force to address this.
Commr. Campione asked if there were two hands raised over Zoom Webinar, and Mr. Ross confirmed this.
Mr. Scott Taylor, representing the Elaine Berol Taylor and Scott Bevan Taylor Foundation, said that he had offered to take a small strip of Lake May Preserve, opining that this would give Lake County some leverage over the ability of the City of Eustis to extend annexation into east Lake County. He opined that by accepting this land into his foundation, this would provide east Lake County with a more balanced situation. He remarked that if Lake County decided that it did not want to donate the land to his foundation under advantageous conditions, the County could have the property back and the foundation would be bound to taking care of the property as it presently existed.
Mr. David Serdar, a concerned citizen, commended Commissioner Shields and Commissioner Smith. He also made comments relating to local government.
Commr. Campione said that there were two other speaker cards for Tab 12, regarding the Thrill Hill area, and that they could wait for the Board to get to that item.
CLERK OF the Circuit COURT and comptroller’s CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller’s Consent Agenda, Items 1 through 5, as follows:
List of Warrants
Request to acknowledge receipt of the list of warrants paid prior to this meeting, pursuant to Chapter 136.06 (1) 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.
City of Clermont CRA Resolution 20
Request to acknowledge receipt from the City of Clermont Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Resolution 20 adopting the budget amendment for the 2020-2021 fiscal year.
City of Mount Dora Annexation Ordinance 2020-18
Request to acknowledge receipt of Annexation Ordinance 2020-18 from the City of Mount Dora.
Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Final Order DEO-20-050
Request to acknowledge receipt of the State of Florida Department of Economic Opportunity’s final order DEO-20-050 pursuant to Section 380.05(6), Florida Statutes, approving land development regulations adopted by Lake County, Florida, Ordinance No. 2020-37.
Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Final Order DEO-20-049
Request to acknowledge receipt of the State of Florida Department of Economic Opportunity’s final order DEO-20-049 pursuant to Section 380.05(6), Florida Statutes, approving land development regulations adopted by Lake County, Florida, Ordinance No. 2020-36.
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
Commr. Smith asked to pull Tab 5 to the regular agenda.
On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the Consent Agenda, Tabs 3 through 8, pulling Tab 5 to the regular agenda, as follows:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Procurement Services
Request approval to declare items as surplus and authorization to remove these items from the County’s official fixed asset inventory records. The fiscal impact (revenue) cannot be determined at this time.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Facilities Management
Request approval of Contract with Vetted Security Solutions (Saint Petersburg, FL) for a video security system at the new Animal Shelter. The fiscal impact is $29,453.86 (expenditure). Commission District 3.
Request approval of Contract 20-0462 with Randall Mechanical, Inc. (Apopka, FL) for fire alarm system services, and authorization for the Office of Procurement Services to execute all supporting documentation. The estimated fiscal impact is $35,000.00 (expenditure).
Public Works
Request approval of Resolution 2020-212 to advertise a public hearing to vacate unimproved rights of way in the plats of Silver Lake Estates, located on the east side of Radio Road at the intersection of Morningside Drive, in the Leesburg area. The fiscal impact is $2,295.00 (revenue - vacation application fee). Commission District 3.
Request approval to accept public right of way and easement deeds that have been secured in conjunction with development, roadway and stormwater projects. The fiscal impact is $1,530.30 (expenditure - recording fees).
tab 5 – office of facilities management contracts
Commr. Smith said that as he was looking at the staff recommendation for this item, the fiscal impact was $30,000; however, the bid sheet was $37,700. He relayed that the bid sheet was done on an hourly rate, and the office estimated that they only needed a certain number of hours to equal $30,000; therefore, he wanted to make a motion that they do not exceed the $30,000 budgeted.
Commr. Parks asked if it could possibly be up to $37,000.
Commr. Smith said that he did not want it to go over $30,000.
Mr. Cole clarified that this would be annually.
On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the following items: Contracts 20-0456 with Convergint Technologies, LLC (Orlando, FL) and NetPlanner Systems Inc. (Tampa, FL) for countywide maintenance of security video systems; and for the Office of Procurement Services to execute all supporting documentation, with the modification not to exceed $30,000 annually.
appointment to the value adjustment board
Commr. Campione commented that the Board would have a public hearing, which was a budget issue; however, she expressed interest in moving through the rest of the agenda and taking up Tab 12, regarding a City of Eustis annexation, for individuals present, including City officials. She stated that the Board could come back to Tab 9, the public hearing regarding the budget, and they would now have Tab 10, for which they needed to appoint one County Commissioner to the Value Adjustment Board for the remainder of the 2020 year. She explained that this was the board that heard petitions by taxpayers with regards to their tax bills if they did not agree with the way something was calculated such as assessments, exemptions, etc. She noted that Commissioner Blake was the other Commissioner serving on it, and she opined that all Commissioners should serve on this board at least once.
Commr. Shields indicated that he was amicable with serving.
Commr. Campione opined that it was interesting and said that the Lake County Property Appraiser’s Office did a good job working out conflicts before they made it to the Value Adjustment Board.
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved to appoint Commissioner Shields to the Value Adjustment Board for the remainder of the 2020 tax year.
appointments to the affordable housing advisory committee
Commr. Campione stated that this committee had a scope defined primarily by statute and that it dealt with issues regarding State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP) funds for affordable housing, and they would bring recommendations to the BCC. She was unsure if this board could statutorily take up issues with regards to mobile home evictions or purchases, if it would be more appropriate for this to be a separate body, or if there was jurisdiction for the County to be involved.
Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, explained that the County was preempted from regulating in the area of the mobile home tenancies; rather, this was reserved to State enforcement, and investigation was under the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR). She said that the Board could likely have a group or the AHAC look at the statute and recommend changes, but the County would not have any jurisdiction to request a property owner or mobile home park owner to come in and be subject to questioning by any County employee.
Commr. Parks stated that he would be in favor of making it known that one of the AHAC’s purviews would be to look at these statutes and make recommendations to the BCC to possibly be included in a future legislative agenda.
