[Music] [Music] Check. Check. [Music] [Music] Yeah. Holy Spirit. The cont. They are new and it seems very
institutional. >> Yeah, I think a little bit cooler than This is the Lake County Board of County Commissioners regular meeting on August 26, 2025 in board chambers administrative building to Florida. recording in progress.
Good morning everyone and welcome to the August 26, 2025 Lake County Board of County Commissioners meeting. And we're honored to have with us today Pastor Michael Watkins of Friendship CME Church here in Tavaris. And so we'll welcome
you to um the microphone to give our invocation and then we'll remain standing for the pledge. Welcome. >> Good morning to all. >> Let us pray. Oh God, how grateful we are
for even the fact that you woke us up this morning and started us on our way. And we thank you for our county commissioners and thank you for the responsibilities you have given them. And I pray that you'll give them wisdom
as they make decisions for the residents of this county. Bless their families and loved ones. We pray for the citizens of this county, those who will be coming before them today. I pray you give them favor and just bless our country. Lord
God, we thank you to be able to live in a place where we are free to choose many things in life that we want. So Lord God, this is the day that you have made and we shall rejoice and be glad in it.
I pray this prayer in Jesus name. Amen. >> Amen. >> I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to theublic for which it stands, one nation under
God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. Thank you, pastor. Um, always a pleasure to have you here. Um, agenda update. Jennifer Barker, county manager. >> Yes. Good morning, Madam Chair,
commissioners. Uh, first I would like to request that we pull tab 19. This is an unanticipated revenue resolution that was meant for the emergency management department. However, it was um put on
the agenda as an adopt a late program. So, we're going to pull that agenda item and revise it and bring it back at a later date. >> So, moved. >> No move. >> Um second is um I'm requesting that we move tab 25 to immediately follow the
consent agenda. Tab 25 is discussing our transportation funding options. We have with us today Representative Nan Cobb. She would like to be present to hear the discussion. However, she has a conflict later in the morning. So, if we could move that up so we could do that
presentation, I would appreciate it. >> Move to approve consent agenda with the changes of removing tab 19 and moving tab 25 to a more appropriate point in the agenda.
Okay. Can we We don't We usually wait till we get to the consent to make those changes. >> Oh, approval agenda. I apologize. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, I think we're we're good on the agenda as matter protocol. We
don't typically do a motion, but I think we we've all acknowledged those changes. Um minutes approval. Mr. Cooney. >> Uh good morning. I have two sets of minutes for your approval this morning. All right. Now, I'll take a motion, Commissioner Sabatini,
>> to approve the minutes. Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? All right. Those minutes are approved and then we're moving to citizen question and comment period. Um
so, um we have um signature cards. If you have not signed up and you wish to speak during this u time in the meeting, um this is a a point in our meeting when the public can discuss items that are on today's agenda with the exception of any zoning items. Anyone who has joined the
meeting through Zoom can use their phone and press star 9 to virtually raise their hands. Anyone participating through Zoom, please click the raise hand button to let us know that you wish to speak. Everyone will have three minutes to speak and after three minutes an alarm will sound letting you know
that your time is up. I'll start with the speaker cards that I have. Um and we have quite a few actually. So I know we're trying to get Commissioner Cobb out of here or or Representative Cobb out of here. Um so we have to
figure out this is going to be Let me just look at these just to make Three. Four. Five. Six. Seven. 8. 9.
10. 11. This is >> 30. 40 minutes. >> Yeah, that's about 40 minutes of time. >> You want to move it up now? Um, as far as county attorney, is there any prohibition on us shifting the citizen
comment until after we have an agenda item? >> If the comment's not specifically on that agenda item, you can go ahead and move move it around as you need to. >> Okay. All right. Let me just make sure that these are incentives. All right, we have one on
transportation, but we can Okay. And we do have veterans here today. Or do you mind waiting for your comments until after we have our um transportation update? Um because I could just I could do the veterans comments first. Um were you planning to
stay for a while or were you planning to talk and then leave? Okay, why don't we do the veterans comments and then we'll we'll come back to the other public comments. >> Is that is that okay with everyone on the board? Okay, I think that would be
appropriate. So, we've got David Bris Bristol. Okay. And then we have James Johnson and then Chris Singh and then Jerry Weed. So
we can go in that order if you wish to speak. David Bristol. >> Okay. You'll go. Okay. >> Uh over here. >> Morning ladies and gentlemen. Respect. Please allow me to introduce myself and
what I'm here for. My name is Chris Jerome Singh. I'm a 26-year veteran. I did 10 Marines, six in the Air Force at 77. I'll go back again if they need me and if I could serve the boys food, but
I will serve. Our problem that we have today, ma'am, sir, we had VSO, veteran service officers, and in the past, I was here maybe 10, 12 years ago, there were two guys. We asked for one. Thank you guys. You give two
more and you give a clerk. Right now we do not have any veteran service officer. Ma'am sir our veteran here just about all of them 100% disabled. At one time we were young we went to foreign country to fight for
this country for all of us men dog we fought for this country. We came back here and we have physical we have mental emotional and sometime financial problem. These VSOs are like angels. We come to them and they guide us through
the V maze. I don't know how much you know but the V maze is very complicated and most our veteran do not know how to do it. My job as a veteran service officer which I've been doing this since 2006 help them then we bring them to the
county VSO and they do the paperwork and process the whole thing for them. Um, okay. My background again like I said I did 10 Marines, 16 Air Force. I'm past commander of the Davy chapter 87 here in
um Leburg. I'm past commandant of the Marine Corps League 5277 Claremont. Past commander of the VFW chapter 1120. Uh past commander of the American Legion and I'm a moose mason.
All them good stuff. I joined all this organization so I can encounter my veterans so I could guide them how to approach the VA and put in for the claim. Now if we don't have no one out there to help them, we are heartless because we are less than 10 1% of the
men and women who serve this country and we come back and we're not asking for much. Just give us a little help for medical, you know, psychological. Ma'am, if I could explain to you, you know how it it bother us at 77 years and
I still think of incident you calling an air strike and when they ask for collateral damage and you say 13 never mentioned that nine of them were children and we live with it. It kills us that we could live with this. Uh most
civilian doesn't encounter this. Respect to the cops, respect to the EMT. But we are there 24 hours a day in foreign country kill people who don't do us anything. And we got to live with it. And I belongs to the Christian faith. And the Christian faith said, "Thou
shall not kill." And I got to live with it. And all I'm begging and asking you for, if you have it in your heart, please let us have VSO again. And another thing I was told that the housing department want to control the veteran service officer. With all
respect to them, they do not know anything about military. Our military men and women, we don't need housing. We live under a tree. We live in tent. We live whatever. We just need some psychological help, mental help, physical help. There's a young lady. She
suffer a whole lot from MST. It's called military sexual trauma, PTSD, and a whole lot. U sorry, my time is up, right? >> It is. And we have we have other speakers, too. I'm assuming everyone wants to speak. >> And can I just ask a question? I know
that the spot is being filled. They just haven't taken their post yet. The >> correct. We have several positions that are currently being filled. As you recall, we did when the uh previous veteran services officers director, the veteran services director did retire, we
transitioned the department to merge with the housing and human services department um to expand the services available. A lot of the services provided on both sides were overlapped and we thought it would be more efficient as well as opening up more uh
services available to the veterans. And so during that transition, we've um had some that have chosen to leave the employment of Lake County. However, we are actively filling those positions. >> Okay. So, just to clarify, it comes under the umbrella housing, human
services, and veterans. So, it's just an organizational issue. It's not that we won't have designated veterans services officers. So that we're just waiting for those positions
to get filled and this is the county manager. So she's in charge of personnel. So she's assuring us that those spots are being filled. They're just we're we're in a gap right now. So I think that what they've done at housing, if somebody calls and needs
help or comes in, they attempt to help them, but they're not really yet. We don't really have the veteran serviceser services officer yet. they're just doing it on a you know filling that gap temporarily. So just just to clarify.
Okay. Thank you. So let me let's go with the next speaker. We got to if you're going to ask ask a question I have to have a microphone because we have to record everything that happens at this meeting. So let's let's go with the next speaker and then maybe if you want to ask your question. >> Hello. My name is Jerry Weed. I served 11 and a half years in the US Army as a
paratrooper. Uh there's 22 people a day that die from suicide that are veterans. Okay? 22. This service officer up here is designed to help veterans. And it we cannot help
veterans if they ain't trained on what they got to do. And they it needs to be run by veterans and supervised by veterans because veterans understand veterans. Okay? You get somebody that knows nothing about a veteran, you're asking for trouble.
There's a lot of veterans go in there with PTSD, all sorts of mental anguish, and everything else. And you set one of them off, it's law will not turn out well. Okay? Y'all need to think about what you're doing as a group
for Lake County veterans because I can name a bunch of them out there that's got PTSD, got all sorts of issues, and you set one of them off, you're you're asking for trouble,
okay? I ain't here to belittle nobody. I'm just saying we have to do better. And that service officer up there, every time we get service officers, they last for a few
months, next thing they're gone. We get another set in there, they last a couple of months, then they're gone. We need to keep people in there year round and the same people that can work for us. >> Thank you. >> That's all I got to say.
>> All right. Appreciate that. Um, this is James >> Dave Bristol. >> Dave Oh, Dave Bristol. I got my cards mixed up here. >> Good morning, folks. I'm Dave Bristol, a longtime Lake County resident,
permanently and totally disabled veteran of the US Air Force 22 years. And I have been helping veterans and their spouses for years understand the VA system. It's not easy to understand,
but I understand it and I can steer them the right way. And when I send them to the county VSO and there isn't one, I get angry. And I am angry. The reason that the very good veteran service
officers that were there for the county left was because of inept management. The manager, a housing manager, knew nothing about veterans and didn't
want to learn anything about veterans, so they bailed out. And I don't blame them. It's very important for families also. I spend hours and hours and hours explaining to spouses about dependence
indemnity compensation. And I guarantee that the manager of that office doesn't even know what dependence and demnity compensation is. So get us a manager that knows something and get us veteran service officers to
serve the veterans and their families. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next speaker. Good morning. First of all, I would like to thank everybody for giving me this opportunity to express my thoughts and
feelings about what the present situation is about the VSO veterans. I did my tour in Vietnam at a very early age, right two years after high school. I
didn't volunteer. I was drafted behind the fact that 10, 15 of my high school graduates, we all signed up to go while we were still in high school, getting ready to graduate to protect our country at all
necessary reasons. But any rate, as we were as the years went past, 10, 15 of our high school graduates was killed. That tore us apart. Yeah. 18 years old, 20 years
old, you think you know everything, but don't know anything. But we were drafted. I was drafted. I went and did what I had to do for this country of mine. I knew it was wasn't going to be easy. It wasn't going to be easy at all.
But I was trained to do what I had to do. No, we were trained to do what we had to do. And that was protect and defend. And right now, I am here trying to do my best to help the other veterans. The ones that gave them gave
their all, I take my hat off to them every day. Every day. And the ones who did make it back home, like me for one of them. But when I came back home, I brought a lot of bad things with me. Couldn't sleep, couldn't eat, couldn't
do anything. Drugs, alcohol, all of that. It played a major role in my m in my mind. And but I overcame that through the grace of God. Through the grace of God, I came through the through all of that because I know there were people praying for me. At any rate, right now
I'm here to beg beg this organization to get the VSO back to where it should be and have them do what they should do for the veterans and that is also to
protect and defend also. We gave it their all. We gave it our all and and I'm just asking for this committee to see it in their heart to understand what we are going through. And it's not like a light bulb where you can cut it on and
cut it off. This is a everyday thing. A sound, a smell, food, any smoke, these anything. Bam. Right back at you. And there you go again in your little hole doing what you have to do to trying to get the help
that you need. Yes. The VA's been good. It's been good. It's been a long, hard, trying time. But we need all hands on deck to help those veterans that are still out there and don't know which way to go. I think we deserve much more than what we are getting. And if you can see
it in your heart to do what need to be done, it' be appreciated by all. >> Thank you very much. >> We we appreciate it. We appreciate you. >> Yes, sir. You want to read something? >> Yes, please. I'll be real quick. Okay,
I wrote this out. I want to tell you what is a veteran. To understand a military veteran, you must know we left home as teenager or in our early 20s for an unknown adventure. We love our country enough to defend it and protect it with our own lives. We said goodbye
to our friends, family, and everyone we knew. We learn the basis. Then we scatter in the wind far corners of the earth. We found new friends, new family. We become brothers, sisters regardless of color, race or creed. We had plenty
of good times and plenty of bad times. We didn't get enough sleep. We smoke. We drank too much. We pick up both good and bad habits. We work hard and we play hard. We didn't even earn a great wage, very minimum. We were working 24 hours a
day. We were never 8 hours a day. We experienced the happiness of mail call and the sadness of missing important events. We never had cell phone. We never have email. Whenever the mail do receive us, we were so happy that our wife and kids are alive. Okay? We didn't
know when or even we're ever going to see home again. We grew up fast and yet somehow we never grew up at all. We fought for our freedom as well as the freedom of others. Some of us saw actual combat. Some of us didn't. Some of us
saw the world and some of us didn't. Some of us dealt with the physical warfare. Most of us dealt with it. Psychological warfare. We have we have seen and experienced and dealt with things that we can't fully describe or explain as not all of our sacrifice were
physical. We participate in in timehonoring ceremonies and rituals with each other, strengthening our bonds and camaradership. We counted in each other to get our job done and sometimes we survive it at all. We have dealt with
victory and tragedy. We have celebrated and mourned. We lost a few along the way. When our adventure was over, some of us went back home. Some of us started somewhere new and some of us never made it back home. When our adventure was over, some of us went back home and
started somewhere with new families that will never see home again. We have told amazing and hilarious stories of our exploits and adventure. We share an unspoken bond with each other that most people don't experience as few will understand. We speak highly of our own
branches of service and and poke fun of other branches. We knew, however, that if needed, we will be there for our brothers and sisters and stand together as one in a heartbeat. Being a veteran is something that we we have earned and
it can never be taken away. It has no monetary value, but at the same time, it is priceless gift. People see a veteran and they thank them for the service. When we see each other, we give a little nod, we give a little salute, and we
smile and we say goodbye. So from myself to the rest of the veterans out there and civilians, I commend and thank you for all you have done and sacrifice for us while we're serving and abroad. Try to remember the good times and make peace with our bad times. Thank you so
much. U Miss M Parker, I beg of you, please help our veteran. It's in your command you can do it to help these men and women who sacrificed their life and we are still suffering. Also, Miss Campion, please help our veteran. I beg
you, please. Thank you so much. And I appreciate our time. Thank you all very much. Thank you. >> Thank you. And [Applause] >> thank you so much for being here today. And we are working hard on getting those
two positions filled. Just real quick followup just super quick. Do we have candidates for that yet? >> We do have candidates. And in fact, I believe we're already doing the interviews. If not, they are scheduled. We do have candidates.
>> Okay. >> Yes, sir. >> Yes. You haven't spoken yet. You have to identify. Can you identify your name for the record so we have it on the record? >> I can't do that. Ma'am,
I have a path with the government that needs to be possessed. I'm sorry. But what I wanted to say is all these gentlemen spoke. I think the the the crust of this issue is veterans for
veterans. the housing has no part in our lives. If we can't trust the veteran that's servicing us, we won't go. Let me say something before I leave
here. I only speak for a lot of other veterans as well. We'll trust our money to our wives, our family, our banks, but we will trust our souls to another veteran.
I leave that with you because in your choice. You need to understand the veteran need to talk to a veteran, not someone from housing, not someone from anywhere else. If they're not qualified, they can't
help us. They don't feel what we feel. They don't understand what we stand and they have never done what we've done. I implore you to please take that into consideration in your selection for a veteran service officer or a
manager, not someone who has no idea what we've been through. >> Thank you very much for that. I appreciate it. >> Appreciate it. Appreciate your service. All right. So, we're going to move on to our transportation presentation
and then we'll come back and then pick up our regular citizen comment. Um, okay. So, let's see. Jeff and Jordan. Yes. So, Commissioner 2, as they're approaching the podium, I just wanted to
introduce this item. So we've had many discussions here with the board members as well as in the public about the needs of our transportation system. Uh we have a lot of rapid growth as everybody is aware happening right now and the financial resources we currently have
available for infrastructure improvements whether it be road resurfacing projects or capacity increases on on our current system have have been have been lacking. So today we want to just give you an overview of some some financing options
available to you to um accelerate the critical road projects. These are by no means an exhaustive list. It's just a few options we'd like to review with you for your consideration. However, we're open to any other ideas we can
talk about, take some feedback from the public. uh our goal is to accelerate the the road infrastructure project so we can meet the needs of our residents >> and I know we've had a lot of discussions about this and I know from my standpoint particularly in my
district but this is countywide um we there's a backlog of projects um and the way that our no funding works our transportation needs are sort of all grouped together a lot of the roads that service our county are part of the state
transportation system and some of those are where we have our they've been at the top of our priority list for a really long time like 44B 444 44 41 widening in uh Leburg Leburg at Perkins also in Mount Dora from Donnelly to um
Renegger's you know there and then 44 from Eustace to um Leburg that whole stretch of roadway um so we we have this massive backlog um and as we all though we've been trying to um sort of bring
that to the attention of of the state as far as the current transportation funding formula doesn't allow us to get caught up on those things. So, so anyway, I think the hope was that we could look at some different options and that's the the goal of the presentation
today to see what else is out there or what might be available right now. Thank you, Jordan. >> Thank you. Good morning, commissioners. Madam Chair, for the record, Jordan Salinger, public works operations director.
So many counties and local governments uh face funding challenges when it comes to transportation infrastructure. So the purpose of today's presentation is to look at some of those potential funding options and then um hear the board's discussion and and further direction.
Our outline includes discussion of the current funding sources. Uh we're going to look at some funding overview and trends, then discuss the current resurfacing needs, and then take a look at the additional 5-cent local gas tax option. Then I'll hand it off to Jeff
Heheart, engineering director, to discuss the road capacity projects, and then Allison Teslia will discuss the additional funding options for those capacity projects. Then we'll open it up for board discussion. So, the current funding options when
discussing gas tax, um the the pennies tend to get a bit confusing. They're a little complicated. For every gallon of gas sold, uh the tax is collected, and then depending on which penny, the revenue is divvied up between the state, the counties, and municipalities through
interlocal agreements. Many of the pennies were enacted in various years and some apply to both diesel and gasoline and others apply to just gasoline and then some pennies have limitations on what we can spend the revenue on. So with respect to the state
allocated funds uh we have three pennies. They are collected by the state and distributed to the county. Uh these pennies apply to gasoline only. So the first penny is called the county fuel tax and the second two pennies are
called the con constitutional fuel tax and both can be used for road and bridge construction maintenance and debt services on transportation projects. So the county essentially receives 100% of these three pennies because they're not split with the municipalities.
Then we have the locally imposed pennies which will be our our primary focus for today since we have more control over those. Um there is one penny referred to as the ninth cent. The 9th cent is called the 9th cent due to its history. At the time of its implementation in
1972 the state already had 8 cents. So this was the 9th cent on top of the state tax. So the 9th cent is collected on both gasoline and diesel fuel and this one is split between us and the municipalities 50/50
and then there's the 6 cents local option fuel tax. So these pennies are collected on gasoline only and Florida statutes allows counties to levy between 1 and 11 cents per gallon of gas in this category. So between the allowable 11
cents and the 9th cent that brings us to a possible total of 12 cents. So all Florida counties levy a minimum of 6 cents. Our 6 cents was levied 2 cents at a time in back-to-back years in
the 80s. The six cents are split um 66 33% where the 33% or one-third of those six pennies are divvied up between the municipalities according to their population size and their road miles. The uses of these funds includes uh
public transportation operation and maintenance, road, bridge, right-of-way maintenance, equipment and structures used primarily for road maintenance, road and right-of-way drainage, street lighting, sign, signal striping, and the construction or reconstruction of roads
and sidewalks. So, the uses have expanded a little bit in that category. So, while we currently have a total of seven cents locally imposed, the county only receives a portion a percentage of each of those seven pennies.
So, we just mentioned that we collect seven pennies, but in as authorized in uh 1993 by state statute, there are five cents that are not currently being imposed. These five pennies would apply to gasoline only. Um, but we'll we'll
dive a little bit deeper into the five cents in a in a later slide. And then we have gas tax. Uh, well, we've discussed gas tax and another funding source is the infrastructure sales tax. So, one penny is collected for every dollar on goods sold in Lake
County. I think it's important to note that the previously discussed gas tax as well as the sales tax applies to purchases. So this isn't a tax that directly falls on the shoulders of our residents, but it it's assessed to visitors as well. So it's a shared
responsibility. This sales tax is collected and distributed by thirds to Lake County School Board, the municipalities, and the BCC. Around 17% of the one-third share that goes to the BCC is typically distributed
to public works. The majority of that portion um is dedicated to capacity projects, but resurfacing as well as any debt service payments for loans taken out also are typically paid by uh sales tax. Public works is not permitted to
utilize this tax for road and bridge maintenance, but rather it's used for capital expenditures associated with construction, reconstruction, or improvements of public facilities that have a life expectancy of five or more years.
Also the related land acquisition, land improvement, design um or engineering costs associated with those improvements is also an authorized expenditure. And then we have road impact fees which is a major non-tax source of our
funding. These impact fees are one-time uh charges that are assessed on new developments including residential, commercial, industrial. Um, it helps to ensure that growth pays for growth. It helps to address the increased demand on
our roadway networks created by this new development. The rates charged by vary by development type, but the larger traffic generating uses will incur higher fees. So, as such, these fees can only be used on capital road
improvements such as new roads, road widening, intersection improvements, signal and safety improvements, etc. but not for maintenance. So, these fees are collected in geographic benefit districts, as you can see, and they don't immediately align
perfectly with the commission districts. There's some overlap. Um, and the expenditures of these fees must be used in those geographic areas. This image demonstrates the revenue from impact fees collected for fiscal year 25, about 7.7 million countywide.
