A Special MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

February 16, 2023

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in a special annual strategies workshop on Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 9:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chambers, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Kirby Smith, Chairman; Douglas B. Shields, Vice Chairman; Sean Parks; Leslie Campione; and Josh Blake. Others present were: Jennifer Barker, County Manager; Melanie Marsh, County Attorney; Niki Booth, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; Kristy Mullane, Chief Financial Officer; and Stephanie Cash, Deputy Clerk.

welcome

Commr. Smith welcomed everyone to the meeting, and stated that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting was being streamed live and was also being broadcast through Zoom for those who wished to provide comments.

virtual meeting instructions

Mr. Levar Cooper, Director for the Office of Communications, 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.

INVOCATION and pledge

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

BUDGET HISTORY AND OVERVIEW

Ms. Jennifer Barker, County Manager, commented that she would present some short-term strategies being used to create the budget as well as some long-term goals identified by the Board for discussion. She explained that Ms. Allison Teslia, Director for the Office of Management and Budget, would give a brief budget history and overview, and that other department directors would discuss items they had been working on over the previous year and items they planned to work on in the following year. She relayed that after discussion on immediate focus areas, the Commissioner projects and priorities would be discussed, and that action on those could possibly be pursued in the current year. She stated that the goals guiding the budget development and the strategic planning process included the following: avoiding tax rate increases; preparing for emergency responses; enhancing core function service delivery, such as solid waste and road resurfacing; enhancing customer service; enhancing quality of life for residents through community outreach and parks programs; identifying efficiencies; and fostering economic development and tourism. She said that in the current year, the County had implemented some efficiencies, which included the following: the Office of Planning and Zoning implementation of a new online permitting system that allowed for digital signatures; the Office of Elevate Lake partnership with Lake Economic Area Development (LEAD) to bring private businesses and government together to enhance economic development; and the Office of Library Services’ opening of the East Lake Mini Library to offer library services while in transition to a permanent building. The Board also approved the donation of a larger facility from the Town of Montverde which could be used as a library until the permanent facility was constructed. She mentioned that the County had allocated an additional $4.1 million towards road resurfacing from the General Fund and had increased the General Fund reserves.

Ms. Teslia displayed a slide representing a 15 year history of the General Fund budget, which included the County departments and the Constitutional Offices, and said that in 2008, there was a significant decrease in property values which impacted the General Fund revenue. She elaborated that County budgets were decreased and General Fund reserves were utilized to meet operating needs, and that in 2010, the General Fund reserves level began to decline. She related that in 2015, the reserves stabilized until Hurricane Irma made landfall in 2017, and that the recovery efforts significantly reduced the reserves level until Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) reimbursements were received; furthermore, reserves had steadily increased to the current level which was approximately 19 percent of the operating budget. She displayed graphs representing the makeup of the major General Fund revenues and expenditures over the previous 15 years, and pointed out that there was an influx in Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 due to Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act related funding. She commented that the main services and functions paid for by the General Fund included general government services, constitutional offices, judicial support, the Medical Examiner, and debt service. She noted that the supplemental funding provided in FY 2023 via transfers included the following: about $1.5 million to the Office of Parks and Trails for public lands; about $4.3 million to the Office of Library Services; about $3.1 million for road resurfacing, which was in a special reserve; about $3 million for solid waste and landfill; about $1.1 million for the Office of Transit Services; and about $1.7 million for the Office of Fire Rescue. She commented that of the FY 2023 General Fund revenues and expenditures, ad valorem tax was a major revenue source, and that County departments made up less than 30 percent of the General Fund budget. She noted that the preliminary budget estimates showed reserves at the current level of $35.8 million without taking into account Hurricane Ian or Hurricane Nicole related expenses; additionally, preliminary estimates showed that the County was operating with a surplus, which was subject to change based on actual budget requests. She remarked that the short-term immediate focus areas included the following: maintaining the status quo millage of 5.0364 mills; maintaining the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) minimum recommended reserve of 16 percent of operating expenses; and accounting for the expiration of supplemental funding from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) for the Lake County Health Department and LifeStream Behavioral Center.

Mr. Jim Kovacs, Director for the Office of Human Resources and Risk Management, recalled that voters in the State of Florida approved Amendment 2 in 2020 resulting in a $15.00 minimum wage initiative which incrementally increased the minimum wage by $1.00 each year until reaching a peak of $15.00 per hour in September 2026. He indicated that in 2021, the County took a proactive approach by advancing the County’s minimum wage from the required $10.00 per hour to $12.00 per hour and adjusted the wages of existing staff to prevent wage compression. He related that even with the County’s proactive approach, the County struggled to recruit qualified personnel and retain existing employees in a highly competitive labor market, and opined that the post coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) employment environment not only focused on competitive wages, but also on work/life balance and remote work options. He commented that the County had recently implemented a new work schedule option, opining that it had been received well by current employees, and that they had already seen a reduction in the turnover rate; additionally, it was attractive as a recruitment tool for job candidates,. He relayed that because of inflation, the cost of commodities, such as eggs, gas, new cars, and home insurance, had increased significantly; however, the employee health contributions had not increased since 2015 even though the national rate of health inflation had increased 16.6 percent. He explained that the County had hired an actuary specializing in health insurance to analyze the revenues, claims, trends, and total disbursements to project the total gain or loss, and that they had helped formulate the County budget and strategies for health insurance. He remarked that total disbursements included administrative fees and required excess insurance, and noted that the County was projected to lose money in the current year. He mentioned that the employer share and the employee share combined to form the health insurance retention fund to help pay the expenses, and that 24 months after the start of COVID-19, the County had paid about $4 million in direct COVID-19 related expenses. He commented that since the County could not sustain those losses, the actuary recommended doing some increases, which could correct the shortage by 2025. He recommended that the County increase the employee rate by 20 percent, and opined that it was not an unreasonable amount to ask for a premium insurance plan at a lower cost than Osceola, Seminole, and Polk Counties. He remarked that the County could have chosen to degrade the plan to help with expenses; however, he opined that this benefit was a retention tool.