Ms. Marsh said that the AHAC could make a recommendation to the BCC, and the BCC would have the ability to make it one of their legislative priorities.
Commr. Campione asked if this would be an issue at another time to decide whether to expand the role of the AHAC, or to do it in the form of a separate task force or group of residents who could make recommendations to the BCC.
Ms. Marsh confirmed this and noted that the Board could not take action at the current meeting due to it not having been on the agenda.
Commr. Campione mentioned that if the Board thought the statute needed to be changed or improved, then they could petition the legislature and their legislative delegation to address this. She said that for appointments, she was currently the liaison to the AHAC, and the applicant for the first vacancy was for a resident who represents essential services personnel, along with approval of a waiver of potential ethical conflict; furthermore, she recommended Ms. Danielle Stroud. She also recommended Mr. Ken Thomas from District 1 as a resident who is designated as an advocate for low-income persons in connection with affordable housing, noting that he would also need a potential ethical conflict waiver. She said that Mr. Thomas had served on this board for many years, that he was working for the City of Leesburg, and that he had been very involved in affordable housing issues. She commented that for the next two appointments, because they had a District 4 and a District 1 appointee, she proposed that the Board make sure they balanced it out unless anyone wanted to make recommendations on the other two openings. She indicated that one was for a resident actively engaged in banking or mortgage banking industry, in connection with affordable housing.
Commr. Parks relayed that Commissioner Smith represented District 3, and Mr. Joe Jamieson was an applicant from District 2. He said that he did not know much about Ms. Amanda Walters, who was another applicant. He stated that the Board could table this appointment and then if there was someone that Commissioner Smith wanted to appoint from District 3, this would be fine and they could have balance this way.
Commr. Smith indicated that this was fine.
Commr. Parks said that this would be for the appointment for a resident actively engaged in banking or mortgage banking industry in connection with affordable housing.
Commr. Campione stated that this slot was an important individual because they brought a lot in the discussions about how to assist with affordable housing needs, and the Board wanted to make sure they had the best appointee in the present situation. She mentioned that the next slot was for a resident who is actively engaged as a real estate professional in connection with affordable housing, noting that they had multiple choices. She read the names of the applicants, and asked if anyone would be the right fit for this position. She added that this was also something that the Board could bring up at their first meeting in December 2020.
Commr. Smith was amicable with this.
Commr. Campione said that the Board could move forward with Ms. Stroud and Mr. Thomas for this meeting, and they could take up the appointments for the other two positions at the next BCC meeting.
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the following items: to appoint Ms. Danielle Stroud to fill the vacancy for a resident who represents essential services personnel, and approval of a waiver of potential ethical conflict; to appoint Mr. Ken Thomas to fill the vacancy for a resident who is designated as an advocate for low-income persons in connection with affordable housing, and approval of a waiver of potential ethical conflict; and to table the appointments for a resident actively engaged in banking or mortgage banking industry in connection with affordable housing, and for a resident who is actively engaged as a real estate professional in connection with affordable housing.
potential eustis annexation
Commr. Campione said that she had asked for this item regarding discussion and direction regarding annexation of property located on Eldorado Lake Road and Thrill Hill Road to be placed on the agenda because time was of the essence. She explained that if the City of Eustis went forward with an annexation at their first meeting in December 2020, it could open the door for multiple large tracts to be arguably contiguous with the city limits, and then they could be annexed and thousands of new homes could potentially be built in the area. She recalled the planning of the Wellness Way area, which was made up of thousands of acres in South Lake, noting that the Board was trying to do master planned development instead of doing it piecemeal, and prevent what happened in the 1980s in the City of Clermont when the area grew significantly without much planning in advance. She said that once the door was opened, it could be a cascade effect, and she opined that there was significant potential for this area. She stated that she understood the City of Eustis wanting to grow and expand its tax base, and that most people she had spoken to in the unincorporated area had accepted that the area would change in some regards; however, she wondered how the Board could ensure it was done in a way that was responsible, well thought out and well planned. She thought that the question in front of the Board was how they could try to coordinate the City’s vision and the residents’ concerns, and to do this in a way where in the future, they would not look back and wonder why they let this happen without trying to engage in more of a master plan of this area. She said that the area was in the Wekiva Basin and opined that it was special; additionally, there were traffic issues at the intersection of SR 44 and Thrill Hill Road, and an intersection with Britt Road. She advocated that the Board do what it could to convince the City of Eustis to sit down with the County and try to do planning that could help guide and direct growth in the area in a way that they could be proud of. She opined that the annexation request before the City was unusual, noting that there was not much contiguity. She also said that it was not a situation where a City was incrementally growing and its boundaries were naturally expanding; rather, she opined that it did not fit and that the City was trying to make it work. She said that a Florida statute indicated that they could consider the park to not exist for purposes of contiguity, so the City could hop over the park, but the statute also said that it was supposed to still be compact and part of a whole. She opined that when looking at a map of what was being proposed, it was far from being compact or a part of a naturally occurring growth of the city limits. She said that she had talked to Mr. Taylor about deeding a 25 foot swath of the County park on the eastern boundary as a way to stop the park from being used to create contiguity. She stated that she wanted to bring up this request to see if the Board would consider making this conveyance, noting that the foundation agreed that they would deed it back to the County so that it would not have to be done in perpetuity; however, it could be a way to put a pause on an annexation that could change this area of Lake County irreparably. She thought that density issues such as this were the kinds of things that the County could try to work out between the County residents and the City in order to come up with master planning that could be more compatible with a primarily rural area. She hoped that by putting a pause on this, the County could meet with the City of Eustis and work on this issue. She said that the County had reached out to the City, but the response was that the City did not want to postpone the item or engage in joint planning. She noted that the City would have different City Commissioners and that there could be a different view of this, though they would not be installed until January 2021, and the decision would be made in December 2020. She requested that at the very least, to let the City know that the Board was not in favor of the annexation of this property east of Eldorado Lake Drive, into the Thrill Hill area, and outside of the joint planning area (JPA). She thought that this was a solution that would put this item on hold and get everyone talking, noting that they were supposed to engage in planning. She then asked for a map of the area to be displayed.
