A regular MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

January 25, 2022

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 9:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chambers, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Sean Parks, Chairman; Kirby Smith, Vice Chairman; Douglas B. Shields; Leslie Campione; and Josh Blake. Others present were: Jennifer Barker, Interim 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 Stephanie Cash, Deputy Clerk.

INVOCATION and pledge

Commr. Parks welcomed everyone to the meeting and said that the meeting was also being streamed online. He said that the invocation would be given by Pastor Brooks Braswell, with First Baptist Church of Umatilla, and that the Pledge of Allegiance would be led by a veteran who was part of County staff. He introduced Mr. Anthony Padilla, Veterans Services Officer in the County’s Office of Veterans Services, who served in the United States (U.S.) Army from 2000 until 2004 in field Artillery where he trained as a Multiple Launch Rocket System (M.L.R.S.) crewmember. He mentioned that Mr. Padilla’s deployments included a NATO peacekeeping mission in Kosovo and Macedonia and a wartime mission to Kuwait and Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.  He commented that Mr. Padilla’s awards included the Army Commendation Medal, Army Achievement Medal, Good Conduct medals, Global War on Terrorism medal, Iraq Campaign medal, and the Kosovo Campaign medal, and he thanked Mr. Padilla for his service to the country and the County.

Pastor Braswell then gave the invocation and Mr. Padilla led the Pledge of Allegiance.

virtual meeting instructions

Mr. Erikk Ross, Director for the Information Technology (IT) Department, explained that the current meeting was being livestreamed on the County website and was also being made available through Zoom Webinar for members of the public who 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 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 webinar via 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 read the person’s name or phone number, unmute the appropriate line, and the speaker would be asked to provide comments. He added that everyone would have three minutes to speak, and after three minutes an alarm would sound to let them know that their time was up. He added that they previously notified the public that comments could be emailed through 5:00 p.m. on the previous day, and those comments were shared with the Board prior to the meeting. He stated that anyone wishing to provide written comments during the meeting could visit www.lakecountyfl.gov/commissionmeeting, noting that comments sent during this meeting would be shared with the Commission after the meeting was concluded.

Agenda update

Commr. Parks indicated that Commissioner Blake was participating in the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting virtually; therefore he would be unable to vote.

Ms. Jennifer Barker, Interim County Manager, requested that Tab 5 be pulled from the consent agenda for discussion. She noted that the resolution for the midyear adjustment was attached to the agenda since it was first published, that Tab 24 was added as an addendum to the consent agenda, and that Tabs 25 and 26 were added as addendums.

Commr. Parks indicated that Senator Alan Hayes, Supervisor of Elections, was in attendance to present Tab 25, and that this would be heard after the minutes approval.

Minutes approval

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the minutes for the BCC meetings of September 7, 2021 (Regular Meeting) and September 14, 2021 (Regular Meeting).

Supervisor of Elections’ and sheriff’s facility location

Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, recalled that the purchase of a piece of property to build a facility for the Supervisor of Elections was discussed at the previous BCC meeting. She showed the property on a map and mentioned that it was under contract for $1 million, adding that there had been an issue with a potential sand skink survey, which could only be done in March or April. She commented that the seller provided an environmental permit for sand skink mitigation that was issued in June 2020 and was valid for a 10-year period, adding that it would be about $17,000. She remarked that the quote for the arsenic removal was $22,606, and that gopher tortoise removal could not be done until right before construction began, adding that it would cost around $75,000. She mentioned that the seller would reduce the purchase price at closing for $22,606, and that he would pay any costs associated with transferring the federal permit for sand skink mitigation to the County, adding that the County would be responsible for the gopher tortoise removal. She asked for authorization to close on the property, which included the early closing discount, and said that if it was closed by February 25, 2022, it would result in an additional discount of about $50,000, noting that the total purchase price would be around $927,000 in addition to closing costs.

Commr. Parks commented that the Supervisor of Elections, representatives from the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO), the Lake County Fair Board of Directors, and staff had a meeting on the previous day to come up with a 25 year plan. He stated that he was in favor of moving forward, opining that this was the best move. He mentioned that the County had discussed if it was feasible to combine the Supervisor of Elections, the LCSO, and the Lake County Fairgrounds on property owned by the County that contained the Lake County Office of Animal Services and the Lake County Landfill, and that it was determined that the County would require another site. He said that the Lake County Fairgrounds had planned up to 80 acres, which would not leave enough room for the LCSO and the Supervisor of Elections. He opined that the LCSO and the Supervisor of Elections could be located on the same property, adding that the LCSO would do an analysis and prepare some long-term plans.

Commr. Campione inquired what the total acreage was on the proposed site for the Supervisor of Elections.

Ms. Marsh stated that it was approximately 13 acres, and she showed the location on a map in relation to the Lake County Landfill property.

Commr. Parks commented that the proposed location was close to the other property.

Commr. Campione asked if the County had inquired about another parcel that was adjacent to the County property.

Ms. Marsh replied that the County had contacted the property owner, and that the price was very high and not realistic for purchasing that property.

Commr. Campione remarked that she was glad that contact had been made with the owner, and that the County had determined that it was not possible.

Commr. Parks commented that every possible solution was explored, but that the County would have to purchase land. He reiterated that the County tried to fit everything into one area, but it was determined that the Lake County Fairgrounds would not be changed to make room for the Supervisor of Elections or the LCSO.

Ms. Barker said that there was a feasibility study for the property out at the Lake County Landfill, and that it would be revised to not include the Supervisor of Elections and the LCSO buildings. She hoped to have the process completed in a few months.

Commr. Campione mentioned that the Supervisor of Elections was leasing a facility currently, and that building a facility would allow the County to avoid those fees.

Mr. Hayes thanked the staff for their diligence in searching for a suitable location for the facility, and he mentioned that the State of Florida Constitution required his office to be located in the County seat, which was the City of Tavares. He pointed out that the contract specified that if the County closed on the current day, it would save $50,500, and that it would cost $500 for each day the closing was postponed.

Ms. Marsh stated that the lease payment for the existing building was $21,400 per month, and that in 2023 it would go down by a small amount because of renovations. She mentioned that the County could save money by terminating the lease and building a new facility.

Mr. Hayes inquired if the lease expired in July 2023.

Ms. Marsh indicated that it could, but that the County had a five year renewal option.

Commr. Parks commented that there would be a new appraisal for the current Lake County Fairgrounds in preparation to sell that property.

Ms. Marsh stated that the County had issued the purchase order for the appraisal, and that it would be ready in about 45 days.

Commr. Parks mentioned that the Lake County Fair Board of Directors had asked about that, as had the City of Eustis.

Ms. Marsh requested a motion to approve the purchase agreement and to move forward with the closing.

Commr. Smith reiterated that all due diligence had been done, noting that the seller had agreed to pay for the arsenic removal, and that if the closing was done soon, he would pay for much of the potential gopher tortoise removal.

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the purchase agreement and to move forward with the closing.

citizen question and comment period

Mr. Andy Colando, a resident of Lake County, expressed concern about the number of cell phone towers, opining that they caused visual pollution. He commented that many of his neighbors had been contacted by tower companies to permit them to put towers on their properties, and he indicated concern that he would have to look at a cell phone tower from his property. He opined that it would cause divisions in communities, and that people would be upset. He proposed that the County issue a moratorium to stop any future cell phone towers, and that it would require the company to inform the local residents and give them an opportunity to address the situation. He asked how he would know if the BCC took action regarding his request, and if Commissioner Blake had received his email from the previous week.

Commr. Campione inquired if the County Attorney could inform the Board about the federal law about this issue, opining that the current Board had not approved many cell phone towers. She mentioned that if the property was in a city, the County would not have any recourse; however, when applications came in, the County had to follow the federal law concerning cell phone towers.

Commr. Parks mentioned that the County could do a presentation at a future BCC meeting on what could be done about cell phone towers.

Mr. Colando mentioned that there was a provision from the previous year that would allow a cell phone tower to be built without a variance or other allowance.

Commr. Parks commented that the County could schedule time at a future BCC meeting to go into more detail on what could be done, and he indicated that Mr. Colando would be notified.

Ms. Marsh stated that under the 1996 Federal Telecommunications Act, there was limited ability to regulate cell phone towers, and that they could not be effectively prohibited. She said that they had certain radiuses they were required to be from each other, and that limited where they could locate them to address deficiencies in a specific area. She mentioned that Lake County’s code could be updated, and that staff could look at that moving forward. She commented that the last time the Board denied a cell phone tower, there a federal suit in which the County lost, noting that those cases went to federal court. She said that she could give an update at a future BCC meeting with more detail.

Commr. Parks proposed that at the first BCC meeting of the following month, this issue would be on the agenda, and that staff would explore what could be done.

Commr. Campione commented that it had been a long time since those provisions had been reviewed, opining that there could be setbacks initiated without going against the federal provisions that prohibited the County from disallowing them. She added that the current County code could be reviewed with the understanding that it could not be prohibited.

Commr. Blake remarked that he had received the email from Mr. Colando, and that the answer had already been discussed in the current meeting. He mentioned that the reason there was a good cell phone signal was because someone else had to deal with a cell phone tower, adding that there was one within view of his neighborhood. He commented that it was something that one had to deal with living in modern society, but that he understood and appreciated Mr. Colando’s concern.

Tab 2 Proclamation 2022-6 Animal shelter partner of the year

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Proclamation 2022-6 naming The Pixel Fund as the Lake County Animal Shelter’s Community Partner of the Year.

Commr. Campione read and presented Proclamation 2022-6 to the representative of The Pixel Fund.

Commr. Parks expressed appreciation for their work.

CLERK OF the Circuit COURT and comptroller’s CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller’s Consent Agenda, Items 1 through 4, as follows:

List of Warrants

Notice is hereby provided 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 Eustis Annexation Ordinances and Corresponding Ordinances

Notice is hereby provided of having received the following items from the City of Eustis: Annexation Ordinance 21-34, corresponding Future Land Use Ordinance 21-35, and corresponding Design District Designation Ordinance 21-36; Annexation Ordinance 21-37, corresponding Future Land Use Ordinance 21-38, and corresponding Design District Designation Ordinance 21-39.

Lake County District School Board Comprehensive Annual Financial Report

Notice is hereby provided of having received the Report 2022-059 – Lake County District School Board Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Federal Single Audit.