Commr. Shields asked if he had compared the rates to businesses.

Mr. Kovacs commented that he did not because while the rates for the other Counties were public, the rates for private businesses were not.

FISCAL YEAR 2024 FOCUS AREAS

Ms. Mary Hamilton, Operations Director for the Public Works Department, related that two functions of solid waste included the solid waste assessment and general services, such as convenience centers, hazardous waste disposal, and landfill operations, and that their two funding sources were the General Fund and the solid waste assessment that the residents paid. She explained that the assessment was used to fund collection, management, and disposal of residential solid waste and recyclable materials in unincorporated Lake County, and that the rates, which were based on area and service level, were set annually and included on the TRIM notice. She remarked that the current assessment rate would not cover the FY 2024 collection and disposal costs, and that additional funding needed for capital equipment replacement would be addressed with the Infrastructure Sales Tax. She relayed that there would be a solid waste workshop in March 2023, and that there would be a speaker there who could update the Board on the Southeast Recycling conference results. She mentioned that in the focus areas, the invitation to bid for the bear carts went out on the previous day, and that they had about $79,000, which would pay for about 240 carts. She commented that there was a legislative request that could be made available in the current year, which could cover everyone currently on the waiting list as there were about 1,000 people.

Commr. Campione opined that if the bear carts were made available, there would be more people who would want them, and she inquired if the County was requiring a copay from residents.

Ms. Hamilton answered that residents would pay a delivery fee of $40 or more depending on the consumer price index (CPI).

Commr. Campione opined that the more bear carts there were in northeast Lake County where there were frequent bear interactions, the more likely the residents would be able to manage those times when trash was not picked up on time for whatever reason. She wondered if the company that had provided them in the past would respond to the bid, and if there would be multiple responders.

Ms. Hamilton replied that there were three other vendors known to the County, and that they would have to be certified with the international grizzly bear management plan, which tested the carts with grizzly bears to see if they could open them. She then displayed a graph illustrating new assessment rates for other jurisdictions, noting that the Lake County assessment rate of $257 was the highest twice a week service, and that $194 was the lowest once a week service. She stated that on March 29, 2023, the consultant would be there to speak on the recycling conference, any questions brought forward, and any other items the Board wished to address.

Commr. Shields remarked that there were many unincorporated areas in other states that required the residents to provide their own trash haulers, and that it was not a responsibility of those Counties.

Commr. Campione opined that they were very different communities than Lake County.

Commr. Shields opined that it would require convenience centers in areas that did not have them, and that it would give residents an option to go to the convenience center rather than paying for haulers; furthermore, the free market could provide opportunities for savings on haulers.

Commr. Campione agreed that it would give people options; however, it could create issues with more litter and dumping, especially in rural areas.

Commr. Parks opined that it could increase traffic with multiple haulers servicing the same neighborhoods.

Commr. Shields opined that there could be areas where it would be a viable option, and that the County could explore this.

Commr. Smith opined that another issue would be the many different enclaves being serviced by municipalities, and that another option could be for those Cities that provided trash hauling to provide services for all the interlocal service boundary agreement (ISBA) areas.

Commr. Campione added that the trucks were heavy and had a large impact on county roads, and opined that the enclave issue was worth exploring. She opined that ISBA areas would be too large for that purpose, and that it could be more beneficial in urban areas. She opined that if the County eliminated the service and removed it from the tax bill, residents could choose not to pay for their own service, and trash could possibly be piled up on their properties.

Commr. Blake commented that he was open to the discussion, and noted that Marion County used this method. He agreed that large trucks had a negative impact on roads; however, he opined that if residents could opt out, there could be more traffic with smaller vehicles because there could be multiple providers picking up smaller loads.

Commr. Smith mentioned that since the County’s consultant was reviewing this issue and would present all the information to the BCC in March 2023, the best course for Lake County could be determined then.

Ms. Barker remarked that the County had used surplus ARPA funding, which had been set aside for solid waste services, to order two garbage trucks that could be utilized by the County when there were properties missed. She said that even though it was not a financial savings, it would give the County more control.

Commr. Smith questioned if these trucks could respond to calls to pick up trash, and Ms. Barker indicated that this was correct.

Commr. Campione commented that she had received emails from residents stating that their trash was piling up, and opined that many residents did not have a way to take their trash to a convenience center or were not able to because of age or other reasons. She also opined that those residents who could not take their trash to a drop-off center would not want to have to find someone to pick up their trash on the free market, and that it might work in some areas but not others as there were many elderly residents living in the Paisley and Astor areas.

Commr. Shields suggested that the County could survey the residents to ask what they wanted, and relayed his understanding that they had never had the option.

Commr. Campione remarked that she did not know how the County could survey them.

Commr. Parks recalled that it had been considered many years ago, noting that the option had not been recommended. He recalled that one concern was finding qualified people to hire.

Commr. Campione expressed concern that residents could possibly be taken advantage of.

Commr. Parks opined that even though it may seem easy to buy a trailer and start a new business picking up trash, it was not that easy.

Commr. Blake relayed his understanding that Marion County kept a list of approved vendors on their website.

Mr. Hamilton commented that Marion County paid a franchise fee every year for that service, and that Lake County also paid a fee to have a list available on the website.

Commr. Parks opined that there were only five or six of them that were capable, such as the big haulers, and that they were the same haulers that Lake County was working with.

Commr. Campione asked what the County spent from the General Fund for the old landfill sites.

Ms. Hamilton answered that the long-term care fund that was used for six facilities was about $400,000, and that it fluctuated occasionally depending on the annual reports. She mentioned that a small five acre cell was closing in the current year, and that the maintenance costs would switch from the General Fund to long-term care. She explained that when it closed, it would require certain monitoring functions and a 30 year commitment, and that if there was an issue in the reports, it could be longer.