The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.
Mr. Dan Langley, representing Promise Fields, LLC, said that this company owned 145 acres of pasture land at the intersection of CR 44A north and CR 44A, across the street from Lake May Reserve. He added that it was the tan property on the map that was within the city limits of Eustis. He asked the Board to support the request to convey the 25 foot strip of the County property to the Elaine and Scott Taylor Foundation to create a pause in the urban sprawl that the City of Eustis had facilitated in unincorporated areas of the county. He opined that the City would ask the County to trust them because they had a form based code to ensure compatibility with surrounding areas; however, he opined that the City’s code had been modified to remove all protections of the rural areas in unincorporated county areas, including incorporated areas of the city. He also opined that this was not smart growth and was a situation where the City was jumping over 4,000 linear feet on the edge of their city, on the other side of two right of ways, a park, and a lake, to annex land that they could designate with five units per acre in their future land use (FLU) map. He expressed a concern that the City did not have zoning, so once they designated a FLU for these properties, a developer would present a site plan and maximize the density. He noted that the area was rural with large tracts of land and large estates; therefore, he indicated a concern that unincorporated residents would be upset at the urban sprawl and question why the County did not act. He mentioned that the County’s Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) and zoning would no longer apply once the City annexed it. He relayed that his client was concerned about the encroachment of urban density into rural lands that needed to be preserved, and he opined that it was important to the economy to have agricultural land, in addition to some individuals preferring to live on large tracts. He opined that it was important to do joint planning between the County and the City, though relayed his understanding that the City had asked the County for the ability to annex land. He indicated a concern for the City trying to encroach outside the JPA boundary, and he opined that this annexation did not meet the Florida Statutes. He asked the Board to pause the annexation and to convey the land so that it could not be used for this. He opined that this was a way to stop this from becoming a litigation issue, and he questioned how police and fire services would be provided, along with indicating an understanding that the City did not have utilities in this area. He said that the conveyance would not be permanent, and he opined that the harm in not acting during the current meeting would be worse.
Ms. Allison Yurko, an attorney representing property owners in the unincorporated area, welcomed Commissioner Shields and Commissioner Smith to the Board. She said that she wanted to confirm the unincorporated residents’ strong opposition to these proposed annexations, and she expressed a concern that it would be a domino effect. She relayed her understanding that the proposed plan was 25 times the existing density, and she relayed concerns about the lack of planning and entitlements to the density that property owners were seeking. She thought that it was time to slow this item down, and she opined that significant harm would occur if this played out.
Commr. Parks said that he would not disparage form and performance based codes because while they may be unclear with the City of Eustis, he opined that they were very good. He also thought that the County should consider this in the future and that it would solve many issues.
Commr. Campione recalled that an issue that came up previously with the City of Eustis was that they had a land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) with one unit per acre, and then they jumped to Suburban Residential (SR) with five units per acre. She opined that a form based code made sense in an urban area because they could work with the limitations and attributes of a site, but in a rural area, she thought that everyone was concerned about the idea of five units per acre. She recalled that the County had asked the City if they would consider a new land use designation to be between RR and SR. She relayed that most of the property had pine trees, and that it probably had an agricultural exemption. She thought that some things could be done to create compatibility in an area that was partially rural and partially on the cusp of developing; however, the County could not delve into this because they were not at the table. She said she liked to think that a form based code could work, but unless one had the expertise of being a planner, there was no way of getting the comfort level that this would produce neighborhoods which would be consistent and compatible with the five and ten acre tracts there.
Commr. Parks said that there was agreement with why residents were present, but he relayed that the City had indicated that when considering their form based codes, there was no way it would allow remotely close to five units per acre.
Commr. Campione expressed interest in someone laying out a site plan for the property to show them what it would look like. She commented that doing this later did not give the level of assurance that residents wanted. She expressed a concern that this would keep happening if it was done, and she opined that there could be a master plan to figure out what to do between this area and CR 437. She hoped that the Board could pause this enough to get the City of Eustis to talk with the County.
Commr. Smith asked to confirm that there was an agreement with a nonprofit organization to convey a piece of this property, and this would put a brake on the annexation. He also asked if the nonprofit had agreed to deed it back to the County once the County came to an agreement for the annexation.
Commr. Campione confirmed this.
Commr. Smith expressed a concern for Thrill Hill Road and Marshall Road being owned by the County and that they could be significantly impacted. He relayed his understanding that the City wanted a five unit per acre density, but they did not have a plan yet. He questioned the impact to Thrill Hill Road and what the County could do to ensure that these roads could handle the anticipated traffic count. He asked who would perform this upgrade, and noted that it would be the County’s responsibility to fix the road unless it was given to the City. He also asked who would protect the city residents there with fire service, and if the City police department would traverse the county road to reach the area. He added that garbage trucks would be driving on Thrill Hill Road, and he mentioned that it was not known what the City was intending other than a five unit per acre density. He opined that it was a good idea to pause this item.
Commr. Shields said that his initial thought was that it had to be known ahead of time where the city would end and where the county would begin. He relayed his understanding that it was previously agreed to be Thrill Hill Road, and he then said that it was a question of if people who bought property knew that they would someday be part of the city. He indicated that he would like to see a plan before anything was done, and that he would like to understand how the Cities and the County worked together to ensure that the city could grow, but not at the expense of people who thought they were following the County Comp Plan.
Commr. Campione mentioned that in the 1980s, there was a JPA set up and that Thrill Hill Road was the extent of it; therefore, this annexation included land that went outside of the JPA. She relayed that ordinarily in a best case scenario, cities grew incrementally according to the statute, because the statute discussed being compact, coterminous, and close to the city limits so that one would not have to drive through the unincorporated area to reach a city area. She expressed a concern for larger tracts potentially being annexed and this possibly leading to a large pocket of unincorporated area in the middle, because there could be police patrol cars going out into the rural areas and it could be confusing. She opined that in this scenario, it was a stretch to say this was what the statute intended.