St. Johns River Water Management District 2022 Meeting Schedule

Notice is hereby provided of having received the St. Johns River Water Management District Governing Board’s 2022 meeting schedule.

COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the Consent Agenda, Tabs 4 through 12, with the addition of Tab 24, and pulling Tab 5 to the regular agenda, as follows:

PROCLAMATIONs

Recommend approval of Proclamation 2022-1 designating January 23-29, 2022 as Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists Week in Lake County.

COUNTY ATTORNEY

Recommend approval to conduct a Closed Session of the Board of County Commissioners to be held on February 8, 2022, to discuss Lake County Voices of Reason, Inc. vs. Lake County, which is pending in the Circuit Court of the Fifth Judicial Circuit in and for Lake County, Florida, Case No. 2020-CA-000799.

Recommend approval of a Partial Release of Easement contingent upon County Manager and County Attorney review and approval. There is no fiscal impact. Commission District 3.

ECONOMIC GROWTH

Recommend approval of funding to the United Arts of Central Florida on behalf of the Lake County Arts and Cultural Alliance for the Arts & Economic Prosperity 6 (AEP6) research study. The fiscal impact is not to exceed $1,800 (expenditure – Lake County Arts and Cultural Alliance funding).

PUBLIC SAFETY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

Fire Rescue

Recommend approval of the sale of ten Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) units to the City of Minneola. The fiscal impact is $13,333.33 (revenue).

PUBLIC SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Public Works

Recommend approval of a Development Agreement with Galvin Land Services, LLC for improvements to CR 437 in Sorrento. The fiscal impact is $741,975.80 from Northeast Wekiva Transportation Benefit District, as impact fee credits. Commission District 4.

Recommend adoption of Resolution 2022-8 to advertise a public hearing to vacate platted rights of way located east of US 27 and south of Eagles Nest Road. The closest municipality is Fruitland Park. The fiscal impact is $2,295 (revenue-vacation application fee) and is within the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget. Commission District 5.

Recommend adoption of Unanticipated Revenue Resolution 2022-9 to receive funds from the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services for the Lake County Mosquito Control Program to be used for domestic mosquito control services, including vector-borne disease surveillance, prevention, and response. The fiscal impact is $13,559 (revenue/expenditure - 100 percent grant funded).

Recommend approval to accept the final plat for Sanctuary Phase 1B and all areas dedicated to the public as shown on the Sanctuary Phase 1B final plat, located south of Clermont. The fiscal impact is $1,551 (revenue - final plat application fee). Commission District 1.

tab 5: Lake County Canvassing board

Ms. Marsh stated that since elections were coming up in 2022, the County was required to appoint a member of the BCC to the Lake County Canvassing Board, which went over returns and issues as they came up during elections. She commented that it was typically the Chairman of the Board; however, because the Chairman was up for election, he could not serve on the Lake County Canvassing Board for the 2022 session. She said that there needed to be a primary and an alternate appointed, and that the training sessions and various dates would be added to the calendars of those Board members, adding that Commissioner Campione also was not eligible to serve.

Commr. Smith volunteered to be the primary.

Ms. Marsh mentioned that an alternate was needed in the event that there was a conflict.

Commr. Blake volunteered to be the alternate.

On a motion by Commr. Shields, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board appointed Commissioner Smith as the primary and Commissioner Blake as the alternate County Commissioner to serve on the Lake County Canvassing Board for the 2022 election cycle.

presentation on economic development

Ms. Barker said that the presentation of economic development would be given by Mr. Kevin Sheilley, President and CEO of the Ocala/Marion County Chamber & Economic Partnership (CEP), and that he would be speaking on economic development opportunities in Lake County.

Mr. Ben Pauluhn, President and Owner of Optimus Energy Solutions, mentioned that he had been the chairman of the school board for Faith Lutheran School in the City of Eustis, and that he had been involved with the Lake 100 which was an organization dedicated to Lake County’s economic development. He commented that over the previous two years, the Lake 100 had enjoyed many foundational successes working with Cities, with the County, and with private businesses which numbered over 110 member presidents and decision makers with businesses located in Lake County. He mentioned that the Lake 100 had secured $20 million in funding for the Lake County trail system over the last year and had implemented the Coalition of Housing and Economic Development for affordable, workforce, and middle income housing for this area. He said that they had formed effective partnerships for the benefit of communities, quality of life, and business growth in this area. He stated that over the previous two years, a subset of the Lake 100 had researched economic development models throughout the southeast, and that they had found the Ocala CEP. He introduced Mr. Sheilley as a professional in this organization, adding that there was alignment between what they were trying to achieve for businesses and citizens in Lake County and the Ocala CEP.

Mr. Sheilley showed a presentation which stated that the Lake Economic Area Development (LEAD) partnership was a not-for-profit public/private partnership focused on economic development in Lake County, and that the financial support would come from Lake County. He mentioned that the board would be composed of representatives from Lake County businesses, and that the goal was to generate jobs and investment in Lake County. He stated that LEAD would contract with the Ocala CEP to provide staffing and support, such as finance and IT, and that staff would be hired to work in and for Lake County. He commented they would recruit new primary employers within the distribution, manufacturing, and back office operations industries, adding that there were many opportunities in Lake County because of the close proximity to the City of Orlando. He mentioned that assisting and growing the existing business base would retain and create employment opportunities, and that they would focus on training opportunities and working with plant managers. He said that they wanted to bring in new employers, help existing employers be successful, and encourage people to start their own businesses, adding that they used programs from the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, which was the largest funder of entrepreneurship in the world. He remarked that the Ocala CEP had accountability and transparency in their agreement with Marion County and the City of Ocala that outlined measurable objectives, and that they reported every month on the activities that could lead to jobs and investment. He stated that LEAD would do the same thing, and that Lake County would receive monthly data detailing what the County was receiving for their funding, noting that Marion County had received a 32 to 1 return on investment (ROI) with the Ocala CEP.

Commr. Smith asked if the Cities were involved with this program.

Mr. Pauluhn replied that they had over $200,000 in funding from private businesses and Cities in Lake County.

Ms. Mandy Wettstein, with the Leesburg Area Chamber of Commerce, remarked that the Cities of Groveland, Leesburg, Tavares, Umatilla, and the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills were committed, adding that the City of Eustis was working on their commitment. She mentioned that they had begun negotiations with the Cities of Clermont and Mount Dora, and that they had plans to include the City of Fruitland Park and the Town of Lady Lake.

Commr. Campione inquired if the commitment was based on a per capita amount.

Ms. Wettstein replied that it was based on $2 per person per population, and that some Cities were doing more and some were doing less, but that the average was about $2.

Commr. Campione noted that one of the slides had mentioned manufacturing and had specified prepared foods.

Mr. Sheilley explained that industries that did well during an economic downturn included prepared foods.

Commr. Campione commented that when the County had attempted to recruit businesses, they had looked at the workforce within a certain radius of a possible location, and that much of the manufacturing workforce was in Marion County. She mentioned that the County had partnered with Lake Technical College (Lake Tech) and other education partners for workforce training, and she asked how his organization could help the County with workforce issues.

Mr. Sheilley replied that in the Ocala CEP, there were team members focused on partnerships for workforce development, and that they started with seventh graders in the Marion County public schools. He mentioned that they also partnered with Marion Technical College and the College of Central Florida, and that they ensured that they were aligning those programs with CareerSource Florida. He commented that it would be up to the County what role LEAD would take in workforce training in Lake County.

Commr. Campione mentioned that the County’s economic team and the Office of Elevate Lake had close relationships with the area’s education partners, and that there would have to be a decision made on what role LEAD would take going forward. She wondered if the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation could be used to do outreach to young people to encourage business-minded students.

Mr. Sheilley commented that Marion County had a youth business planning competition with over $15,000 in prizes, noting that there was a number of high school students who had ongoing businesses. He said that there was an opportunity to partner, and that this program would be driven by leadership in Lake County.

Commr. Parks agreed that education and training were important for economic prosperity and growth, and that LEAD could help in that area. He mentioned that Lake County had limited locations for job creation and job centers, and that Lake County wanted the best use for designated lands, such as Wellness Way and the Wolf Branch Innovation District. He asked how LEAD could supplement those types of projects.

Mr. Sheilley commented that the Ocala CEP had been preparing sites in Marion County, and that LEAD could look at areas that were already established for this type of development and then let the private developers and private investors contribute to the economic growth of Lake County. He mentioned that they could leverage relationships that they had in Marion County to benefit Lake County, adding that his team had started looking for sites that were ready to go and buildings that were available.

Commr. Shields inquired how Marion County was handling workforce housing.

Mr. Sheilley replied that the Ocala CEP, in conjunction with Marion County and the City of Ocala, worked together on housing overall, and that there was a shortage of housing in Marion County. He commented that they looked at what housing was available, and that they reached out to developers. He mentioned that they partnered with the County and the City to create incentive zones for workforce housing that could help developers build in areas that were close to employment centers, and that they could help find ways to make that housing affordable.

Commr. Campione commented that finding appropriate locations in Lake County was an issue, and she hoped that it could be addressed in ongoing discussions with them and the Cities.

Mr. Sheilley said that in a public/private partnership, all entities would be working together, and that when done right, it could make good things happen.

Commr. Campione said that she was interested in the measurable activities which they used to determine if their investment was impacting the community in a positive way and enhancing the tax roll, adding that there had been companies that had overlooked Lake County because of the approval processes.

Mr. Sheilley commented that they referred to it as being an ROI, noting that the Marion County budget continued growing while keeping millage rates low. He said that every time Ocala CEP brought another business into the area, it would bring in an equivalent of 500 homes, and that it had a large impact for that investment. He mentioned that Marion County and Lake County had large retirement communities, and that these investments could help keep their property taxes and utility rates low. He reiterated that as those investments came in, the value would be seen.

Commr. Shields inquired if there needed to be a certain number of municipalities participating for there to be consistency.

Mr. Sheilley replied that they would be focused from a standpoint of growing Lake County, and that they wanted the Cities engaged so they could benefit. He said that if a City was not engaged, it would not benefit them as much as others, and that any improvement to Lake County as a whole would benefit all the municipalities, noting that currently, the municipalities were responding positively.

Commr. Smith commented that he was favorable to a program that was objective based and had targets the employees were focused on completing every year, as they would in a private business. He mentioned that if it worked well, LEAD could continue, and if it did not, they could adjust.