You'll notice that the west district shows zero. This district is the villages um where there are impact fee credits currently. With county approval, developers can perform roadaway improvements themselves rather than the county contracting and paying for the
improvements with the impact fees we've collected. So, it essentially is is a trade-off that works um to the county's benefit as most developers will perform these roadway improvements in conjunction with their development. So that means projects typically get done
faster, cheaper, and with uh less risk to the county. So we're going to dive into some trends. The population outlook, we previously mentioned development and growth. Here is a population history from 2000 and a
forecast out to 2050. Historic values were pulled from the US Census Bureau and our projections come from the Bureau of Economic and Business Research or Bieber. Bieber has low, medium, and high growth scenarios. So here we've used the
medium growth scenario. As you can see, Lake County's population has more than doubled in the last 25 years, and we're expecting another 35% increase over the next 25 years. But I'd like to note that again this was the
medium growth scenario. The high growth scenario uh was closer to 750 um,000 population in 2050. So it goes without too much explanation that growth significantly impacts our
roadway network um with respect to both the capacity and the maintenance because of the wear and tear of all these additional vehicles. And one would think that um with the population doubling that gas tax revenue would also double, but that's not the case. With electric
vehicles and fuel efficiency um it it can't keep up. So they definitely have not followed the same trend. And then there's inflation. While there's lots of discussion on population growth and inflation, there is another
important related trend to note and that is the uh construction cost index. So this chart compares the n national consumer price index or CPI to the national highway construction cost index obtained from the federal highway administration. While the construction
industry has historically exceeded the CPI, there has been significant variance since CO times. Between 2020 and 2025, there's been roughly a 70% increase in average construction costs. So, this trend has directly diminished the
purchasing power of the county's available funding. It limits our ability to deliver the same level of infrastructure improvements as we have in the past. So simply put, the dollar is no longer um going as far as it once did. So especially as it relates to
construction. This is an overall view of public works revenue since 2000. As you can see, some uh sources have remained fairly consistent while others have fluctuated quite a bit. We've discussed gas tax
which is shown in orange and as you can see it definitely has not doubled. Um road impact fees are shown in gray and sales tax is shown in red. Resurfacing funding um from the MSTU funds is shown in purple. That showed up in 200 between
2007 and 2010 and and tapered off. Um but we've recently received MSTU funds again for fiscal year 25 and they're budgeted for 26 as well. That's a similar scenario to general funds. Um, in more recent years, we've seen a lot
more general funds. The green uh that you see was the 2019 resurfacing loan that was secured in an attempt to catch up on those four and five critical rated roads. Um, however, the that was right around COVID time. So, that work was delayed. So, the
revenue shows up in 2020 and 2021. And then lastly, public works charges uh service fees for our reviews of residential, commercial, industrial, and subdivision site plans. Um we need to make sure that we cover the cost of
staff time associated associated with these development reviews that are shown in yellow. So last year, public works did perform an analysis of these service fees as it's been a considerable amount of time um since those fees have been adjusted. So it's important to recover the cost of
the staff time associated with the development activities so that the gas tax dollars can be preserved and committed to road and bridge maintenance. Essentially again growth should pay for growth. So what is not shown in this chart is
the grant revenue as this is not a consistent funding source. Um but impact fees do um and are often used to um um match those grants to make our dollars go that much further. So for fiscal year
26, we have budgeted 15.1 million in gas tax, 1.2 million in service fees, 4.4 4 million in general fund, 1 million in MSTU, 7.9 million in sales tax, and 7.7 million in impact fees totaling about 37
million from these revenue sources. So, if we look at um our 26 projected $37 million revenue, this is how it's utilized. Gas tax and service fees fund the operations and maintenance which
takes up about 43% um of that total revenue. This includes staff salaries and everyday maintenance costs associated with maintaining our roads and bridges. Capacity projects are funded with impact fees and the majority of sales tax. This
accounts for about 37% of that revenue. And then lastly, resurfacing is funded with part uh part of sales tax, MSTU, and general funds when they're available and is about 20% of our budgeted revenue for fiscal year 26. And again, any
grants that we're able to secure, which we try to go after as many grants as possible, extend those dollars. So now we'll talk about the current resurfacing needs. This is a slide that you've seen in our previous May budget presentation. Um,
these road, this is the road ratings from 2020 to 2025. The miles are based on our centerline miles. So, new roads will start out with a uh good rating of 10 and progressively deteriorate over their lifetime. So, the average lifespan
of a higher volume collector road with preventative maintenance is between 15 and 25 years. The average lifespan for a lower volume uh local road with preventative maintenance is between 20 and 30 years. So these lifespan estimates um without that preventative
um maintenance component can be reduced by upwards of 30 to 50%. That's due to the accelerated cracking, oxidation, and moisture infiltration that we're experiencing today. So with the recent um with additional recent
funding made available, we are and have been able to make a little bit of a dent in our critical rated roads. But the roads in the yellow um in the yellow category, which is sort of the danger zone, they are progressively and rapidly
deteriorating and and they keep refilling our red bucket. So this is another slide from our budget presentation. We averaged the cost of local and collector roads and applied it to the total miles in that category. It's this is just to demonstrate very
high level estimates. So currently out of our 1,293 total paved centerline miles about 50% are in the green 25% in the yellow and the remaining 25% fall into that red critical category. This means that
nearly half of our maintained roadway network is either already in critical need of repair or quickly on its way to needing critical repairs. So, please keep in mind that we'll never touch, you know, all of these buckets. We'll never touch every road in any given year. So,
even if $93 million fell into our lap, um we would never be able to contract uh $93 million of resurfacing in a single year. But this is to simply spread some awareness of the overall need that should be addressed over a number of years with a plan.
So as you can see from the average cost, if we are able to dedicate more funding for road preservation before they hit the yellow category or immediately after hitting the yellow category, we would be able to extend the life of our roadways significantly, resulting in our
maintenance dollars going much, much further. So this is the uh road miles resurfaced history um since 2014. Historically the main funding source for our resurfacing program has been sales tax. But sales tax is a shared revenue
source and there are competing interests um that need to be prioritized at the countywide level and we understand that as a result resurfacing funds have fluctuated. So therefore, the annual miles we're able to resurface also fluctuate. So you'll notice a
significant increase in 21 and 22 and that was from that um $10 million resurfacing loan that originated in 2019, but those COVID delays um you know resulted in the actual work being completed a couple years later.
So, as you can imagine, it's a bit tricky to program long-term maintenance without a consistent funding source because it'll dictate whether we complete six miles or 35 miles in resurfacing in any given year.
So, the great news is that in very recent years, additional funding has been allocated for resurfacing. So while in 24 we received approximately 5.1 million in 25 that was increased to 8.1 million for fiscal year 26 we're
expecting about 7.5 million and we're hoping that this trend will will continue. So, if we're able to um continue the $8 million, you know, annual budget um for
resurfacing specifically, this is the 10-year outlook of what this might look like for us. It's not quite enough to get us out of the red, but you can see that the critical roads are significantly reduced.
But keep in mind this is barring any economical craziness like a COVID or anything else that would really you know disrupt the the construction industry as well. So let's circle back to that additional 5-cent local option gas tax um that is
not currently being implemented. Should the county implement all five pennies and assuming the same 66 33% split with the cities, um we can expect roughly 4 million in additional annual funding for resurfacing. This could bring us um to
12 million if the existing funding sources remain consistent. So what can we do? What can we accomplish with $12 million of consistent funding? It can get us out of the red well before the 10-year mark.
Additional funding would allow us to incorporate pavement preservation techniques so that we can get ahead of that deterioration. This would allow us to transition from being reactive to much more proactive. And it would save on so much road
rehabilitation costs in the long term. So the most important aspect of an adequate maintenance program is that key word consistency. So, now we're going to take a closer look at the additional 5-cent local gas tax option.
What is the rest of Florida doing? Florida has 67 counties. 39 out of those 67 already levy some portion of this additional 5 cents. That's 58% of Florida. So out of those 39 counties,
28% levied the full 5 cents. As you can see in the dark green, we have highlighted Seminal County here specifically because they are the most recent county to have levied that full 5 cents and it was implemented through a supermajority board vote at their August
5th board meeting. As we can see, it's it's not novel or or crazy and the trend is to levy the full five cents. Um, and you can see that most counties in Central Florida and South Florida are already doing that.
This view is a slightly different look at what is happening locally. The previous slide was displaying which counties specifically were implementing that additional 5 cents. This view demonstrates the larger bucket of local gas tax that I discussed earlier. It's
the 9th cent, the six cents that every county has, and then the additional 5 cents, meaning there is a maximum of 12 local cents possible. Since Lake County has the 9th cent and the six cents, we are currently at seven local cents. On
the left, the darkest green indicates counties that have fully implemented the 12 cents. You'll notice that we did keep Seminal County at the seven cents because we're comparing present- day gas rates. So that their full 12 cents has has not
been fully implemented yet. So let's look at some examples. Bradford Bradford has the lowest average gra gas prices with uh $2.89 per gallon as of last week.
Bradford implements the full 12 cents, but Bradford may not be comparable to us because they're they're tiny and comparable to our population size. So, we're going to look at another example. Orange County, they levy only 6 cents.
So, that's a penny less than us. And as of last week, their average gas prices were 5 cents higher than ours. Let's look at our next door neighbors. So Sumpter County, we both levy the same seven cents and their gas price prices
average 4 cents higher than ours. And we can keep this going. Hernando County, they have uh the same average gas prices as we do and they levy the full 12 cents. And lastly, let's just take Lake County
out of the equation and compare Gilchrist to Levy County. They are essentially at opposite ends of the spectrum with one lev levying uh seven cents and the other one at 12. But if you look on the right, they have the highest gas prices in the region, both
of them. So while I don't claim to be an economist, it doesn't seem like there is a direct correlation between levying the gas tax and the average gas prices. However, if um
one might say that the gas prices are definitely going to go up, and if that's the argument, then I would point to um uh Semino County's argument that they estimated that based on 12,000 annual miles driven, the financial impact to
the average driver is estimated to be $2 per month or a mere $24 a year. They also noted that by implementing the additional gas tax that the tax burden is shared with visitors as opposed to the burden being placed on residents
alone if it was added as an advalorum which they did also increase their millage rate in a mixed strategy approach to address their their funding deficits. But again the additional 5 cents was passed by seminal county board for a period of 50 years and it is
effective January 1st. So, what do we do? Implementing the full five uh cent local option gas tax can secure roughly 7 million in additional funding that would be split with the municipalities. Lake County would see
more than 4 million in additional resurfacing funds. It could be implemented through a majority plus one vote by the board or put to a voter um approval as a referendum. Um, as a note, I thought it would be interesting to know the number of counties that have
implemented the additional local options specifically through referendum, and I couldn't find one, but there was lots of evidence of um them implementing through board approval. Um, almost all
of them, I found some evidence that it was through board action. At any rate, this tax would need to be levied before October 1st for it to be effective January 1st of 26. And per statute, proceeds from this tax must be split
with the municipalities um per an interlocal agreement. So that concludes my portion of the presentation. So I'll hand it off to Mr. Hehart. >> Can I ask a quick question though about the four million? Is that would that be the county share or is that is that
taking into account the split with the city? >> That's after the split. Yes. >> All right. Just want to make sure. >> Thanks, Jordan. Good morning. Jeff Airheart, um, engineering director. Just wanted to give a little bit of what some of the capacity projects and just kind of let let you know um, coming up January 9th, we'll have a full
presentation on our on our five-year program. And this is just a little taste of what's kind of to come. And we keep hearing different numbers of what the capacity projects may cost. So the ones that are listed here, um, they come up to about 1 billion in in cost. And that's estimating design and estimating
some some rightway cost. But I always like to start with a little bit of a good news or things that that are currently happening. The 466A project is almost ready to start construction. and we're doing some PD&E and that's estimated to cost about between 12 and 15 million for
construction once it's bid. Citrus Grove phase 2 is also currently in in bidding. This one is estimated to cost between 23 and 25 million to do that particular project. It is getting 8 million from the state and then we're making the rest of that up through sales tax and impact
fees. And finally, we talked about Odora roundabout just about two meetings ago. Um we're moving forward with that with about an $8 million project also funded cooperatively through DOT um and our impact fees and also Mount Door is participating. So, in addition to some
of those projects, there are, as Commissioner Campion mentioned, that the um the projects are mainly on state roads. And here's some state roads that we generally don't fund out of our impact fees, which is State Road 44 in Mount Dora as well as US 441
in um Leburg and 441 in Mount Dora. And you can see some estimated costs there for 44 is about $43 million for construction. um 441 in um 19 million and then 28 million. I also wanted to kind of add in that if we
did look at widening and doing because we've been looking at 19 from to varies up to uh I I just went to the bridge. It didn't go over the bridge except go over the bridge I add another 10020 million but just to to get up there is about $105 million and those type of capacity projects and
these are DOT projects that are typically funded by DOT and we typically do not participate but that doesn't mean that that we can't participate in and move those move those forward. um projects that are related to a lot of our county roads, which a lot of you are very familiar with. These is our Round
Lake Road expansion is estimated. This is going the whole way from the county line up to uh 40 um 44. That's about 100 million when we do the entire project. The rolling acres, the expansion there, um as well
as 455 and 437. You can see the the 455 is very long. It's about 88 miles. That's about over 200 million to go that that whole stretch down south. As well as um the county road 44 that we mentioned going from Leburg to Eustace that could cost up to 400 million. And
one project that we're looking at funding is the Hook Street may or may not come off that's estimated about 30 37 million. So there are a variety of capacity projects and so I'm in I'm talking a billions and we're talking millions. So it's a it's it's an
interesting thing. But we've got Allison who is going to tell us exactly how we're going to fund all this or give us some options. Allison, >> good morning. For the record, Allison Tesla, director for the office of management and budget. So, I'm going to talk about some of the additional
funding options um other than the fit cent that we have available. Um so the first one, the Florida statutes give the county um the authorization to establish establish an MSTU um which could be used
for transportation improvements. Um if we went down that route um in order for it to be a countywide MSTU, the municipalities would have to opt in. Um MSTU um revenue could be used to increase the
road capacity, improve intersections, um add traffic signals um for the countywide network. It could be utilized also as a match for state road projects which would also speed up some of these projects and we would be able to stretch
the dollars um being at match. Um we estimated that a half mill would generate approximately 20 million based on the current property values. So the other option would be financing.
Um we could uh leverage some financing which would also accelerate the most critical projects because we would have immediate funding. Um, it would also be considered a more cost-effective method other because we would be paying higher construction costs if we waited to do it
in future years. Um, if the board decided to go this route, we would work with the the county's financial adviser to evaluate um and recommend the most effective financing office options. Um, currently the rates are about 4 to 4.75% depending
on the number of years that we would go with. Okay. So, I'm going to turn it over to the board. Um Allison, if you could go back to the financing. So, some of the roads that we had proposed, and of course, this isn't,
you know, by any means a final proposal, but some of the roads we proposed to use the financing for would be the state road 44. This would be a partnership with the state. I have had conversations with Representative Cobb who indicated
that if the board chose to go with the financing option that there would be a legislative request for an additional $5 million for road uh for 44B to help offset the cost. Additionally, Hartwood Marsh Road is a major choke point in the
South Lake area. We do have fund some funding identified, not all of the funding identified. It is a partnership with the state as well. They've provided about $9 million or $7 million, excuse me, worth um of funding to accelerate
this project. However, we estimate that this project is going to be for the immediate needs $ 18 to $20 million. So, we would have to identify that that additional funding outside of the state funding. And then finally, the state road project. If we wanted to do a small portion, maybe perhaps by the bridge
area um where you it it intersects with 48 19 and 48, that could be an option as well. So, if you chose to go the route of the financing option, we would limit it to just a few of the the critical choke points throughout the county and
then you could talk about the other options for long-term um maintenance resurfacing needs or the long-term capacity improvements for this infrastructure. As far as the ones that you just listed,
if we wanted to also run the numbers on say 44 from Eustace to Leburg and the Perkins 441 expansion and the 441 expansion in Mount Dora, um where it bottlenecks from three lanes to two lanes. Same thing in Leburg. Um, we
would look at it from a matching fund standpoint, not the county doing the whole project, but state if we put up this much, will you put up the balance? >> Correct. And with my conversations with DOT representatives, they did indicate that if if the county had skin in the
game for these state road projects, it would accelerate the timing of the improvements on the state side. Any additional questions for >> staff? Okay. All right. Um, Commission or
Representative Cobb, would you like to come to the podium? >> Good morning. Thank you very much for having us and thank you for having the discussion. Um I have spoken with Secretary Tyler and uh regarding 44B.
The funding is not available till 2032. You all know that we cannot sustain that till 2032. It will just not allow it because it's problematic to begin with. Now by 2032 from 441 to to 44 you won't be able to drive. It's it's that backed
up now. So, um he had committed to uh um that it is the number one project and it meets all five prongs of the priority and I would ask for 5 million in appropriations. Um he's he's aware of all that and um he said the first check
that they would write would be back to the county uh once we started the project if you all could get the loan. Um it u it is a number one priority for them. It is Madam Chairman, you know how bad the
road is and um I um I don't see a problem getting the five million from the state. I don't. >> So would they do you know though when you talked with the secretary would they take that out of our other MO projects or would that be like a standalone
appropriation? Do you have any idea >> stand that 5 million is a standalone appropriation for that road? >> Okay. All right. because I know in the past we've gotten in trouble when we've tried to get um >> improvement funding >> improvement funding from our state representatives and then the FDOT says
okay that's fine but now we're going to take that from another project that was on your list >> now this is strictly 444B >> okay and then um another you know thing that we had kicked around was um the intersection like a couple of the key
places on that road considering that it's like a $40 million project like what about taking a few of the key locations like the intersection at 44B and 44 is just you know it's ridiculous. The traffic was backed up the other day um all the way to the lakes of Mount
Dora. Um you just don't have you know enough turn lanes and it's as you know I was there last night trying to come off of East Lake Joanna Drive making a turn to the north. I sat there for I don't know how long. Finally I decided okay I'll just go south and then I'll see if
I can find a place to make a U-turn. Um, and ultimately I found a place to make the U-turn. But it, you know, it's just you drive it, so you know, and you live it. Um, but I we I mean I certainly appreciate it from the standpoint of, you know, if we can, I mean, that puts a
lot of focus on that, you know, on the road from DOT and um the 5 million would certainly help a lot. It's just timing wise if if there's a way to um you know leverage you know using financing in
order to get things started sooner than later would be ideal. >> That would be wonderful. And I will tell you right now it's currently 42 million and if we wait till 2032 it won't be 42 million. I think we just heard the uh the finance portion of that and you know how much worse it's going to be. >> Yeah. >> It's like trying to make a left on
weight. I think we finally solved that but at those points are just difficult. Yeah. Yeah. And you know, we still have the bottleneck issue at 441. So I think that still needs to stay there because you go from three lanes to two at Donnelly. And so that that really
actually, you know, makes that part the southern part of 44B, >> you know, as bad as the north part. >> But they the conversation I had with Secretary Tyler was to get started on 44B. He knows how bad it is and it is the number one priority, but we just
cannot wait till 2032. Thank you very much. >> You're welcome. You're welcome. Any any other questions? >> No, I I want to just a comment. I have comments about other things and long term what we should do, but I think short term this is a good move and um I
I appreciate your discussions. We had a good one last week about this and um I think it's a good a good shortterm u you know solution for us. Um it'll address the it'll address the and South Lake um Hartwood Marsh Road as well too. So, which you I know you know is is pretty
bad, but >> um you deal with the other one dayto day, but yeah, I deal with with Hartwood Marsh weekly at least. So, um I think it's good for us to move forward and I appreciate your time. >> All right. Well, if there's anything else I can help with, please don't hesitate to reach out. >> I I I just have a question. Um you
mentioned something about a loan um to get this completed. Would that loan be would that loan be through state or would we be doing traditional routes? No, this would be um a loan that the the board would secure,
the board of county commissioners would secure on the advice of our financial advisor >> like they did before. What was it? >> Like we did with the resurfacing basically. >> Right. Right. I know that. But I'm just wondering if there's another avenue for
this loan through the state that may have a better percentage rate than what we do through traditional financing. And that would be part of the evaluation process that we would talk to with Jake Glover, our financial adviser. Um, we could look at at funding opportunities
through the state, private loans, a bonding consideration. I mean, we would look at all of that to find the best value for the >> Okay. >> for the board. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> So, those two projects, 44B and Hartwood Marsh are estimated to be how much?
So Hartwood Marsh just for one portion of it that we're looking to do in the next several years is about we estimate it has not been bid but we estimate 18 to20 million. We do have $7 million committed by DOT. So we would have to
identify the additional 11 to you know $15 million that would be needed. Um for 44B they estimate the entire project to be roughly 42 to 43 million uh for the widening and intersection improvements and things like that. However, if you
could do just the intersection portion, I have spoke to DOT just doing the intersection at 44B and 44 that would probably be around $5 million. So if we could at least come up with 50% of that
funding that could immediately and then it would help until they could have an opportunity to widen the the remainder of the road. And I know that they're re they were um revising the study of the road um
because a lot has happened since the original plan. And at the time the original plan was adopted through the PD&E process, there was also a lot of public um um un they people were unhappy with the plan itself. They didn't
necessarily love the plan. Um so the fact that they want to go back in and revise it um that that's going to take I I'm just guessing 6 to 8 months >> at least. >> Yeah. So that's still h that would still have to be done for the whole road
project. So the thought was, could we get them to take on the intersection at 44 and 44B first? Then the revise of the plan happens, then we take the 5 million that we would hopefully get as an appropriation, add that to what we might
be able to borrow as our match to do the whole project, which at that point the whole project would be a little less because you will address that intersection. >> Correct. you know, so it'll it'll bring that number down. >> And the intersection improvement that is being proposed, um the DOT
representative sent me kind of a map. So, they're looking to do a widening at the intersection to do a dual left turn lane onto 44B from 44 going towards 441 and then a
dual left g left turn lane from 44B going west onto 44. >> Yeah, that's the one that people just have a makeshift lane right now. And I will tell you that that DOT project I' we've talked about that 44B
for 40 years and it's been on the shelf sitting there the plan for 20 and it's still and now it needs to be amended again. >> So that's how long this has been discussed. >> So just just so I'm clear um we're we're thinking that this
intersection at 44 and 44B will be 5 million. >> Correct. And it'd be a split between the county and the state. So 2.5 million county and 2.5 million state. >> Correct. >> And do we have two 2.5 million in the
county right now under our current road budget projects? >> It would have if we took it from another project. We would have to reallocate it from another project. >> Do we have any of them that are allocated for another project now that may be eight years down the road? >> I'm sure we do. We could we could
provide a list of what those projects are, but currently it would have to be reallocated from another project. >> Okay. So, you can get 5 million even though we're only going to spend 2.5 and we're going to keep the rest.
>> That's going to go towards the whole project. The 5 million >> goes towards the entire 44B project. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. You need any questions, please hesitate. >> And thank you very much for being here today. >> You're welcome. Thank you.
>> Okay. As far as, you know, direction on these other issues. I mean, I think we, you know, we we got a lot of information today that we probably need to all maul on. Um, Commissioner Parks, do you have a comment? >> Yeah. Um, I I appreciate staff. That was very thorough presentation, good
historical background and um uh I I'll sort of condense my comments. This has been a obviously a hot topic for all of us, but I put a lot of time into this. I know personally this past year and um certainly appreciate if some of the people I see in the room, you know, like
Lake 100, home builders, uh realtors as well, working with all of you um just trying to hear you out a little bit over the last couple months about um putting some solutions on the table. And we do have a lot to think about. I'm I'm hope I'm hoping and you know you might see my
frustration is because we're we're talking about I mean you look at the impact fee graphic for instance you know $8 million in the South Lake district which is the highest amount that's collected and that doesn't even do one mile worth of construction.
I mean, we're we're talking about here we are and we're doing the right thing with the short term here, but we're talking about delaying other projects to get these moved up. So, you know, I'm just hopeful that um and and confident working with you all
that, uh that we'll really make some good decisions uh hard decisions over the next couple months to get get some funding sources in the long range transportation plan through our NO, as you alluded to. um sharing is going to be important in committing monies. Um
yeah, you know what my I'll just put them out there. Uh you know what my um I have some lowhanging fruit long term and some things that longer longer term we should also address that maybe a little bit harder to talk about. But I do think the gas tax is as uh is something that
we'll get will get our resurfacing program up to speed. Um, I think that we should commit 8% out of our uh general fund budget right off the top and it'll it'll force fiscal constraint everybody that shares out of
the general fund um moving forward. Uh, and I would ask that the cities commit the same amount as well. Some do, some don't. But I think it's some discussions with the cities that they would uh I think they're they're understanding now that the time now is the time that we
have to come together to put money in the pot, so to speak, to start whittling away these projects that end up on the LOP list uh and just sit there for years and never get done. And then we're here frustrated moving projects around and at
the MO cities are asking why aren't these projects as you know aren't why aren't they being funded and they just keep getting put off further and further. Um I I'm interested in the sales tax and that was something you mentioned in the presentation.