Mr. Fred Schneider, Assistant County Manager, stated that road resurfacing was a core function of County government, and that the funding for FY 2023 was about $11.7 million. He related that $7.5 million of that was encumbered under contract, which was the rollover, and that most of that was with CW Roberts Contracting, Inc. He recalled that there had been delays with them; however, they were catching up. He elaborated that the County had asked them to finish everything that had been given to them to date, and because the contract allowed for price indexing, they had to submit their costs by the deadline. He commented that they had recently finished County Road (CR) 561 south of the Astatula area, and that their prices were still below recent contract bids which were about double from the previous year. He mentioned that they received $3 million from Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) with the transfer of Sorrento Avenue, and that they had contracted with Ranger Construction Industrial, Inc., who completed CR 435 and some sections of Sorrento Avenue in about eight weeks for about $2 million. He stated that CR 437 was a road which was damaged significantly by sand hauling, and that with the remaining $1 million from the FDOT and $1.4 million in sales tax allocated for 2023, they could repair it with the required full depth reclamation; additionally, a developer agreed to construct a section of this road along their property. He relayed his understanding that those funds would be expended in the current year, and that funding from the General Fund reserve may be required for the Coolidge Street design cost as well as the CR 437 project, depending on the change order request from CW Roberts Contracting, Inc. He remarked that a short-term road resurfacing strategy included evaluating workload and capacity, and opined that the right contractors could expend those funds and complete projects quickly. He relayed that the long-term road resurfacing strategies included projecting the need for annual resurfacing funding and evaluating available funding, such as the General Fund, the Gas Tax Fund, and Infrastructure Sales Tax. He displayed a graph showing road pavement ratings, and said that they were projecting that the miles of road which were rated as fours and in very poor condition would be fewer in 2023, noting that those were the roads with potholes which required much staff time and operational costs in addition to any costs for damages done to vehicles.

Commr. Shields relayed his understanding that each heavy truck trip was equivalent to 10,000 car trips, and he inquired if there was a way to require the companies who ran the large vehicles on the roads to pay more to the County for maintenance.

Mr. Schneider replied that these companies bought diesel fuel and gas for their trucks, and that the County received an amount of that revenue. He commented that roads had been designed for how many trucks would be on the road, and that local roads did not have as much asphalt as collector roads or arterial roads. He mentioned that the County had inherited many roads from FDOT that were built in the 1930s and the 1940s, and that those roads did not have the same base or the same surface because they were not designed or built for current truck traffic.

Commr. Shields wondered if anyone had addressed the issue of gas tax disappearing because of the possible phasing out of gas powered vehicles in exchange for electric vehicles (EVs).

Commr. Parks opined that a County or a City should have the ability to collect tax on a charging station, and noted that the County currently had a charging station and only collected enough to offset the cost.

Commr. Shields opined that it would not be enough because most people charged their cars at home, indicating his understanding that the average commute was only 40 miles.

Mr. Schneider relayed his understanding that it had been discussed at the federal level, and that some states already had some pilot projects charging a per mile tax.

Commr. Smith questioned if the roads would need to be redesigned to handle the EV weight since the roads were designed for truck traffic and the EVs were significantly heavier than regular vehicles.

Mr. Schneider indicated that he had not considered that, and commented that electric pickup trucks were 3,000 pounds heavier than current pickup trucks, opining that it was something they should explore.

Commr. Parks mentioned that those with traditional automobiles were paying a tax on gas that other motorists were not paying, and opined that it was a good reason for allowing local governments to charge a tax on charging stations.

Commr. Smith pointed out that hybrids also reduced the amount of gas tax paid, and opined that it was a good trend.

Commr. Parks inquired how quickly roads rated as 5s degraded down to 4s.

Mr. Schneider said that he could find out and give them an answer.

Commr. Parks commented that many roads were old citrus grove roads, and he asked if the additional cost of a bike lane or two feet on each side had been factored into the cost of resurfacing.

Mr. Schneider replied that it depended on the width of the road and whether it already had bike lanes or shoulders, and that a typical local road resurfacing cost was about $275,000 per mile, $575,000 per mile for a two lane collector, and $1.2 million per mile for a four lane road. He related that because the Board had adopted a multiuse plan for CR 437 with a trail, a developer was reconstructing the road along their property and adding the trail on their side, and that the County would have to dig up the road and add new materials before resurfacing and creating some paved shoulders.

Commr. Parks opined that the County should minimize the miles of road with 4s and then add two feet on each side of Anderson Hill Road or four feet on one side that would be walkable.

Mr. Schneider remarked that he could explore the cost to resurface a 20 foot road.

Commr. Smith commented that the County would require right of way.

Commr. Parks opined that there was right of way on this road.

Commr. Campione opined that it would be good to start developing a list of roads that could benefit from having a shoulder on the road for bicycles and pedestrians.

Commr. Shields suggested that the County could add a bicycle lane to roads that had to be rebuilt.

Commr. Campione questioned where the County stood in catching up on the roads with the funds that were borrowed, noting that the time was nearing its end.

Mr. Schneider related that those funds were under contract with C.W. Roberts Contracting, Inc., and that they were urging them to finish in the current year.

Commr. Campione asked if the 4s would be gone at that point.

Mr. Schneider explained that this was a projected number of what the County still had to do, and that the County needed about $5 million per year to keep up.

Commr. Campione opined that the County should explore how to obtain that amount when these funds were expended, and she inquired if there was a new system for classifying roadways. She opined that the rural roads did not fit the standard classifications of functionality, and she wondered if there was a way to update those types of roads; additionally, when Cities annexed properties, the road capacity could be addressed.

Mr. Schneider replied that there were some roads that were 18 to 20 feet wide, and that when there were 2,500 vehicles per day, the maintenance cost in time increased significantly. He opined that the increased traffic caused motorists to drive on the edge of the road, requiring the County to construct millings along the edge of the road. He mentioned that the County did not have right of way for some of these roads, and that some roads had increased traffic above what they were originally built for. He said that the classifications of roadways were federal classifications, including arterials, collectors, and local roads, and that some recent changes included adding urban collector roads as well as rural collector roads.

Commr. Campione commented that when roadways would be impacted by a new project being annexed into a municipality, there was not much data regarding what that road would need to function with more traffic, opining that this could be explored. She questioned if there could be a formalized program or funding set aside for the non-maintained roads with access issues for safety purposes, and opined that it would be expensive to make a road passable without maintaining it.