Mr. Sheilley said that if LEAD did not provide that ROI, then the County would not have to fund it. He mentioned that it would take time to see a return, but because it was an investment, the County should expect a return.

Commr. Campione relayed that it would be good to have the support of the City of Minneola because of its location near the interchange, noting that there was property there for job creation. She specified that she wanted LEAD to generate high-wage jobs in Lake County, and that she wanted to protect the character of Lake County. She commented that there were diverse demographics in different parts of the county, which should be incorporated in the strategy. She mentioned that the County had been part of the Orlando Economic Partnership, but had not received a good ROI. She inquired what his input was on those types of relationships, and if they should be continued.

Mr. Sheilly replied that partnerships were important, but that the County should look at if there was an ROI or if there was a way to increase the return by investing somewhere else. He commented that LEAD would set goals and objectives, including job goals, investment goals, and wage goals, adding that the Ocala CEP was focused on growing higher wage jobs because that allowed everyone to be more successful.

Commr. Campione relayed her understanding that a site selector would go through the State of Florida who would then send them out to appropriate locations, and she asked if LEAD would be that point agency or if the County economic department would do that.

Mr. Sheilly replied that Marion County did not have an economic department and that Ocala CEP did all of that for them. He encouraged the Board to consider LEAD as the economic department for Lake County, and that in Marion County, Ocala CEP had directly impacted the announced creation of 9,500 jobs and $1.2 billion in capital investment which did not originate with the State. He commented that those projects all originated on efforts by the Ocala CEP using site selection consultants, marketing, and brokers, and that it was imperative to build their own structure.

Commr. Smith asked how quickly they could start, and what the timeframe was.

Mr. Sheilly commented that there was a timeline that started in February 2022, and that if they had the support of the Board, it would be easier to engage the private sector. He mentioned that in March 2022 they would create a strategic plan and assign staffing, adding that they could be ready to work in August 2022.

Commr. Blake expressed concern about the speed of the timeframe, and he suggested that the Board could take time to consider this decision. He opined that the Orlando Economic Partnership did not bring in a good ROI, and that he was in favor of outsourcing many things and exploring the benefits of outsourcing; however, he commented that he did not want to outsource the County’s economic development to the City of Ocala. He indicated that there were many differences between Marion County and Lake County, and that he wanted more time to make this decision.

Commr. Parks commented that he appreciated what the Office of Elevate Lake staff did for the County, and that this could add to what they were doing, adding that there were things the Office of Elevate Lake could not do. He opined that working with the Cities would require a tremendous effort from staff to supplement what LEAD could do, and that some roles could change.

Mr. Sheilly said that the County would not be outsourcing economic development to the City of Ocala, and that LEAD would be its own entity. He mentioned that it would not be any different than any other business arrangement the County had, and that it was a local non-profit driven by local individuals and funded locally, opining that they could help the County be successful and productive.

Commr. Campione commented that the Ocala CEP Board of Directors included private sector individuals, appointed education partners, and a County administrator, opining that it closely resembled the Orlando Economic Partnership. She said that for this type of investment, she would want to see local elected officials or administrators who were responsible to the elected officials involved in order to justify spending public funds on this investment.

Mr. Sheilly opined that it would be a good place for the County Manager to serve who would be responsible to the elected officials, and he commented that Ocala CEP had moved from being publicly funded to only receiving 18 percent in public funds, which was the reason it was important to include private business leaders.

Commr. Campione suggested that the Economic Development Department could work with LEAD if the Board chose to go in that direction, noting that private organizations could recruit while public entities could not. She mentioned that the County had success with education partners, opining that it would be enhanced by having this partnership.

Commr. Parks mentioned that having representatives from the business community would help recruit others, reiterating that they could do some things that the County could not.

Commr. Campione commented that it would be good to have access to private capital to help with the building needs for manufacturing and other targeted industries. She opined that there was good potential, and that the Board should take some time to integrate County staff.

Commr. Blake inquired who was on the board for LEAD.

Mr. Pauluhn replied that LEAD was formed as a legal entity, and that it was currently forming its board of directors. He mentioned that there were several of them committed to serving in that role, such as himself, Ms. Wettstein, Mr. Dan Robuck III, Mr. Abel Biri, and other representatives of local businesses, adding that the County would also have a representative on the board of directors. He commented that there would also be private sector investors who were coming from the Lake 100 initiatives, and that there were many things an economic development entity could do that the Office of Elevate Lake could not. He noted that it engaged private sector funding, and opined that it could help create a virtual cycle of business development and quality of life, which was the main driver.

Commr. Parks opined that private businesses would not invest funds into it if there was not some gain for their business.

Mr. Pauluhn agreed that some of the businesses who had already committed $25,000 or $50,000 would not invest unless they could receive a return on that.

Ms. Wettstein commented that an executive board had been formed for LEAD only because they needed to complete the corporate paperwork, adding that the board had not been completely formed yet because they were working on the private sector funding. She mentioned that the board would be up to 25 people, and reiterated that the present board had been formed only for the corporate paperwork.

Commr. Blake mentioned that he was not opposed to it, but that he would like more time to think about it. He proposed that the Board postpone a decision on this item for two weeks.

Mr. Pauluhn commented that they were not asking for a decision or a vote from the Board on that current day, and that the presentation was for informational purposes and an opportunity to ask questions. He said that they could come back in two weeks, opining that they could reach an agreement that made sense for all parties.

Commr. Parks commented that in two weeks LEAD could go more in depth with the structure of the board and a way to include the Office of Elevate Lake.

Mr. Pauluhn remarked that LEAD would send out a written timeline, names of those willing to serve, and an accountability matrix, adding that those items would be delivered in advance of any specific request.

Commr. Shields opined that there was some consensus that could help LEAD in their discussions with the Cities.

Commr. Parks thought that it was a good idea, and said that he would respect any vetting that needed to be done before it was signed. He expressed appreciation for what LEAD was doing, and he opined that it would take the County to the next level.

Commr. Smith asked if LEAD would meet with Commissioners individually, and Mr. Pauluhn indicated that they would.

Commr. Campione suggested that the County could provide a workshop with the executive board of LEAD.

Mr. Pauluhn replied that whatever gave LEAD the best outcome would be good, opining that the community needed this organization.

Commr. Parks suggested that it could be heard at the strategies workshop.

Ms. Barker commented that the strategies workshop was scheduled for February 15, 2022.

Commr. Campione mentioned that the Board could use the upcoming two weeks to meet with LEAD individually to have questions answered, and that they could discuss it at the February 1, 2022 BCC meeting.

Ms. Barker proposed that the Board work with LEAD individually, and that staff could gather any requested information to present at the strategies workshop with open discussion. She said that the Board could give the staff consensus and suggest how to develop the budget.

Commr. Campione commented that it would fit into the strategies discussion.

Ms. Barker said that depending on what information the Board would require for that meeting, the staff would need time to gather and present that information.

Mr. Pauluhn opined that information sharing and individual questions were important, and mentioned that there had been two years of preparation. He said that questions could be answered from the perspective of what had already been done with the Ocala CEP for 10 years and what the business community had done on its own for the previous two years with creating a foundation to build on.

Commr. Smith expressed appreciation for this, and opined that it was a good opportunity for Lake County, adding that he had some questions that he would like to discuss with them. He opined that this would not be like outsourcing to the City of Ocala because there would be Lake County businesses and stakeholders involved, and that the Office of Elevate Lake could partner with LEAD.

recess and reassembly

The Chairman called a recess at 10:34 a.m. for 10 minutes.

Presentation on the Tourist Development Council meeting

Commr. Parks commented that there had been a joint workshop with the BCC and the Tourist Development Council (TDC) on September 29, 2022, and that this was the first formal discussion the Board had to follow up on some items. He mentioned that the Board would cooperate with the TDC on a facilities plan, and that there would be some direction provided.