I mean a question about um you know the interest of sales taxes is that again everybody pays that um but also people that visit the county pay into that as well. I know that's not up till 2032. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Yeah. I mean, let's I'll just put this
out there. Could Could we discuss um you know, restructuring that um with supporting the the county to do uh the school board to do an additional half penny for them and then restructure the existing one penny that we have now to
commit more towards transportation. I don't know whether that can be done and without going out to another referendum uh sooner or do we have to wait till 2032? >> I think I would think you would have to wait till to the um the current
authorization sunsets in 2032, >> but you could begin talking to the because it would have to go out for referendum, right? >> So, if you wanted to to take effect in 2032 and you would put it on the ballot in 2030. So you would start talking to the public and and getting feedback and
and what their priorities are earlier than 2030 >> because the because the one penny and everybody knows this up here, but the one penny that's collected is a third, a third, a third >> city, county, school district. So potentially with that change, you would have a half for the school board. They
would actually gain more and then it's a half city, half county using most most of that towards roads. Uh so it's just a thought I obviously can't be solved today but I just think we have to have that discussion and then as well as u
why is it costing roads why is it so much um why does it cost so much to build roads I mean I think we have to keep looking at that I mean I tell people I don't know what you tell people in the public the people the residents that you represent you know the first thought is um well we
don't really care you guys just figure it out um you you know, don't it's cut the cost somewhere. And I'm I'm looking I'm thinking, where do you cut the cost on building roads? They're so expensive. I mean, one thought is is perhaps I see
some builders in the room. What do we need to do to reduce the red tape, the bureaucracy, so to speak, to have some of our local builders build these roads, which I know >> privatize it >> in some in some areas of the county where they're building roads cheaper
than what we can do. And I I I hear it, but then I but then I hear reasons why it can't be done. And I understand some of those reasons as well. But I think we have to look that if we're going to be talking about um at least if we're going to talk about a gas tax and then maybe an additional penny and then using 8%
out of general fund, I think we also need to look at the the cost of of building the road. >> Just briefly had that discussion real quick with just some staff. What are the options for private sector, maybe smaller contractors? There's got to be a better way on the roads. Every time I go
to these fat conferences, they're always there's commissioners and vendors that say, "We found a way to get roads built at a much lower rate." >> I don't always follow up on that because I'm busy with other parts of the conference. But >> I don't want the staff to I'm not trying to put the staff on the spot randomly
because obviously didn't plan to have this part of the discussion subp part, but do you does Jeff or anybody have ideas on that? I mean, that's what I'm most interested in >> because usually what they do is they'll get their impact fee credits and then they build the road in exchange and they
Yeah, that's that's that's the privatization side that we currently use. And those that impact fee slide, I don't even think in included the value of those credits. I may be wrong, but >> it didn't. So, and and if you remember
what that graphic showed was the West Benefit District had zero revenue generated. That's the new villages in the in the Leburg area. And the reason we're not collecting impact fees is because they're building the new interchange for 470. So, all that road
construction you see happening on County Road 470, the villages is financing. They can do the work cheaper than we can, and we provide them with the credits, the impact fee credits. >> Yeah. But it's just that that works when you have >> you have somebody like the villages >> somebody like the villages that can do
that as a general rule. It's it's more of a priv private umization on a short taking care of what's in front of their development. They're not taking care of anything else except what's in front of their development. Right. And I think that's some one way we need to look at
it is the impact that you're going to have on 44B is going to be much worse than just your 300 homes and your analysis. We we've got to say you're going to have to help us with 44B if you want to. >> But we've been told by the courts that
we can't do that. I mean we you >> the art of negotiation that and they can say no and we can say no. >> Yeah. You just have to every every single situation has its own set of facts. So there may be times when you could negotiate. If someone's trying to
take a parcel that doesn't already have current rights on it, that's when you have your most leverage to negotiate. But when they're on a parcel and it's already got urban, you know, high and they're zone C1, you don't have the
leverage to say, I also need you to go widen 441 for me because you're 3 miles away and you're going to impact. That's not allowed by law. So it it's it's you know, I know we all want a silver bullet and it sounds cool to say privatize it.
Well, how do you know there there is no such way to totally privatize it? >> Well, here's something we could do though with that along the lines. uh if if a builder um and again I know there's some in the room but if they're already mobilized building a road they're
responsible for I mean what isn't could there be some merit to let them keep doing their thing on part of what we know is going to have to be done in the future an extension or a widening and we come up with some through negotiations or whatever come up with some agreement
that that that is paid back as well because I would rather pay that back at at the at their cost than have us do it and it be a much higher cost and we're bonding and we're >> that that is how you privatize though. It's called pioneering and you let them
build it and then you pay them back. It's just that >> you know and there are times when you have that kind of leverage. I'm just saying it's not >> it's not leverage that you have in every single situation. It's it's the leverage that you have in certain >> but if you don't ask >> Yeah. There's more. >> Yeah. I think you ask and I think I
think there's a couple roads that you know and I won't I won't mention the roads because it'll give everybody like you know send everybody off but there's some roads that that I think where that could be done now. >> I agree but it would take in those cases
I think if you're talking about what if you're thinking what I'm thinking it would require a municipality to be involved. >> Yeah. and and that's where the that's where the uh you know agreements with them, joint planning agreements and and you know some understanding and more communication with them on that would
would pay off. I think >> I I'm I'm wondering and I like the idea and I was going to bring it up that since they're already mobilized and we already never have to fix this road, can we just have them fix the road, but I know that we do a bid process and we always go to the lowest bidder. Is there
a way that we can get not get around it? Is there a way that we can incorporate a new philosophy of thought to have this road built by somebody that is already mobilized that would reduce the cost per
mile um and then pay them the money at a savings to the Lake County taxpayers that would have been spent anyway if we would have had them stop and then had another company bid remobilize and go back out. We we have done certain things like like
that. There are sometimes we put in the developers agreement that they need to get the at least three bids the way we would and and bid it out. I believe are we also have in that if they give us an engineer's cost estimate that we can reimburse it that way. So there are there are we are taking methods to do that. You've approved um extending
Hancock Road. Um LAR is actually here. They they built their section and they're going to continue building it up to um from Five Mile up to Hartwood Mars. So, we're doing that that way. The uh the North Hancock connector up there um that's um Nick German is doing he's
he's going to pay half and we're going to pay half and he's going to bid it bid it through that to hopefully get that less. Also, that connection up from 561A up towards the I call it Sugarloaf that Green Mountain connector. Um but LAR actually did that one. and we gave them 20 million that was 20 million impact
fee credits. So we are taking we are looking looking at those efforts because it's when when we bid it we do only get those few that that have the time to bid it and bid the big jobs and sometimes if you have a smaller job and there's also a lot of paperwork associated with doing work with us um as far as trying to get
the prices down. you you just mentioned it. Um you've got a private developer doing his part and then he wants to help with the road and you say, "Well, you got to go get three bids." Why would we do that? If he's already
there, he's mobilized. He's going to get the best price he can get >> that that I Yeah, >> there's there's a reason there there's a reason >> that So, so it's going to take what? three months, four months to bid something and you got to have three bids and it's got to be awarded. That's the
red tape that that is holding everything up. So, >> yeah. And I think with the with some of the developers, too. So, they're they're building the roads like you mentioned to Hancock. Well, that the houses are there. So, what we hear is why didn't you build the road first? And I understand there's some reasons why you
don't do that, but you're working on the road, but all the houses are there already. Well, what I'm saying is there's roads that are a little even further out that we know are going to have to be done. So, why not while they're mobilized at today's at today's cost,
look for those options. I know they're not going to be everywhere, but but look for those options and they're they're here. >> I agree. As long as we have the the funding now to to do it, it's it's it's nice to do agreements with them because they can do it more quickly and generally more more efficiently. even if
they do get those those three bids, they're they're still able to continue the momentum. They're able to negotiate with them, whereas we get a bid and that's our that's the bid. We really negotiating is hard for for us to do, >> right? Absolutely. >> I think you do. Melanie, were you going
to chime in on the reason why we like the developers to show that they at least bid it even though they're doing it under their >> own process? So, we do have some code language that requires them to show us at least three bids. again, you're you're trying to ensure that you're
spending the public money appropriately. Um, and just because they come to you with a number may or may not be the number that it should be. Um, I mean, much like people think government can just unlimited payout funds. So, so we do have code requirements. We could go
back and look at it. I think the other thing you have to look at too is some of our roads are federal aid highways and that requires a whole different set of policies and procedures that we have to fall you know go through. Um Brit roads an example even though it's was old you
know grove road paved over no rightway. It was a federal aid highway which is why it has taken us longer to get some of those things done because we have a lot of requirements um under federal law that we have to follow. So we'd have to look at all of those things. It may just be simple as code adjustments, but
again, we've got to look at state and federal requirements when it comes to roads. >> Couldn't we couldn't we quantify? We know the builder is going to build the road in front of their development as economically as possible if we ask them to build another two miles. Couldn't we
just quantify how much it costs them per mile in front of their development and continue that on knowing that that's going to be the best price that they could possibly get? and we can look at that and I think even what Jeff said we do have a provision in the code where if they provide us an engineers's estimate
then we can go with it but they understand that we are not going to be changeordered to death if their engineers estimate is incorrect. So we do have options that we can use um and again we can always go back and look at our our code provisions and see if we
need to make adjustments to that as well. >> Well at least it's a conversation that needs to be had. Yeah. And I mean, I have great trust that you're gonna you could call bull on somebody that's trying to, you know, pull something over. You're going to look at that. >> You'd love to negotiate with with with
developers. >> Yeah. Uh I mean, but but that said that would bypass the process of which I which could take what's I mean six months. Am I off on that? Like to go get bids for them, 12 months for us maybe. So I mean you're talking some time right
there. That could >> they can do it a lot quicker than us. our process is much longer and I I will reiterate what what Melanie said is that if it's a DOT roadway, they have very specific and they have to review stuff and get it approved beforehand and and all that. So, it's it's be much more uh
harder to do this on a DOT type road. >> And and just to add to that too, keep in mind it also depends on the sophistication of the developer. Um you know, you've got your big builders, this is what they do. You may have smaller builders, they may not do it as much. Um, and I'll just throw out as an example. Several years ago, we had an
issue where we had builders on the opposite ends of a road and we had negotiated with them that they would build out the road to meet in the middle and they started at different survey datam points. They did not meet in the middle. They had different elevations.
So, there's a lot of things that go into it other than just saying, "Hey, you developer, just build this for us and we'll throw you some impact fee credits." There's a lot of of things that we have to look at. No, I totally understand. I just think I think we're we're at the point where we have to do something like that. I think I don't know. I think and the fed the federal uh
requirement I mean I've been told this a month ago that the Trump administration is and you know from the Department of Transportation on down is going to make that the requirements a lot easier from their federal money that's attached to DOT. So I hope that happens. I've been
told it is. So I that doesn't bother me as much this time. Um because I do know that yes, the federal requirements can get pretty >> used to be pretty bad, pretty long. >> And just to point out to you as well on the issue of the gas tax, if you are
going to move forward with that, I will need your vote on that today because it has to be done before October 1st, meaning it has to be done on September 23rd and I have to advertise for that by September 10th, which is week after
next. So, if you are interested in doing the increase of the gas tax anywhere between the one to five cents um for it to go into effect January 1st, I would need that decision today so I can bring that ordinance back and have it adopted before October 1st. >> So, you would need to at least hear from
us whether you wanted to advertise it today. Yes, I I would need to know um if you want to advertise it, you know, if you have a specific number, if you want to do all five cents or less than that, again, you also have the option to do referendum, but of course, that would not be until 26 and then it wouldn't go
into effect until the following year. So, either option, but if if you do want to do the October 1st for effective date of January, I need that answer today. >> Okay. Um we did have a speaker card. Um I don't want to cut you off if you want.
I've got a bunch of questions on the tax. So, >> okay. >> We'll let the speaker. >> Okay. All right. >> The only thing I wanted I did want to say is that >> what are we legislatively mandated to do to lake for Lake County as a board of county commission?
>> For what? >> Safety. >> Hundreds of things. >> Safety, infrastructure, >> right? We have a a whole host of discretionary and non-discretionary expenses. for instance, um you know, we have to do public safety, we have to do infrastructure, roads, um we have to
pick up trash, we have to provide funding for um Medicaid, juvenile justice to the constitutional officers, things of that nature. >> I would like to get that number based on our budget for 2026, if you don't mind,
because I I am not one to raise taxes until we've cleaned our own house. And I want to know where it all all the money is and how we can possibly move money around. And everybody's suffering on the roads. So maybe everybody's going to
have to suffer that they're not going to get the money for a park or something like that. I mean, it it's I need the numbers, the real numbers of what we're required to do and then we'll look at the budget and we'll address the rest.
>> Right. Speaker cards. Um, Bud Dorman and then Adam. >> My name is Bud Dorman. I know quite a few of you. Um, I'm the owner of White Aluminum and Windows. Um, also a 30-year member of the Homebuilders Association,
three-time past president. I've joined Lake 100 myself four or five years ago and I've also been talking I'm also a member of the real estate association and all the chambers in the county. So, um I have no doubts that
there's a ground swell of public support for roads in this county. We all drive every day. It actually cost me money in my business because of how crowded the roads are. I think everybody here
understands that and obviously the big problem is finance. Uh recently we've developed a coalition. I can't speak for those parties now. I can only speak for the homebuilders association, but there is some popular
support through that coalition that maybe would surprise some of you. So there could be additional funding mechanisms developed because of that. But we're looking at really big numbers here. So, um I can tell you this that the board of the homebuilders
association is in 100 support 100% support of uh supporting and building better roads in this county which will you know make smart construction uh enabling you know roads and waste
treatment plants uh allows more housing which develops a stronger economy and I'm 100% behind that because my business survives on that. Um so, uh there's no question in my mind we just have to put the finance together. I it would be hard
for me to believe that somebody would be against roads. Um it develops a strong economic infrastructure as well as schools that will bring uh more money to the county uh through either commercial ventures or more residential
opportunities. So, uh, I look forward to hearing how the county commissioners are going to decide how to move forward. Uh, but to me, there's there's so much money needed that all avenues need to be looked at hard to determine how we're going to get where we need to go. Thank
you. >> All right, Adam. >> Good morning, Madam Chairwoman, the board. Um, I kind of wanted to reiterate uh what Bud said. The um I know that there's a lot of us here that are trying to focus on the transportation issue
because we all sit in the same traffic and now it is um fairly pervasive throughout the county. Um I certainly wanted to urge everybody on the board to look at the gas tax, get us equal to most of the surrounding counties. We are um
obviously a growing county. um we're pretty much right on target from the study that the county conducted 20 years ago um where we're going to be. So, it's um it's it's a good opportunity for us to get the same. Nobody here wants
additional taxes. Um this is approved by the state. We'd be looking forward to at least taking what is already allocated by the state. I would certainly encourage it. um the public private partnership. You know, I heard some examples just last week of um a road
that was put in by um a Fortune 500 builder. Um counties cost 4.4 million done private side 2.6 million. So there is some opportunity in my opinion that we could
try to express those deals. as Tim uh Commissioner Morris uh noted, you know, the P3s are a good opportunity for us to save money across the board. And then I do believe strongly that allocating some general funds. Commissioner Morris again
said he wants to know where the taxes, where we're spending, and stuff like that that automatically is bringing our budget down. We're it's going to tighten the belt. So that is in keeping with uh your opinion of trying to sharpen our pencil here at the county. So um you
know when I look about the tra or think about the traffic situation the um you know let's say the state goes and give us all the same tax rate which you know there's been some discussion about the state stepping into everybody's role. If that were to happen the thing that's
going to separate our county from other counties that surround us is really when you're looking to relocate business and bring in good revenue tax revenue is all things being the same. what's it like for your truck to pull out in a semi, you know, and stand still 45 minutes in
front of your business. So, it is important, I think, that we start really tackling it. Out of the couple of months we've been discussing um transportation, one thing I have figured out is it is not a big chainsaw to cut down the tree. It's going to be a whole bunch of little
axes slowly cutting it down. But I think every opportunity that we can take to get something um on the board and start putting money toward it, the sooner the better. You know, the problem's not getting better. It is in fact not getting better. So, I'd look I'd be uh
certainly want to stand behind the board and tell you guys that we are looking for a transportation solution. The sooner the better. It's not going to get less expensive to put in roads. That's for sure. That's all I have. Thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you. Um question on the local
option. Um but this is for staff. Um the resurfacing that's where we've been focused on that would be the way to try to take down um the roads that are in the fours and fives that trying to keep them from getting more degraded.
>> Correct. >> So that would not go to capacity. >> No. >> So I just want everybody to be clear that doesn't that's not going to change whether you're sitting in traffic the the gas tax. it's going to be whether the roads are crumbling. >> It's it's going to re provide
resurfacing funding as well as a proactive approach to preserving the road. So doing um a true CIP where five years out you do some sort of and I don't know if this is the timing the timing is correct but crack sealing or
rejuvenation and then it extends the life where you're not having to do a full mill and resurface. But yeah and to the point that you know arguably it takes multiple approaches it's not just one thing is gonna you know but that
just so everybody I just wanted to be clear that that's more towards the resurfacing side of things not the capacity um which was you know where we got we're getting into the billions on the capacity and then um then the countywide MSTU
that would require an opt-in by all of the cities to be countywide. You couldn't. What if one city held out? You still You couldn't do a countywide MSTU. >> Well, you could do it for all but the city that >> all but that city, >> right? >> Okay. And could you could that be a a um
could that be a referendum issue or >> it could be a referendum as well. However, the cities would still have to opt in through interlocal agreement. So if you wanted to take the approach of of going to referendum and then the cities
are evaluating how their residents feel about the potential of an MSTU for road capacity projects, they may be more favorable to opt in at that point. >> Question about that. So, if if that was an option and and it gets on the 2026
ballot and say two cities decide not to do it, do the do the do the people in the in the those precincts not is that not on their ballot or is it >> so >> in the cities? >> Yeah. So, I'll jump in there. I it really wouldn't be an MSTU on the ballot. You would do it as a bond
referendum like you just did public lands and then it would be applicable across the entire county. >> They just wouldn't opt in and >> right there's no opt-in at that point. I mean, if it's a referendum, it's it would just be a bond referendum. >> Yeah. All right. >> Okay. >> But it wouldn't be ongoing funding. The
MSTU is an ongoing funding structure. So, you could set it up for 20, 30, 40, 50 years. >> Whereas, if you did a bond referendum, it's a set amount that you put on the ballot not to exceed this this period of time. >> And we had mentioned the possibility you
list five projects and say we're going out for a bond referendum. Does the public support this to get these five done and they might be the matching for the state to pick up the 50%. >> But it would not be the ongoing MST. >> Okay. All right.
>> Right. >> Okay. Um I do I I I appreciate Commissioner Morris um asking the question of a breakdown on how things shake out budget-wise, like what are essential, what are discretionary, what
are mandated by state law. I mean, you can take the budget. I think I I pretty sure that you can whether you use a highlight pen and different colors represent different things, you know, but it would at least break down that dollar amount. So, if it comes back and
I don't know, let's just say you said find $3 million or discretionary >> three million more than we had, >> but but but well, it's three more. But but then you have that discussion about what is it used for and is it nec really necessary to stay where it's at versus
move somewhere else. So I think that's a good exercise. Um me personally, I'm not prepared to vote in favor of gas tax today. Um but >> so I I have several questions on the ga on the gas tax and these three options
here. Um the first and I don't know who's going to be able to answer any of my questions, but we'll we'll just try. Do we have a percentage of um Lake County people purchasing fuel as opposed
to outside of Lake County purchasing fuel? Will someone please come to the podium? >> Yeah, because she and you might be able to extrapolate from the sales tax. Yeah, >> I don't care who it is. >> He's getting angry.
>> But I just want to add that when we did the sales tax, you know, referendum, we actually had a study done on who was actually paying the sales tax and it broke >> it was almost 40% other people were >> and that but that's for good. So I don't
know if that would have be but just in case you wanted to try to extrapolate from that. Um, I I don't currently have those figures, but we're more than willing to try to do some research and see if if we can get those numbers for you. >> Let me put this little anecdote out there, too, just along the lines. Um, in
South Lake, where uh the turnpike has been it seems like under construction for 10 years now, um, and it's got 10 more to go. Uh, most of that traffic on a literally on a daily basis, and this is this is will sound like I'm trying to pass the problem off onto somebody else,
but it's true. We know that that traffic gets diverted off of the turnpike onto 27 or off of 50 through South Lake and all those on almost a daily basis. Not I mean I could be exaggerating but it's a lot and those people are buying gas in
Lake County and they've been buying it for years now as that project has been a problem. Uh, and so I can only imagine and they they track the data and how many people and how many times it goes off and that is a that is a big part of the traffic problem in South Lake by the way just that alone and everybody trying
to get around I4 on 27 the other end. Um, it diverts people outside of Tampa to come up through Lake County. So I bet it's a lot of people anecdotally we know it's it's a lot of people that are going to pay the gas tax. >> I'm sure. But I'm trying to >> educate the I'm trying to educate the
public as well with some of these questions. >> Yeah. No. And I know you a number would be good if you had an exact number. >> We'll try to do that research. >> Yeah. >> So, is there a way that we can get some type of um idea about how much is county spent, county
citizens are paying for gas as opposed to outside? I don't know if there's a way to do that or not. Um I know there's quite a bit because we have a quite a bit of transient traffic coming down 441 paying our taxes. Um we're a major thorough affair
uh from the turnpike 295 which is going each each side. So I know I know that there's got to be at least 20 or 30% I'm thinking of outside of Lake County and we're including visitors as well because
visitors come and spend taxes on gas on rental cars and everything else. So um I would like to try to get that number if we can >> try our best. >> All right. And maybe you can get with um
Ryan with economic discover lake to see how many overnight stays and we can kind of extrapulate driving patterns there as well. I I don't know. Uh one of the things that I
that I I noticed that uh one is it one cent is not does not get for diesel. Uh what is that? >> So let's see
which one was that? >> I think it was slide five maybe. How about the state allocated funds? So, can you bring it up on the screen? >> All right. So, for the state allocated
funds, >> it's not that one. >> Oh, no, not that one. So, those two are gas only. The 9th cent is for gas and diesel and then the six cents only apply to um to gasoline and
not diesel. >> Okay. So it's all of the six cents is not diesel. >> Correct. >> So we need to quantify how much diesel is being spent compared to gasoline here in the county as well. >> Okay,
>> that should be fairly easy to do. Um, and the reason why I'm asking these questions is can you go back to the last slide? Actually, um, go to the one which shows all the counties and the and the and the
gas rates. Okay. Right there. Um, it looks to me like we're on par just about with every other county, even though those counties are incorporating the the extra six cents. >> Correct. That's what we know.