Commr. Smith recalled that there was a similar situation when he was on the Tavares City Council, and he said that the City of Eustis could make a designation of suburban transition from large acre lots down to suburban, and then into urban areas. He thought it would be a good idea if there was a transition zone somewhere, but also noted that they needed to consider the roads.
Commr. Campione said that she liked the idea of a transition zone because this may have been what happened in the Shirley Shores area, and that it still made sense for the water and sewer services to make money without going too far in the density to become an urbanized area.
Commr. Parks relayed an understanding that the City of Eustis was envisioning it to be two units per acre and clustered based on the form based code. He expressed concerns about the dialogue with the City, and he opined that something had to be done with the area when considering the 20 year plan with the City. He said that for whether this was compliant with Chapter 171, Florida Statutes, there were cases in the Cities of Clermont and Mount Dora with only six feet that was annexed, and that this was never challenged.
Commr. Campione questioned if it turned out well in the long run, noting with the current case, residents were asking the BCC to do something.
Commr. Parks opined that this was why the Board needed to oppose this and challenge the annexation. He mentioned Wellness Way and said that an important item was having a good relationship with the City of Clermont. He relayed that he did not want to do the nuclear option, and he opined that in discussing this with the City of Eustis, if the Board was to do this with a dedication, there would no longer be a door open for discussion. He reiterated his opinion that it should be challenged and opposed, which would mean that Ms. Marsh and Commissioner Campione could attend the next Eustis City Council meeting to oppose it.
Commr. Campione opined that this was the opposite of a nuclear option and that it was a pause to indicate that the County did not want this to be the end of the discussion; rather, they wanted it to be the beginning. She opined that if the County challenged it in court, it would be more contentious and adversarial. She also opined that while it could be an interesting test case, ideally the County should avoid litigation.
Commr. Parks said that the County could mediate.
Commr. Campione remarked that once the annexation was done, then 30 days later it could not be challenged. She added that this option could slow it down.
Commr. Parks indicated that it could be challenged.
Commr. Smith relayed that he did not see this as a nuclear option, and that he understood it as if they did not do this, the City of Eustis could annex property and his concerns about roads, fire and police would still be unanswered. He said that he asked if the nonprofit would deed it back to the County because once the City and the County had an agreement, it could be deeded back and the City could move forward with their annexation. He expressed a concern for the impact when the plan was not known. He said he was unsure if they would place apartment buildings there, which he opined they had the right to do. He added that the County did not have any traffic studies, and he supported stopping this and figuring out what would be done with roads, the fire department, and the police department, along with how they could transition. He believed that once this was addressed, everyone could come to an agreement, the property could be deeded back, and the County could let the City of Eustis grow how they wanted. He said that the County should have a good relationship with all of the Cities, and he opined that this would not damage their relationship with the City; rather, it could facilitate discussion.
Commr. Shields asked about the challenge option.
Ms. Marsh said that with the way the statute was set up, if the City annexed the property and the County wanted to challenge it, the County would first approve the resolution to go through the Florida Governmental Conflict Resolution Act. She added that the County had done this in 2018 with the City of Eustis when they were dealing with an interlocal service boundary agreement (ISBA) request, and that this process was fairly lengthy. She said that toward the end, there would be a joint meeting between the two boards, and the ability to bring in a mediator if necessary. She relayed that if there was an impasse at that proceeding, then the County would have 30 days to file a writ of certiorari with the court in which the County would go through the court process to challenge the annexation.
Commr. Campione inquired if this would happen after the City’s first December 2020 meeting for the second and final reading if they voted to proceed.
Ms. Marsh confirmed this and explained that if the City adopted the annexation on December 3, 2020, she could bring back an item at the BCC’s December 8, 2020 meeting to approve the resolution and/or authorize her to file the writ of certiorari. She said at that point, the County would send the resolution to the City if it was adopted, and the City would have a certain number of days to respond; furthermore, they would start going through the intergovernmental dispute resolution process.
Commr. Campione asked if it would not get to the circuit court until they had already gone through that entire process.
Ms. Marsh confirmed this and said that there was language in the Florida Governmental Conflict Resolution Act where the County could file the writ of certiorari, but they would then have to file for an abatement and the court would be required to abate it to go through that process. She said that the annexation statute said that the County would initiate the resolution process first, and if there was no resolution within 30 days following that, they would then file with the court.
Commr. Campione commented that it could be a drawn out process.
Commr. Blake stated that he admired the creative strategy suggested to deal with the park, but he felt that it was the equivalent of moving the goalposts when the City was going through what they thought to be the legal process. He opined that the correct way would be to do what Ms. Marsh just explained. He relayed that if he could vote today, he would not vote in favor of this because he felt that the City was doing what they thought was in their best interest; additionally, he thought that the correct way was to address it legally.
Commr. Parks said that at the end of the legal route, there would be a decision on whether something like this could be annexed.
Ms. Marsh confirmed this and explained that if there was no resolution on the process and if they went to court, ultimately the court would decide if the connection to the park, which equated to 23 percent of that boundary, was substantial enough to constitute contiguity under the annexation statute.
Commr. Parks inquired if there would be a body of case law for future annexations.
Ms. Marsh replied that the County would have a circuit court decision if one of the parties appealed it up to the district court and if it became more well-known and had more persuasive authority in other districts; additionally, it would be binding in this district. She stated that circuit court was persuasive authority.
Commr. Parks asked to confirm that if it came back and the court said that it could not be annexed, then staff could look at this in any similar future situation.
Ms. Marsh said that this was correct.
Commr. Campione mentioned that there was case law, but it was not exactly the same. She expressed concerns for forcing this into dispute resolution and then to a court case, versus avoiding the annexation from happening altogether. She added that then they could sit down and work on this, and opined that this seemed like more of a direct route than litigation. She then indicated that she had two speaker cards and that Ms. Yurko wanted to weigh in.