Mr. Steven Clenney, Director for the Office of Visit Lake, presented the tourism data, budget, future planning information, and the tourist development tax (TDT) strategy as it related to capital project development. He said that destination organizations, such as the Office of Visit Lake, attracted visitors to their communities, and that visitors spent millions of dollars, generating tax revenue, putting people to work, and helping our economy recover. He commented that this was a vital driver of the visitor economy and supporter of the tourism sector in Lake County, noting that destination organizations created a ripple effect that made their communities more vibrant, dynamic, diverse, and fun places to work, visit, and live. He reported that according to Visit Florida’s 2019 Economic Impact of Tourism report, Lake County’s total visitor spending was $903.4 million, 9.5 percent of Lake County jobs were supported by visitor spending, tourism generated $84.6 million in state and local taxes, and each of the 175,153 households in Lake County paid $483 less in state and local taxes as a result of taxes generated by tourist spending. He stated that the first three percent of the TDT could be used for any purpose authorized under Section 125.104 of the Florida Statutes, and that the fourth percent could only be used to pay debt service on bonds issued to finance construction, reconstruction, or renovation of professional sports franchise facilities, spring training facilities, or convention centers, adding that it could also be used to promote and advertise tourism in the state, nationally or internationally. He remarked that the fifth percent which was not currently levied could only be used to pay debt service on bonds issued to finance construction, reconstruction, or renovation of a professional sports franchise facility or a spring training facility, adding that it could also be used to promote and advertise tourism in the state, nationally or internationally. He presented a graph showing that the total TDT revenues collected by the Office of Visit Lake and Lake County for fiscal year (FY) 2021 was about $3.8 million, and that in FY 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic shut-downs were responsible for the lowest year on record at $2.7 million, adding that projections of FY 2022 through 2026 were based off of a three percent increase per year. He commented that in February 2021, the Tax Collector started receiving collections from online platforms, such as Airbnb and VRBO, which made a significant increase in TDT revenues. He mentioned that there was no way to forecast that impact without understanding that market better, and that one year’s worth of collection data and other determining factors on travel did not offer a clear understanding of the forecast and impact. He commented that the average of each TDT-generated cent ranged from $678,000 to $1.1 million with a mean value of $910,000. He displayed a chart reflecting the historic budget allocation for the Office of Visit Lake operations and where the funds were traditionally spent, which included an average of the FY 2018 to FY 2020 actual expenses as well as the FY 2021 adopted budget and the FY 2022 proposed budget. He stated that personal services included staff and salaries, and that capital expenses were through the TDT capital projects program. He mentioned that the operations expenses included the following: different association membership fees; travel, per diem, and registration fees for conferences and industry tradeshows for business development; expenses for hosting tourism roundtable events and stakeholder seminars; and software licenses and subscriptions for the office. He commented that items under destination marketing included the following: the contract with Madden Media which started in May 2021; the contract with the Greater Orlando Sports Commission; in-house advertising within the Office of Visit Lake; local support programs, such as the TDC event sponsorship program or the co-op marketing grant program that went directly to the community partners and local tourism stakeholders; promotional items; research; and destination marketing efforts. He then proposed some different funding allocation options to consider, noting that in previous years, historic budgets were based off the needs of those years and any previous planning that had been done, and that as projects and different opportunities came they were able to take advantage of those funds. He said that one option was the status quo, which was based on the historic budget allocation, and that it would be more of a destination marketing focused effort. He mentioned that the first cent would be used for personnel and operating expenses, the second cent would be used for capital funding, and the third and fourth cents would be used for destination marketing. He commented that there would be no changes within the destination marketing, and that it would have a dedicated source for capital funding in this option. He stated that option two was a capital development focused strategy which allocated the first cent to personnel and operations, the second and third cents would go towards capital development projects, and the fourth cent would go towards destination marketing as per the State statutes. He commented that if this option was elected by the Board, the capital development budget would range from $1.3 million to $2.2 million; however, he cautioned that current destination marketing programming would be negatively impacted, resulting in program reductions that would affect marketing efforts, events sponsorships, co-op marketing grant programs, and other marketing efforts that went directly to community partners. He mentioned that option three was a balanced approach that levied the fifth cent, noting that currently, the fifth cent was not levied. He stated that the balanced approach would use all five cents in which the first cent would go to personnel and operating costs, the second and third cents would go towards the capital expenses and capital projects, and the fourth and fifth cents would go towards destination marketing. He commented that the tourism marketing program would stay intact while supporting all local partners, and that it would provide from $1.3 million to $2.2 million in potential capital project development funding, reiterating that the fifth cent was currently not leveed. He said that historically, the Office of Visit Lake and the tourism capital project strategy investment had focused on niche sports capital projects, such as beach volleyball and disc golf, and on projects submitted through the TDC capital project funding program. He mentioned that the Hickory Point Beach Fieldhouse with beach volleyball at Hickory Point Park was approved in 2014 and continued to produce good returns, such as national and international tournaments and events for beach volleyball through the partnership with the Florida Region of USA Volleyball. He reported that the Lake County disc golf course had hosted the amateur world championships as part of the recent events hosted in the Cities of Orlando and Clermont, noting that there were six different courses across Lake County. He commented that the TDC capital project program, which was approved by the BCC in December 2012, had been in a moratorium due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the unknown TDT collections, and that it was reopened at the previous TDC meeting, adding that applications would be due February 25, 2022 and would be reviewed at the April 11, 2022 TDC meeting. He stated that capital projects funded through the TDC capital project funding program included the following: the Venetian Gardens boardwalk and dock; the Clermont Waterfront Park Boat Ramp and Amenities; Victory Pointe in the City of Clermont; the Wooton Park Expansion West; Legends Way Ballfields Scoreboard Replacements; improvements at the Hickory Point Park boat docks; and the Clermont Rowing Boathouse. He commented that the goal of tourism was to grow the overall visitation and to increase visitor impact and economic impact to Lake County communities. He said that some thoughts for consideration included the following questions: what type of visitor would Lake County want to attract to accomplish this; what type of visitor matched what the community had to offer in the areas of accommodations, attractions, and activities; which type of capital development projects would produce the greatest ROI in terms of tourist development and increased economic impact, such as sports facilities, trails, lakes and waterway restoration and preservation; how does the County balance the destination marketing efforts and attract visitors to the destination as well as develop and maintain capital projects to increase total visitation; how much should the County spend on destination marketing programs versus capital development; who was the competition and what was Lake County’s advantage; what was the competitive advantage and differentiator; what was missing in order to compete; what did the future of tourism look like with COVID-19 impacts and other industry disruptions; and how could the County build a resilient strategy to support the local tourism industry and community. He mentioned that Madden Media and their partners Destination Analysts performed a destination perception and awareness study in the prior fall, and that the key findings included the following: visitors preferred lodging in three star hotels or better and vacation rentals; the length of stay of three to four days implied visitors were looking for a comfortable experience over a particularly budget-conscious one; people associated Lake County with outdoor assets and water activities such as fishing, swimming, and boating; and using sports, such as events and training, attracted visitors and inspired extended or future travel to Lake County. He likened sports events and tournaments to a business trip, and he asked how the County could convince them to stay longer and come back another time. He then presented a graph showing a visitor to resident ratio for Lake County points of interest, and mentioned that the information was provided by Zartico and UberMedia using cell phone geolocation data, adding that this was from the prior three years aggregate to get the best sample size possible to illustrate what had happened over the last couple of years. He said that a visitor was defined as a person that had departed more than 30 miles from their known work or home location, and that a resident was less than 30 miles away. He observed that about a third of the attendees were visitors compared to residents in the attractions category, which included Showcase of Citrus, Citrus Tower, Lakeridge Winery, Alexander Springs, and Lake Louisa State Park. He mentioned that the events category included event host locations, such as Donnelly Park in the City of Mount Dora, the Lake County Fairgrounds, Ski Beach and the Venetian Center in the City of Leesburg, Victory Pointe in the City of Clermont, and Wooton Park in the City of Tavares, and that 76 percent of the attendees were residents compared to 24 percent visitors. He said that the parks and trails category consisted of passive recreation parks, such as the Clermont Boat Ramp, Green Mountain Scenic Overlook, Grantham Point in the City of Mount Dora, and the Mount Dora Lighthouse, and that 75 percent of the attendees were residents and 25 percent were visitors. He stated that the sports parks were active recreation parks, such as Hickory Point, Legends Way Ballfields, the Big House, and the Sleepy Hollow Sports Complex, and that 50 percent of the attendees were residents and 50 percent were visitors using those amenities. He said that based on the information from Madden Media and past visitor behavior studies, the greatest ROI in terms of tourist development and increased economic impact came from the following types of projects in this order based on the potential tourism and visitor impact and the potential future mix of resident use: sports facilities; event facilities; trails; and lake and waterway restoration and preservation. He commented that the reason lake and waterway restoration projects were listed was because it had an eligible use of TDT funds, and that it impacted many things that involved tourism industry in Lake County. He remarked that the items that included lakes, such as triathlons, fishing tournaments, boat and nature tours, seaplane tours, the different lakeside parks, and waterfront restaurants and accommodations, were all impacted by the health of these waterways. He mentioned that as seen in the visitor insights research, the lakes and waterways were the main draw for visitors to come to the area, and that it was important to keep the lakes and waterways healthy to sustain the tourism industry in Lake County. He commented that the FY 2022 approved Infrastructure Sales Tax projects with potential tourism impacts included the regional sports complexes, such as South Lake Regional Park, East Lake Sports and Community Complex, and Central Lake Regional Park, as well as trails. He stated that based on the potential budgets, the Board had $3 million in capital reserves and the potential to dedicate up to two cents for capital to fund tourism-oriented sales tax projects, and that capital reserves could be replenished using the funds dedicated to capital development in the following years. He mentioned that for projects and budgeting in FY 2022 and FY 2023, the capital budget of $3 million was currently in the budget, and that there would be no volatility or concerns if it was dedicated to these purposes. He commented that there were dedicated tourism uses in the South Lake Regional Park contract that Lake County had with the City of Groveland that had outlined tourism uses for six events annually. He remarked that spending the $3 million in capital reserves towards the South Lake Regional Park or any of the other projects would make available the $3 million in sales tax funds over two fiscal years that could be utilized to advance other projects like trail studies that may not be eligible under TDT statutes. He mentioned that if the Board selected these options, staff could engage a consultant to develop a strategic plan to determine direction and potential opportunities utilizing approved funding allocation with the goals to identify potential opportunities for the greatest ROI of tourist development funds, and to identify projects with the greatest economic impact. He commented that the strategic plan could take up to two years, which would allow time to replenish the capital reserves back to original levels and would also allow for a better understanding of new TDT revenue sources, such as Airbnb and Vrbo online platforms. He hoped that it would allow for the tourism industry to stabilize after COVID-19, and that the Board could then have a completed tourist development strategic plan with multiple trail projects entering into the right of way or construction phase of development that those accumulated funds could be utilized for. He said that this strategy could be aided by eliminating the capital projects grant program or by reducing the amount of funds available for the program, noting that a reduction in funds would also necessitate adjustments to the TDC capital funding program, which came directly from the $3 million capital reserve account. He mentioned that applications were currently open for the next cycle, and that they could be reviewed at the April 2022 TDC meeting and approved at the May 2022 BCC meeting. He said that the preferred TDT funding allocation was the status quo with a destination marketing focus, a capital development focused strategy, a balanced approach with levying the fifth cent, usage of the capital reserve account as proposed with the different sales tax capital projects, and the strategic plan development.

Commr. Parks thanked Mr. Clenney for the presentation, and reiterated that it was a review of the September 29, 2021 BCC and TDC meeting. He recalled that it had been determined that the status quo would not work, and that the Board had discussed using more of the four percent for capital. He mentioned that he liked Mr. Clenney’s ideas about the strategic plan, opining that it would be important to do.

Commr. Shields mentioned that the Board was constrained with using TDC funds until they received $10 million in revenue, noting that it was State law. He opined that Lake County did not have the inventory to get to $10 million at four percent, and that if colleges traveled to the Clermont Rowing Boathouse, they would have no place to stay. He wondered if the Board should encourage more Airbnb rentals, and opined that visitors were constrained on places to stay when they came for sporting events near venues. He thought it would be good have a dormitory near the Clermont Rowing Boathouse, and that participants could be within walking distance of downtown where they could then purchase food.

Commr. Campione commented that the ESPN Wide World of Sports Complex had built-in accommodations, and that it was like having a dormitory. She opined that the National Training Center did not have anything like that.

Commr. Smith mentioned that the more Lake County promoted and supported tourism, the more likely it was that the private sector would step in and build a hotel. He said that there had to be people coming in before the private sector would build something.

Commr. Shields opined that the County could put incentives in place.

Commr. Parks commented that there were sites around the South Lake Regional Park that could be hotel sites, and opined that there was interest.

Commr. Shields mentioned that the Coast to Coast bicycle trail could bring in many people who would need places to stay.