Mr. Schneider replied that it would first have to have public right of way; otherwise, they could not go on that road because it was considered a private road. He remarked that if an emergency vehicle could not get through, then the Public Works Department could bring in some clay and help to make it passable, and noted that in the previous year, the County had spent about $200,000 in gas tax on that.

Commr. Campione wondered how an emergency situation would be handled if there was an impassable road that did not have public right of way, and opined that the fire truck or ambulance could become stuck.

Mr. Schneider replied that according to legal advice, they could not go on that road or do anything with it.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that if a person was calling for an emergency, they did not need a public right of way because they owned the property.

Commr. Campione stated that these issues came up when vehicles were becoming stuck on the dirt roads, and that it was good to know that $200,000 was being spent on these issues. She wondered if the County could prevent these issues by being proactive, opining that it would be better than disagreeing with residents over whether or not their homes could be accessed.

Ms. Mary Ellen Stern, Executive Director for the Office of Economic Growth, related that in September 2022, Lake County engaged the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) to work with the County and the municipalities to create joint planning areas, visions, and implementation strategies including a model joint planning agreement (JPA) for consideration by municipalities and to develop a countywide conservation strategy. She noted that JPAs were intergovernmental agreements involving a defined area of common study and land use planning by Lake County and the 14 participating municipalities. She commented that as part of this JPA initiative, there were several partners involved in addition to the ECFRPC, including 1,000 Friends of Florida, University of Florida, Stetson University, the 14 municipalities, and the businesses and residents of Lake County. She explained that the goals of the JPA initiative included the following; conserving the County’s natural resources and agricultural lands; improving land use planning and land annexation processes between the County and the partner Cities; improving the County’s transportation infrastructure and unifying transportation practices; enhancing the local economy and supporting economic growth; and increasing the housing supply and improving housing options for all. She relayed that the County had started the JPA model process by working with the City of Groveland, and that in December 2022, there were two workshops to encourage public participation in the JPA initiative. She elaborated that one workshop was with the 1,000 Friends of Florida, which included public participation that was very informative, and another was a conservation workshop with Dr. Jason Evans, with Stetson University, which resulted in the analysis of various conservation issues throughout the county, such as surface water, aquifers, and wildlife movement. She mentioned that this information would be utilized by Stetson University highlighting particular areas of concern, and that there would be a workshop in either March or April 2023 to review the visual graphic model created by Stetson University from the data collected in December 2022. She remarked that the model JPA process was continuing, and that they would soon start working with additional municipalities. She related that additional data analysis would continue, and that the ECFRPC was creating a map to show the entitlements throughout the county, including the 14 municipalities. She stated that there would be further work on the transfer of development rights (TDR) strategy, and noted that the ECFRPC was gathering more details on this to bring that part of the JPA initiative process forward. She continued her comments by stating that in July 2022, the BCC agreed to fund the Strong Towns program for the benefit of the entire county, and that it was a two year engagement with the Strong Towns team, with the majority of the work and coordination being done in the first year. She commented that the program was launched in Lake County with a two day summit which brought much municipal coordination, and that there were public town halls held in the Cities of Leesburg and Clermont; additionally, on the second day, there was a workshop for stakeholders and one for public leaders. She explained that the Strong Towns summit included the following parts: the three workshops in January 2023, June 2023, and November 2023; the public participation aspect, which happened at the workshops; the action team, which was a group of volunteers who would learn the Strong Towns program and meet every two to three weeks with assigned work; and the leadership team, which would be made of community leaders and business leaders. She relayed that the Strong Towns team would give updates on the action and leadership team processes, and that there would be events at future workshops. She stated that the rural protection areas (RPAs) were presented as a legislative priority, and that rural lands and rural lifestyles were intrinsic, inalienable parts of the character, history, culture, and quality of life within Lake County. She explained that the preservation of rural land, and sustainable agriculture and forestry contributed to the conservation of natural resources, and that the request to the Florida Legislature was to enact legislation that provided for the preservation of designated RPAs and specific density limitations within them.

Commr. Parks opined that there may be a perception that JPAs were unnecessary and would result in more bureaucracy, and that members of local governments wanted to come to decisions quickly regarding growth management. He also opined that there was a process resulting from a JPA between the municipalities and the County to resolve many of the issues faced currently, such as Cities annexing land and causing residents to voice their grievances in BCC meetings. He opined that this was an important policy that could shape the way for future growth even if it was painstaking, and said that he looked forward to the conservation strategy and the TDRs.

Commr. Campione commented that the way the legislation was written and proposed, a City and County could enter into a JPA or an ISBA and go to a higher density, but it could not be done unilaterally as it was currently. She mentioned that there was still an avenue for an appropriate location to blend concerns of unincorporated residents and incorporated residents, and that a solution could be generated that would work for everyone.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that this was the first time that the County had an initiative to enact that would help protect agricultural land and the growth of the county.

Commr. Campione commented that the access issue to United States (U.S.) Highway 441 from the proposed Anglers on Harris subdivision was an example of how a JPA would operate, opining that if there was a JPA and a City annexed a project that caused a negative impact to residents, the County could have no recourse because they had signed a JPA. She opined that there was no way to anticipate every situation or address issues in advance of a project being submitted, and that it would be good to consider how a difficult case could be resolved as a result of a JPA. She also opined that if the municipalities were already working with the County to resolve issues, there would be no need for a JPA, and she suggested inserting a dispute resolution procedure into the JPA requiring a process of integrating the other party’s input into their approval.

Commr. Parks opined that requiring a City to respond to an issue before moving forward should be part of the process, and that currently they could proceed without any consideration for County issues. He opined that elected officials should be educated and involved with planning policies, including being involved with the Strong Towns program and attending the planning workshops.

Commr. Campione opined that even if it did not solve every situation, it was good to enact a mechanism to address these issues.