Ms. Yurko stated that she had been involved in a number of annexation lawsuits and Chapter 164 proceedings, and she opined that it was stressful. She relayed that when she had worked for Orange County, they filed a lawsuit within 30 days of the date of the City action and then abated it in an abundance of caution because there was case law indicating that it was a jurisdictional deadline. She opined that the statute was unclear, and she supported splitting the park and letting planning take place.
Mr. Jochim opined that many people made plans and moved to large lots to retire, and that they thought they would have the same kind of neighbors. He recalled an issue with an annexation by the City of Tavares in the Shirley Shores area, and expressed a concern for there being no mitigation of road issues. He opined that there needed to be something to block high density encroachment by cities. He encouraged any attempt from the County to prevent Cities from being able to annex at all without coming to the tables and developing a workable density transition area.
Ms. Elaine Renick, a concerned citizen, asked not to get the lawyers involved. She opined that the Chairman had come up with a good way to make people come to the table and discuss the item, and that this was the best way to do this.
Mr. Scott Atkins, a concerned citizen, expressed support for Commissioner Campione’s proposal of pausing this item, and he expressed a concern that if the City annexed this property, then it could spread. He proposed pausing this item and discussing what would be done with the area.
Mr. Ron Neibert, Eustis City Manager, relayed his understanding that for the proposed action, the County was under an agreement with the State, under the grant received to purchase the property, which required a 60 day notification to the State before the County received permission to do this. He stated that if the County was willing to pass a countywide policy that any annexation that the County considers would need police, fire and roads plans to be submitted as part of that application, then the City would embrace this; however, he opined that the County was beginning a new process only for the City of Eustis. He relayed that when other communities had ISBAs and were doing non-contiguous annexations, no one submitted plans to the County for permission and approval. He remarked that the City had recently sent a letter to the BCC about some past controversial actions and why the City was being singled out for some of these actions. He commented that he had an annexation plat from the City of Mount Dora that was passed less than 30 days prior, which was utilizing the same provisions of the statute that the City of Eustis was using to establish continuity. He questioned why the County was not challenging this, and said that an annexation was either legal or illegal; therefore, he opined that the County should take unilateral equal action on annexations. He opined that by deeding the property and not going through the legal route in establishing a clear legal precedent on what is a legal annexation, the County was establishing a policy of picking winners and losers. He questioned if the County would continue this action in the future and why the City of Eustis was receiving this treatment.
Commr. Smith inquired about the rush in doing this.
Mr. Neibert said that 10 years prior, the City had passed moratoriums and stopped growth; additionally, they had spent five years trying to grow. He stated that other communities had embraced the ISBAs, but that when it was the City of Eustis’s time to agree to embrace an ISBA, they were told no. He elaborated that the City had asked about several options to get an ISBA, and they finally entered into one for two properties and one project. He stated that the City of Eustis was the third largest city in Lake County, but they had the third lowest per capita taxable value in the community; therefore, they were providing more services for more residents with less money per person than most communities in the county. He added that they had the fourth lowest per capita income in the county, and he opined that the city needed to grow, noting that they provided services and needed those revenues. He said that they were trying to establish a stream of revenue to continue to provide services, commenting that the City of Eustis was an Insurance Services Office (ISO) class two fire service and that they were responding to fires in that area currently. He stated that they would continue to provide the services at the levels that they had provided to all of their incorporated areas.
Commr. Smith asked again about why the City was rushing to get this done at their next City Commission meeting. He relayed his understanding that the County had asked them to pause so that they could look at this and figure it out, and that the County was told no.
Mr. Neibert recalled that earlier in the current year, the City was working with the County on negotiating a phase one ISBA with the promise that they would negotiate a phase two ISBA based on negotiations with the City and the County on land use changes. He stated that they had not heard back and that they had been waiting since April 2020 to begin negotiations. He added another email was sent to the County in October 2020 and that they had not heard anything from County staff. He commented that it took five years to have a small ISBA for the City of Eustis, and he expressed a concern for repeated delays.
Commr. Campione recalled that they had a joint meeting when they were working on their ISBA negotiations with the BCC and City Commissioners; additionally, Commissioner Parks had asked that they do joint planning in the JPA and ISBA. She opined that the County was opposed to noncontiguous annexations, and that when the request was made for joint planning to work out land uses in the ISBA, this was when discussions broke down. She recalled that Mr. Tim McClendon, Director for the Lake County Office of Planning and Zoning, contacted the City’s planner and that neither side wanted to do the type of joint planning to look at parcels and designate land uses.
Mr. Neibert commented that the City had sent two emails to Mr. McClendon in April and October 2020, and that both emails requested for the County to send the City their recommended changes and suggestions for land use changes; however, the City had not received anything.
Commr. Campione said that this was not the way it was conveyed to the Board from Mr. McClendon. She commented that the attempt was made to work on a map, and that the answer from the City was that they did not want to engage in this.
Mr. Neibert relayed that at the November 5, 2020 Eustis City Commission meeting, the City Commission said that they were not wanting to delay this annexation, though this did not mean that they were unwilling to have dialogue on future areas. He said that the City still wanted a phase two ISBA and had requested discussion regarding that, along with a citywide negotiation for land use changes. He questioned if the County had done this level of negotiations and discussions regarding land uses with communities that they had conflict with.
Commr. Campione said that the County had a JPA with the City of Mount Dora where they had agreed on what the land use designations were. She elaborated that they had a process by which they merged their land uses, and that for Wellness Way, the County mapped out everything about the land south of the City of Clermont down to Four Corners. She thought that the Board was relaying that they wanted to have discussions about joint planning where they would look at properties and land uses, designate densities and intensities, and determine how to blend their boundaries.
Mr. Neibert commented that Wellness Way and the Wolf Branch Innovation District were specialized development districts and not the generalized boundaries of these communities. He opined that the County had done no joint planning with many other Cities.
Commr. Smith indicated that joint planning had been done with the City of Tavares.
Mr. Neibert opined that the City of Eustis had done its joint planning and that the district was established in 1987.