Commr. Campione inquired if the Board had talked about hotel and motel incentives in prior BCC meetings, and she wondered if it was worth exploring options from site selectors that looked for hotel sites. She mentioned that water and sewer impact fee waivers would be a good incentive, and that Cities could offer that, opining that the County could partner with the Cities. She commented that this was an ongoing issue that she had heard for years, opining that some incentives could help.

Commr. Smith inquired what the definition of destination marketing was, and what it did. He also asked if there was any data on how the outsourced marketing was doing, adding that he did not know what the objectives were and how they were performing.

Commr. Shields opined that destination marketing was general tourism, and that was there was also sports marketing.

Mr. Clenney explained that it was all within the same destination marketing focused approach, which was 50 percent of their total budget, and that it included all sports, leisure, and activity that go to sell the destination. He said that it could be likened to a sales office, and that general marketing was the overall campaign. He mentioned that the sports marketing was a direct business to business type approach working with events rights holders, national governing bodies, and event organizers to hold their events in Lake County, which included different bid fees and options. He commented that with the waterskiing championship, there were multiple locations bidding to host that opportunity, and that Lake County bid for that event and was selected. He said that the County worked with the Greater Orlando Sports Commission and local partners as they bid on events, and that the efforts were intended to bring a visitor back to Lake County through hosting events or a leisure campaign to garner some interest. He mentioned that local support programs, incentive programs, grants, and events sponsorships went to local event organizers to offset many of the event organizers’ operational costs, adding that the TDC reviewed the event sponsorship programs which were based on hotel room nights. He said that the ROI was based on what the County received in terms of the total visitor money spent, and that the sales tax and TDT would be received.

Commr. Smith reiterated that he would like to know what the outsourced marketing company was doing and how much the County was spending on them.

Commr. Campione commented that it would help to see the amount that was paid for a bid for a sports event, and that there was information about that at a prior workshop that showed how much went to the outsourced marketing company. She mentioned that they had measurable items that showed how their marketing resulted in people coming to Lake County, and that there was data that could help show how it came together. She asked why each cent had to be allocated in terms of one cent, noting that the first three could be for anything that was in the statute, and she wondered if it could be split.

Ms. Barker replied that it could be split.

Commr. Campione commented that the personnel costs would not need to be estimated because the fixed costs were going to remain the same, and that the extra funds that went towards the high end of that category could go towards capital without using the funding for destination marketing; furthermore, if there were extra funds left from destination marketing, it could be moved over to capital.

Ms. Barker commented that the Board could do that, and that since the County was now receiving revenue from Airbnb, there could be a large increase in revenue reducing the need to spend a full one percent of revenue on personnel. She said that they would know more in a year, noting that it required a full 12 months of generation outside of the COVID-19 pandemic to judge what the trend was going to be.

Commr. Parks mentioned that the Board had wanted to use more funds for capital, but that there was a concern about balancing it with the other needs. He commented that the different options did not adequately accomplish that, and that more data was needed. He said that whatever option was chosen should be phased in, adding that he wanted about 50 percent to be used for capital with the four percent, since there was no need to go to a fifth cent. He mentioned that it could be a few years to accomplish that, but that the County could choose to start at the current BCC meeting.

Commr. Campione commented that the strategic plan could help determine which capital investments would result in a good return.

Commr. Parks agreed and said that the Board should give some direction on the reserve, noting that nothing would be spent in capital until the following year when the strategic plan is done.

Commr. Campione mentioned that applications would be heard by the TDC in April 2022, and she suggested that the process could continue while the strategic plan was being worked on. She inquired if the Board would have to submit proposals to the TDC to use the reserves for the capital projects listed at the current meeting.

Ms. Marsh stated that it would not have to be submitted to the TDC, and that the capital program was for outside agencies to apply. She mentioned that the Board could inform the TDC of what they planned to do but not as an applicant under that program.

Commr. Campione commented that the Board could inform them of the things they were looking at without having to choose one direction, and that in April 2022, the TDC could continue with their process to see if any new applications came in that would be beneficial, such as a sports related event.

Commr. Shields mentioned that $3 million was worth less each day it was not spent.

Commr. Parks thought that it would be fine to wait until April 2022 to see what was provided, but that there were investments that could be made towards sports related facilities, such as the South Lake Regional Park. He commented that facilities located in the center of the County could attract visitors who would come and stay in a Lake County hotel, Airbnb, or VRBO, which would make sales tax funds available for projects, such as the Central Park.

Commr. Smith asked if TDT funds could be used for design purposes.

Ms. Marsh replied that this question was forwarded to the Attorney General’s Office recently, and it was determined that it could not be used for design.

Ms. Barker commented that it was discussed in the City of Tallahassee the previous week.

Commr. Campione mentioned that if there were projects in one category and none for another category, funds could be moved around.

Commr. Smith inquired how the TDC’s $3 million reserve was different than the General Fund reserve, and what the capital reserve was being held back for.

Ms. Barker replied that this was a separate fund from their operational reserve.

Mr. Clenney commented that the last time money was spent from the reserve was in 2019 for the Waterfront Park boat ramp in the City of Clermont and the Venetian Gardens boardwalk and docks, noting that it was about $1.3 million, which was immediately replenished with TDT funds. He mentioned that the capital projects funding program with that application cycle came directly out of the capital reserves, and that as those projects were approved by the TDC and by the BCC, those funds were allocated directly and did not impact direct budgets for personnel, operations, and marketing.

Commr. Smith asked if that money could be used on projects that had already been designed, and Mr. Clenney indicated that it could. Commissioner Smith then mentioned that those funds could then be used for projects, such as South Lake Regional Park, Central Park, or trails that were already designed.

Commr. Campione commented that those funds could be used for any of the projects on the presentation list, and that a list could be provided to the Board to show possible projects while allowing other applications to come in that should be processed.

Mr. Clenney mentioned that applications would be due February 25, 2022, and that by April 2022, staff would know if there were any applications.

Commr. Campione remarked that if there were no applications, the Board could make recommendations in March 2022, adding that the TDC could be made aware of the recommendations of the Board and comment on them.

Commr. Parks opined that the TDC was aware of the projects listed on the presentation, and that the $3 million reserve could be replenished with sales tax. He commented that these projects were discussed at the September 29, 2021 BCC meeting, adding that the input of the TDC was valued.

Ms. Barker mentioned that this was just what was in the reserve, and that it did not take into account any new revenue generated and allocated towards capital projects. She said that there would still be additional funding annually with new revenue.

Commr. Parks commented that applications could be received every year, and that there could be more revenue received from the Airbnb and Vrbo tax. He opined that the Board did not have to agree to one of the options presented, but that there was consensus that more could be done with capital than was currently being done as well as the strategic plan.

Commr. Campione opined that the numbers could be changed to percentages, and that the marketing could have the same funds while moving more funds over to capital.

Commr. Parks opined that more information from Mr. Clenney would help with that decision.

Mr. Clenney replied that he would supply that information.

Commr. Blake remarked that he would defer to the decision of the TDC unless they proposed to raise the tax.

Commr. Campione commented that she would not support a raise in taxes.

Commr. Parks mentioned that was not part of the decision, and he hoped that all TDC members attended the meetings.

Ms. Barker relayed her understanding that the County would continue with the status quo allocation and wait to see what applications were received before spending reserves. She mentioned that in March 2022 there would be more discussion, and that the projects would go before the TDC in April 2022 for consideration. She commented that if the Board decided to use some of the capital reserve funding towards a County project, the TDC would be notified in April 2022 of funding requests from the Board on projects for the County.

Commr. Parks said that their review and comments would be welcome, and that it would come back to the Board. He inquired what the status quo allocation would be.

Ms. Barker indicated that no money would be taken from destination marketing or changing the allocation.

Commr. Parks asked how the future capital would be addressed.

Ms. Barker replied that since there was consensus, the County would move forward with a consultant to develop a strategic plan, and that any excess revenue could be used towards capital without disturbing the current allocation.

Commr. Parks opined that the Board wanted to spend more on capital without affecting the destination marketing.

Ms. Barker commented that personnel was a fixed cost, and that anything above that, would be moved towards capital, adding that it would not affect the destination marketing.

Commr. Parks requested that those numbers be presented to the Board before April 2022.

Ms. Barker replied that in March 2022, it would be presented, and that the Board could discuss what to take to the TDC in April 2022.

Commr. Campione commented that it would let the TDC know the results of their discussion, and that they could give their input on how a balance could be achieved. She mentioned that destination marketing could be addressed while moving additional funds to capital and moving any excess from personnel to capital. She then asked if the TDC could be given a packet that gave more understanding of what improvements were already in place, what events were hosted there, and how many visitors came to those facilities, adding that there were some quality of life projects that could fit under sports tourism. She opined that if the TDC would be discussing what a good use of tourism dollars was, it could be helpful to know more about these facilities.

Commr. Parks opined that TDT funds could be used for one trail segment because it could draw tourists, and that tracking the data would be good.

public hearing: Resolution 2022-12 vacate part of adams street

Mr. Fred Schneider, Assistant County Manager, presented Tab 17, which was a public hearing for vacation petition #1264. He explained that the applicants were Mr. Ernest Boyd and Ms. Robin Boyd, and that the property was located on the east side of the City of Clermont, south of State Road (SR) 50, and west of Lake Boulevard. He showed on a property map that the easement was a section of Adams Street, and that it was a 50 foot right of way that was platted in 1926. He said that the purpose of the vacation was to construct a garage in the vacated right of way, adding that the driveway was currently in that right of way. He mentioned that the other property owners were notified and that there were no issues, and that staff recommended approval of the vacation.

Ms. Boyd commented that the part of Adams Street being vacated was their driveway, and that it would be nice if they could build a detached garage.

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. Smith, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Resolution 2022-12 to vacate a portion of Adams Street located south of SR 50 and west of Lake Boulevard.

Ms. Marsh commented that the applicants might want to talk to a title company, noting that even though the public interest had been vacated, it did not make the property theirs, and that there may be other title issues.

public hearing: resolution 2022-11 vacate part of easement

Mr. Schneider presented Tab 16, which was a public hearing for vacation petition #1263. He explained that the applicant was Mr. Joseph Eddy, Title Manager of Colina Del Lago, LLC, and that the proposed location was in the Town of Astatula in Commission District 3. He said that there was a deed granted to Lake County in 1996 for a right of way, and that the property owner wished to vacate this right of way. He mentioned that staff had unity of title and had ensured that none of the parcels were left without access, and that the title would be unified once this was done. He added that there were no utility issues or other issues that staff was aware of, and that staff recommended approval of the vacation.