>> Do we know why that is? >> No, it's >> Is it profit? Is it profit that from the gas stations? I mean, I don't know how gas is how you determine the price of gasoline. >> They do the gas stations. >> Mhm. So that so the gas stations are
looking at the surrounding counties are saying, "Hey, you know, >> we'll get that extra six cents for our pocket >> basically." >> Yes. Essentially. Yes. So our next door neighbors that have the extra six cents,
the um gas station owners are essentially um not bringing home as much money as they are here. >> Okay. All right. That makes that makes perfect sense. So they're they're using the other counties 6 cents for their own
first say profit 6 cents a gallon which is either either 90 to 90 cents to $1.15 per fillup on a 15 gallon to 20 gallon tank. So essentially the counties that have
implemented the full 12 cents, the gas station owners aren't bringing home as much money >> unless they're charging a higher amount. >> Correct. >> That's good. All right. So now can you move to the last slide? >> The
the last slide. >> Keep going. Keep going. All right. Right there. So on all of our options here, options one which is the gas tax, option two, MSTU, option three
is uh financing. Option one is the only one that takes into account other funding sources other than solely Lake County people. Correct. >> The other two are solely on the backs of Lake County.
>> Yes, sir. >> For everybody else to use our infrastructure. >> Yes. >> Okay. The only way that I would So, so also on your slide, I noticed that we're about 20 years behind because for 20
years, general fund was not used at all for roads. I don't know why uh when when I first got on the board. That's one of the first things that we did was put general fund money toward the road infrastructure. There there could have been a myriad of reasons
before me. I don't know. It's before my time. Um, but the only way I would even um look at at an additional uh tax is if we can guarantee somehow
that general fund is continued to be used and our continue MSTU proposals are continue to use. That way we don't have an influx of money and say, "Oh, we got this much more money, so we're going to take it away from this and do it on that." that. So I want to make sure that
there's a solid way that we can keep our current strategy and if we implement the fifth cent or the six cents or whatever it is um on top of that and it not be touched
because I know things happen but I wanted I don't know if there's a way we can guarantee that that we don't drop because right now we're using 12 12% of general fund for our road infrastructure. Last year we used 8%.
Is there a way we can have a we can't go below 8% of general fund if we go this option. >> So just a bit of a correction this year for fiscal year 26 we're proposing to
use three and a half% of general fund advalorum revenues. Um then the prior year I believe it was closer to 6% of general fund advalorum revenues. Um the reason it's lower this
year is because our reserves were wiped out from the hurricane essentially. Um we could easily um create a policy. We have a policy now for the reserves have to be between 7 and 12% of the general
fund operating budget. You could create a policy that says 5% 8% 10% whatever the board chooses of general fund Avalor res revenues have to be dedicated to road resurfacing projects or road
capacity projects or something a hybrid of the two. Um and and that would come off the top and then when we have identified the available funding after that funding is set aside that would be the funding that would be available for
all other governmental operations including constitutional officers. >> Okay. So we need to set a baseline three or 4% >> whatever it is >> that we can go up from that. Um, I just want to make sure that people know that
out of all three of these options, the only option here that is not fully funded by all of Lake County citizens is option one. >> Except what you just described, if you put a percentage policy in place out of adorum, that is on the backs of Lake
County taxpayers on their property tax bill. So, I mean, just to be, you know, >> No, no, hold on a second. We we already we're already doing that. What I'm saying is we do not do the five cents and then cut the avalorum. We do the five cents and keep it the way it is so we can gain momentum on our
roads. This is the whole reason why I'm even looking at this. >> Okay. And this is just resurfacing though. So it's not capacity >> saying that. But if you use your money for resurfacing then you have more money for capital. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> I mean it's it's simple e economics to
me. So uh you save on one end you have more to do on the other end. I I would go so far though to break the advalorum down to new construction and pull out your new construction advalorum revenue increase so that that's where you get your
transportation capacity funding out of as opposed to current existing residents. Just just something to think about because you know you can break that down easily on the tax role each year. What comes in from the new construction? what's the result of um
existing property owners and take that number and look at that number and say a percentage of that new construction number has to go to capacity. >> Yeah, I'm I'm I'm good with I'm good with that. As long as there percentage and we don't waver away from, oh, we're
getting this extra money, so let's take what we've been doing and move it. >> Right. No, I I hear you. I think that's I I think when you present it that way that the the the that that's the reason why you want to have a baseline, you want to have a certain amount. I get that because you wouldn't want to be adding a new tax and then just doing a
shell game. >> So that is exactly right which I'm >> well and but just for a little history again with the the um capital facilities advisory committee who had the the most diverse group of every extreme of political extremes and on that comm I
know Vance was part of that. Um so what they felt like was that it's a portfolio of options. It's spread out and that there should be a commitment because of fis it would show some fiscal constraint out of the general fund. Even for even for um those that have lived here if
they lived here two years or 10 years or 30 years, there was still a little part of a commitment through the property tax, love it or hate it, property tax that would go towards the continuence of your infrastructure system. No different than somebody that's here continuously supports the continuous that's been here
for a long time supports the continued needs of the sheriff out of the general fund. >> Yeah. For growing, you know, for they got to add deputies to it and, you know, to the system. So, it's a it's a it's a good discussion to have, but you know, and maybe it's a higher percentage of
the of the new growth versus the in the general fund versus 8% out of just all the general fund. But I definitely think that we we need to make that commitment though. >> I all I know is I've been here for 57 years >> and I still use the roads in Lake County. >> Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. And love it or hate
property taxes. I think there's there there's some merits to the reform on that and changing it and everything. You know, that's that's part of that little that's part of a bucket of how we pay for the infrastructure. >> I just want to make sure that if we do additional funding source Oh, one more
question. Is is there a timeline on this additional 5 cents? Can we put a timeline on it? Can we not put a timeline on it? Can we put like 10 years or >> you could have an automatic sunset? >> Yes. >> Yes. It um I know that seinal um it was for 50 years, but >> how many years?
>> 50. >> Yeah. Holy moly. None of us going to be here. >> I would assume. Yes. I would believe that would be up to you. >> Yeah. You could do you could do 10 years. I mean five years probably doesn't make sense because it's too short, but 10 years. >> Yeah. We've got 10 years on your little other little graph. That would make sense.
>> Yeah. 10 years sunset. Automatic sunset. >> I think 10 years would be a good and then have to rehash this in 10 years to see where we are from there. At least people know it's not an ongoing forever thing
and that you're probably not going to pay more in t more in fuel anyway because of what's happening with our gas stations and the surrounding counties. They're going to continue to It's not like our our fuel prices are going to
jump up six cents. It's just going to be >> No, there's no there's been no evidence of that. We've pulled these numbers um a couple different times and while there are different results, there's there's no correlation. There's no direct correlation that we found that just
because you implement the additional 5 cents that gas prices go up. But um as far as consistent funding sources, really the gas tax that we have in place now in that orange graph, that's the only real consistent funding source that
we've have that we've had for, you know, a number of years. So, um as far as resurfacing goes, so by increasing that gas tax, it gives us that consistent dedicated funding source, >> right? And if you notice, um, the blue the general fund didn't start until
2022. And that was that was because we took out a loan in 2020 and 2021. And then we said, "Hey, we got we're going to start allocating general fund money to the roads as long as that continues to happen.
I think I would be be okay. I I'm not okay with putting everything on the citizens of Lake County through an MS or through a um a loan per se because all of Lake County has to pay
for that. Now, if we do the gas tax, have the cities and the municipalities been contacted about this because they're getting a third of it, right? >> They would be getting a third of it. Yes. >> So, how does that work?
So, we would communicate if the board chose to move in that direction. So, several years ago, actually, the board did v vote to put it on a a ballot for approval. I think it was 2018. However, it was pulled off of the ballot at the last minute because the Parkland
shooting happened and at that time the school board needed to get more funding for school resource officers and mental health counseling within the school system and we did not want to have our ballot competing with their ballot. At that time, the board chose to go to a referendum rather than just a
supermajority vote. If the board decides to move forward in one way or another, we would contact the cities to let them know this that there's the potential of approval of an additional 5 cent gas tax. We would have to work on the interlocal agreements that we have in
place currently to identify the funding allocation among the cities. And I I would like to have the cities say either yes, they want this or no, they don't. The ones that don't want it, we just don't give it to them. >> Well, you have to you have to if we if we have to.
>> I mean, hey, if they say no, then we just say, okay, fine. >> Sure. >> I don't want to interrupt. >> Are you done? Are you >> in 2018? >> Probably. >> I don't know if I am or not. >> This is for the additional five cents that we're discussing today. >> But in 2018, they asked they were
getting ready to do the full five cents. >> Correct. That is correct. by by referendum. >> By referendum, >> it wasn't a super majority. It was a referendum. >> And then right before that happened, the Parkland shooting happened and the state gave school boards the opportunity to go
out for the extra money they needed to fund their school resource officers, which was essentially a mandate by the state that was not funded. And so they had to go out for a referendum to try to get the money to pay for their school resource officers. And I bet you if we add this five cents,
we we we wouldn't see one penny increase in the gas price in Lake. >> Well, if you go to the com the rates um where it shows Bradford. So if you look at that, Bradford has implemented the full 12 cents. They have
the lowest gas price in the state. >> Right? But >> because of the market, >> the market, >> it's market driven. >> The market around us is is um from 307 to 306 and we're at 301.
>> I don't see it being that much of an increase. >> How much a year will this generate? >> 4 million. >> 7 million total. We estimate between four to five million for the county. >> But it's all aimed at reservicing obviously.
>> Correct. And can you go to that graph that shows the decrease in the number of row um the the the pretty one that had that we >> the resurfacing where the red goes away >> the where the red red goes away. >> Oh, okay.
>> Oh, I got to go backwards. >> I mean, while you're doing that, I've been told that gas prices very >> right there >> based on what side of the road they're on. >> Right. It could just be two gas stations that are competing against each other. It could be that basic. >> Yeah.
Yeah, I say 10 years. Everybody Everybody knows that we have an infrastructure issue and we need to and we need to correct it. So I I have those questions and and Melanie, you said you needed an
answer today. >> Advertise, right? >> Advertise, >> right? So, >> oh, just to advertise? >> Yes, because I have to put the ad in September 8th for a public hearing on the 23rd and then I've got to get the ordinance drafted knowing whether you
want referendum or you want um majority vote. >> And can uh Jordan, can you get me the the questions that I asked? Can you get me that information before that time? >> Yep. We'll get started on it right away and see what we can compile for you.
>> Okay. I I'm okay with advertising and then we can make the final decision once we have more information and everything else. >> So, could we have a motion and vote? >> All right. Hold on. We don't have a motion. >> No, we we we we're not >> We have one more speaker. Katherine
Dang, did you want to speak? Um, and I'll go back to, you know, the the discussion we had the other day about um, well, we had a lobbyist from Tallahassee come in and he told us about, he may regret that he shared this with us, but he said, "The state of
Florida has quite a large reserve account and the state of Florida and especially this session, we felt the full brunt of policies that were aimed at, how can I say this nicely? I mean,
more than a welcome mat to anything and anything everything that the development community might want to bring in under Senate Bill 180 without any local say over where it goes and so forth and having no chance to use local
regulations to manage growth in our own county. So, it just seems to me like the capacity issues that we're feeling in Lake County are being felt all over the state of Florida, especially in the fastest growing counties where all of this growth is coming to. And while I
think it's fabulous to have, you know, strong economy and and and and typically housing starts will signal strong economy, but we're the people of Lake County are like totally bearing the brunt of this. And so I just feel we got
to go back to the state on this issue of funding and we've talked about it being part of our legislative priorities and ask is that the formulas that are being used by the state don't just rest on throwing some gas tax the way of a county, but they actually help get
caught up on the capacity needs of of Florida and in particular the fastest growing counties in Florida, us being one of them. So anyway, that's you know, I just want to get that in there. Katherine De Young. >> Thank you. Katherine D. Young, District
4, um, unincorporated Lake County. This has been very interesting and a lot of it's been over my head. Um, I'll point out the obvious that a lot of this that we're facing right now is a problem of our own making. And, um, I think this is a patch. I don't know that it will um
it's going to solve all of our problems, but I suspect this is the way we'll have to go to uh pay for the problems with our current uh road system. Um just one thing um if if anything um this justifies why our county should consider
advocating opposing Senate Bill 180. Um kind of piggybacks on what you were saying there, Commissioner Campion. Um and and also, you know, if some of these developments that are coming in did not have such high density, we would not have as many cars on the road um and and
need to look for other funding sources to pay for some of the damage that's happening just in the daily course of traveling. Um one thing to consider, um and I may have missed it, but what about um instead of just a gas tax, an
additional tax on automobile registration? I know that doesn't capture people that come in from outside the area and and use our roads. Um, but it would account for any electrical vehicles that are not using gasoline. I know that's not probably a huge factor
right now, but it um, you know, it it may be some some point down the road. And the only other thing is there was some discussion about shifting funding on road projects. I would hope that before we do that that there's some sort of um threshold of um
looked at to make sure that when funding is pulled from one road project that it's going to a project that that is at risk of you know perhaps bad accidents and fatalities because it would be uh it would be bad if we took funding from a
needy road project and um and then we did have a fatality there. So, thank you for listening to my thoughts. >> Okay. I do need to check to see if Joshua Cabria or Asaf Nolander are here
because they had >> Okay. Is this on the gas station? Is this the gas tax discussion that we're having now? >> This is different. Okay. I just want to make sure because I can't tell from the comment on the card if this was this item or not. Okay. All right. So, bring
it back to the board. couple comments. Um, so I I would um again this has been a very good discussion and I think it's going to require a lot of more discussion this year. again thinking about the long range transportation plan that what we know
and we have to find out we have to fi come up with a way to commit more and I agree that the state has a lot of money but like you take a 17 billion dollar 17.5 billion budget last year that the state DOT had they used four and a half
of that four and a half billion of it just for one part I4 so I know there's more money that's available there but what I hear loud and clear um from all legislators is that it's going to be you have to put you have to show us some
money. Uh you have to you have to show some commitment to it to get that money and we don't we don't have anything to really hardly even commit now. So that's what I think that's going to be the struggle. We have to do that and then on the business side take care of the
assets or liabilities whatever the accountants want to call our roads uh that are uh going to become really bad liabilities as they keep getting worse and worse and that's where the gas tax comes in. Um, it's not a uh I understand the growth and I'm a biggest I feel like
I'm the biggest conservation guy there is, but it's not a a matter of just say uh no more growth and then sort of bury your heads in the sand and nothing's we're not going to do anything because we're here. We're here. We're going to have to do this. We have to address it.
And it's not an easy thing. Believe me, I don't I know all of us up here don't like to be put in that position. Um, I I am for uh at least getting the gas tax advertised as uh Commissioner Smith has said. I think there's we could get some
data maybe to to put that in there and maybe I could see a scenario where perhaps that's passed uh by a majority vote. We look at the MSTU as well uh there based on some further discussions about priorities. Um I I see that at the
same time we would definitely have to look at reducing the red tape around um having quite frankly some of the builders build our roads. It's not an a good thing to talk about but builders could be a partner in that and I think that's something we have to look at as
well. Um, so I'm, you know, I would, if there's a motion, uh, for that uh to to at least advertise for the gas tax for this just one part of this today, uh, I would support that as well. In fact, if there's no other comments, I'll I'll even make that motion, but I don't want
to cut somebody else off. >> Uh, is seems like some members of the Well, yeah, we'll definitely have public input, right? Don't we? I don't know. >> Well, we don't second for discussion. Uh, no. Do we want 5 cents? Is that what
the board settled on? I mean, it seems like pretty pretty big jump. I >> I don't >> The advertisement has to include the number, right? >> Hold on a second. We got a motion on the floor. I'll second it for discussion purposes. >> Okay, we got a motion. We have a second for discussion purposes. And that was for the five cents. Vance yelled out
that he wanted to talk, but I don't have a card on this issue. I have >> right there. >> All right. I'm sorry. I associated that with another matter. >> He's not. >> Okay. All right. So, now we have a problem because we have a motion. We
have a second and you got a speaker card. >> I would go ahead and bring him up and let him have his three minutes. >> Three minutes and then we'll come back to the motion and I'll be back. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> She doesn't want to listen to me. Uh first of all I want to say kudos to the staff for that presentation that was very uh illuminating and very useful. Um the uh I'm talking about in general the
road uh funding and I agree that the sales tax fuel tax probably is a good solution. Uh my main concern would be why don't you increase the impact fees to cover the other part of the roads. Now, the sales tax is going to cover
maintenance, and that is sounds to me like a good idea because it's funded by the people who are using the roads. But MSTU, as for everybody that's got property, we got to stop hitting everybody with property taxes uh and
adding to the list of reasons why the governor wants to get rid of property taxes. Um the uh uh I would investigate also, you know, as a guy that used to work in construction
companies as an internal auditor and uh in uh projects overseas is that you you have an inspector general. I've never seen her in here making a presentation. That used to be what would
happen uh many times in the past when we had an inspector general that got into a lot of things and saved a lot of money. But why not have the inspector general or an outside strong consultant review the whole
process of all these different things that are impacting your ability to handle traffic and to build roads. I mean, I just smell that there's a lot of money there being left on the table because I've worked on major, you know, oil oil project, oil
field projects and others in auditing and saved millions. So, I don't understand why you aren't even having anybody at that level come in. I would also suggest that you get some sort of a shark attorney and go after all the reasons to that are
removing your ability with home rule to stop uh construction until which the HBA would be mad at me about but to stop construction until the roads are say it's lower than 70% capacity. Um the
there's some major issues that you can look at and uh the the proposal you have here for the sales tax I think is is workable and it's a a solution but you need to look at some bigger items and I'll have to put that in writing and
send it to you. Thanks. >> Okay, back to the motion. >> Yeah. Um, so I just have a couple of closing things. We we know from we heard from a state representative today
who talked to to the secretary of transportation this week that one of our major projects wouldn't have funding until 2032. So that's one, two, one, two, three,
four, five, six, seven years from now. Um, and on your point, uh, this here would be for resurfacing and maintenance. However, we currently spend money that
could be used for new construction on resurfacing and maintenance. So, the money that would be allocated for that that should be used for new infrastructure can be moved over to new infrastructure. I'm okay to advertise to get more
information. Uh it could be the five cents, it could be four cents, three cents, two cents, one cent. I just want to make sure that um whatever we do, it's it's fair across the board. Everybody in the state uses
our roads. So, I think that the people who use our roads here in Lake County should have some funding obligations toward that. And that's the only way we can do that is by this uh gas tax. Um,
and it says it's a gas tax, but again, I don't see a gas station going up if the competing gas stations around them are at $3.7 and we they're not going to go up to $3. So,
>> okay. And I go ahead. >> I just say and I those are good comments. The only thing I would add to it is is in light of the comment about property tax changes and reform, whatever it's called, which I do believe will will face us next year. Uh I mean
be even more of the reason why you'd now you'd switch it over to more of a use true user fee through the gas tax, but and then the sales tax as well. uh as well as maybe the MSTU that I know you you brought up as well that maybe we
could look at too in the next two months. >> Correct. And I want to I want to make sure that we answer Vince's question. He might not understand about the impact fees that we have raised them and we're stuck. >> Yeah, that's true. >> With what we have for the next what four
years on the impact fee. >> I think we have I think we have another two years left >> before we can even raise the money. So, I mean, that's a state thing. >> You you would have to go through the extraordinary circumstance process if you wanted to make changes to what you've adopted before that four years
runs. >> And we definitely know how the HBA feels about that one. Um, we have one more hand raised on Zoom, so we have to recognize that. So, if we could do that. >> Courtney Roxson, please unmute your line
and state your name for the record. >> Hi, good morning. Um, my name is Courtney Roxson and I reside at 12426 Lakeshore Drive in Claremont. Um, I'm also speaking as a representative for my neighbors at 12418,2442
and 12508 Lakeshore. Um, my husband and I have lived at our home for nearly 10 years and we are raising our two young children at this home. And to piggyback off the trends stated in the transportation presentation and to address the traffic nuisance and the
pollution impact on our southern corridor, I would like to offer a possible cost-effective solution to help relieve us of the congestion and the cleanup on our road. Um the traffic and the speeding on our road has become or it has been an issue for some time. I
attended the initiative a handful of years ago that resulted in the speed tables being added to our road which have not been of much help. Um today we still experience the speeding and the people blowing through the stop signs. But to add to it, and even though it is
posted, the heavy trucks, including the semi-truckss and countless dump trucks going to these new communities are traveling our road and the added congestion and noise because of our town's growth has taken our road from tolerable to cringeworthy.
Um, the quality of life in our homes and in our yards has become tumultuous and extremely unsafe, and we are at the expense of passer buyers who enjoy a shorter or scenic drive home. Um, this morning alone, I woke at 4:00 a.m. to cars already speeding past our home. And
at 6:15, I counted 27 cars traveling in the direction from Hammock Ridge to Hooks by using Lake Shore, assuming they're going to US50 to go to Orlando for work. Um, the disrespect from the passers in the
middle of the night is alarming, and frankly, I'm tired of them waking up my kids in the middle of the night. Um, Commissioner Parks, I know you live in the same corridor as we do, and I'm sure you see the changes to Lakeshore Drive, but I'm not sure if you feel them quite like we do. Um, and then with the
traffic comes the pollution. We're having to pick up trash from our front yards and our lakeside. And never is there a time when I'll let my kids play in the sand down at the lake without first carefully scanning every inch of the frontage for glass. Um, in fact, it's become less frequent that we even
use our lakeside because it's more work than it's worth and it's just as dangerous when trying to get across the street to utilize our property as no one stops for pedestrians trying to get across the road. Last night, we happened to go down to the lake and I stood at the roadside with a baby in my arms to
meet my husband and son while they were fishing and at least 10 cars passed me, not one stopping to allow me to pass. And yes, there are signs posted that this is a residential area and that there are pedestrians, but they frankly do not care. Um, the future is real and
while development on Hammock Ridge and Lakeshore Drive continues to flourish, we are feeling the impacts based on the decisions made in the county and are looking for alternative routes for our new neighbors to go other than traveling our road. I uh I know that we cannot
close the entrance to our road down like many have requested before, which is why I'm proposing omitting the lefthand turn from Hammock Ridge onto Lakeshore Drive and creating a first responders median like that on Hancock Road between Target
and Legends Way. And for those traveling south, a dual turn signal from Hook Street onto South US27 to encourage people to take the larger roads on their way home. Our 35 foot rideway simply can't handle the traffic load that we have, not mentioning the deterioration
of our road or room for foot traffic and shoulder parking. We are basically landlocked on I4 on this road. I have very low expectations that any of this will be heard because we are here again and not much has been done. Um, time after time I've called the police. Um,
I've been, um, I've talked to members in the county and I've been passed around from one representative to another. Um, so I'm curious if there has been any talk or if there's a master plan to help relieve the nuisance that is Lakeshore traffic. Um, because we are getting
those people from Tampa. Um, we are no longer an interconnector like I know that we once were for the citrus um, trucks. Um, but we are a residential area that is pleading for help from the growth of the community around us.
>> Thank I appreciate your your call and that information. And I know >> I I appreciate you. Thank you, chair. Just real quick, I I understand and know I don't live right on Lakes Shore, but I do live a block off of Lakes Shore, so I'm I'm aware of the how bad it is at times with people moving through that.
It is a way that everybody goes to Tampa. Um, and I know there's been some proposals on the table before. Um, the limited access is one that I actually support. Um, uh, so, you know, maybe, and hate to say it, maybe we'll talk, we'll continue to talk about it in the
future, but there's still a funding question for that project as well, uh, where the money would come from. And if there's funding solutions on the table, then that get that could get done a lot sooner, as well as the sidewalk that's planned for parts of Lakeshore as well to make it safer.