Commr. Campione commented that there had been nothing since then to designate land uses. She opined that the County and City had not engaged in joint planning and that much had changed since 1987. She stated that the City’s form based code came into existence only in the past 10 years.
Mr. Neibert asked where the County’s objections to the form based code were.
Commr. Campione replied that no one had any discussions about it. She asked to work on this issue together and opined that this was not the correct way to go about it. She also questioned how to take care of roads in the area.
Mr. Neibert opined that there were multiple issues in all of the communities as they grow and expand. He asked why the City was receiving this special attention when each City in the county was conducting annexations.
Commr. Parks asked if the County had responded to the City.
Mr. McClendon explained that staff had received an email on October 20, 2020, and that they were still formulating a response; additionally, they had requested multiple meetings with the City’s planning staff.
Mr. Neibert said that the City was asking for the County to bring forth their land use proposal to them. He indicated that the City was comfortable with their land use classifications as they were, and that they were asking the County what they would be more comfortable with.
Commr. Campione inquired if Mr. McClendon was trying to receive feedback from City staff.
Mr. McClendon confirmed this and said that typically, planning staffs come together at joint meetings rather than emails.
Commr. Campione relayed her understanding that it was thought that the staffs would get together and bring something back for the Board to look at, rather than County staff sending a map to the City to indicate what they wanted.
Mr. Neibert clarified that if the County prepared the map, the City could meet to discuss the suggestions.
Commr. Campione asked him if he would like the County to take a map of the current JPA and map out what they think the land uses should be.
Mr. Neibert replied that this was what was requested in April and October 2020. He also relayed that the special action to stop this annexation and force the City to the table was not received well by the City Commission. He commented that if it was an illegal annexation, they could go through the standard legal processes. He questioned why the County was initiating this action and if they were doing it as an adjacent land owner or as a regulatory body.
Commr. Campione indicated an understanding that it was being done as a regulatory body and that unincorporated residents did not have standing to bring a challenge to an annexation that was allegedly in violation of the Florida Statutes; furthermore, only the County or a City resident or property owner would have standing. She relayed that in this case, it would be a regulatory body as the County would be challenging it.
Commr. Parks asked if an adjacent resident could object personally to an annexation and still have standing.
Ms. Marsh commented that they could attend City meetings and voice their objections as a member of the public, but they could not file a lawsuit if they lived in the unincorporated county.
Mr. Neibert stated that an individual had gotten involved because they had ownership interest adjacent to the park, and he asked that since there was a private citizen who could challenge the legality, why should taxpayer dollars be spent on what was basically a private matter. He supported letting private individuals litigate on their own accord if they had damages to be done to them.
Commr. Campione commented that there were residents in the Thrill Hill area who would like their voices to be heard. She said that there seemed to be a willingness to work on a map together, and that this was where the County was trying to go with this as opposed to ending up in litigation for the next six to twelve months.
Mr. Neibert relayed that the City was not interested in holding up on their annexation, though they were interested in joint planning as it related to a total ISBA and to bring some comfort between the bodies. He clarified that they could not put five units per acre there and that apartments were not allowed in the proposed classification.
Commr. Campione opined that a transitional land use would be a good way to address this because they could continue to have concerns when it was five units per acre on paper.
Mr. Ault recalled that Wellness Way was an example of what could happen with annexations, and he mentioned issues with roads such as Hartwood Marsh Road. He mentioned Mr. Neibert’s comment about special consideration being given, and he thought that it was never too late to learn from the past, opining that there had been issues in the City of Clermont such as with Anderson Hill Road. He also opined that there was nothing wrong with taking time to get it right. He added that the opposition did not get to vote for anyone with the City of Eustis, and they had to look to the BCC for help.
Commr. Parks commented that much of the development regarding Hartwood Marsh Road happened prior to Wellness Way, and that for Anderson Hill Road, he wanted the County to oppose that annexation but there was not support on the Board to do that. He added that the City of Clermont did not have a form based code, and that there were some concessions made on that issue.
Ms. Tammy Pena, a neighbor of the subject property, indicated that she had farm animals and expressed concerns that the annexation would be a significant change to her lifestyle. She indicated concerns for density on Thrill Hill Road and CR 44A, noting that the area was rural. She expressed concerns that the subject area would border two sides of her properties, and she asked the County to conduct planning for this area. She also indicated concerns that this could set a precedent for the area.
Ms. Carrie Emmons, a resident of the subject area, expressed a concern for the worst case scenario with the land use being five units per acre, noting that there was nothing stating what it would be. She said that she wanted a rural lifestyle and that she did not want to see a large number of houses, and she opined that the city wanted to grow and did not care about what the residents wanted. She also expressed concerns for traffic accidents in the area.
Ms. Cathy Gray, a neighbor of the subject area, said that residents came to the BCC because they did not feel like they had a voice; additionally, she stated that they had been told that the City had made up its mind regardless of what the residents thought. She relayed that the area was currently at one unit per five acres and that the paperwork indicated that they could go up to five units per acre. She noted that there was not a plan, and she expressed concerns for traffic issues and for having something in place so that the City could not annex areas while leaving unincorporated areas in between.
Ms. Patricia Duncan, a concerned citizen, relayed that residents attended the City of Eustis meeting on October 1, 2020, and opined that they had no faith that the City would take their concerns seriously; furthermore, this was why they were asking the BCC for their help.
There being no one else who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the floor for public comment.
Commr. Campione urged the Board to approve this request, and she thought it was a way to slow things down. She indicated that she was committed to the Board working with the City of Eustis, noting the possibilities of creating buffers between subdivisions and rural home sites; however, none of this was under discussion currently. She opined that the only way to hopefully bring the City to the table to discuss these issues was to pause this annexation.
Commr. Parks thought it was clear that there were five advocates on the Board for discussing this with the City. He relayed a concern that if the Board went through with this option, then the planners meeting could possibly never happen. He thought that the first step should be to meet with the landowners and have a County-led effort for a Comp Plan amendment to place more restrictions, similar to what was being done with the Flat Lake area. He added that this could tie together with the County providing the City of Eustis with that map.