COMMISSIONER PROJECTS AND PRIORITIES

Ms. Barker stated that regarding the Commissioners’ projects and priorities, the septic to sewer conversions requested by Commissioner Parks had resulted in an agreement with OnSyte, which was approved by the Board at the January 24, 2023 BCC meeting, noting that they were currently in the process of transferring the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) permit to the County. She related that there was communication with some potential utility providers and municipalities, and that the County had signed a grant from FDEP for $1 million.

Mr. Jeff Earhart, Engineering Manager for the Public Works Department, commented that they were working on the applications to sign people up, and that they were working on how to obtain legal easements to access properties. He explained that they would establish a monthly rate of about $55, which would include the $38 monthly payment to OnSyte, and that they would determine how to collect the fee, such as placing it on the tax bill, using a Municipal Service Benefit Unit (MSBU), or cooperating with a utility to send a monthly bill. He relayed his understanding that the County would possibly own the concrete box and the electronics; however, they would not own the drain field associated with that. He remarked that currently the agreement stated that OnSyte would maintain the concrete box, the electronics, and the drain field, and that there was a concern about financial liability and how the rates might change. He related that they would be staffed to operate and maintain this, and that the grant currently focused on wastewater systems that were around lakes and total maximum daily loads (TMDLs); however, they did not know if the grant could be used for staff members that were not in those focus areas or if they could apply for new grants. He remarked that there were subdivisions that were using OnSyte to meet their central wastewater requirement, and that it would have to be determined how that affected the charging and collecting as well as who was operating the system.

Commr. Parks opined that the County could use ARPA funding as it became available or partner with the Cities.

Mr. Earhart commented that the plan was to use $1 million from ARPA funding to match the $1 million from the grant, and that the County had contacted the City of Mount Dora about a couple of subdivisions; however, they wanted to study the issue more as there was no lift station close by. He questioned how one utility service area would interact with another utility service area.

Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, remarked that one consideration was whether or not the County would have to be licensed as a utility provider even though it was being contracted out, and that another consideration would be individual MSBUs to collect fees, which would require an interim billing mechanism until it could be placed on the tax bill. She stated that they would collect all the information and bring it back to the Board as one package, which would contain everything necessary to know about going into this particular business.

Commr. Parks pointed out that there was a legislative policy trend moving to more of the septic to sewer conversions.

Commr. Campione opined that many people wanted to do it, and that if the County needed to call itself a utility provider, then it should be done because the County would be offering a sewer utility as a service provider just as municipalities were service providers of utilities. She mentioned that it would be self-funded because it was based on a user fee, noting that many people did not currently have an option.

Mr. Earhart opined that it would require funding because the MSBU funds would be collected later.

Commr. Campione opined that it would be more palatable for customers if it was charged on a monthly basis, such as a water bill, and that using the MSBU would be a good way to initially fund the launching of this. She noted that if someone did not pay their bill, it could go onto the tax bill and be collected that way.

Ms. Marsh remarked that they were exploring those options, and that they would bring that information back to the Board. She stated that staffing a County billing department would be determined by how many people ultimately used this service, and that decisions would have to be made about how to go into collections. She noted that it may require waiting for the next assessment roll date to put it on the taxes.

Mr. Earhart asked if the County would place a lien against a resident who did not pay, and pointed out that the County could not turn off their water since only the sewer service was provided.

Commr. Campione opined that a lien might be a good way to enforce that.

Ms. Barker stated that the next priority was the Golden Triangle Regional Park from Commissioner Smith, and that the Board had recently approved the funding agreement with the City of Tavares for the YMCA property in the amount of $4.8 million. She related that the City was proceeding with the due diligence associated with making that purchase, and that the County and the City had a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), in which the County provided the capital infrastructure and the City provided the daily maintenance; additionally, the County would enter into an agreement with the YMCA to lease the facility.

Commr. Smith inquired if there was a closing date.

Ms. Barker replied that there was not, and relayed her understanding that the City was still working through the due diligence. She stated that the next priority was the Fairgrounds relocation from Commissioner Smith, and that a consultant had done a feasibility study and a presentation to the Board. She relayed that a concept of the layout of the new facility had been presented, and that the master plan was near completion. She commented that the consultant had provided a potential cost estimate for the concept, and that the County was evaluating those cost estimates. She mentioned that the County had applied for a grant to obtain funding for design in the amount of $2 million, and that they were waiting for the results. She then related that Commissioner Campione had requested a discussion on the high wage job creation and a LEAD update, and that the strategic and action plans had been approved by the Board on December 6, 2022. She remarked that the County was now in Phase II, which allowed for the additional funding of $500,000 to further their business attraction, business creation, and business retention efforts throughout the year. She relayed that they had to identify a funding level required for FY 2024 by March 2023, and that she would provide that information during the budget process.

Commr. Campione commented that she had attended the Orlando Economic Partnership (OEP) meeting on behalf of Commissioner Shields, and that the OEP federal lobbyist was in attendance and had reviewed many different federal funding sources available for projects, such as rural roads and rural infrastructure. She relayed her understanding that Mr. Maurice Kurland, the County’s federal lobbyist, was aware of these opportunities and would keep Lake County connected with them. She related that the OEP presented the potential business leads they were pursuing, and noted that there was a decrease in activity with fewer new companies coming to the area. She opined that businesses showed reluctance and hesitancy in light of the current economic conditions, and mentioned that an economist gave a presentation on the global and national economy. She remarked that one focus in the City of Orlando was the semiconductor business, opining that Osceola County had received large dividends for high tech businesses and had seen much activity in that area. She opined that there were opportunities there, and she hoped that LEAD was looking at that area, noting that there were many grants available for incentives to attract computer chip businesses and high tech businesses.

Commr. Shields commented that LEAD was part of the three pieces, which included recruiting, business retention and growth, and entrepreneurship.

Commr. Campione hoped that there were opportunities and capital available for the growth of companies.

Commr. Parks remarked that he was interested in the global, national, and state economy presentation, and asked if that could be made available.

Commr. Campione answered that the County could obtain the presentation that was provided by their federal lobbyist.

Ms. Barker mentioned that Ms. Stern would be presenting the Board with an economic forecast within the next month.