Okay, back to the back to the motion um at hand. Does it require a supermajority to advertise or only um a vote? >> No, it's just a regular majority. And then for Commissioner Sabatini's um information, if you do the five cents if you advertise that, you can actually
approve something less during the public hearing or you could advertise something less now. It's completely up to you. And you also indicated before that this could the vote you'll advertise it as either a supermajority or a referendum.
>> No that I my understanding is that you wanted it to be effective January 1st which would have to be by supermajority vote. If you want a referendum you do not have to do this today because we don't have to bring that back until March. >> Okay. So if that if it didn't work
whenever we took the vote, then the referendum would be the next one. >> So I I think it's only fair that we that we advertise this and get it out to the public and let the public come in and either call us, email us, or come to a meeting and let us know their thoughts
as well. So that's one of the reasons why I would like to see this advertised um to give the the citizens of Lee County an opportunity to discuss this as well. Okay. All right.
And we're still under discussion. I when this was looked at before, I know my position was that it should be done as a referendum. Um, and I think there's great public information that that could be provided. And um but I that that's
where I would be at it on on on this issue is I would support it as as a referendum with the voters deciding whether they want this um this additional 5 cents. But um we have a motion. We have a second. All in favor say I.
>> I. I. >> Opposed. I >> Okay. So that moves ahead for advertising. >> What was the vote? >> Three to two. So, now we have speaker cards. Um,
>> we're back at citizens comment. All right. Um, Asaf Nolander. Hi, good morning to you all. This is the first time here. I own a gas station on Claremont
and since I purchased it, I had some issues over there. The last time the last thing that happened was on the 8th of July. I own the the business. I operate with a car wash with everything, paying my
taxes, always obey the laws. The issue that I have that I'm renting a car wash there to some person who decided to take over my place. He doesn't pay his rent. He doesn't do anything.
One time they came a code officer enforcement and told me about a sign that was listed on my property that it's not allowed and if I want to move it, I'm going to be penalized. So I reach out to that guy. I told him, "Please remove the sign because I'm
going to get penalized. I'm the owner." In a nice word, he told me that I can go. You know what? So, I took that sign by myself. No damage, no nothing. I took it from the nails that it was attached to, gave it
to the to my employee in the convenience store to hand them to him. The la the second thing that happened that he called the cops. The cops took a warrant against me. My employee got arrested for a mischief or a petty theft
that there was no mischief, no pettyft. The sign is completely full. No damage. It must was my property. I tried to obey to the city laws not to get a violation, not to get a penalty. And now I got in
trouble for that. There is a case spending. There is a trial. I tried to reach up to the prosecutor with my lawyer. No answers, no nothing. This is a false charges. And if I'm
obeying to the city laws and get in trouble, why I need to do that? That guy doesn't pay his rent. He used my utility bills. He put a lot of illegal signs around the property, my property,
and the police give him 100% backup. I have an eviction notice against him. He's playing around with them, but they finally reach him. He should be evicted in one, two days. I have the videos from the surveillance camera that I'm
approaching him and asking him, "Remove the sign. I'm going to be penalized." Nothing. and he got 100% back up from the police. I don't know how I even sorry got to this issue because it's my property. It's against the city laws and
I get arrested and uh take a case of a pis pett and mischief. >> Can I ask just a followup which city? >> I'm a little confused which city >> in Claremont. I'll tell you the exact address just to >> Is it inside the city limits? >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I already checked it's
inside the city limit. Just a second I'll tell you >> the problem is the city has most of the jurisdiction over the issues you're describing. >> Yeah, but they get they want to penalize me. So I followed their instruction. I have I even have the notice of that
they're going to penalize me. I did everything that they asked me because he doesn't he didn't want to take off his sign and now I got in trouble for that from the local police. It has no sense. >> Have you approached the city commission
of the city of Claremont? >> I I have a lawyer who reached out to the prosecutor. >> Well, everything you're doing right now is appropriate. I just think it's the wrong forum. You should go to the city of Claremont Commission and make your same views heard because they have the
ability to remedy that. They gave me the notice of violation and they said that I need to to handle >> but the board so we don't have any jurisdiction over their decision making about things like this. So that you would need you would need to go in front
of their city commission and make the same argument that you just made to us. >> I understand. Yeah, >> I would try I would try that first >> even if >> somebody moves you around from here to here. Go to the prosecutor, take a
lawyer, go there, go there. I don't know who to approach to. I We had a false arrest for nothing. We didn't do nothing, >> right? >> My property, my everything. I obeying the law and the local police gave him 100. He
took over my property. I'm not I haven't been there one and a half months because of that because my lawyer told me stay away. Oh, and another thing that I forgot to tell you. When it happened, I gave him a call. I told him, "What are you doing?" He answered me to the phone.
$20,000 and I'll make everything go away. I put an ex an extortion uh complaint pending. This is how he answered me. He's trying to extort me. Well, um, and the police backs him up. That's
>> I mean, and I can't quite quite tell. Are we talking code enforcement or criminal? I mean, you mentioned arrest. I mean, >> yeah, because when he called the the cops after I took the sound the sign off and put it back in the place because I
didn't want to get a violation, the officers open a case of criminal mischief and a petty theft. There was no theft. The sign is there. I have it on cameras. The the cops even took a photo
of the sign in one piece. They hand them the back back the sign. So, what theft there was there? The sign never left the property. You know, I I want >> I'm going to have the county attorney weigh in. >> So, the code enforcement is city of
Claremont code enforcement. Police is city of Claremont police. That has nothing to do with the board of county commissioners. They are only involved with issues that affect the unincorporated residents. So if your property is inside the city limits and all of those things happened with city
of Claremont departments, police department code enforcement, you have to address your issues with the city of Claremont. This board cannot do anything for you. As far as the criminal charges, that's the state attorney's office. That is also a separate constitutional
officer. This board has no jurisdiction over that office either. So, if you have an attorney, your attorney is going to need to work with the state attorney's office or the city of Claremont on your behalf. Um although it sounds like that the commissioners feel for your situation, there isn't anything this board can do for you.
>> Okay. Thank you for your time. >> And we have another speaker, Josh. Um Josh Cabria. Is this the same issue? >> I'm in reference to the same issue. >> Okay. So, >> absolutely same. >> Okay. And again, like she said, we do feel for you. It's just that we
literally have no jurisdiction. It's >> all right. Good. Good luck to you. >> Um Vance Yokum and after Vance Joseph. >> All right. Um I want to talk mostly
about the next month. As you know, you have your two final hearings for budget approval. And I just want to encourage you to uh uh go to or adhere the uh roll back rate be concerned about the fact that
many people are losing jobs. they're losing their homes because of the property tax increases and that there's just a a whole raft of uh information and commenters and news about that out
there on social media on the news. Uh, and I think that you need to um be aware and you probably already have stated this that you like Kirby has said that he's doesn't want to hit homeowners
with more taxes and that's just to come out with those kind of statements more to support that and to reduce the costs wherever you are. And again, I would say um just amazed that you haven't used the inspector general. Give them permission
to go in and find things. Uh just from my experience, there's always stuff lying on the table. Um big big items, too. Um the uh Howie just sent went to the roll back rate last night. They had
a big kurfuffle and uh uh controversy over huge payraises that they proposed, but it turned out to be that they are five wise people on that commission. They did give increases to the police because they keep they their police kept
getting stolen by other departments and other cities and uh but they held to uh roll back rate and uh they were very frugal actually. I think very good uh comment. I would I would say watch it,
but they don't make a video because they don't have the resources to make a video that meets the legal requirements to post it uh for you know government. Um the uh AI should be used. I'm going to repeat that AI is being used around the
country by corporations. I haven't seen any information that AI is really being used here at the county. Um the uh corporations are now coming out with AI first uh policies where they say that uh they
want people to uh if a department is proposing an expense increase or even their budget, they have to explain why they aren't using AI to keep the costs under control. and uh it really should be a forefront of your uh uh review
because it could help you offset any possible drops in property taxes. And finally, Doge Florida may audit you, so watch out. Thanks. >> All right, Joseph Matis
Senior. Oh, good morning everyone. >> Some of you know me already from my work in the county doing charity work. Some of you are just getting to learn to know me. I am Joseph Matise and I am
currently working on revitalizing the Bassville Park area. Um it's a project of mine that I started years ago and uh things fell through and then my wife broke her back and I'm able to pick back
up and so Jeppes and uh Il Mcato by Jeppes are two businesses that are coming uh where it couldn't be opened up in September and Jeppes uh some of you already know I don't know if you've had the crumb cake I sent the commissioners
a couple weeks ago we've had the braol challenge that uh Commissioner Smith attended and we've had several tastings for a restaurant that isn't even open because of what our goals are. Uh we already have over 450 followers. So, um
based on why do we have these followers is because of our goals. From one tiny little to- go restaurant, we're going to have several programs to help the community. Um and from the restaurant portion, this would be uh to go ahead and provide lowcost Italian ice and
lowcost ice cream to every entity including every school that wants to go ahead and use it as a fundraiser so that we can have extracurricular activities for children. Uh we also have um an elderly program, a lowcost uh meal
program for the elderly that we're going to implement. uh several of our elderly community is having to decide between medicine and food. So, we want to ease that. Then also, we're using Jeppes as a teaching uh restaurant. We have what's called the
Bambini Squad. We've already put them to work. Uh we're teaching children that have never been in a business situation, an organized business situation. That business can be something that's not just greed. It's something that can help the community. And it's also providing
them with uh the education that they want regarding the restaurant business. And then also um being able to uh show them understanding that the responsibility that these first uh the first job for these kids is something
that's going to leave a lasting impression. So we're making it a very enjoyable experience so that they can go ahead and either start their own business uh and be able to carry these ways or if they move on from jeppes know and be able to identify businesses that
are for the good and for themselves. Um, we've started some of, and if I'm okay, as I go ahead and talk about El Marcado and the flea market, I'd like to share the pictures of some of the renovations that have been going on. The plaza down there, uh, when I first got there, uh,
back in February, uh, the walls, and I'll put I'll hand them >> put it on the X down there on the on the green board onto your >> We got somebody to help you. Okay, >> thanks. Okay, so as you can see on these
here, um the walls are uh urine stained and dirty. The uh it's in dire need of repair paint. Um the paints don't match. Some of them are blue, some of them are red, some of them are black. I'm proud
to say that we're almost complete with the changes and everything is looks much more professional. all the same color. Everything's been painted. We've cleaned up the area behind the plaza. Behind the plaza, there was the uh homeless two homeless camps and the drug camp. Uh
we've cleared out um pretty much about 90% of the riff raff thanks to the Lake County Sheriff and uh their cooperation. uh they've been fantastic in helping us with this initiative to change Bassville Park and the reputation as one as the
drug capital of uh Lake County to one that is actually more familyfriendly. Then, as I mentioned, we have El Marcado that's going to be coming up. Um everything's all set. I've gone through planning and zoning and we're ready to kick this off in September as well. Um
it's a flea market and farmers market. This lot here that I'm showing everybody is a lot that was um garbage filled uh broken bottles all kinds of bottles needles and as you can see it's been
completely cleared now to make it user friendly for the community that community will be able to use this now as what like I said for flea markets and farmers markets and the goal of those farmers market and flea market is to provide a lowcost area 10x10 areas is on
that piece of property uh to help families make ends meet, help families be able to have a better holiday coming, maybe uh launch a business, or in like my grandma used to do, she used to knit things and sell them for extra uh cash. So, we're trying to help the whole
community uh through Il Mcado be able to uh raise themselves up, find a little extra capital as we all are. I mean, the board themselves is trying to find extra capital. So is John Q public. So, we're trying to provide those ways. Um, several we've gone ahead and what we're
starting with is a temporary plan that will be for tents. Uh, the squared in portion that you see here, that's where we're starting and that will be with tents. And if it uh moves on, well, we're going to go ahead and start putting in cement chips, a uh poles on a
roof, and then the next phase would be an actual uh small community center there. depending on what kind of attention we can get, what we uh can build with uh and you know how it affects the community. We've already gone ahead and secured the parking areas
because there was great concern when I first spoke to the community regarding this project. The feedback was the main feedback was that it was very positive. Okay. But the great concern was the parking issue in that area. We've gone ahead and I've secured three separate
lots depending on what we need uh on each phase so that we have the parking issue completely settled as well. I am proud to say that we are working hard and there's a lot of work to be done but um you know we want to be the example that there one small restaurant can do
big things. >> Thank you. Well, good luck and keep us posted on your progress and it sounds like you're getting a lot done and that community uh does in fact need your help and we appreciate you stepping up. So,
um we got a whole bunch more speaker cards here I got to get through. >> I appreciate your time and I'll be seeing you next year for uh improvements. >> All right. >> Excuse me. >> Great. Yeah. >> Can he provide those copies of the pictures to >> Oh, we need the copies of the pictures
or we need to make copies and keep them. >> The pictures. That's fine. >> If you can give them to Jeff right there. >> Yes. >> All right. Um Ray Hayden and then Lisa Hayden. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, commissioners.
>> Thank you. >> Hello, Ray Hayden. Uh we live at uh 35121 Dennis Road in um le well outside it's unincorporated uh Lake County. Now, yesterday we met with uh Senator uh Senator Trunell and
uh one of the things that you're for all familiar with with our discussions about the community of treasure trove, but um our meeting here during that meeting with with the senator, he actually uh forwarded something that was new information kind of shocked me at the time of the state's interest in uh the
expansion of of County Road 44. And um you know I made that familiar joke that you know hey if I was somebody at the state a long time ago seeing the utilities on both sides of the road no you know a possibility of expansion really all kinds of at at reasonable
costs. Um and and uh and yet yet he said that yeah no the state is interested and he specifically is is interested. Sorry about that. Let me get this the yellow seven there in on County Road 44. Uh, Senator Trunal is related to us that the
uh, big interest is or or concern is like hurricane Milton last year. If you look down at that image there, this road here goes down to Treasure the Treasure Island, a point off of Treasure Island. It goes out into Lake Griffin. That
entire area was 100% cut off by trees after Hurricane Milton came by. Now, myself, I I told my wife that I'm just going to park the tractor out of the barn and out on the property so that when it comes by any damage that's done on our property, I can just move it around real quick to the pits that the
county would prefer us to use. And also that if the roads had any issues because emergency vehicles were 100% blocked from getting through there. without saying another word to my you any of our neighbors, you know, communicating the process. We just jumped on a tractor and uh went around and pushed trees off the
road, brought out the chainsaws, cut things up to get them out of there so the emergency vehicles could get through. There was a concrete pole that broke down and people the owner of the property allowed everybody to make use of his property and drive across the road so they can actually access out to the point. But that was the huge
concern. U and you've seen some of these images before. I'm going to leave these two documents with you. Uh I'll drop them off here and uh so that we can be familiar with with that's it that the state is interested in in County Road 44. We're all interested in County Road
44. It's still at one way each way and um the safety concern for ingress, egress, and uh basically traffic through traffic getting through uh County Road 44 as we all know. All right, so that's all I have for that. I'm just going to drop off these. I'm sorry. >> Houses is sitting right on
>> Oh, yeah. That's a good point. That's actually he brought that up too for expansion purposes. That that yellow section, if we can zoom in on that a little bit. This is this is county road. If it can be zoomed down or maybe it's big enough on your monitors to see that yellow row there, the bottom part of the
seven is a row of houses. That would prevent the um ability for County Road 44 to be expanded there due to that row of houses. and we addressed that with him. And I believe Lisa is going to pick up the rest of that. Move this here. >> Okay. Where do you want?
>> Thank you. >> Oh, good morning. Thank you so much for your time. Uh my name is Lisa Hayden. I live at 35121 Dennis Road in Leburg. I'm going to read just because it's a little bit more efficient for me. I'm here to ask your support in opposing St. John River Water Management District's recent
approval of the Treasure Trove Environmental Resource Permit. For the past three years, we've witnessed chronic flooding and storm water failures at Silver Lake Point in Leburg. These failures illustrate that the regulatory framework currently in place is not enough to protect nearby
residents and public roads. Our neighbors believe that there's a real possibility that Treasure Trove could experience the same damaging runoff we witnessed at Silver Lake Point as well as what happened on Brit Road in Mount Dora. These examples demonstrate that
the risks are not hypothetical. They are happening right here in our area. To relay our stormwater concerns to St. John's, a 120 petition has been filed requesting a formal hearing to dispute the approval of Treasure Tro's environmental resource permit. We would
be grateful for any support this commission can provide to us as it is Lake County among other parties who will be called upon to address the shortfalls in Treasure Trove's storm water management. Another concern is that the original applicant Jerome Hennon is no
longer proposing to build on this property. He has submitted a memorandum of I'm sorry he submitted a memorandum of contract where he will be trying to sell to Southern Impression Homes.
This is the about us page from Southern Impression Homes. They are a build to rent community. Their new construction homes are contracted in advance of the actual build. They are built by
investors for investors. And our neighbors concerns are no one who is looking to live in their home will have even an opportunity to purchase at Treasure Trove. In closing, try to speed this up. Um, we are asking this commission to help
protect our community by advocating with St. John's and the city of Leburg or by placing treasure trove on a future BCC agenda so our neighbors can formally present our concerns to this board. And I thank you so so much for your time.
You're so busy today. But I'm going to leave all this with you. >> Okay. And would you consider putting it on an agenda or having us, you know, because we have documentation from Silver Lake Point that it's an utter failure. And I
know that Commissioner Morris can say you've seen the runoff from Silver Lake Point. It's it's devastating. And if that happens to private property, it'll be horrible. >> Okay. All right. Yep. We've got several questions. >> Followup question. What's the more direct ask like what's the jurisdiction
the board has in regard to this that we can do that that you're requesting that we do? >> Well, I'm asking that you um communicate to um St. John's that our 120 petition. And I'm sending I'm leaving a copy and you all received an earlier version that
they had to update that you support that this might have implications where Silverlate Point we can see it was a St. John's failure. It's still three years later a St. John's failure >> and this is the same models that they're
using to approve Treasure Tro's environmental resource permit. Um, I'm not saying the models are broken, but there are certain things that they're not taking into consideration or the build is going wrong, but where it is impacting Silver Lake Point is impacting County Road 44, washing it out for 7
hours one day. Um, that was a while ago. Then we've had neighbors go out there with the city of Leburg and St. John's to say, "This is wrong. Look at this. This is not operating correctly." And they did make some changes. It's still not correct. But that's impacting County
Road 44 and a vacant property that is being used as a de facto stormwater retention pond. And we can't have that happen at Treasure Trove because it's surrounded by people that own the property. There are a couple of vacant parcels to the south. But the people
that will be impacted to the west are a teacher, a nurse, and a fireman. Those are the immediate western neighbors and their their property could easily be washed out if something happened like has happened at Silver Lake Point. >> Okay. Any other questions, Commissioner Parks?
>> So, um and I got your email. I just had not had time. Oh, no, I know. To the ERP. >> Um but so you're in the notice period and that's why you're challenging in 120 the ERP specifically to the storm water. >> Okay. Um >> so I'm interested in that for sure. The
concerns I think we've talked about that a little bit in the past. Um, you know, again, the bar is going to be pretty high. Those are, my experience, there's not a lot of those that go in your favor because they'll show engineering and >> that it works. But but I'm certainly uh
all ears to listening to it. I I I forgot also that did you say the city of Leburg is going to they're already >> it was approved by the city. >> It was approved by the city, but are they challenging? >> They're annexing it in. >> They've annexed it. Are they challenging with you the >> We're challenging with the city of
Leburg. We're asking them to put it on their agenda. So we >> Okay, I follow you. >> And the and the second part is the Southern Impression Homes. This was a homeowners community and now it's being bait and switched to being a build to rent for investors only. And I'm sure Commissioner Morris, you live right there. We're not happy with that. we
want, you know, >> and I can imagine it's just that I know that when this has come up in other cases, we've been told by the um lawyers that we don't distinguish between ownership
and rental in like our comprehensive plan. There's no distinction whatsoever or ability for local government to say that you have to own versus, you know, you're not allowed to
sell for someone, you know, to rent out >> a quasi commercial property if there's no nothing but investors. So, >> yeah, I don't I don't know whether that plays into the I mean, it's like from a zoning standpoint, it's like it just says unit. It doesn't say unit owned by
someone. And I think it's actually a Fair Housing Act issue, too. I'm not positive, but anyway. >> Right. Currently, our comp plan does not um distinguish between whether something's rental or versus um ownership. Single family is single
family. It is a single family house that a family lives in. So, that is something we would have to look at in the future if the board wants us to move in that direction. >> But for this particular property, it's still back in >> right >> Leburg's jurisdiction. And so if they don't have a distinction, just like our
code doesn't have a distinction, then I don't know where you're how you're going to whether you even have any merit on that argument. Yes, it makes you mad and you don't you know you'd rather it be home ownership, but I don't know that it gives you like a point of entry into any
type of legal action. But the her I mean that's like another issue. I mean I think we could have engineers take a look at it, see whether there's any merit to a challenge. Um so we could at least review that and then decide whether to put this on our agenda.
>> And additionally, as Rey had said, um those yellow houses are right on County Road 44. If there's any sort of um uh we've we've handed that in already, but if there's any sort of expansion, there's going to be an eminent eminent domain purchase that will be kneebuckling, you know, for the county.
So, it's again, you know, like looking out a little bit further to see if you'd have to buy those houses along County Road 44 to expand because they're only 25 ft in from the uh two-lane road. So, that that's a you know, we brought it to um Senator Trunow's um you know,
attention yesterday. We were at Leburg last night where I touched base with uh Commissioner Sabatini and we're just going we the problem is is that we know that there's very little we can do at this point but we want anybody who has power to step in to stop this
multifaceted poorly, you know, ill-advised development. It's ill advised being on County Road 44 right there without that cushion. Um, it's ill- advised because it's built on a bay head and it's ill- advised because now it's being sold to a a quasi commercial
entity. Um, so it's just, you know, boy, it's like five strikes. This thing should have been out a long time ago. But I don't want to take up more of your time. Is there >> No, I've got a question for our attorney. >> Go ahead. So, um
I'm thinking that you're the Miss Hayden's asking the county to write a letter to St. John's about the storm water runoff. We have to do some due diligence on our part to make sure that's even possible. Would it be feasible to write St. John's letter to
have them hold off on any permits until our due diligence is over with? We can probably send them a letter to that effect, but keep in mind they've got statutory time frames for processing. I'm >> sure. So, I mean, >> at least I know that we're looking at it and it's a concern of ours.
>> This permit was approved. >> There's a 30. >> It's in compliance. >> 30-day notice period, which is you're in probably trying to >> that's where the time frame is going to be. >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah, that's another thing. all the other residents that are surrounding
this would be impacted would be county and we've had that catch 22 with Silver Lake Point it floods well that's a county road we can't do anything then we call Leburg you know then it's like well that's a you know I mean then we call Lake County they're like well that's a Leburg development we're going to have
more of that here and it really gives us you know no no play we we we did eventually bring all the parties together and public works is always you know very helpful here at Lake County but we just don't want that to impact people's personal primary residences and
that would be a big difference than what Silverl Point has done. >> So, did you file the 120 challenge already? >> Yes. >> Okay. And you're asking basically the county to put an agenda item in place to consider whether we would join in on that 120 challenge. That's the ask. >> Yes. Yeah. >> All right. So I say let's put it on the
agenda and in between now and when the agenda item comes back we have our engineers look at it to advise us to what extent we have merit to argue that the storm water management plan is not sufficient or has the potential of
flooding other properties um in various storm events. M >> I would also like to know that if this project that is in the city of Leburg will will stop the fourlaning of a state road.