Commr. Smith asked that if the Board conveyed the property, what the possibility of a lawsuit on the County was.
Ms. Marsh said that she was not aware of any cause of action for the City to come against the County for conveying the property. She added that the County owned the property and had the right to convey it, and that for the references to the Florida Communities Trust (FCT), this was a contractual agreement between the County and the State; therefore, the County would have conversations with the State. She clarified that the FCT grant was not used to purchase this property, and that it was to be used for improvements to the property. She added that this 25 foot strip was not in any area where improvements with the FCT funding would be made. She commented that this was not to say that the City could not sue the County, but currently she could not say what the cause of action might be.
Commr. Parks asked if this was why the 60 days would not apply, and Ms. Marsh stated that she had conversations with the FCT.
Commr. Smith relayed that if the County did not convey the property, they would automatically get into a legal battle which would cost money. He said that if they could convey the property and talk to the City, it could save the county taxpayers money, and he thought that something could be worked out. He stated that he would like to see the City grow out to their JPA and that he would be happy to work on an ISBA. He opined that it did not make sense to say that this was a nuclear option when the County knew they would sue the City.
Commr. Parks relayed his concern that after doing this, there would be no more discussions with the City.
Commr. Smith hoped that the City would see that the two new Commissioners were trying to build relationships with the Cities. He opined that the City was unwilling to not annex this property until January or February 2021 and to talk. He said he did not see the County using taxpayer money when they had another way around the issue, and he questioned the urgency behind the annexation when the BCC was expressing interest in meeting with the City. He stated that this may be the only option the County had.
Commr. Shields thought that the Board had to be responsible to their county residents and to get this right. He stated that he would have liked to have a better option, but he agreed with Commissioner Smith.
Commr. Smith asked if the City would delay the annexation.
Mr. Neibert replied that he had no authority to make that promise at this point. He said that the Eustis City Commission made their decision at the November 5, 2020 meeting that they did not want to delay it, and he opined that 60 days would be required to dedicate the property and that the City would challenge this. He stated that they could litigate on the legality of dedicating the property, or they could litigate the annexation and clarify the answer for annexations moving forward. He expressed interest in establishing case law rather than picking winners if the zoning on an annexation was liked.
Commr. Smith made a motion that the County convey the property if the City of Eustis did not decide to delay their annexation until the point where the County and the City could meet to come up with a plan.
Ms. Marsh did not think that the City Commission would meet again before December 3, 2020.
Mr. Neibert indicated that they would meet on Thursday, November 19, 2020.
Ms. Marsh said that the Board could do this, and then if the City Commission did not take it up on that day, the County would need to record the deed prior to December 3, 2020 in order to break that connection for contiguity. She recommended to convey the 25 foot strip to the nonprofit organization no later than December 2, 2020, to authorize the Chairman to sign the deed, and to authorize the Chairman to sign an agreement which would establish the terms for reversion and maintenance.
Commr. Smith asked if they could have it be conveyed on December 2, 2020, unless the annexation was delayed, to give the City and the County time to come together such as in February 2021.
Ms. Marsh responded that this could be added to the motion that it would not be conveyed in the event that the City Commission postponed the annexation until February 2021.
Commr. Parks inquired that if the City Commission agreed to delay it, then the property would not be conveyed, and Ms. Marsh relayed that this was her understanding of the motion.
Commr. Smith stated that if the City Commission agreed to delay this to February 2021, he saw the motion as that it would not be conveyed; however, it would be conveyed by December 2, 2020 if the City Commission did not agree to this.
Commr. Parks noted that this gave the City a choice to delay it another month, and that he liked the idea that it was more time. He proposed to delay it until the City Commission’s second meeting in February 2021.
Commr. Smith then proposed to delay it until March 1, 2021.
Commr. Campione opined that it showed good faith and that the County was trying.
Commr. Parks proposed to add to the motion that it was with the understanding that County staff would reach out to the City staff regarding the maps. He then proposed to take this up separately.
Commr. Smith said he thought that after this conversation, staff understood the intent of the BCC to work with the City and do what was best for everyone in that area.
Commr. Campione commented that if the City Commission agreed to delay the annexation, the County would not convey the property, and County staff would work rapidly to come up with something that could be presented to the BCC and the City Commission as a joint planning compromise.
Commr. Smith confirmed this.
On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved to convey the 25 foot strip of land in Lake May Preserve to a nonprofit organization no later than December 2, 2020, to authorize the Chairman to sign the deed, and to authorize the Chairman to sign an agreement which would establish the terms for reversion and maintenance, if the City of Eustis did not decide to delay their annexation until at least March 1, 2021 to give the County time to work on a joint planning arrangement.
recess and reassembly
The Chairman called a recess at 12:36 p.m. for five minutes.
public hearing – budget adjustments for year-end closeout
Ms. Jennifer Barker, Executive Director of Administrative Services, commented that Ms. Allison Teslia, the new Director for the Office of Management and Budget, would be presenting the year end cleanup.
Ms. Teslia said that the purpose of this presentation was to reconcile the FY 2020 final budgeted revenues and expenditures. She relayed that following each fiscal year, all budgeted revenues and expenditures were reconciled based on actual transactions throughout the year, and that budget adjustments were necessary to account for unanticipated revenues and expenditures. She said that the General Fund had a total increase of about $377,000 which included recognizing unanticipated revenue received for interest in user fees; a reduction in the Transit Fund transfer due to CARES Act funding which was received; a transfer to the Fleet Management Fund to offset the unanticipated shortfall; the reallocation of funds to cover COVID-19 related expenditures, and various other budget adjustments as necessary. She explained that the Transit Fund was decreasing by around $545,000 to recognize the reduction of the transfer from the General Fund due to receiving some CARES Act funding which was offsetting the cost to provided services. She stated that for the Fleet Management Fund, they were recognizing an increase of approximately $545,000 for a transfer from the General Fund in order to offset the anticipated shortfall in that fund; additionally, in summer 2020, the County Manager had sent a memo regarding the fleet management budget and outlining a plan to get the fund back on track. She elaborated that there were several steps taken to improve efficiencies, and this was the final piece of the plan to reconcile negative balances in that fund. She then said that there were also various other budget adjustments as needed in other funds.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved budget adjustments for the year-end closeout of Fiscal Year 2020 in accordance with County Policy LCC-36, and Administrative Procedure pursuant to section 129.06 (2) (A), Florida Statutes.