Commr. Parks inquired if she used Dr. Sean Snaith, a state economist, as a resource.

Ms. Stern replied that he was a resource; however, it would be her forecast. She opined that in the following year it would be good to have another economist come in and help, noting that it had been done in prior years.

Commr. Campione wondered if the economist who gave the presentation at the OEP meeting could come give the presentation to Lake County, and Ms. Stern said that she would reach out to him.

Ms. Barker stated that Commissioner Campione had also requested discussion about utilities in the Mount Plymouth-Sorrento Community Redevelopment Area (CRA).

Commr. Campione commented that the City of Apopka had offered to provide utilities to the CRA with assurance from the County that the Cities of Mount Dora or Eustis did not want to serve that area, and noted that there were many considerations, such as distance and access to reclaimed water. She related that a developer was encouraging this, and that the CRA wanted central utilities in that area, opining that it was the only way to redevelop that area with amenities. She wondered if the County could buy utilities from the City of Apopka in a wholesale type of arrangement and if it was advisable. She mentioned that it would be similar to the arrangement with OnSyte with the County being the utility provider while using their sewer plants, and that the County would have a rate from the purchase of that utility from the City. She relayed that the developers were going to construct the capital lines to acquire the service there, and she questioned if the Board wanted to explore that possibility. She pointed out that a long-term goal for the Wekiva area was to have services, and that there was an old utility there which could be acquired and upgraded for the old Mount Plymouth Golf Course area.

Commr. Smith asked if the County was still waiting for replies from the Cities of Eustis and Mount Dora.

Ms. Barker answered that the City of Mount Dora was going to do the calculations, and that there was no update. She related that the City of Eustis was going to contact the developer to see if there was an opportunity to work together, and that she had given the developer’s information to Mr. Tom Carrino, Eustis City Manager, who could contact them directly for any opportunities to provide services.

Commr. Campione related that the City of Apopka offered to impose no more than a 10 percent surcharge for receiving the service out of the jurisdiction, and that the Cities of Eustis and Mount Dora both imposed a 25 percent surcharge. She opined that the City of Apopka’s offer would be more beneficial to Lake County residents.

Commr. Smith remarked that it would be better if the base rate was the same.

Commr. Campione relayed that the City of Eustis was considering a rate study to be done there so they could offer a different rate for that area.

Commr. Smith opined that it could be transformative if that area could receive water and sewer services.

Commr. Campione mentioned that the developer gave a conceptual presentation to the CRA which included the CR 437 realignment, and that the developer could speak to the Public Works Department for a way to integrate that into their plan. She said that they wanted to develop a large assemblage of property, and opined that it was at the only location that could accommodate a large master plan. She stated that another priority she wanted to discuss was the use of ARPA funds to solicit a few local builders to build five to 20 units on infill parcels around Lake County by paying them a market rate, and pointed out that the County could then transfer those units to The Salvation Army to use for bridge and transitional housing. She noted that there was a lack of inventory to use for the in between stage, and that the agreement could include a reverter clause ensuring that it would return to the County if it was not wanted for that purpose. She opined that if the property came back to the County, it could be sold, and the funds could be used for other affordable housing. She mentioned that The Salvation Army was important to Lake County’s homeless mitigation program, and that they worked closely with the Mid Florida Homeless Coalition. She explained that The Salvation Army took vouchers and helped homeless people obtain housing, and opined that they would be a good local entity to partner with and would appreciate the opportunity to do this if the County could have the units built. She opined that if they could be built in various locations, it would alleviate the impact on neighborhoods.

Commr. Smith commented that the County owned land in various locations throughout the county that could be sold at a low cost, and he suggested that those could be used.

Commr. Campione remarked that the properties that the County would normally give to a nonprofit organization could be used, and she asked if there were any available, noting that they were usually given to Habitat for Humanity.

Ms. Marsh replied that she would check, and that most of those properties had been disposed of. She pointed out that properties that were not accepted by Habitat for Humanity, Homes in Partnership, Inc., and the Christian Worship Center of Central Florida were generally in locations with no services, such as the Pine Lakes and Astor areas; however, she could look at the list to see if there was anything left.

Commr. Shields opined that the Cities could also be asked.

Commr. Campione relayed her understanding that the City of Mount Dora had lots, and that if they were willing to provide the lot, the County could pay for the housing to be built. She opined that the County could find builders that would want to help, such as Homes in Partnership, Inc., Habitat for Humanity, and Mr. Joe Ziler, President of Kevco Builders, Inc., who was currently involved with many infill projects.

Commr. Parks opined that the County should make the offer competitive, and that it should not be a grant.

Commr. Campione opined that the builders could give the County their best price for the projects and still generate revenue; additionally, there would be an opportunity cost. She opined that it would be better than asking them to build and operate the program, and that the County could then turn it over to The Salvation Army.

Commr. Smith opined that it was an interesting concept.

Commr. Campione then opined that the opportunity for the Wekiva Trail to go to the Cities of Mount Dora and Tavares was lost because CSX Transportation would not do business with the County.

Commr. Smith remarked that he had sent emails to them, and that they were still in negotiations. He relayed his understanding that he should hear something from them by the end of the current week.

Ms. Barker commented that Congressman Daniel Webster’s office had been instrumental in reaching out to them, and that their contacts at CSX had been investigating why there had been a reversal; however, there was no information about it yet.

Commr. Campione said that she had received an email from Mr. Mike Stephens, with the Lake 100’s trails committee and Friends of Lake County Trails regarding CSX, and opined that there was a pattern of CSX stopping negotiations in other locations. She related that there was a possibility of buying the Florida Central Railroad Lease, and opined that if the County obtained the rights they had under the lease and if ARPA funds could be used while using the railroad right of way, then it could present a cheaper option. She opined that the tourist train could be allowed to maintain the tracks and operate only a certain number of times per year, and that the trail could be open at other times.

Commr. Shields inquired what the deadline would be for the funding.

Ms. Barker replied that ARPA funding had to be obligated by 2024 and spent by 2026.