>> Okay. Now you're getting into inverse condemnation. >> Well, I know that's a state that's a state issue, but >> No, it's a county road. >> Oh, it's a county road. >> I support both ideas, but can we maybe we just move forward with this one and then we can take that one up. separate that one out and take a look at that
just because you know once you start looking at >> I'm okay with putting this on the agenda but I also want to make sure that we don't hamper oursel to fourlane the road down the road. >> Okay. So we'll we'll include that review
>> and all that that entails on our agenda item. Just to clarify, when does the 30 days run? >> Oh, I I received the email on August 7th. >> So, I got the approval >> meeting is September 2nd.
>> September 2nd. >> Okay. We're just Can we call St. John's and say we've got >> these things when you do a 120 when you have challenges like this, there are hard and fast rules and so you can call them and you can tell them, but if you know they have
>> that window. I mean, we certainly can let them know that it's something that we're taking a look at, but it's not going to give us necessarily legal standing like they will have. >> So, we will put it on the agenda for September 2nd. And if you if we have grounds to intervene, we'll have to do
it pretty quickly. >> They they can get a continuous based on that. >> Well, we couldn't ask for more. And thank you. I appreciate all of your support with this. Thank you so much. >> All right. Um Joe Famasi and then Cindy
Newton and then Vance Yokum >> the hit list. >> It's our key players. >> Good morning commissioners. Actually good afternoon. Uh we come here today as a group Claremont new residents for change. We stand with you commissioner.
You have been very good to us and we've heard some of your critics and we choose to stand with you. Thank you, chair. Mr. Morrison, thank you. Thank you. And Commissioner Sabatini. Thank you. Thank you for helping representing our area
down there. I wanted to redefine the word stakeholder in Wellness Way. I think it's the people that buy the homes down there that are paying the taxes should be the number one stakeholder. In the past, I've heard stakeholder developers, former land owners, but we
are the ones that are investing down there forever. I hope that you can get us reclaim water and bring it down there like it's been promised for years. I think that it's time for the Orange County to Annie up. 2,700 acres of Orange County sits in the
middle of Lake County. It's time for our neighbors to uh give us a little back since we've been giving them so much. So, I'm asking for your support that you bring down the reclaimed water to Wellness Way because we do have a fire
danger down there. I know you're aware we had two big fires down there and without water sources, which were kind of lacking right now, they were not going to have the resource to fight that. Also, I'd ask uh if there could be gates
put on five mile road to prevent traffic instead of foot traffic and bicycles be allowed to use it because I've noticed at night that there's a lot of trucks going out there four-wheeling tearing that thing up and I think it needs a little bit of protection. So, I
appreciate all the support you could give us down there and I hope that we can continue the partnership. And once again, Miss Campion, Claremont, New Residents for Change stand with you. Thank you. >> Yeah, sure.
>> Yeah. Um, and the the call for reclaimed water and alternative water supply is absolute music to my ears. Um, we've been trying to work with uh Conserve 2 and as we know, Clare uh the Claremont and the county for probably 10 years.
Uh, and there's with Orlando and Orange County. Um and there's some progress on that as well. Actually, it's a good opportunity to report this to the board and I know Kathleen has been involved with this, but you know, we have been we have been funded um to do the the next
uh preliminary engineering and study to put together an alternative water supply. We're only going to get so much water from them. That's we know that's going to be a a fact that even buying at retail from them uh from Conserve 2, it's only going to be so much. There's
different parts that go into um uh the water resource plan as you know uh for wellness way. Uh it's a multi-pronged approach of yes getting some water reuse water but that won't uh that won't do everything. It's also conservation, it's also engineering to for storm water
capture as well. Um so all those options that were you know are on the on the table again and we're looking at through this uh through this next study. Um, but ultimately to to get water from Conserv 2, they will still have to pull the trigger to sell it to us retail rate,
not even wholesale, but a retail rate uh as well. That's why there's going to be some other options that'll go in there and that we have to stay hard and fast with the mission for uh for Wellness Way. So, um, but that uh glad to hear that. I'm totally totally 100% agree
that you know we if there's anything else we can do. So, will that be the owners of the houses that have to pay for the reclaim? >> Um, anybody there would be So, if it goes to like Claremont, it'll be built into their retail rate, the Claremont part of of Wellness Way. If it goes to
Sunshine, it'll be built into their uh their rate as well. Yeah. >> How far off is I mean, you you're having negotiations now, discussions are ongoing. Any estimate on time frames? No, I mean I we've had negotiations for 10 years
on and off, different legislators coming and going and commissioners and mayors and things. Um but this looks like a little more positive this time as well. It does. Um but they're ongoing now. >> Okay. >> They are ongoing. They're actually ongoing with our with our legislative a couple of our legislators.
>> Rep. Rep. Yarkowski. >> Okay. Um Cindy Newton and then Vance. Cindy, you okay? No, Vance first. >> Vance, are you okay to come up and do you >> This is on You've already
>> Okay. I'm sorry. This is on number seven. So, we have not gotten to our consent agenda. All right. >> All right. We got All right. Number seven. All right. That's it. Do we have anyone online? >> D. Shelly, please unmute your line and
state your name for the record. Deborah Shelley. Uh, good morning. I have one quick question. Are you taking public comment for regular agenda uh tab 24? >> We're not to tab 24 yet. >> Are you taking public comment for that
though? >> Um, only if you can't stay with us. If you want to make your comment now, make it. >> Otherwise, we'll do it when we get to that agenda item. >> Okay. It's uh a couple of different different topics but related. I I'll
talk now if if that was okay. Uh first quick comment. Thank you so much for your support for our veterans. I did hear the veteran comment this morning. I have veterans in my family, including a Bronze Star and Purple Heart recipient. So, thank you very much for your support
for our veterans. Um I'm asking today that you consider additional protections for county designated rural protection areas. uh by supporting changes to chapter 171 Florida statutes that of course deals with annexation law. Uh I
know you tried once before but there were issues with the language in HB171 in 2023. Uh that bill died in committee. I would like to mention that there is value in the idiom uh that states if at
once you don't succeed try try again. uh the wildlife corridor legislation uh took more than several years to pass. Uh regarding rural lands, uh you may be aware that chapter 570.70
parent 3 Florida statutes states that agricultural, rural, natural resource, and commodity values of rural lands are vital to the state's economy, productivity, rural heritage, and quality of life. But we are still losing
rural lands to annexation and urbanization. So I'm I'm not asking for support for all rural lands because I know we cannot protect all rural lands, but I would hope that we could put extraordinary effort into protecting
county designated rural protection areas. uh the joint planning agreements do not appear uh to lock in precluding annexation of rural protection area lands. So, I'm asking that you consider
uh submitting uh changes to 171 Florida statutes that says where there are county or state designated uh protected areas that any proposed annexation must incorporate county comprehensive plan policies, zoning regulations, and
land development regulations. Uh, this language is a start and perhaps you can have a meeting with interested parties to develop meaningful language to changes to 171 Florida statutes. Lake County Conservation Council has
previously previously submitted uh information uh draft language for changes to 171 and that language can be resent to you for your consideration. Uh so please consider a meeting with interested parties uh to develop
meaningful language for changes to 171 Florida statutes and make this one of your uh issues for your legislative priorities. >> Thank thank you Deborah. Appreciate it. Okay. Anybody else online? >> Barbara Morris, please unmute your line
and state your name for the record. My name is Barbara Morris. I'm in district 4. I wanted to bring to your attention and about the situation with the sunken gardens out here in Mount Plymouth. I'm not sure if the uh commissioners are
aware that we have a historical um park that's going to be 100 years next year. Oh, 100 years old. And it it you you have gone in and you've taken control over it. This park
had been hidden from the public for decades, mismarked as a private property. And we recently found out that it was not that it was a we own it. It's public. This park was designed and built by Sam
Staltz. He it is the only property that he did under landscape architectural engineering that exists now anywhere. Orange County has preserved a whole lot of his properties for buildings,
but this is the only property in existence anywhere with his landscaping architectural engineering. I had proposed that that we work with the state and get a historical designation on this property because
when you guys went in, you didn't know about the history of the bamboo that he had originally planted and it got wiped out all except for one clump that is just outside the fence in a a
road that has been vacated. And I can't even get a designation that we actually own half of that road. Even though when it was vacated, the county attorney at the time designated that it half of that went to the park. I was
trying to preserve that last clump of bamboo that he had planted. I would like some help in getting this property designated as a historical site.
Um, statewise, possibly even federal wise because we have this. Orange County doesn't, Seminal County doesn't, nobody else has this specific thing. And if you if you really are interested in economic
development, this park is a gym for the county. And and I I want to bring it to your attention and hope that I can get some help in getting it protected so that as we go forward, a historical
designation will help us make sure we don't make another mistake like wiping out all the bamboo. I support native plants and the native plant program, but this particular park was a designed as a tropical park.
And as we plant native plants in there, I would ask that these plants be more towards the tropical criteria if possible. They recently went in there and planted pines
and that is taking away from the historical value of the park. >> Thank Thank you. I think those are good comments and I know um the parks and trails folks are here today so they heard it and they'll take that into
consideration. So good good comments. Um okay, moving. Did we have anyone else online? Okay. All right. Now we're moving to consent agenda. Clerk of Courts. >> Thank you. Christy Melain with Lake County Clerk's Office. We recommend approval of the clerk's consent agenda.
>> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? That passes 50. Consent agenda tabs 3 through 19. We have a card on cards on seven and card on 21.
>> Was 19 pulled? >> 19. >> I'm sorry. 19 was pulled. So, if we could get a motion um for consent minus 7 and 21 and then we'll take the cards and do a separate vote. >> Move to approve minus 7 and 21. Was it
>> 21's not a consent? >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Just minus 7. >> Okay. Oops. I >> just minus 7us. >> Yep. >> Move to approve minus 7. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. I. Any
opposed? All right. That passes and picking up seven. Um comments on seven. Um this is economic development business incentive. Cindy Newton and then Vance and then
Katherine. Good afternoon. Cindy Newton, District 4. Uh I just had some questions. It was unclear to me how the funding for these grants work and it you know it states
that it's not coming out of the adarm taxes but then it's calculated with those. So I'd like clarification on uh more detail on the funding and with the deficit that we have for
road maintenance. I'm wondering about the waving or at least the ability to wave reduce and defer the uh transportation taxes on this. If
it's only done for capital improvements for that property, I can understand it. um if it is shown that what they're going to be doing would be less than the cost of what the county would
be able to do it under. And also the fact that the hotels are being added, is this going to be including hotels that have already been approved or is this going forward for approval? because just going by my memory I could think of
three that have already been approved in Mount Dora, five in Claremont, one in u Minnola and Eustace is also trying to get one downtown. So it just just questioning
why more hotels at this point. So thank you for your time. >> Okay. Does anyone have any questions? Oh, wait. I'm sorry, Vance, you're next. >> Uh, I would agree with Cindy uh in
questioning this. Uh, I thought that the wording in the agenda was very vague. So that it was almost like deceptive in my viewpoint because it didn't clearly say that this was talking about, you know, giving some uh
waiverss or tax breaks to hotels or other organizations. And there was no mention of an amount. Um, I I'm going to have to research this further because I haven't read the the bottom part of it, but uh I think that any talk about
trying to give a waiver of impact fees to any business like hotels is means that you're shifting then the cost of the the growth cost caused by that uh facility to the taxpayer. And as a
person who lives on Highway 19 where 561 intersects with it and it's just massive traffic jams which you haven't talked about today, but any place any organization that gets waivers of any kind or or a grant. Now, it I don't know
whether TDC has funds that they're going to give to it if they collected taxes, which they do. And they allocated that instead, but I'll just have to go with Flo that I agree with with Cindy because she's read
more than I have at this point. But I I really object to giving any waiverss on impact fees to anybody. Thanks. Um, chairman, if if I'm not mistaken, this is just
to advertise and then there'll be a presentation once it becomes advertised and it's going to be a public hearing, right? >> That is correct. It >> So, all of our information will be at the public hearing. This is just to advertise. >> That is correct. >> Right,
>> Katherine? Thank you, Katherine. Katherine D. Young, District 4. Um, and I understand it is just u a move to advertise, but I think maybe there's some questions that can still be asked ahead of time. Um, we've just acknowledged that Florida is experiencing unprecedented growth.
Kimley Horn's survey shows residents believe that Lake County is crowded and um, aside from that, some have even asked for a moratorum on growth and buildings. So incentivizing development um in the form of hotels is um unnecessary and I think in the long run
that it's going to shift some of the burden um I mean think of the transportation burden that it that it's going to put on the taxpayers and I think it it's a betrayal to our our residents and our taxpayers and I don't think it's necessary. Um and and I I
think maybe just put a little bit more thought into this before you um bring it up for um before a legitimate vote. Thank you. >> Okay. All right. So, this is a this is an agenda item to advertise this
ordinance. It'll come forward for a public hearing in the future if it passes to advertising. Do we have a motion? I I got questions about it, but I'll wait because I do have share some of those concerns, but obviously I'll make a motion to advertise it >> and and commissioners and and madame
chair, we did hear the concerns. We'll make sure that all of the answers are included with the presentation that comes back on September 9th. >> Okay. >> So, move to advertise. >> If first, we have a second. Any further discussion? U >> I'd like to have a list of the strategic
corridors that we currently have. now and and somewhat include them in the ordinance. And then if there's another strategic corridor that we want to do, it has to
come back to the commission. >> I think I like that. >> Would that be part Well, it's separate from the motion, right? >> Well, we'll move forward with the ordinance, but I think that um that can be part of the presentation. And with that in mind, staff could include
language so that when it comes forward, we have some language for >> the strategic corridors are listed in the ordinance that's part of your agenda packet. Um, it is Wolf Branch Innovation District, Wellness Way, the Christopher C. Ford Commerce Park, and the Minnola Interchange. >> So, there's four >> and that's all.
>> That's the only four. >> That's the four that we have right now, >> but the ordinance requires them to be used already in that what's being advertised would require this to apply to those corridors. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. So that's already there. >> Got it. >> All right.
Okay. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Okay. Moving then to tab um 20. >> No. Um >> what am I missing here? >> Never mind.
>> 19 was removed and tab 20 is Allison Tesla. >> Good afternoon. Allison Tesla, director for the office of management and budget. Um, today we are going to hold our public hearing for the infrastructure sales tax plan.
Um, first we'll go over some of the revenue projections. We'll talk about the five-year plan by category. Then we'll hold the public hearing and the requested action. All right. So, here's the revenue projections over the next five years. Um, we used an average of 3.25% 25% over
the next 5 years. And um the revenues for fiscal year 2026 is about 24.8 million and it includes 1.4 million in carry forward from fiscal year 2025 which was from um reserves and
unanticipated interest that was earned. Here's the totals by category. category per year. For 2026, it's 26.1 million. In 2027, the total is 25.4 million. In 2028, it's 27 million. 2029, it's
27.8 million. And then in 2030, it's approximately 28 million. Um the 5-year projection is 134 million. Okay, so here's the five-year plan for public safety projects. Um, in fiscal
year 2026, it includes 2 million for sheriff's vehicles and equipment, 1.7 million for public safety support tower and equipment projects, 1.6 million for fire and EMS station renovations, and then funding for fire and EMS
vehicles and equipment. The total for 2026 is approximately 7.6 6 million with the 5-year total being 36.6 million. Okay. Next, we have quality of life. Um, some of the major projects that are
being funded in 2026 includes 1.8 million for South Lake Regional Park, 1.5 million for Golden Triangle Regional Park, 1.2 million for East Lake Park, and then 500,000 towards the fairgrounds relocation.
Um, the total of quality of life funding in 2026 is approximately 6.6 million with a 5-year total of 45.1 million. All right. Next up, we have public works 5-year plan. In 2026, funding includes
4.1 million towards FDOT grant match. It includes 2 million for um road resurfacing projects, 860,000 for intersection improvements, and then funding for equipment and sidewalks. The
2026 total is approximately 8.4 million with a 5-year total of 35.8 million. All right. Next up, we have the other public infrastructure projects. In 2026, there's funding um for capital building
construction and renovations, fleet equipment, and IT enhancements. The total for 2026 is about 1.2 million with a total of 6.2 million over 5 years. All right. And then finally, we have
funding under the debt service in 2026. It funds 2.3 million in in debt service payments with a total of 10.6 6 million over the next five years. And then I'm going to turn it over to the chairman for the public hearing.
>> All right, this is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak on public infrastructure sales tax agenda item number 20? Anyone online? All right, bringing it
back to the board. Is everyone satisfied with the presentation as it >> move to approve >> presented? >> Second. >> All right. >> Discussion. >> Yeah. >> Go ahead. >> Not done by motion. >> Yes.
>> For the public hearing. >> I believe um Mr. Teters would like to speak. >> Oh, okay. hear it mentioned. Uh for the record, Zayn Teters, mayor of Astatoula. Uh I'm here because we were at one point
allocated $100,000 uh for some park improvements. Um that land deal that we were going to purchase uh went south. The builder of the development decided to raise the price to double it uh when he noticed the municipality was buying it.
Um, so what I'm asking today is to reallocate that money into the existing parks that we have. Um, currently we had an FMIT inspection and we failed miserably. Um, I don't know if you got the presentation that was presented at the last meeting. Um, what we'd like to
do is we'd like to bring up all our safety features. Uh, one of them is a fall resistance, uh, which is mulch. Um, we've partnered with a company that's going to give us some mulch that's a rubber mulch. It's California approved, so it's antibacterial, antimicrobial, and u it's 100% rubber, not tire rubber.
Um, that's one of the big things we want to do. So, I'd ask that uh you approve the reallocation of the funds to this project uh so we can bring our parks up to standards. >> Thank you. Appreciate that. Do we have to actually make a modification or is that understood?
>> Does this By the way, it passed it passed parks and trails unanimously. >> Oh, okay. All right. So you brought up park >> is it just the rewarding on the document itself? >> Yes, we would put the um identification
of park enhancements for acetula in the project plan dollar amount is not being approved. It's the project itself. However, I would ask that you identify not sure if the rubber mulch will count because I'm not sure it's considered capital. However, you can work with our
budget office to make sure you identify specific projects within the park that may qualify. >> Okay. But the dollar amount that is being carried forward for uh a Tool is $100,000 if approved by the board. >> Okay. All right. >> So, I would modify the motion, but can
you can we restate the uh exact verbiage of how we're retooling it >> for existing park improvements, capital improvements? Right. >> Right. So reallocation of Astatoula's funding that was provided in the current fiscal
year in the amount of $100,000 towards capital improvements at their parks. >> All right. So >> with that >> the current plan with $100,000 towards the current capital uh >> for existing parks
>> for exist for existing parks. Correct. My second. >> All right. And that was a second on the amendment. All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Oh, wait. >> You had more discussion. >> Had more discussion. >> Wait, it was late. We were right in the middle of the vote, so we just pulled
that back. >> Under the quality of life South Lake Regional Park, we've got a commitment for 1.8 million >> through 2030. Does it go beyond that? >> It goes to 2032, which is the life of the the current sales tax authorization.
>> Okay. Okay. And Golden Triangle Regional Park, we've got a $ 1.5 million um agreement with them for how long? Through 2032 as well. >> Okay. Is there any way that we could
take the rest of this, put it into one project, and get it completed? So like towards put all the rest of the remaining funding into East Lake Sports. >> I mean because we're just we're something needs to be completed and
we're just >> well that >> 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 and >> well they're but they're paying as they go. So it's not like they're not getting something done each time with the dollar amount, right? I mean it's not just sitting there. Is it
>> like the South Lake Park? They're working on that right now, >> right? >> Yeah. >> That's >> So, so can they How much is it going to cost to complete it now if they continue to work on it? >> I believe their estimate was 22 million.
22 million. >> I mean, that that's >> I I think what I think what what you're trying to get to this plan is probably what they can spend within that year. Okay.
>> So, it's conditioned out per year what they think they can spend for their capital improvements >> without financing the cost, >> right? So, I mean, it could be that they're stabilizing a parking lot or and then the next year they're actually doing the paving or they're putting in
the bathrooms and then the next year, you know, it's like they they stage the >> golden triangle. Have we done anything there? >> Oh, yeah. So, has it been completed? It has not been completed
>> like one You mean your question is 100% completed? >> You wouldn't be able to complete Golden Triangle Regional Park in a year, >> right? You wouldn't be able to do anything. >> It's a five or sixy year project just for the building infrastructure. >> Okay. >> Even if >> Okay. >> Even if even if you threw hundred million dollars at it, you couldn't do
it in a year. >> Okay. >> Yeah. You couldn't do one in in a full year. Yeah. And I mean like South Lake has been for 12 or 14 years, right? >> But each I mean >> each a little knock it off. >> Yeah. They just keep whittling away at
the hole until it is there one day. But it also to a certain degree it corresponds as you have more traffic, more use of the park. It it Bobb's been a master at doing it this way. So that you're growing the parks, but you're
doing it in a way they still can be used and then they're being expanded. >> So sometimes I know at East Lake we went for a long time with that Limerock parking area. They got everybody dirty and their cars all messed up and then
one day ne one year it got paved. But people were so happy to have that park. They didn't mind if their cars got messed up. So if the money is not spent in 26, does it roll over to 27?