reports
county attorney
upcoming closed session
Ms. Marsh mentioned that there would be a closed session on December 8, 2020 to discuss fire union negotiations.
county manager
fruitland park fire services merging with county
Mr. Cole recalled that in January and February 2020, he had notified the Board that the City of Fruitland Park staff had engaged in discussions with County staff about merging the City’s fire services with Lake County Fire Rescue. He stated that the discussions had continued and that on November 10, 2020, the Fruitland Park City Commission voted unanimously to begin negotiating with the County to merge fire services. He relayed that once there was a tentative agreement that the City and County agreed would work for both parties, they would come back and present it to the Board for discussion and consideration.
county offices closed for thanksgiving
Mr. Cole reported that County Offices would be closed on November 26 and 27, 2020 for the Thanksgiving holidays.
commissioners reports
commissioner shields – district 1
upcoming four corners constituent meeting
Commr. Shields said that he would have his first constituent meeting on Saturday, November 21, 2020 with Four Corners residents; additionally, Commissioner Parks would join him. He also thanked staff and said that he would like to talk to any other Commission District 1 communities.
discussion of mask mandate
Commr. Shields mentioned that during his campaign, the issue of whether the County had considered a mask mandate had come up. He relayed that many stores had signs to wear masks and that people were wearing them. He commented that the Board received a recent email regarding this issue, and said that he wanted to bring this up to see if the Board wanted to entertain it.
Commr. Campione opined that if a business wanted to require it, then that was their prerogative. She relayed that she had no interest in the County policing this.
Commr. Smith thought that it was a personal choice. He mentioned Lake County’s COVID-19 numbers compared to other counties, and he encouraged social distancing.
Commr. Parks relayed that he was generally seeing a good balance in Lake County of trying to encourage businesses to take every measure they could, but not having a mandate. He said that the people he had seen were generally keeping their distance and not going out if they were at risk. He supported maintaining the status on this with what was being done.
Commr. Shields commented that his concern was that if some individuals were not frequenting businesses, the County could possibly make them feel more comfortable. He said that testing could help.
Commr. Campione stated that the County had provided signs and that they had used the template provided by the DOH; additionally, they had been provided to businesses, and the County had resources online where businesses could print the signs. She said that the County had done everything to encourage businesses and to facilitate them doing this. She indicated that a question she previously had was would they have more compliance by requiring something, or by telling people that they should do something while letting businesses address this issue. She opined that if the County required it, they could end up with less compliance than if masks were provided for people to make their own decisions.
Commr. Parks opined that it was about balance and that this was what the County was trying to do.
Commr. Shields recalled that many people had asked him about this and that he had said that he would bring it up.
Commr. Blake expressed appreciation for Commissioner Shields bringing this up, and he agreed that it was a balance issue. He opined that the County mandating this would cross a line that he was not comfortable with.
commissioner parks – district 2
hooks street meeting in clermont
Commr. Parks complimented Mr. Fred Schneider, Public Works
Director, and his staff for doing an excellent job at the Hooks Street meeting
in the City of Clermont on the previous day.
He mentioned the Hooks Street extension project that would go further
east toward CR 455, and that they received good input.
welcoming new commissioners
Commr. Parks welcomed the new Commissioners, and said he knew both of them and that they would both be diligent, intelligent, and would be working hard for the County. He added that they were not afraid to weigh in and ask challenging questions.
commissioner smith – vice chairman and district 3
thanking staff and county manager
Commr. Smith thanked staff and Mr. Cole. He said that he discussed with Mr. Cole that when presenting the fiscal impact on future agendas, budgetary impacts would be included so it was known if it was already approved by the Board.
Mr. Cole stated that currently, the requested action typically said something about the fiscal impact being a certain amount, and what staff was looking to add was that the fiscal impact was a certain amount, if it was an expenditure, and that it was within the FY 2021 budget.
Commr. Smith indicated that this way, the Board would know the expenditure and that it had already been approved by the Board. He said that he did not receive these numbers and that he was unsure if the general public received these numbers either, noting that this was why he had asked for this.
thanking lake county residents
Commr. Smith expressed that he was excited to be here, and he thanked Lake County residents for putting their trust and faith in him. He said that he would do his due diligence and that he would do the best he could. He also stated that he was excited to work with the Board.
COMMISSIONER BLAKE – DISTRICT 5
congratulating new commissioners
Commr. Blake congratulated Commissioner Shields and Commissioner Smith, and said that he looked forward to working with them. He also apologized for not being present at the current meeting, instead attending via Zoom Webinar.
Commr. Parks congratulated Commissioner Blake on his reelection.
commissioner campione – CHAIRMAN AND district 4
thanksgiving and covid-19
Commr. Campione wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving and reminded them that they were in a situation with COVID-19. She noted that these were the times where family members could transmit illnesses among themselves, and she asked everyone to keep distance and do things differently. She hoped that people could get together and see each other with creative ways to stay connected while also being safe.
welcoming new commissioners
Commr. Campione welcomed the new Commissioners and said she looked forward to working with them. She encouraged them to watch the State of the County address and opined that it gave a good perspective of what the County had been working on over the past year, along with items coming up. She stated that they were focused on issues that they campaigned on, and that unexpected issues also came up which they had to find solutions for. She thought that this Board would be great at problem solving, working together and being creative to address items
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 1:04 p.m.
_________________________________
Leslie campione, chairman
ATTEST:
________________________________
GARY J COONEY, CLERK