Commr. Campione opined that it could be spent sooner if the Florida Central Railroad was willing to sell them the lease, and that even if CSX chose to negotiate with the County, the lease would still have to be bought.

Ms. Barker stated that another priority from Commissioner Campione was for the Astor roads.

Commr. Campione said that when the FEMA was giving attention to this area after the hurricanes and the disaster fund was established, there was an opportunity to obtain help for some of the roads, and even though many of the roads were too low and had drainage issues, there were some spine roads and key roads that the County could ensure would always be passable. She relayed that there were ditches and canals in some areas that only received maintenance when the need became dire, and she wondered if there was a funding source, such as federal infrastructure funding, that would provide the funds to proactively clear some of these areas to serve as retention and storage areas for flood waters and to help mitigate flooding.

Ms. Barker then relayed that the Wellness Way Area Plan was a priority from Commissioner Parks.

Commr. Parks commented that he wanted to ensure that the integrity of the Wellness Way plan was held up, and that the staff was doing that. He said that he was not asking for a particular action, but he opined that the Board should be cognitive of the resources that would be needed as the Wellness Way plan was starting to build momentum.

Commr. Campione suggested that the Board could be updated on how employment opportunities related to residential development.

Commr. Parks opined that there could be some challenges in the following year, such as people involved with the plan who may want to change it, and that the original plan should be kept. He opined that the partnership with the City of Clermont was working well, and that he did not want the County to counter what the City was doing with the immediate development occurring in the city portion of Wellness Way. He wondered if the County had adequate staffing levels to handle working on Wellness Way full time and processing what was coming in, and said that Dr. Richard Levey, with Levey Consulting, was helping staff follow through with this plan. He commented that he wanted them to have the resources to ensure that the integrity of the plan was upheld.

Commr. Campione relayed that another priority of hers was internet gaming facility permits and renewals, and opined that the County should review the permitting fees. She opined that if it was not an annual review, then the renewal fees should be increased, and that there should be a full time position to monitor and oversee these establishment requirements in coordination with the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO). She opined that this position could be a law enforcement or code enforcement officer position, and that there should be some staff time overseeing what these establishment were doing and researching how many times were they cited for violations. She opined that an increase in the permit renewal fee could fund a position dedicated to overseeing these establishments, and that the ordinance could be revisited to ensure there would not be any new permits issued; additionally, as permits were not renewed, the County could reduce the number of allowable establishments until the number of permits was at the lowest possible number.

Commr. Smith thought that when this was first approved, it would be reviewed annually, and said that a staff member could only oversee the establishments in unincorporated Lake County.

Commr. Campione stated that the County was only responsible for those establishments, and that if a City had an issue with one, the County could not help them with it.

Commr. Smith indicated that he would be in favor of this.

Commr. Parks reiterated that the fees would cover the cost of the position.

Commr. Campione commented that it would be based on the needs created by the establishments, and she questioned when this item could come before the Board.

Ms. Marsh related that she would have a meeting soon to review the existing 31 facilities on the list, which was routinely provided to the LCSO making them aware of those locations in unincorporated Lake County. She recalled that when the Board adopted this ordinance, there was a cap of 25 with the exception of those facilities that were already operating before February 23, 2021, and that there were many applications for locations the County was not previously aware of. She commented that permits had to be renewed annually, and that they were treated the same way as adult entertainment applications. She mentioned that they were staggered throughout the year, and that the County wanted to enact some changes, such as having an annual renewal every September so that staff was not having to process them throughout the year. She related that the County could forgo the cap and prohibit any new establishments from obtaining a permit, and that as establishments closed, changed ownership, or did not renew permits, there would eventually be no more in the unincorporated areas except those that were legally operating and in compliance with the County codes. She stated that they were working on those changes and would bring them before the Board as soon as they could.

Commr. Campione commented that she approved of going to one period for all permit renewals and removing the cap, and that she wanted to see how much the renewal fee would need to be to fund a position and cover any additional staff time involved.

Commr. Shields questioned if that new position would work for the LCSO.

Commr. Campione suggested discussing it with the LCSO to find the best way.

Ms. Barker stated that it would be funded through the General Fund either way, and that they could meet with the LCSO and the Office of Code Enforcement to decide what would make sense.

Commr. Campione mentioned that another priority she had was condemnation and code enforcement for uninhabitable structures, and said that there were several of these structures in the Pine Lakes area. She relayed her understanding that the County had not done any condemnation before, and opined that if it was not a homestead property and was not brought up to code or made safe, then it should be fined and foreclosed on. She asked if the Board would approve of a more aggressive approach, opining that when there were places that were in as poor condition as they were in the Pine Lakes area, it was as if the County was condoning illicit activities in that area; therefore, the County should do something about it.

Commr. Shields recalled that there was a marina on Lakeshore Drive that was reported as having dilapidated buildings and swimming pools, and he thought that the County had taken them out and made it nice again.

Ms. Marsh said that it was Lake Susan Lodge, and that someone had purchased it for redevelopment and did a settlement agreement with the County because of the code liens that were on it.

Commr. Campione opined that the code liens made a difference.

Ms. Barker then noted that Commissioner Parks had listed staffing levels as a priority.

Commr. Parks commented that there were certain areas of County government that had much demand, and that he had heard from residents that there was not enough staff in those areas, such as the Office of Planning and Zoning and the Office of Building Services. He questioned if the County had enough staff to meet the expected level of services, adding that he did not want to just build a larger government entity, opining that Lake County was still about the same size as it was before the Great Recession in the number of employees.

Commr. Smith mentioned that each of the directors could come to the Board with their requests.

Commr. Campione opined that they felt pressure from the Board to do more with less and to make it go further, which was a good goal; however, if there was a real need, the Board needed to know if they were having a challenging time accomplishing their work.

Commr. Smith commented that there were other ways to provide staff, such as vendor relationships.

Commr. Parks recalled that there was a company, Other Personal Services (OPS), which offered temporary employees, and opined that there were some benefits to them.