>> With the board's approval, it does >> on on all of these >> on all projects. For instance, we have about a million dollars being rolled forward from prior years for FDOT projects because what we're doing is
cobbling together enough money to have a match requirement in the year that FDOT is funding a road project. >> Perfect. Thank you. Oh, go ahead. >> Okay. Any more discussion before I call for the vote? All in favor say I. I. Any
oppos? All right. Moving along then to tab 21 and this is Jeff Heheart as the presenter. >> Good morning Jeffart um and engineering director. Yes, I'm the I'm the introducer. So um I'm happy to be able
to tell you that the uh PD& study for North Lake Trail is almost complete. This is like the last the last portion of it. So, I'm gonna invite um Beth Beam up from Stantech to kind of review it for us, but just to kind of give you a little a little hint. Um the the recommendation is kind of this is going
for like Umatillaa up up to 40 and we're looking to go up um 19 and then take 445A across to get up. And of course, there will be spurs related to kind of getting to Alexander Springs, but there's some cultural issues there. But, um Stantech,
did you come up Beth? Where? She's hiding back there. So, um, right over there is the clicker. So, Good afternoon. I had good morning on here, but you guys have had a busy uh day so far. Um I am Beth Beam with Santech. Uh we're consultants to Lake
County for the North Lake Trail phase 3 project development and environment or PD&E study. And I thank you for the opportunity to present to the board today. So the purpose of today's presentation is to present the findings of the PD&E
study and um then Jeff will come back to uh request the board's action on that. So although this PDE study is being facilitated by Lake County by and through the board of county commissioners, in order for this segment
of North Lake Trail to be eligible for state and federal funding, the study followed the national environmental policy act or NEPA requirements and that is um the environmental review consultation and other actions that have
been required are um done in accordance with Lake County pursuing to 23 US code section 327 and a memorandum of agreement uh dated May 26, 2022 between the Federal Highway Administration and the Florida Department of Transportation
or FDOT. So throughout this PD&E study, Lake County has complied with various non-discrimination laws and regulations, and all the public meetings that were advertised were conducted in accordance with state and federal requirements,
including title six of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. So the North Lake Trail uh begins at East Altuna Road on State Road 19 and terminates at State Road 40. The trail will pass through the rural communities
of Altuna, Pitman, and Aster Park. And then uh the northern trail or the north lake trail is the northern part of the river to hills regional trail which is included on the Florida office of greenways and trails priority map. Most
of phase three is located within the Ocala National Forest. So shown here are the project development steps being followed. FDOT completed the corridor planning study uh I believe it was in 2019 and we are now
in the PD&E study phase and as previously mentioned uh for this segment of North Lake Trail to be eligible for that state or federal funding and comply with NEPA we followed um FDOT's PD study process to evaluate the social economic
and environmental impacts associated with this plan transport transportation improvement project. So this uh process is followed to evaluate engineering alternatives as well as environmental impacts including social, cultural, natural and physical
resources. At the end of this PD&E study nor when the Lake County Board of County Commissioners concurs with the preferred trail alternative, the project can then move forward into the next phase of this process. So there has been a long history of uh
consistent support for the North Lake Trail beginning with its inclusion in the 2008 Lake County Trails Master Plan. It remained in the county's updated trails master plan and comprehensive plan in 2018. Other agencies have also identified the need for North Lake Trail
including the city of Umatillaa Lake Sumpter Mo uh FDOT their uh through their planning study completed in 2019 and then again the Florida Department of Environmental Protection through its office of greenways and trails which
added uh this portion of the North Lake Trail to the priority map. Oh, I am on a head. Okay. Thank you. As a trail advocate, Lake County is familiar with how trails can enhance the community by providing a healthy alternative for getting around,
connecting key community assets, supporting local businesses, and improving safety for pedestrians and cyclists. So, the North Lake Trail will travel through the Ocala National Forest and connect the those communities of Altuna and Pitman to Aster Park and
other recreation areas along the way. And uh the trail is intended to have a pave width from 12 feet wide to 14 feet wide. Motorized vehicles will not be permitted on this trail. So the purpose of this PD& study was to
evaluate multi-use trail alternatives for bicyclists and pedestrians within the project limits. Public involvement was an important part of this PD study and public input was considered as trail alternatives were developed. Three public meetings were
held uh before today's presentation before the board and that included a project overview public meeting in December of 2022, the alternative concepts public workshop in June of 2023 and the recommended alternatives public
meeting in November of 2023. We also had a study advisory group or SAG which was created to serve as project advisors to the study team and these included representatives from the US forest service from Ocala National
Forest, FDOT, county and local agencies and project area cities and communities. Public input indicates support for the trail and a range of trail elements were suggested including recreation connections, buffers and trail
separation from roadways. So in addition, coordination with federal, state and local agencies along with public stakeholders was critical to the development of project alternatives and selection of the preferred trail. This this slide shows the ongoing agency
coordination that has taken place with multiple agencies uh throughout the PD&E study and then again uh the study advisory group met three times prior to today's board meeting. Each build alternative was developed as it relates to trail design criteria as
well as trail design requirements for safety, drainage, utilities as examples. Results of the analyses are being documented in individual technical memorandums and will be summarized in the preliminary engineering report or peer for this project. This
documentation will be available following today's uh board meeting. Each build alternative was also evaluated as it relates to social, cultural, natural, and physical resources with the goal being to avoid or minimize impacts to these resources.
And the criteria included community and recreational resources, historic and archaeological sites, wetlands, water resources, water quality, flood planes, wildlife, and habitat, and contamination. And again, these results are being documented in technical memorandums or reports that will be
available. So the National Environmental Policy Act requires that the no build alternative be considered during the environmental review process and serves as the baseline for comparison of the build alternatives. The PD study limits were
separated into six segments as shown here on this slide. And the segments were combined into three build alternatives which allowed oop sorry which allowed for more detailed understanding of each alternative and provides the opportunity to phase
construction as funding becomes available in response to public input following the May 2023 alternative concepts public meeting. Phase two included a potential spur along County Road 445 to Alexander Springs. And
that's segment D in this uh graphic. The phase 2 spur uh did add to overall mitigation costs due to additional uh wetlands and surface water habitat and species impacts and potential significant impacts to cultural
resources in this area. So at this time it is not under consideration for the preferred alternative. The results of this evaluation are summarized in this matrix which will also be included in the project documentation and the evaluation
criteria are shown in the left column with the alternative shown to the right beginning with the no build alternative which I think it's like it's changing on me. Uh the benefits of the no-build alternative include no additional
environmental impacts, no disruption to Ocala National Forest operations, but the drawbacks are there's no trail improvements. There's going to remain a gap in the river to hills trail and there are safety issues uh which will remain due to mixing traffic traffic
with cyclists and pedestrians. The no build alternatives does not meet the purpose need for the project either. The legend serves as a key to the color coding, showing most favorable in green, favorable in yellow, least favorable in
red, and no change in gray. And shown here is a summary of that ma evaluation matrix. Uh this table shows the results of the engineering and environmental analyses. Under the no build alternative, uh there would be no impacts. However,
again, this does not meet the study's purpose and need. And build alternative three provides a safe paved trail con Are you doing that to me? Trail connection
uh which completes the northern segment of the North Lake Trail phase three. So, the preferred trail alternative follows State Road 19 and County Road 445A to State Road 40, which was shared as the recommended alternative at the
November 2023 public meeting. So, this alternative completes that gap. It's the best fit within the existing right ofway. It provides an opportunity for future connections to Ocala National Forest Recreation Areas. It minimizes impacts to cultural, natural, and
physical resources. It avoids the congressionally designated Billy's Bay Wilderness Area. And it maximizes uh connections to other trails that are in existence. It does minimize construction costs and satisfies the purpose and need for this
project. So, the preferred uh trail alternative begins with segment A, which is from the um East Altuna Road on the west side of State Road 19 crossing to the east side of State Road 19 near the Lake Door
Recreation Area. The trail begins as a 12- foot wide trail with curb and gutter and it widens to a 14 foot wide trail with curb and gutter as it crosses over County Road 445. Then segment B uh begins on the north
side of County Road 445 and it is a 14 foot uh trail that continues along the east side of State Road 19 and it transitions to a 12t wide trail with a roadside ditch north to County Road 445A.
And then segment F begins at State Road 19 and County Road 445A. It's located on the south side of County Road 445A. And um as you come off of State Road 19, it is a 14 foot wide uh trail with curb
and gutter that transitions to a 14 foot wide trail with a roadside ditch. And now Jeff, I'll hand it back to you. Thanks, Beth. Um, I told her this would happen at 9:30 this morning because I guess really badly when it comes to schedules.
Um, so with this, I'd like to open it up for the public hearing and then afterwards like a vote on the on the recommended alternative, which would be number three. So, I'll pass it back to the chair. >> Okay. Um, I have a speaker card, Mike Stevens. Good afternoon. I'm Mike Stevens, a
resident of Lake County. I'm the chairman of the Friends Lake County Trails and also the chairman of the Florida Greenways and Trails Council for the Department of Environmental Protection. I'm here today reluctantly supporting the North Lake Trails Hills PD need is being presented today and I'm asking you to move it forward and vote for it uh because it does offer a north
south long-distance trail coordination and connection with the heart of Florida loop as well as the coast to coast and the St. John's River Sea Loop. Unfortunately, as it currently stands, the PD describes a trail that's really less provide a less than optimal user experience and one that doesn't really connect with the most popular
recreational areas, the main one being Alexander Springs. Um, nor does it, you know, it's not the best user experience. Um, unfortunately, we really don't have any other alternative because the US Forest Service is kind of dictating the route because of environmental and cultural concerns along the route to the
springs. Um, it's a shame because there's plenty of successful examples of trails that are built within forests by the Department of Environmental Protection, the state of Florida, within state of Florida forest, but we really don't have any control over that with the US Forest Service. Um, members of the public have written several letters,
uh, made pleasing persons and attended numerous meetings and I've gone to Tallahassee numerous times to meet with the US Forest Service, Florida Forest Service supervisors, and it really hasn't changed anything no matter what mitigant we presented. uh there was no wavering in their stance in terms of
where they wanted the trail to go. Um hopefully when the design is done, we can design something more curve linear on approach and as close to the force as as possible and get the best we can out of it. Um we're still waiting to see that. Uh we were hoping to get the
Alexander spur, but then the Florida the US Forest Service um outlawed uh any hikers or bikers from even entering Alexander Springs from the highway. So now Florida trail users can't go into Springs. Uh Paisley Woods bicycle trail users can't go into Springs. You have to
arrive at the Springs in a car and you have to have a reservation to get into the Springs. So that kind of threw that whole spur idea out as well. So we're kind of stuck with what we're stuck with, but it does give us a long distance trail uh that connects with the heart of Florida loop as well as a coast
to coast. Um it's disappointing, but uh it does provide what we're the connection that we're looking for. Um, honestly, I believe it's a huge loss, an opportunity for the US for Forest Service to gain more support and protection for the Ocala National Forest. As I'm reminded of a statement that I heard recently regarding the
Florida Wildlife Corridor, if if someone can't access it, experience it, or enjoy something, they won't love it, nor will they support it, nor will they protect it in the future. So, it's disappointing. Uh, but again, all that being said, uh, please vote for and support the PD as it is presented today.
We'll make the best of it. uh and it will provide a connection to the heart of Florida loop as well as a coast to coast and other statewide regional trails that are being done that will connect Lake County with those things. So, uh I'm looking forward to Jeff and I have been talking about segment 3A that's about to be constructed. It's
about to go out to bid from Umatella up to the forest and the first picture was my picture uh the tree tunnel for the old railroad going north of Umatella. So, thank you. Uh please uh vote for it and support it. Quick question on that prohibition. Unless you arrive by a car
and you have your reservation, when did how long has that been in effect? >> Uh I'd have to look. Hold on one second. >> And what was the reasoning for it? >> Uh overuse. >> Yeah, it's been >> uh I believe it was in 2022 or 20 2021
actually. >> Uh they mandated the entrance to the springs only be permitted by car and only be permitted by um reservation. So, it doesn't make any sense to me environmentally as environmentally conscious because you want people to walk in. You want people to ride their bikes in and not have a car and not drive their car there. But
>> you get the reservation once you get, you know, when you you literally can't accommodate more people and that happens in national parks and all over the country. But, um, but you would think arriving by a bicycle or or being a trail user would just be, you know, a
nobrainer that they should be able to make a reservation, too. Yeah, that caught us caught us off guard and kind of redirected the entire thing because the entire public support, all the letters, all the meetings, all the public comments were all Alexander Springs, Alexander Springs. We want to go by Alexander Springs. We want to connect recreational areas,
>> but um because of their concern for overuse of the springs and also because of cultural artifacts and archaeological things around the springs, uh they didn't want it to go that way. So >> yeah, >> I met the actually Dale Allen and I met
with the Florida or US Forest Service Florida supervisor at the bridge at the Springs because we're talking about building a new bridge and uh I showed him there's 54 4-in cuppper drains from that bridge deck that dump every bit of oil and gas straight down into the creek and they still supported the old bridge.
It's built in 1959. It's almost 80 years old. Um, in addition to that, there's 44 pilings that are driven into that creek. And the new bridge was no pilings in the creek, pilings on the outside, just like the Wakaver Bridge was just done. Uh, so I don't get it. I don't understand it.
But I beat my head against the wall for eight years and gone as far as I can go. So, >> thanks for everything you've done. >> Yeah, I appreciate it. But, uh, hopefully we can at least design something that is better user experience and as close to the force as we can
going up 19 to 445. or 445A. >> Yes, thank you. >> But it will connect us to the heart of Florida loop on 40 and the state of Florida is working on that now. The heart of Florida loop goes all the way around Central Florida. It's a 250 mi trail and it's already built in a U-shape. All we got to do is finish the
piece up on 40 because it goes over to the greenway on this side and Bush County on the other side. So that'll connect us to that. >> So So I thought we were supposed to use the old railroad bed. >> We are What county? The county bought up the railroad bed that wasn't in the forest and we're using that for segment
3A. That first picture you saw there picture I took, that is the old railroad bed now. >> Yeah, I'm kind of disappointed this thing goes along 19. >> Yeah, they're going to try that once you >> any other way we can get there besides 19 because it's like you're riding. >> No, because it is constrained through there. U there there is an opportunity
possibly along the Aqua River and coming into Leburg that way and coming down to Lake County and we're talking to um Marian County about that. But this is the best route right now that we've got going up to uh >> Well, doesn't a railroad bed go all the way from Aster down to Eustace?
>> It used to uh Lake County bought up as much railroad bed as they can from Umatella up to north of Altuna and we're about to build that. That's going to start next year, right? I'm holding you to that. U but that segment's going to be built. That's already designed. That's in the
railroad right away. That is the railroad that was there. Actually, I walked it with Galas uh last week. We met with Seco to make sure they weren't going to cut down all the trees in there because they're about to start trimming trees along the transmission line. So, there's an old tunnel of trees that goes north of Umatella, up to Altuna, and
then up to uh the forest. Uh so, yes, that'll be on the old railroad bed. From there, the railroad bed kind of disappears and it's all private ownership up until you get up into the forest. You can still see the old railroad bed up in the forest and it is along 445A. So that is the route that
where the old railroad took. Uh the forest service again did not want us building it on the old railroad bed in the forest to the west of that and going up 19 because they didn't want a paved trail going through there when they they don't pave the roads for the residents and they were worried the residents were
going to get upset about that. So uh and also the horses use the old railroad bed on the Ocala National Forest on that piece. So we're trying to follow it as best we can. Uh but that's what we've ended up with now. So, >> okay.
>> I'm still disappointed it's going up 19. >> Yeah, I'm and I appreciate your work and yeah, it's unfortunate. It's it's all in the management philosophy when you have state lands, different state agencies, federal goes to forest service is not a they're not an access, they're resource
base. they go back to the 1800s and the night national park might be a different story, but we're dealt with what we're dealt with now. And yeah, >> they do have a recreation mandate, but they tend to forget it. >> Yeah, it's not it's it's not quite like the others. Yeah, I but I appreciate all
your hard work, though. Wanted to say that. >> As mentioned, I'm the chairman of the Florida Greenways and Trails Council with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and we work with the Florida Forest Service all the time. I mean, if you look at the Cross Florida Greenway Trail and all the other trails that the D has built, they all wind through the forest and are
perfectly fine and they're beautiful trails, but um again, I do ask you to support it. It does give us a connection and it does give us a north south corridor through uh central Lake County and that's the south part of it is being built. Uh Jeff mentioned it already. The north Hancock trail extension coming up
over Sugarloaf over the top of uh Green Mountain. That's all part of this trail that'll be connected through Tavaris. So Eustace and Tavaris and in that sense I might bring up as well the uh Eustace Taris Umatella and Lake County are all under an interlocal agreement to find the next segment from Umatella down to
Tvaris through Eustace. So they're all working on that. They're going to be buying or getting a feasibility study done for that. So >> that's great. That's good to hear. That's good news. And I think that one segment you described that's the Altuna one that's going to be really that's going to be beautiful. >> Yeah, that's that's the best looking segment. And uh so I'm looking forward
to that. And >> so I not to open up a can of worms and I know we're all getting anxious to get out of here, but I noticed that you representative Fine was having like a big you know press conference up in the forest and he was going to push for this like springs national park designation.
Don't know if that's going anywhere at all. And I also when I started reading that it would restrict people from hunting in the forest. I knew that that was going to be like really really unpopular with the Lake County, Marian County, Felicia County crowd. Um, and anybody that enjoys hunting up in that
area. But that all being said, if that were to go anywhere, then maybe, you know, maybe he's somebody that we should talk to just to see if there's a way, you know, even if they pulled out the springs and they left the forest alone and then maybe they incorporated a
trail. I don't know. It's just always worth a try. We'll continue to work on it. What I read so far would actually make it worse, but uh we'll continue to work on it and see what we can do. And again, once we get it designed, we'll push it as far close to the forest as we can and get it, you know, some additional trees planted in there to get
it a better user experience. But again, the big thing is it's a connection. It connects us to the other statewide uh trails that are being built and investing in. Uh the number one trail for the state of Florida is a coast to coast. Number two is the St. John's River to Sea Loop. And the number three is that Heart of Florida loop. That's how they're working them in terms of
getting them funded and getting them done. So once that heart of Florida loop is done, then everybody from Ocala, everybody from Valuchia County will be able to come down into Lake County through this piece. So >> and and park at a trail head, get in a car and get their reservation in Alexander Springs and then they can go to the springs. >> You can't go there in a bicycle. You
can't go there from the Florida Trail. You have to arrive at the spring. >> No, I mean they'll just have to, you know, somebody will come up with a way a car service or something. >> Let's hope. >> Okay. All right. All right. Well, so we need a motion and uh >> move to approve.
>> Second. >> All right. I think we all feel reluctantly to approve as you stated so eloquently. Appreciate all the hard work. Like you said, eight years you've been working on this and um we appreciate you taking the time to do all the things you've done. >> Thank you. It's been more like 20, but
eight officially. >> Eight officially. All right. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? All right. Moving then to our next item which is our
tab number 22. Okay. This will be an ordinance to the board of county commissioners of Lake County, Florida amending the following sections of the Lake County Code. Section 5-3 entitled Airboats at Lake Yale and section 16-54 entitled Pine Meadows Conservation Area to comply with
section 327.75 Florida statutes which is known as the Watercraft Energy Source Freedom Act as created by Senate Bill 1388. Repealing section 5-7 entitled motorboats powered by gasoline or other motor fuels prohibited on Lake Elsie. Repealing section 5-8 entitled motorboats powered
by gasoline or other motor fuels prohibited on Blue Lake. providing for inclusion in the code, providing for filing department state, and providing for an effective date. If you choose to approve this today, it'll become ordinance 2025-39. >> And this is um a public hearing. And just to be clear, this is an ordinance
that brings us into compliance with Senate Bill 1388. All right. Do we have anyone online who wishes to speak? Do we have anyone in the public wishes to speak? >> All right. We'll bring it back to the board. Do we have >> motion to approve by K Commissioner
Smith? >> Second. >> All right. Um, all in favor say I. I. Any opposed? All right. Moving along then to tap 23. >> All right. This will be an ordinance of the board of county commissioners of Lake County, Florida, amending chapter uh six, Lake County code entitled emergency management powers and
procedures, updating and clarifying regulations and authority, providing for removal of disaster generated debris from public and private roadways, providing for severability, providing for inclusion in the code, providing for filing with Department of State, and providing for an effective date. If you choose to approve this today, it will become ordinance 2025-40.
>> All right. And this is the one we had a presentation on, but Megan at the last meeting. Um, do we have anyone online who wishes to speak? Anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? Bringing it back to the board. >> Move >> for approval. Second. >> All in favor. We have first and second.
All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? That passes 5. Moving now to tab 24. >> Miss Barker. >> Uh yes, madam chair. So last at the last board meeting we discussed fiscal year 2026 proposed legislative priorities. At
the time, the board wanted to elevate the transportation concerns as the number one priority as well as add addition the the addition of the roads named as the high priorities for this board. So, in the interest of time, I'm
going to go ahead and scroll to the language that was included for the legislative priority. Erin, if you could go forward, please keep going. back. I'm sorry. Go back back one back one more there. And there is the
transportation funding. So this is the um legislative request that FDOT provide additional re or I'm sorry the state provide FDOT with additional financial resources to accelerate vital infrastructure improvements on state
roads or roads providing relief to state roads within Lake County. Those roads would include State Road 44 widening, the 40 441 widening in Mount Dora as well as Leburg, State Road 19 in the Howy area, as well as the Hart H
Heartwood Marsh widening. The other proposed legislative priorities include the the um 2,00 or 2,500,000 request for design, engineering, and reconstruction of the washed out two-lane roadway and an upgrade of the
box coververts and rip wrap basins at the culvert inlets and outlets on Brit uh Brit Road. And this will help mitigate the risk of future washouts from hurricanes. The next item, judicial
senator expansion. So we know now that we will be assigned one new circuit judge as well as one new county judge here in Lake County. Uh the administrative chief judge asked that we look into expansion of the current
judicial center to accommodate the additional judges as well as their administrative staff. We're requesting a million $1 million for a master site plan and architectural design for the expansion of the jud judicial center as well as adding an enclosed elevated
walkway over Sinclair Avenue from the the public parking facility over to the judicial center. The neighborhood lakes gateway center. This is going to be a dualpurpose facility uh that will serve as a dynamic
entry point into the re regional trail system at the convergence of Orange Seminal and Lake counties. We will use this as a trail head. It will also include a full service library for the East Lake um the East Lake area. It will
include community gathering spaces, meeting room concession area, as well as a bicycle repair shop. The request is for $800,000 to fund the design, engineering, and permitting for the new facility. And so at this point, we're requesting
approval of the proposed legislative priorities. Commissioner Campion will be attending the uh the legislative delegation that will be held here tomorrow morning and present these to our legislative delegation. However, this does not mean these are
the only priorities that we can address. We do have until November and to turn in our forms to our representatives. So if there's other things that come up between now and then, we can certainly address those with them as well. >> Okay. And I do think that Deborah
Shelley brought up a really good point and that is we did take a stab at that um bill a couple years ago that would protect the rural protection areas if they're annexed and the cities would have to recognize our protections. Um, and if that were to extended to any
state designated areas as well, like the Waka River Protection Area, the Green Swamp, um, I think that we should definitely consider putting that back out there, either M suggesting a change to 171 for that purpose or one that's a
special law for our own protection areas. So, if you all would consider that, I think that we should bring back some language and and pursue that. Again, >> I'm okay with bringing it back and I'm just wondering if we can make it like a um what they call that a local act.
>> That's how we tried it before, >> right? >> So, I don't know whether you try sort of both. >> It died in committee because they were too scared to bring it up. >> I mean, I don't mind looking at some language. Uh my my concern would be that we're we're trying to go through a joint planning agreement process and what that
might do to to cities. So, I mean, let's see what it how it's worded. >> This is so hard. It's like if the joint planning process doesn't then restrict them to not annex and change these >> protection areas, then what >> I mean there's a couple cities that I've talked to that are interested in putting
that in there actual restrictions like they would only annex to this point and that's it. >> Be on board with us. >> Yeah, they would be on board for the change. >> They they might. Yeah. But I'm I'm worried about I'm I want to see how it how it's worded. So it if we're making progress with other cities, too, they >> Yeah. I wouldn't worry about until we
see the language. Yeah. >> And then adjust it from there. And >> you could even have the language acknowledge that if there's a joint planning I think that's how we had it before. If there was a joint planning agreement that addressed the issue that that you would defer to that JPA and
then that would take care of ones that you work out. >> It the language did propose last time that there could be a either sight specific or other type of agreement between the county and the city that would then remove them from the provisions of that local bill. >> Okay. Well, let's see what let's see what it says and then I'll ask some of
the other cities that we're trying to win over on JPA's first how they'll take it. We have a by the way, since we're talking about we we have a round table scheduled with them again in three months, less than three months now, right? >> I believe it's scheduled for September 29th. Let's see.