Mr. James Stout, an individual who owned the 11 parcels that would be affected, said that he had approached the neighbors with the issue. He mentioned that he had given one neighbor a section of land at the end of his neighbor’s driveway, and that he had a good relationship with his neighbor, adding that he had included a letter from his neighbor acknowledging his consent. He commented that he was moving forward with a subdivision plat, and that this would clear the title.

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. Smith, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Resolution 2022-11 to vacate a portion of a public non-exclusive easement located south of Florida Avenue and west of Adams Street. The closest municipality is the Town of Astatula.

presentation on four corners community center

Ms. Allison Teslia, Director for the Office of Management and Budget, said that she would be giving a presentation regarding the Four Corners Community Center and potential options, which included building specification, cost estimates, and funding options. She mentioned that they planned for a 32,500 square foot building which could be used for a community center, a recreation center, and a Sheriff’s substation, and that it would include two indoor basketball courts, meeting rooms for classes and activities, restrooms, office spaces, and other required indoor spaces. She stated that the cost estimates were about $275 per square foot, which would be about $8.9 million based on typical industry standards, and that the estimated site improvement costs would be about $2.7 million, which included parking requirements, walkways, roads, utilities, stormwater system, lighting, landscaping, and other amenities. She commented that the estimated project cost without contingency was $11.6 million, and the estimated project cost with a 15 percent contingency was $13.4 million. She mentioned that those estimated costs did not include the following: the cost of purchasing the land, which was estimated to be from $3.5 to $4.5 million; the professional fees; engineering and permitting; site or environmental mitigation; fixtures, furniture, and equipment; changes in market conditions; and operating and maintenance costs for the facility. She said that one way to fund this was to reprioritize some of the Infrastructure Sales Tax projects; however that would not cover operational costs. She remarked that the other option was finance the project through a loan to be paid back by a Municipal Services Taxing Unit (MSTU), which would require approval through a referendum.

Ms. Evelisse Bookhout, Founder of Hands of Hope America, mentioned that her organization was a nonprofit organization that had provided emergency food assistance, social services, employment assistance, educational classes, computer use, technology training, and other resources in collaboration with community partners to serve over 3,500 families since 2019. She said that in June 2021, with the assistance of collaborative partners, Hands of Hope America opened a community center providing summer youth camp, after school tutoring, homework assistance, mentorship, and enrichment programs to over 35 youth, and that it was growing out of capacity. She mentioned that she had seen firsthand how providing these services and resources had impacted families, youth, and the community and provided hope in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic and a sense of community during difficult circumstances, adding that this was why a community center was needed in the Four Corners area. She relayed her understanding that the community center would be put on the November 2022 ballot for the residents of the Four Corners area to vote on; however, when the City of Groveland needed a community center, the City of Groveland provided land and a facility. She commented that Anointed Community Services International, a nonprofit organization, provided the services and resources, adding that the community was now thriving in partnership with the City. She mentioned that a LCSO substation was critical in the Four Corners area, and she expressed concern about the crimes that had recently taken place in that area. She remarked that a LCSO substation in the community would also provide a way to build relationships with the residents of the community, and opined that it was important to provide residents with resources and services for a safe and healthy environment.

Commr. Shields remarked that the Four Corners area looked like a city, but that there was no government. He mentioned that there were two locations available to build a new community center, and that one was near the Orlando Health Emergency Room and Medical Pavilion and the other one was near Woodcrest Way and U.S. Highway 27. He opined that it could be placed on the ballot to form a taxing unit, and that if there was another way to accomplish the funding of the new community center, it could be discussed.

Ms. Bookhout mentioned that Hands of Hope had been providing operations and programs through grants and collaboration with other partners, and that they could partner with Lake County to help pay for operational costs and programs.

Commr. Smith said that he agreed with Commissioner Shields, and opined that it should be placed on the ballot for the residents to vote on having an MSTU.

Commr. Shields explained that the Four Corners area would include a five mile radius, and that it would include the Showcase of Citrus, opining that if the radius was smaller, it would be more relevant.

Commr. Parks clarified that the purpose of this item was to determine if there was an interest to move forward with an MSTU and placing it on the ballot, and that knowing what geographic area would be involved was important.

Ms. Marsh stated that there were two options, and that it did not take a referendum to create an MSTU. She said that if the Board wanted to find out if the voters were interested in funding a new community center, it could be placed on the November 2022 ballot as a straw ballot. She commented that it would require a referendum to take out a bank loan and then use the MSTU as the funding source to guarantee the bank loan. She mentioned that the straw ballot would determine if there was enough interest to go through the process of the bank loan, and then it could be placed on a referendum to get voter approval, noting that it was an ad valorem tax. She pointed out that under the MSTU, every property in that boundary would be assessed a millage, and that the smaller the boundary was, the more money the residents would have to pay. She said that under a 10 year repayable loan, it would have to be determined how much to add to the tax bills, noting that residents could lose their property through the tax deed process if they could not pay that portion of their tax bill. She commented that if the Board wanted to do a straw ballot, the ordinance could be prepared and brought back to the Board, and that it would need to be submitted to the Supervisor of Elections in April 2022 when the ballots would be prepared for printing. She mentioned that the Board did not have to do a straw ballot, but the second referendum would be necessary in order to bond those funds.

Commr. Shields commented that the straw ballot would prevent the referendum from going out for two more years.

Ms. Marsh stated that if the Board received approval in November 2022, the County would need to create the MSTU, and then Ms. Barker would go through the process of acquiring the bank loan and bonding it. She mentioned that the Board could consider a bond validation proceeding to ensure that somebody could not challenge it later, adding that it could take a couple of years to do that.

Commr. Smith asked if it could be put on the ballot as an MSTU, and commented that if the residents did not want to pay for it, they could vote it down.

Commr. Parks inquired if that would include the MSTU and the bond.

Ms. Marsh stated that the MSTU could be created without doing a straw poll, and that when the County was ready to bond it, then it would be voted on by referendum.

Commr. Smith asked if the bond question could be on the current year’s ballot.

Ms. Marsh replied that it could not because there was no dollar amount.

Commr. Parks questioned if it was possible to do a mid-year ballot, and Ms. Marsh replied that the County would have to pay the cost.

Commissioner Parks opined that the best way to proceed was to do the straw poll, and commented that if the results were good, then the referendum could go out for the bond at the next election.

Commr. Campione remarked that information would have to be provided to allow residents to know what they were voting on, and opined that most people would not want to vote for a special taxing district.

Ms. Barker pointed out that if an MSTU was created, it would go towards the County’s 10 mill cap, which was currently at about six mills.

Commr. Campione inquired if it was possible to estimate what the annual amount would be for the following 10 years according to the boundaries.

Ms. Barker said that staff could estimate that amount with a three mile radius and a five mile radius for $13 million.

Ms. Marsh asked if the Board wanted to include the purchase price of the property, which was not included in the $13 million, or take it from a different funding source.

Commr. Campione inquired if there could be a donation.

Commr. Parks mentioned that donations had been discussed from a couple of different applicants in that area, which would reduce the cost.

Commr. Campione asked to see the numbers either way in order to see if the County could even get support for this.

Ms. Barker offered to estimate the amount on $15 million, which would include around $13.5 million for the construction based on the square footage identified and $1.5 million to purchase property, and then it could be determined if there was a reason to continue or if there was a way to curb the cost.

Commr. Blake commented that he would caution against building community centers, and reminded the Board that there were many capital projects that would be coming including those that were discussed on the current day. He said that he was in favor of community centers, and that many private organizations could provide those services, adding that there were many parts of the county that would benefit from a community center. He mentioned that in many places, the libraries served in that role, and opined that it would be a mistake to do this.

Commr. Campione opined that this was a unique situation, and that historically, community centers and keeping youth engaged by giving them activities to be involved in had been provided by local governments, often through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programs. She commented that the County had done that in other areas of the county using CDBG funds, but that it would not be an option in this area. She opined that the County was seeking a way to prevent a situation where the issues became worse, address the issues, and create a sense of community, even though there was not a municipality in that area. She said that she was open to exploring financial options, and opined that there could be a corporate entity who could serve as a sponsor, adding that there could be some opportunities in Osceola County or with other groups.

Commr. Parks opined that if someone heard the Board talking about it, they could possibly want to contribute.

Commr. Campione wondered how to manage the facility, and if it could be used by residents from other counties.

Commr. Parks mentioned that the County would charge them for usage.

Commr. Shields added that the County charged them to use the libraries.

Commr. Campione commented that this issue could be an incentive to acquire a corporate entity that would be willing to help, and that it could benefit the entire area.

Ms. Barker stated that staff could do a scenario with a $15 million total cost, give some examples of what the average taxpayer would pay, and then a decision could be made if the Board wanted to move forward at that point. She added that staff would do scenarios with a three mile radius, a five mile radius, and a seven mile radius, and that would give the Board three scenarios of what the tax would be for the residents and commercial taxpayers. She pointed out that the County was going to do a bank loan for the construction of the Supervisor of Elections building, and that the debt ratio should be considered.

Commr. Parks requested that staff would also show impacts to the bond rating in the scenarios, and he asked if staff could explore any corporate options from past applicants that had potential lands for donation.

Ms. Bookhout commented that the Lincoln Park South Lake Alliance was working on a community center, and that the City of Groveland’s community center was thriving. She said that a community center for the Four Corners area had been discussed, but that nothing had been done. She mentioned that in the last two years, she had seen an impact in the residents, in the youth, and in the community, and that the community center would be a place to gather as a community, provide resources, and change lives. She remarked that the youth were struggling in socialization, and that there were no sports or recreational activities. She said that there was a significant need for more community centers because of growth, and that it was a long term investment for Lake County’s future.