Ms. Barker remarked that they had discussions with the department directors regarding their budgets, and opined that even though they did not know what would happen with the economy or property values, they all believed that they had the Board’s support. She related that they were also considering restructuring several different departments, and that they wanted to ensure that the new structure was working efficiently before determining if they needed additional positions, noting that if the actual process was not improved, extra positions would not help.

Commr. Parks opined that they should also ensure that they were retaining talent.

Ms. Barker commented that Mr. Kovacs had indicated that there was a new scheduling system for employees for participating departments called the 9/80 work schedule, and that out of a 10 day pay period, an employee would work nine hour days for eight days and an eight hour day on the ninth day with the tenth day off. She relayed that employees would have a three day weekend every other week, and that those who were able to work remotely would have the opportunity to work remotely one day a week. She mentioned that it was implemented in December 2022, and opined that it was going well, noting that they were monitoring productivity and customer service levels. She remarked that she had heard praise from the employees, and that she had not heard of any issues with productivity or customer service levels. She stated that they had seen a large change in turnover numbers because fewer employees were leaving, and that other local governments had contacted Lake County with requests for more information on this schedule.

Commr. Parks remarked that he appreciated that they were reaching out to all levels of staff to assess those needs.

Commr. Campione stated that another priority she had was for community clean-up strategies, and recalled that the City of Eustis had asked the LCSO to allow inmates to participate in their clean-up event. She opined that it was a great way to enhance the Keep Lake Beautiful clean-up days because it offered more manpower, and that the community appreciated the inmates’ help.

Commr. Smith mentioned that he was meeting with the LCSO on the current day, and that could present this request to them, opining that it was a great idea.

Commr. Campione stated that another priority of hers was to partner with the Lake County Water Authority (LCWA) on the purchase of a parcel of land which had been a restoration and peat mining project on an old muck farm on the east side of the Pine Meadows Conservation Area, noting that the owner had decided not to continue with the peat mining due to many permitting issues. She mentioned that they had completed the reclamation part with FDEP and were willing to sell it, and that it could become the last piece of the Pine Meadows Conservation Area. She relayed her understanding that there were grant opportunities from other agencies, and that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) had always wanted this piece to be part of the Pine Meadows Conservation Area; additionally, it would provide access from the east as well as the west side. She opined that this could be a partnering opportunity with the LCWA because it was more of a water quality project, and that the County could manage the active part while the LCWA managed the water quality improvement. She said that she wanted to seek consensus from the Board to acquire this property; otherwise, it could be sold to someone else.

Commr. Smith opined that the Board should not wait until the following joint meeting to take action, and that he and Ms. Barker could contact Mr. Marty Proctor, Chairman of the LCWA Board and Mr. Ben Garcia, Executive Director of the LCWA, with this opportunity.

Commr. Campione said that she did not want to lose this opportunity.

Ms. Barker commented that they could organize a meeting.

Commr. Campione relayed that since the LCWA had organized lake cleanups in the past and Keep Lake Beautiful organized lake cleanups for the County, a coordinated effort could be beneficial. She remarked that she wanted the LCWA Board members to be part of the Keep Lake Beautiful program, and opined that the lake cleanups could be merged.

Commr. Smith asked if she thought that the LCWA should manage the Keep Lake Beautiful program.

Commr. Campione opined that the LCWA cleanups could be blended into the Keep Lake Beautiful program, and that one of the LCWA members could be on the Keep Lake Beautiful advisory committee and encourage their Board to be engaged in the cleanups.

Commr. Smith indicated his support for this idea.

Commr. Campione suggested that the County could bifurcate the LCWA services for land management and water quality controls, and opined that the land management could be managed by Mr. Bobby Bonilla, Director for the Office of Parks and Trails, and his staff, unifying the land management. She also opined that Mr. Bonilla could report to the LCWA on their properties, and that the Hickory Point Park should be under the active park system. She opined that LCWA funds should be used for the much needed improvements and infrastructure upgrades at the Hickory Point Park, such as water lines and sewer lines, and that it should then be moved over to the active County park system.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that this would be part of the stormwater projects.

Commr. Parks inquired if she thought all the lands should be moved from the LCWA to the County.

Commr. Campione opined that the land management of the passive parks could also be moved to the Office of Parks and Trails under a unified system; however, Mr. Bonilla could report to the LCWA on those properties. She mentioned that some parks were passive and active, such as the Lake Norris Conservation Area, which had primitive camping and canoeing there, and opined that it would be better to have them under one entity.

Commr. Parks opined that it would be good.

Commr. Smith indicated that he was in favor that.

Ms. Barker noted that this would be a topic of discussion at the joint meeting with the LCWA in April 2023. She said that this concluded the presentation, and asked if there was any Board discussion.

Commr. Campione then commented that the OEP brand was “Unbelievably Real,” and that the branding material allowed one to modify the colors and parameters.

Commr. Parks related that on the previous day, he had met with the Legislative Delegation and CFX in the City of Tallahassee, and opined that there would be an additional eight troopers on the CFX system through the use of toll funding. He said that he wanted to thank Senator Dennis Baxley for asking for specific input on four Senate bills, and that he would provide his personal opinion on the four bills and make the BCC aware of them as they could directly affect the County budget. He mentioned that they were Senate Bills 120, 122, 124, and 126, and that these bills would affect homestead exemptions and valuation of property, opining that they would have a negative fiscal impact on Lake County.

Commr. Campione inquired if there would be any cap on investment or rental properties.

Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that there was not a cap, and that the intent was to help businesses.

Commr. Campione opined that the Senate should help with the affordability of housing.

Commr. Parks opined that it was good that the Senate would ask County and City officials how they would be affected.

Ms. Barker stated that she would distribute the copies of the bills to the Board.

Commr. Campione asked if staff could calculate the impacts so the Board could respond knowledgeably.

Ms. Barker replied that they could work with the Lake County Property Appraiser’s Office and calculate an estimate.

The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.

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

Commr. Smith thanked staff and all who attended, and opined that it was a good meeting.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:22 a.m.

_________________________________

kirby smith, chairman

ATTEST:

________________________________

GARY J COONEY, CLERK