>> Okay. So, that may be a good time to talk about it as well. Just saying. >> Okay. All right. So, we're okay with um requested action approval of the priorities as they stand now. Working on
this other one that we just discussed and and any others that come up between now and >> this doesn't need a formal approval, does it Melanie? >> Well, can wait one. >> Just consensus. >> All right. Discussion and direction. All right. Real quick though was um and and
I'm sorry if I missed I don't have the the full presentation in front of me right now but regarding Senate Bill 180 um I I was thinking if that's something to address specifically as a priority put it in here. >> We were not bringing that forward until
we had a chance to meet with um each individual commissioner and Senator Truno >> is why it's not included as a legislative priority at this point. But we did receive a request for a letter for >> and we have that
>> and we have that. So I mean I I noticed that on the um agenda for tomorrow that uh Mayor Hamage from Mount Dora is addressing home rule and Senate Bill 180. But um you know we have our priorities. Do we do we bring it up and
just say as you know we are asking for either a full repeal or revisions? >> Yes. I I think we need to ask for it. I mean, they're there. We know it's a big It's like an ele elephant in the room if you don't say anything. >> Repeal. It's the worst bill to ever pass the history of the state of Florida. Um,
so yeah, needs to be total repeal. Has to be number one on the policy list. >> Yeah, I think it should go in the the priorities. I don't know how exactly it's worded something like that, but yeah, >> it's two sentences. I mean, it's a 60-page bill, 40 page bill, whatever.
There's two sentences that are the meat potato. >> Yeah. I mean, if the idea was to protect properties that had been damaged by hurricanes, you know, we we've offered up a suggestion for well, make the bill about that, not take away local government's right to adopt regulations.
And >> yeah, and I and I've I've I've talked with the legislators uh and um Melanie and I worked on some changes and I gave them to the legislators and I was,
you know, told that yeah, it has to be addressed. So, uh I would I would put it in the as one of our priorities to get it changed. >> I agree. I I mean I think that we have to ask I think it has to be brought up.
Well, everybody else is doing it. We're just along for the ride. Why don't I mean, everybody else is fighting it. They're they've got a um u bunch of cities and counties that are doing a lawsuit. I mean, >> we've voiced our opinion to our local
legislator legislation delegation and they tell me they're working on it. They're working on fixes. >> Yeah. >> So, true. >> Had a conversation last night with our one of our representatives and they're saying the same thing. They're working on >> right >> fixing it. So
>> I wouldn't be in favor of putting it on our priorities, but you know, >> but we're considering joining the lawsuit, but we wouldn't include it on our legislative priorities. That's something that's I wouldn't vote to join a lawsuit. I wouldn't vote for speaking
in sort of categories here. There's voicing it, and then there's speaking very loudly. This is this is a complete and total shutdown of all local government control over literally everything when it comes to land development. So, it's one thing to just mention it, okay, we'll take a look at
it. It's another to announce it as the single most important uh you know, devastating reduction in local government control over land use in the history of the state of Florida ever. There's never been one singular bill since 1985 when the Growth Management Act was passed that's cut down more at
once. So, so just to just address it lightly doesn't I can almost guarantee it does nothing. So, yeah, there's going to be a chorus of voices. There's a lot of voices, but there should be as many voices possible. It should be as loud as possible, as consistent as possible. Um, so that therefore, if there's a lack of
action, lack of co-sponsorships, bills being introduced, then obviously that's easier to demarcate that, you know, they did not take it seriously. And so that's why I would say I would move that make it number one on the policy list. Not to say that and by the way when it comes to
priorities you should have the request for funding appropriation priorities like this is what we want the money for and then a ve very short list of policies next to it and then obviously I think this is the most important one. That's me.
I mean, you guys have read the bill. You know what it says. And we're not allowed to adopt any regulations. We can't do flood plane regulations. We can't do anything. >> Well, currently under the current bill, um, we haven't had anything that would
have been kicked back that we have done since >> Oh, we don't know. >> 20. >> No, it's the hurricanes. it it was retroactive to August 1st of 24 and since 2024 through the date the bill was
signed, we only had one LDR change um related to lot splits which I don't think would be questionable. I don't >> would even have been a question if this bill was enacted today. We've only had one, >> but we're working on a flood plane ordinance right now. I I understand
that, but I'm talking about current situations and I don't want to put it on our legislative priorities. I don't think it's a legislative priority. I think we need to go ahead and move forward legislative priorities and put this on something completely different.
>> Well, just two yeah, two quick comments on that. Again, I I think if you think of the legislative priorities as appropriation requests and policy makes a lot easier. Why? Because they're not competing with each other. It's not like, hey, we want a million dollars for over here and then we also want a modification of the statute. They're not, you could ask for both that they don't compete with each other. So, I
think you should have top three or five policy changes, top three or five appropriation request. >> But what we are telling them is that we don't think they did a good job up there and they're not going to fix it. And by the way, >> isn't that true of every policy request? >> And by the way, can you give us these
millions of dollars that we're after? >> Well, you just hit the heart of the issue, didn't you? >> I did. That's that's the whole goal right there. I mean, it's >> So, we can't say what we really think because we're afraid then we won't get >> Say anything you want to. I'm not I'm not going to I'm not going to sign on to a lawsuit that I until I understand they
haven't fixed it or are not going to fix it. >> Yeah. Yeah. And let me be clear, too. I'm not I'm I'm suggesting as a policy priority like we would have done any year, we would we would put a a policy priority
on our list. Um I and to be clear, I'm not in favor of joining a lawsuit right now either. So I I mean I' I've had some but but I want to make it clear and I' I've got some progress as far as working with the legislators and I do appreciate them on that. But but um I mean it's
going to be pretty clear if we make it our number one policy concern. Didn't we and when they were going to change the TDC funding, didn't we have that on our legislative priorities when we didn't we include that like when they were going to take away they were going
to change something? >> I believe we did that as a fact proposal. >> We did it I think. Yeah, maybe maybe we added it to our list too. But that was the one where it was that >> we did that through fact. We could not we couldn't use the money for the engineering, but you could use it for construction, but we wanted to use
>> No, they were This is the bill that they were going to take away TDC completely. >> Oh, that was recently. Yes, >> that was last year. That's another one. >> But then they were going to change what you could use it >> for I think. >> Yeah, a couple years ago we did we did talk about it might have been through FAC.
>> We wanted to be able to use it for infrastructure, right? >> And we made that a legislative priority. >> Yeah. Oh, and if I just one more comment, which is Commissioner Smith said, "Hey, there's there's nothing retroactive that's passed already that we're in hot water over in terms of this
bill, but there's two pending ordinances that are extremely significant that could obviously are affected by this bill if it doesn't be tweaked. And one is the entire comprehensive plan process. And so we're going to spend a lot of money and time creating a
comprehensive plan that is not going to be legal uh in many ways if we don't get Tallahassee to change it. And then number two, the native plant ordinance. It's not as burdensome, but clearly I mean of course I support it, but that that thing is definitely in the realm.
It it's in the category of something that could be challenged. And so I would say there's just point out there's there's two pending. And then there's the third that our staff has been working on, spending a lot of time on, and that's the flood plane provisions. >> Yeah. And there's some there's some cities, if you ask the cities, I think
they got a nice little round of letters, a couple of them did last week that said that the comp plan changes they made where they used a Latin lawyerly term for it. Uh that were null and void basically, you know, that they had to go back to what they had before because
their comp plan. >> Either way, we're we're talking about legislative priorities here. And I don't think this bill 180 is a legislative priority is something completely different. It could be voted on and done something separately. I think we need to
stick with what we've done in the past with these legislative priorities. And then if we have something we need to bring to the state or the chairman needs to bring to the up to the state, then we vote on that and have her bring it up as a separate item on its own so it has
more merit. If I could just maybe we could just take a back step. I just, you know, obviously it's my first year on the board, right? When I look at the legislative priorities, I just want to make sure we're all on the same page so that when we go into this conversation not thinking they're two different things. I look at the legislative priorities is saying what are the stat
policy-wise, what are the statutory changes you're requesting? And it's not a brutal criticism that there's a statutory. It's it's just hey, this would be better for the county, period. Secondly, the funding requests. I think they're separates basically part A, part B of the same list. So I just for me
it's hard to think that that SP 180 which stops I think we just demarcated three different major projects dead in its tracks wasting a lot of time a lot of money and then of course handcuffing us is not a major legislative priority. In fact, I think it's truly, if you look at the actual root word, priority. It's
the priority. There's no more. There can't be a legislative stat statutory change we request that affects more items than SB80. And so, it's modification or repeal is the biggest one. That's why I think it deserves to be at the top of the list. >> I can't get past I mean, legislative
legislature legislation. I mean, it's the laws that they make. To me, it's like, you know what? But we go up there and we we're like, "Please give us some more. Please earmark money for us. We have these needs." And then, you know, on the other hand, you're passing laws
that are severely impacting our ability to do our job. I see these things as so intertwined, but I mean, we're we're obviously at an impass here. >> Uh we are because I'm not going to vote on any legislative priority that includes 180. >> I think it needs to be completely
separate on its own with it own. I'm I'm only asking I'm not trying to argue. What's that other list? When you say, "Hey, we're going to do it separately." I'm fine with talking about it. What's the other list >> right here? It's in front of us. She just went over them. That's the list. >> But you you're saying we don't put SP
180 on the legislative priority list. We put it on separate. >> Put put 180 completely separate away from this list. >> Because is that Now, let me ask you why. Is because this should be more local like focus just on our local stuff or >> all local stuff. One statewide. >> Okay. Got it. So, so, so you want a
legislative priority list that's really the stuff that's unique to Lake County itself. >> And and that can and that can >> I'm willing to Yeah. >> help. It has to also be conducive to other counties in the state. >> Sure.
>> But I think these here are strictly for Lake County. >> Okay. >> 180 is for the entire state. This is >> I I would say three lists then. I would say flooding list, the the the super local list like, hey, we want a policy change that would allow Lake County to do something and then just one of
statewide interest. I mean, I totally I I get where you're coming from, right? We'll call it a legislative policy request or legislative policy. Um maybe need to be done tomorrow when
we're giving up our legislative priority list. It can be just be later. >> It could be it could be next week when we all go over it. we all look at it and then we decide on that separate issue alone because I personally am not
willing to go to a lawsuit right now. I'm just I haven't got all my information yet to see if the state's even going to change or not change. They say they may they're going to change it. So, we'll I'd like to see if they do
>> see if they do it this session. Is that your like cut off? Like if they don't fix it this session, >> I'd recommend >> it's an early session anyway. Starts in January. >> When do we need to finalize list? Do we have a time set for when this >> No, it's tomorrow. I'm presenting it to
the legislative delegation. So, this is what's going to be presented tomorrow at the legislative delegation. Um, and we're going to revisit this question of um a resolution about Senate Bill 180 and a lawsuit. We're going to revisit that at an upcoming agenda of this
board. and we've certainly have had a chance to talk about it. So, we're kind of seeing where everybody's at. >> Well, I I I I see this as a conversation, not a debate, even though we're a little divided. I I'm totally fine with, hey, here's the here's the local list truly hyper local, just us.
Here's what affects us, but it's multi-jurisdictional. It's multicounting. It's still a major issue, and then here's the funding. But with that said, there might be some division here, but I would I would move to add a repeal of the burdensome language, more burdensome language of SP 180 um as one
of the one of the priorities, how we want to category. I would make that motion because I think it needs to be uh spelled out and I think it's it's truly become a statewide grassroots phenomenon where we almost look bad not speaking up on it and prioritizing it. I mean, I'm
getting more calls about this this week than I did the week before, the week before, the week before. It's truly ga the gathering force and it's coming to a head. The overdevelopment is coming to a head and so I just for me I would make that motion. >> Yeah. And I I'll second it because
adding I think adding it as a policy statement is is okay. I'm not in for I'm not in favor of the lawsuit. So, I know we're going to talk about that at a later date, but I think between this and just discussions that I've had, I I feel like it will we'll have had good
communication. >> We'll have had good good communication with um with our legislators on that. So, >> and the request the motion is the request um repeal of Senate Bill >> repeal of Senate Bill 180.
>> All right. So, does that mean that this doesn't have to come up on our next board meeting? It makes our meeting a little shorter because we're already going to put it on the priority list so we don't have to vote on it. >> Just saying. >> Well, the request is about tomorrow >> being agendaized. 180 is being
specifically agendized at our next meeting for this same thing. And now we're just going to go ahead and circumvent everything we've been doing to put it on here. >> I don't see how it's a circumvention. I see it as just >> I think the discussion of the other the agenda item was a resolution and a uh
potential joining of the lawsuit um that the other cities have started and the counties have started. Um this is a question question of whether when we make our presentation tomorrow do we include on it um a request for the repeal of Senate Bill 180. And
that's that's what's in front of us right now. And I'm totally open-minded to keeping the list local. Uh the local list set, you know, aside from the multi-county, the the motion was to add 180. So I'm going to vote against all the
priorities. >> I hate it, but I'm not going to vote for >> But you're good with I don't mean this is what I'm not understanding though. You're good with 180, but you're good with the idea that maybe it will get >> repealed. We need to have it its own standalone merit and not convoluted with the rest
of this stuff. >> And the thought process being that our legislators in Tallahassee, they had to b they had to vote for that bill because that's what they had to do because they had to be good soldiers and vote for a bill that was horrible for the state of Florida.
>> Yeah. In many ways, they had no idea what's going on. Not because they're not paying attention. It was that late in the game. What happened is it got put into the House bill. House bill from a a representative named Fiona from Sarasota. Went to the House bill. House bill goes to the Senate bill. Senator
Sigley tried to remove the language. They then uh sent it back to the House. House sent it back with the language and everybody voted for it because nobody even knew it was in there. Had come out. It had added back in. It came back out and then it was signed. It was all very very last minute and uh planned by a
developer named Pat Neil. major uh developer uh to to to make it into the final product. And so therefore, I think I think in many ways >> they got tricked. The legislators got tricked. >> My opinion, yes. >> All the more reason to >> all the more reason that this bill should be repealed.
>> We need to let them work on it >> and see what comes out of it. >> Well, I would stand by the motion because I I think the motion's is basically be made in a gentle manner. It's not we're not absconding them. Yeah, >> it's just, hey, please fix this. That's all. So,
>> all right, we have a motion. We have a second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> All opposed. >> I. >> Okay. All right. Moving on then to annexation report. >> Oh, I I don't want to backtrack, but the
the potential conversation lawsuit, is that scheduled future? different >> future meeting. >> Okay. >> And it passed three, too. >> Correct. I don't even know why we need to have that since it's on our priority list.
>> Well, two different types of action. One is a request, one is a demand. >> Um, Mike Fitzgerald, no, we don't have an extensation report. Okay. All right. Well, that's good news. That's really good news. That's the best news we've
gotten all day. us either. >> All right, >> since we're on annexation reports, can we just bring up this one that we've all been getting emailed about in Leburg that's adjacent to either Highlands or Plantation? >> Can we do that? Um, let's see. >> It's a city annexation. Oh, >> okay. All right. >> But I we got hit with a bunch of emails
on it and I was a little legally unclear. Do we know the status of that? It's either next to Highlands or Plantation. >> It's next to Highlands. >> Okay. And I started getting a bunch of emails. I thought everybody was CC on >> or Royal Highlands. >> Okay. Well, then I'll hold off. I'll hold off. I just saw a bunch of emails.
Maybe it's too far in the future for for a topic right now. So, >> we don't have any information. >> We don't have any. So, let's for if you whatever you've got, forward it to Mike. So, make sure it's getting reviewed. >> Thank you. >> Um Okay. Uh appointments to elders affairs coordinating council um and
applicable waiver. And I would ask for a motion to approve Ivani Gant to fill the term ending 1312027. Move >> approval. Second. >> Second then. >> All right. Morris first and Smith second. All in favor say I. I. Any
opposed? All right. Then moving on to Keep Lake Beautiful Advisory Committee. Um appointment for a term that expires May 31st, 2027. Cynthia Paget. Um request a motion for approval. >> Uh move to approve.
>> Second. >> All right. Um all in favor say I. >> I. All right. Moving that passes 5. Um, Commissioner Smith and Sabatini, this is a District 1 appointment to the Parks, Recreation, and Trails Advisory Board,
and the District One members uh expires expired June 30th, 2025. So, we have three. >> Yeah. Who was that dude you liked? >> Uh, Timothy Walker. I think they're all good. I just, you know, Tim Timothy Walker is my choice. Yes, sir. Thank
you. I'd move to approve Timothy Walker. >> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? All right. Moving then to reports. County attorney. >> County manager. >> Uh just a reminder that we do have a CRA
meeting immediately following this meeting. However, after we adjourn, we will need five minutes at least five minutes to reset the recording and prepare for the CRA meeting. >> Okay. All right. Commissioner Sabatini, a report. >> Sure. Just a couple quick uh notes. Just
one is on the sunken gardens thing. I wanted to go there, but I I couldn't get there. I couldn't find it. >> It's hard to find it. >> Is there an advantage to putting it on Google Maps or Apple Maps, or should we not do that until a certain stage? >> Oh, >> I'm fine either way. I just >> Well, I think it's a good thing to Okay.
>> U maybe just staff note that eventually we want Yeah, because I literally couldn't find it. So, I don't know if you know if staff wants to wait until that goes more public, that's fine because you know, maybe there's some advantages to waiting, but um you know, it's one of those things. Second, uh the
next fact conference is uh September 17th. I'm sure me and Commissioner Parks will be there. Encourage everybody to go. It's the technology and innovation focused one. So, it's actually very interesting. It's not just kind of typical policy stuff. It's a lot of new stuff because somebody brought up it ear
I'm sorry AI earlier and that's become a major topic now. I've heard this I haven't confirmed it. Some cities and counties are using AI for a majority of their permitting. So like most basic permitting is done almost exclusively through AI. I heard this in Penelis
County the other day. It was a local government thing down there. So something to look at. And then um I was going to bring up the lawsuit SP 180. Um, obviously I know, you know, there's back and forth about it. I think it has merit. We looked at it. I don't think I'd want to come in at the expense of
20,000. I would move at the next meeting to make it for a $10,000 entry. I think that's more modest and obviously gives them plenty of funds with the amount of the quantity of cities and counties that are joining. But I checked out the potential lawsuit. Um, you know, I had questions last time. I support it. You
know, I'm sure the the board might not entirely agree, but I'll make the motion to the next meeting and hopefully we can put that on the agenda at least for a brief discussion. We don't need to debate it all day, but I think it's important. Uh, and then lastly, you know, I think this is and this is somewhat public of an item, but it's
still, you know, a union item. The firefighting, uh, you know, the firefighters, there's an emerging issue about cameras in the vehicles. Um, you know, I think uh the county and the the firefighter association is divided on that. I just want to state my position
publicly because I think it's important. I'm against the cameras in the cab of these vehicles. I think it's um the benefit is outweighed uh drastically by the um even if it's um minor just the
psychological effect of being filmed for that duration of time that often. I don't like it. I think it's bad. I'm against cameras being in most vehicles, uh, except for maybe very limited purposes. So, I would I would not support, uh, standing by the county if that's become an issue that they're
pushing on the the union or the firefighters down the road. I don't like the camera thing at all. So, uh, obviously I think the conversations are happening now, but I just wanted to let my position be known publicly on that. And that's my report. >> Mr. parks. >> I had a couple items, but I'm essence of
time. I'm just going to wish everybody a happy happy Labor Day. And um I guess I guess it's the beginning of college football, too. So, >> your your team is everybody's team is undefeated at this point. >> Yeah. >> So, that's that's it. >> Great point.
>> Oh, go Knights. Oh, charge on. There you go. >> All right, Commissioner Smith. Um, I'm gonna hold this week since it's late. >> All right, Commissioner Wars.
>> All right. Um, I I'm going to wait. I I was just wondering if Commissioner Sabatini if you would write up like a little memo or something that outlines what you just described about the maneuvering that went on around Senate Bill 180 just because I find that
fascinating and I think it it's very informative and I can certainly appreciate the fact that these legislators have a lot on their plates and they rely heavily on their staffs and they have a lot going on and I could see how something could gets put into a
bill and you didn't realize that what seemed like a good idea, which was to help places where they had been hit by hurricanes and they were trying to rebuild and you didn't want to create roadblocks for them. I could see where that sounded great in concept and then something gets snuck into the bill and
then it literally just like takes away all of the local government power to do the things that we by virtue of the Florida Constitution are supposed to be doing. And so that's why it's just um it's it's just overwhelming to me that
um it this would be looked at as anything other than just you know really really bad um legislation that needs to get fixed like really fast. So um anyway with that we we will um stand adjourned and we'll move into our Do we have a
day? >> Okay. What is today? >> So today's actually a good day and it's a great day for today. have. Is Whitney here? Whitney's not here. Today is National Dog Day. >> All right. >> So, go home, pet your dog, love on your
dog. I know I'm going to love on my granddaughter after this meeting. So, um, today is National Dog Day. >> Okay. Well, that definitely makes you feel good. All right. So, we're going to adjourn. We have five minutes. >> We have 15. >> No, I think we should. It's not going to be very long. >> Okay. All right. >> Okay. We'll
>> jump back in in just a minute. >> All right. It's not too long cuz I have I have lunch. >> We do. >> You know I do. >> Oh, you do? You're not going to share it with the rest of us? >> I mean, I you know, I guess I could next
time, but I should probably, but no. We're opening up our CRA meeting, the Mount Plymouth Sarrento Community Redevelopment Agency. And I'll turn it over to Meg. >> Fantastic. Good afternoon, commissioners. For the record, Meg Brew, director for the Office of Economic
Development. This meeting was properly noticed and advertised in accordance with Florida Statutes and Lake County Code. We have just one item on consent agenda for your consideration, and that is the approval of the May 20th, 2025 uh CRA board meeting minutes.
>> All right. Do we have a motion? So move. >> Second. >> All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Okay. All right. Next up, uh, we had the audit report for fiscal year 24, which was transmitted by email to each of you in
May of this year. It's been included in this meeting's agenda for awareness. There were no negative findings from the report, and a copy of the report has been posted online for public review per state statute. And if there's no questions, I can move on to the next item. That brings us to
our proposed fiscal year 26 CRA budget. As you are aware, the CRA uses tax increment financing to steer tax revenues from increases in real property values towards specific projects in the CRA. Here you can see the increase in TIFF
revenues over time since the TIFF was first collected. There has been somewhat of a slowdown in collection compared to last year. However, with the recent approval of the Hillrest PUD, this number could increase in coming years. So for fiscal year 26, operating
expenses were decreased due to the completion of the CRA plan update. Current operating expenses are inclusive of travel and supplies as well as funds that were approved by this board to fund residential rehabilitation related to chronic code cases in the CRA. The grants and aids line item represents
money set aside for our commercial facade improvement program. The total revenues for fiscal year 26 which includes both tiff revenue and the existing fund balance is $1,643 and total expenditures which includes $924,34
set aside for reserves is $1,643. So the requested action this morning is an approval of the Mount Plymouth Sarrento CRA budget for fiscal year 26 and adoption of the corresponding budget resolution. and I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. >> All right. Are there any questions
regarding the budget? >> This is is this a public hearing or anything? >> No, this is just approval of this. It'll come back to >> move to approve. Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? All right. Moving along. And
that's it. We have conducted the business of the Mount Plymouth Sarrento >> Community Redevelopment Board Agency. All right. And don't forget, it's National Dog Day. >> National Dog Day.
>> All right, we stand adjourned. >> Yeah. Now we go.