Lake May Reserve

Ms. Marsh recalled that in October 2021, the Board conveyed a 25 foot strip of land to the Elaine Berol Taylor and Scott Bevan Taylor Foundation for the purpose of halting a City of Eustis annexation, and that the County was in the process of obtaining a Florida Communities Trust (FCT) grant on this property. She commented that the FCT staff determined that the Elaine Berol Taylor and Scott Bevan Taylor Foundation did not qualify as a conservation entity, and that the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. indicated that they were willing to take an interest in this property. She noted that the FCT had said that the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. qualified as a conservation entity, and that this conveyance had to go to the FCT board on February 16, 2022 in the City of Tallahassee, which she and Commissioner Campione would be attending. She mentioned that the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. board met on the previous Thursday and determined that they would take the property, but they were interested in having a more substantial presence on this property than just a 25 foot strip. She said that the purpose of this item was to determine if the Board was interested in conveying a larger portion of the property to them, noting that they would like to have some programs on the property. She commented that they were interested in a parcel on the left side that would abut County Road (CR) 44A, and that it would also have to include some portion of the property next to the city limits in order for it to accomplish not having contiguity for annexation. She mentioned that they would be looking at the property to see if they could locate a spot that met their goals of conservation and could be used for the programs they wanted to do there, and she inquired if the Board was willing to give them a larger parcel. She commented that FCT was agreeable to it for the purposes of the contract the County had with them, and that the County would still have a maintenance agreement with them to maintain and operate the park as was being done currently. She said that there would be some changes to the management plan to incorporate them into being able to do programs and things of that nature, and that they would agree to abide by all of the FCT rules and regulations and sign the required documents to finalize that.

Commr. Campione said that the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. had been in existence for about 40 years, and that they had been very active in providing Wekiva River programs and ongoing restoration and activities to try to preserve and protect the river basin. She commented that this was part of the overall Wekiva River Basin and was in the Wekiva Study Area, but that historically, they had been involved with the other side of the river in Seminole County, even though the basin affected Seminole County and Lake County. She opined that it was a positive presence to have them in Lake County to provide some programs and do educational programs which could help people understand the connectivity between the aquifer here and how it affected the overall basin and the river. She said that if a portion of this property was conveyed to the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc., the County and the City of Eustis could still reach a resolution through an interlocal agreement or a joint planning agreement to address contiguity, adding that a conservation parcel in this area would not be the basis for allowing annexation into areas that were rural in nature.

Commr. Parks commented that the Board was still working towards a plan for the whole area, and that the size of the parcel conveyed to Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. did not matter, opining that it was a good organization which had been around for a long time.

Commr. Smith asked where the City of Eustis limits were on the map.

Ms. Marsh replied that the City of Eustis was to the left of CR 44A, and that it abutted the road.

Commr. Campione commented that there was a parcel dividing line on the map.

Commr. Smith suggested that the County could dedicate the southwest corner to Friends of Wekiva River, Inc., and asked if that would accomplish the goal.

Ms. Marsh said that it would have to go all the way up to the length of where the city boundaries were; otherwise, it would still be contiguous.

Commr. Smith opined that it would be good to have them use the lake, and that it was a good opportunity to partner with their organization and benefit from their presence there, opining that they could build a pavilion.

Commr. Campione said that there were already FCT funds to build a pavilion.

Commr. Smith commented that they could do educational programs, adding that he had no issues giving land to the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc.

Ms. Marsh stated that if FCT approved a conveyance to the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc., there would be time to bring it back to the Board for final approval of the final acreage and suggestions for programs, adding that this item was just to get approval of a larger parcel to submit to the FCT.

Commr. Shields mentioned that he was also in favor of it.

Commr. Parks inquired which area was being considered.

Ms. Marsh explained that it would be some portion of land bordering the City of Eustis boundary, and reiterated that the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. would look at the property and tell the County what they would like, adding that it would be provided to the Board before submitting it to the FCT by February 1, 2022.

Commr. Campione indicated that the land south of the point where CR 44A curved could be included as well as the lake and the western part of the property.

Ms. Marsh commented that it would be about 40 to 45 acres according to the geographic information system (GIS) measurement tool, adding they the County would receive more information from the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. in the coming week.

Commr. Campione mentioned that there was a cabin on the property, but she did not know where it was located. She opined that there would not be an issue if the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. wanted to partner with the County and have a kiosk on the section of land that was in the County’s name.

Commr. Parks asked if it would be possible to get out of the agreement if the County needed.

Ms. Marsh stated that the deed would include a reverter, and that at any point, if the County needed it back, it would be part of the agreement. She said that if the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. was not going to use it for conservation, it would have to come back to the County; additionally, she related that the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. had requested a provision for them that if they did not want to maintain a presence on this property, that the County would take it back upon request, and that it would all be in the documents.

Commr. Smith inquired if Lake County visitors could have access to walk the property.

Ms. Marsh indicated that they could, and that it was still going to be maintained by Lake County, noting that staff was in the process of doing trails and boardwalks out there currently.

Commr. Campione mentioned that it would be seamless when walking from one section to the other.

Ms. Marsh requested a formal motion in the event that FCT asked for it.

The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.

Ms. Pat Duncan, a resident of Lake County, asked for clarification of the piece of property on the map that the Board had mentioned giving to the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc.

Commr. Campione commented that they were referring to the western half of the property.

Ms. Duncan inquired if it included the entire half of the property.

Commr. Campione indicated that it was a potential possibility, and that the old orange grove could be included, adding that the County was doing restoration in that area.

Ms. Lee Conger, a resident of Lake County, commented that she was in favor of this, opining that it would provide understanding of rural aspects and the preservation of Lake County.

Ms. Cindy Newton, a resident of Lake County, mentioned that she agreed with the proposal, adding that the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc. did go out to look at the property on the previous Sunday. She said that they liked the west side, opining that it would be better for the educational programs they wanted to do there. She related that they had wanted to have a presence in the study area, and that some of the board members had been coming to some of their meetings and the City of Eustis meetings. She commented that they were trying to promote the aquifer with all of the high recharge there, and that this was an opportunity they had been interested in.

There being no one else who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the floor for public comment.

Ms. Marsh said that the request for the motion was for the Board to allow the County to submit a larger acreage to the FCT for consideration.

Commr. Campione relayed that she would be representing the County at the FCT meeting.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved a larger acreage to the FCT for consideration to allow Lake County to make a transfer of the Lake May Reserve to the Friends of Wekiva River, Inc.

Citizen Comment

Commr. Parks indicated that the citizen question and comment period had been done towards the beginning of the meeting, but that he would allow a citizen to speak.

Mr. Steven Gerard Sablotsky, a concerned citizen speaking on the subject of new possibilities, mentioned that there were over 18,000 cities in the U.S. and over 3,000 counties. He asked if all State of Florida counties were chartered, adding that some cities were chartered. He commented there was a county in the State of Florida that was a sanctuary county, and that he had traveled throughout the state teaching Cities, such as the Cities of Leesburg and Fruitland Park, how to establish the concept of personhood in a charter under preamble covenant language. He said that he had come from Lorain, Ohio, and that he was a Franciscan lay brother promoting new possibilities. He mentioned that there had been a Walk for Life event in the City of St. Petersburg the previous Saturday, and that he had participated in it along with many residents. He commented that the personhood efforts in the State of Florida had required 1.1 million signatures in the City of Tallahassee by January 1, 2022, and that they had acquired 70,000 signatures, which was why he was recruiting personhood counties.

Commr. Parks remarked that there were some counties in Florida that were chartered, and Ms. Marsh commented that there were 20. Commissioner Parks mentioned that Lake County was a constitutional county, not a chartered county.

public hearing: Resolution 2022-10 Supplemental budget FY 2022

Ms. Teslia said that the purpose of the presentation was to hold a public hearing on the midyear budget amendment, which would add previously unanticipated revenues and expenditures, and would include any necessary changes that had been identified. She mentioned that the current countywide budget was $604 million, and that the midyear changes were $61.1 million, which would bring the supplemental budget to $665.1 million. She commented that the total midyear adjustments for the General Fund revenues included a decrease of $230,000 in ad valorem revenues due to an adjustment for the final property values as of October 1, 2021, which included the Value Adjustment Board adjustments. She related that it also included an adjustment for changes to the beginning fund balance of $13.7 million, which was attributable to revenues received in FY 2021 that came in higher than initially projected, and that there were also some cost savings, adding that there were some other miscellaneous adjustments totaling $132,000. She said that adjustments to the General Fund for expenditures included a decrease in Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) payments due to the adjustments in the ad valorem and the final property values as of October 1, 2021 and an increase in the subsidized fire assessments for the Cities of Fruitland Park and Mascotte that were approved in December 2021. She commented that $820,000 was being reallocated from unspent proceeds in FY 2021 for the Supervisor of Elections property, and that $728,000 in excess fees received in FY 2021 would also to go towards the new facility. She stated that there were various budget adjustments made for the LCSO with a decrease of $277,000 and an increase of $11.9 million to reserves, adding that there were $104,000 in other miscellaneous adjustments. She mentioned that the General Fund reserves were adopted at $22.3 million during the final budget public hearing in the previous September 2021, which represented 14.4 percent of the annual operating budget, and that after approval of the midyear adjustment, the total General Fund reserves would be $34.1 million, which was an increase of approximately $11.9 million, representing 21.4 percent of the operating budget. She commented that the County was conservative in budgeting in the previous year and spending during the pandemic, and that revenues came in higher than anticipated, and that the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act funding had supplemented some of the budgeted expenditures. She related that the current Board policy was that reserves should be between seven to 12 percent of operating expenses, and that the long-range target for reserves was 16 percent or two months of regular operating expenses, which was the recommended minimum by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) for counties. She stated that the total adjustments for the other funds were about $47.7 million, and that it included the following: a new budget of $35 million in the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds from FY 2021; resort taxes and transportation district revenues that came in higher than projected in FY 2021; and the allocation of Enterprise lease proceeds of approximately $1.2 million to a special reserve account, which was received from vehicles sold back to Enterprise as specified in the lease agreement. She mentioned that the adjustments resulting from grant reconciliations included $1.6 million in the transit fund and about $1.6 million in the federal and state grant funds. She said that under capital projects, there was an increase in infrastructure sales tax revenues, which was due to projections that came in higher, and that the County would be funding the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and facility improvements, adding that there would be $1.1 million in other adjustments that were related to the beginning fund balance changes in the respective 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.

Commr. Smith thought that it was good that the County had increased its reserves.

Commr. Parks commented that the reserve was up to 21 percent.

Ms. Teslia said stated the requested action was approval of an amended budget for FY 2022 to include a reconciliation of beginning fund balances, other adjustments, and the approval of the resolution adopting a supplemental budget of $665,068,729 for FY 2022.

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved an amended budget for Fiscal Year 2022, including a reconciliation of the beginning fund balance and other adjustments, and Resolution 2022-10 for a supplemental budget for Fiscal Year 2022.

appointment to the Parks, Recreation and trails advisory board

Commr. Parks asked if Commissioner Campione had any comments about selecting the At-Large member for the Parks, Recreation, and Trails Advisory Board, and he listed the applicants.

Commr. Campione opined that they were good applicants, and wondered if there would be an issue with Mr. Martin Proctor serving on the Parks, Recreation, and Trails Advisory Board while also being an elected official with the Lake County Water Authority (LCWA).

Commr. Smith mentioned that he would also select Mr. Proctor.

Commr Campione commented that his background and experience would be helpful on this board.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board appointed Mr. Martin Proctor as an At-Large member to the Parks, Recreation and Trails Advisory Board to complete an unexpired term ending May 20, 2022 and an additional two-year term ending May 20, 2024, with the applicable waiver.

appointment to the planning and zoning board

Commr. Parks commented that this appointment was for the At-Large member of the Planning and Zoning Board.

Commr. Campione related that Mr. Carroll Jaskulski had contacted her and needed to have his name withdrawn from consideration.

Commr. Parks opined that Mr. Jaskulski was a good applicant, and mentioned that Mr. Dan Matthys’ background was in planning.

Commr. Campione opined that they were both good applicants, and commented that Mr. Jaskulski could resubmit his application sometime in the future.

On a motion by Commr. Shields, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board appointed Mr. Dan Matthys as an At-Large member to the Planning and Zoning Board to fill an unexpired term ending January 31, 2023.

appointment to the keep lake beautiful advisory committee

Commr. Parks stated that the request was for approval to appoint Mr. Lyman Rogers to the Keep Lake Beautiful Advisory Committee as a member representing the Lake County School Board, and approval of applicable waiver.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board appointed Mr. Lyman G. Rogers to the Keep Lake Beautiful Advisory Committee as a member representing the Lake County School Board, and approval of applicable waiver.

appointment to the library advisory board

Commr. Parks asked if Commissioner Blake would like comment on the approval of the municipal appointments to the Library Advisory Board, and he listed the applicants.

Commr. Blake said that he had no comments.

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board appointed the following municipal appointments to the Library Advisory Board: Ms. Janie Wilkinson-Earley as an alternate member for the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills; Ms. Cathy Gillespie as a voting member for the City of Mount Dora; and Mr. Bill Lowery as an alternate member for the City of Mount Dora.

commissioners reports

commissioner shields – district 1

Florida Association of Counties county day

Commr. Shields reported that he had attended the Florida Association of Counties (FAC) County Day in the City of Tallahassee, and that he had participated in discussions there.

League of cities luncheon

Commr. Shields said that he had attended the League of Cities luncheon in the City of Mount Dora, and that they had discussed issues, such as legislation.

commissioner smith – vice chairman and district 3

visits with residents

Commr. Smith said that he had visited with residents who had issues, but that he had no meetings to report. He mentioned that he had some meetings coming up in the current week.

commissioner campione –district 4

joint planning meeting

Commr. Campione expressed interest in the upcoming joint planning meeting on February 7, 2022 and requested that the Board look at the location of four rural protection areas (RPAs) in relation to the Cities that could impact them. She inquired if there would be a presentation from Mr. Randall Arendt.

Commr. Parks said that there would not be a presentation from Mr. Arendt at that meeting, but that there would be information about the RPAs on display boards and any other maps the Board wanted. He commented that Dr. Richard Levey, with Levey Consulting, LLC, could facilitate the discussion, and that he would provide a summary at the end of the meeting. He mentioned that the meeting would start with a question to the Cities to see if they were willing to participate in building a countywide joint planning agreement (JPA) to address issues, and that RPAs were a large part of that. He opined that it could take two hours to hear from all the mayors, and that there would not be time for presentations. He said that he did not want it to be a four hour meeting, but that he did want it to be effective, adding that he wanted the Cities to agree to move forward. He opined that it would go very well, and that they would see the need for a countywide JPA.

Commr. Campione mentioned that it was a large investment in time and effort, and she hoped that it would be meaningful and result in something substantive. She commented that the Cities could have a different vision for their municipality than the County had, and that it would be helpful to narrow the issues to be addressed in a JPA. She opined that the issues needed to be identified, and that a solution could then be addressed. She mentioned that the RPAs did not affect all the Cities, but that some Cities did not want to be disadvantaged if other Cities were not going to honor the conservation design and RPA, opining that there would need to be a unanimous decision on how to handle those areas. She inquired if they could ask Cities to use a conservation design with certain densities and incorporate buffers, adding that she would like to have a framework of what would be included in a JPA.

Commr. Parks commented that the question could be asked if the Cities would want to do a countywide JPA, and what they would want addressed in it. He opined that there would not be details, but that the Cities and the County could identify the issues they would like addressed. He opined that some Cities could have more issues with roads and road policies, and that some Cities could want help with economic development, adding that they all recognized that there were growth issues.

Commr. Campione wondered if there could be a formal dispute resolution process or something that was used to help both parties come together to address those situations.

Commr. Parks opined that it could be addressed with a countywide JPA.

Commr. Campione expressed concern about how that could be done, opining that there could be good discussion at the meeting but no resolution.

Commr. Shields mentioned that there was a way to address growth without affecting the RPAs, opining that the message was not received.

Commr. Campione opined that the Cities did not think that it was practical, adding that someone who understood that concept could explain that better.

Commr. Shields remarked that it was not approached from the economic point of view of only having to construct half of the roads and lighting, and that the cost of development and maintenance would be less.

Commr. Parks commented that the intent was to have them agree to work together, and to have follow-up meetings with their planning departments to start sharing information, opining that the elected officials should attend those meetings.

Commr. Campione opined that it would be helpful to have a better understanding about how road improvements were funded, and that the money the County had currently allocated to roads was to maintain roads, and not to build roads for developers.

Commr. Parks mentioned that a project that had an impact on a rural road could cause issues that the County would have to remedy, and that there should be an understanding that the developer should make that investment.

Commr. Campione added that if it was turned into an urban setting, then the City should take that into account, and that long-term road improvements should be factored into that project. She opined that it would be difficult to address the issues with the roads if the Cities continued to think of the county roads as the County’s problem.

Commr. Shields mentioned that in the book entitled Strong Towns: A Bottom-Up Revolution to Rebuild American Prosperity, it said that the Cities should be encouraged to redevelop their center and not continue to sprawl, but he opined that it was easier to sprawl, which affected the County maintained roads. He asked if there was a way to encourage redeveloping the interior instead of continuing to move out.

Commr. Parks commented that the County had some infill programs, such as waiving school impact fees and transportation impact fees.

Ms. Marsh stated that transportation impact fees could only be waived for affordable housing, adding that if it was waived for any other purpose, it would have to be offset with another funding source.

Commr. Campione inquired how the County could incentivize more growth in the urban areas while limiting outward expansion unless a conservation based design was used, adding that an engineer or developer could run some numbers to show that it would be practical and economically viable.

Commr. Parks remarked that in Strong Towns, it said that focus should be on interior growth and to be careful about outward growth, which could include conservation design and also encouraging a land use that would be the best use of that land. He mentioned that the housing could include mixed use or a different type of housing, such as two units to the acre, and that there were actual numbers in Strong Towns, such as fiscal impact and an economic impact of growth.

Commr. Campione commented that she would like the joint planning meeting with the Cities to be productive, and that the County could partner with them on economic development, adding that when they were looking at places where they could build with water and sewer, the County could lead them to appropriate locations. She opined that the County had worked well with the Cities in the past, and that there was potential to do better in that regard.

COMMISSIONER BLAKE – DISTRICT 5

county Budget

Commr. Blake expressed gratitude for staff taking a conservative approach on the budget, and commented that staff had helped put the County in a good position.

commissioner parks – Chairman and district 2

Women's Hall of Fame policy changes

Commr. Parks proposed that Tab 23 be tabled to be heard at a future meeting.

joint planning meeting

Commr. Parks commented that he was looking forward to the February 7, 2022 joint planning meeting.

safety analysis

Commr. Parks mentioned that there had been a fatal car accident in South Lake on U.S. Highway 27, and that the County could ask the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to do a safety analysis.

Mr. Schneider commented that the County had been in contact with FDOT and with the City of Clermont who would also contact FDOT. He mentioned that there had been a preliminary safety screening in the current year on U.S. Highway 27 from U.S. Highway 192 to SR 50, and that they had identified four intersections to review. He said that the County would continue dialogue with FDOT and the City of Clermont, and that there could be a meeting to get more information and explore ways to influence speed on those sections.

Commr. Parks mentioned that the incident occurred near the Legends Country Club Community, and that it could be evaluated by FDOT for a decision.

Mr. Schneider said that the Legends Country Club Community intersection was not one of the four intersections identified, but that it could be brought up during the discussion.

Commr. Parks suggested that staff reach out to the Homeowners Association (HOA) president of the Legends Country Club Community with any updates on the intersection. He stated that he had started coordinating with the LCSO on a proposal for a partnership with a fiscal commitment for an additional deputy or sharing of personnel with the City of Clermont for strict traffic and speeding enforcement along SR 50 and U.S. Highway 27, adding that he would encourage looking at the north part of the county for a similar approach. He mentioned that he would have a proposal with some fiscal commitment for a future meeting, and that with the number of fatalities occurring on the roads, he would like to have more enforcement, noting that he was asked about that often.

Commr. Campione commented that she was asked about that as well, including at a meeting in the City of Umatilla where she was asked about speeding and a lack of enforcement presence on CR 450A, and that she would like to enhance those areas.

Commr. Parks said that at a future meeting, this issue could be discussed, including the fiscal impact and other areas in the county that could benefit.

Commr. Campione mentioned that the new connection for Red Tail Boulevard and SR 46A also had speeding issues.

Lake county sheriff’s office ride-along

Commr. Parks reported that he had participated in a ride-along with the LCSO on the previous Friday night, and that he had witnessed criminal activity. He mentioned that they did enforce traffic, but that they also had a number of calls that they responded to, which was very time consuming. He thanked the LCSO, and mentioned that they had worked with the City of Clermont Police Department on one case. He commented that Fire Rescue and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) had come out on a call at that time, and that they all worked well together.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 1:17 p.m.

_________________________________

SEAN PARKS, chairman

ATTEST:

________________________________

GARY J COONEY, CLERK