possibly for a day. So, I followed a surveyor so I learned how to do it. >> Yeah, it was interesting. >> There's no way. >> Good morning, everyone. >> Welcome to our March 10th, 2026 Lake
County Board of County Commissioners meeting. Uh we welcome you today. I'm glad that you're with us. Um, we're going to begin the meeting with a an invocation that will be given by Pastor Chase Allen of First Baptist Church of Umatillaa and then we'll all remain
standing for the pledge of allegiance. >> Amazing. Well, good morning and as I always do, thank you guys so much for allowing me to be here to represent First Baptist Church of Umatillaa uh and most importantly Jesus. So, let's open with a word of prayer. Father, thank you so much for waking us up this morning in
in beautiful Lake County. Thank you for uh a place that we can be proud of. Uh a place that as we talk and plan and prepare and and do all the things that happen in this space, God, uh that we would continue to remain proud of that we would continue to point towards your son, Jesus. And so I do pray that you
would be with the things that happen in this room today. Uh may they be honoring and pleasing to you in all things, God. And may we live our life to bring you glory. It's in Jesus name we pray. Amen. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you, pastor. >> All right, agenda update. Jennifer. Uh, yes. Good morning, Madam Chair,
commissioners. uh first tabs 18, 19, and 20 were all added as well as the annexation report after the the agenda was first um published. I'm requesting that tabs 18, 19, and 20 be moved under
the regular agenda. Tab 13, we did add a business impact statement and an affordable housing impact statement. I'm requesting that we pull tab 14 at this time to be brought back at a later date. And finally, on tab 17, a conflict
waiver for Michelle Kusk was added. All right. And we're pulling 14, correct? >> Yes. >> All right. Okay. All right. Um, moving along then. Um, we're going to have a special recognition today. Um, we are
honored today to have Miss Florida's Teen Florida with us and she is a Lake County resident and I'm going to tell you just a little bit about her and then we're going to honor her with a certificate of appreciation for the great work that she's doing and um,
we're just super proud of her. Um Noel uh Schnacki is a lifelong Central Florida resident and a proud Minola High School graduate whose leadership and advocacy have brought meaningful visibility to Lake County through her work raising awareness to congenital
heart defects and promoting cardiovascular health. She's a founder and president of Hope for Heart Kids, a registered 501c3 nonprofit organization that supports children and families impacted by congenital heart defects through hospital book distributions, community outreach, and educational
initiatives. Through this work, Noel's children's book collection has been distributed to pediatric heart patients in 18 states in three countries while remaining deeply rooted in service to families and hospitals throughout Lake County and Central Florida. In 2024, she
played a key role in supporting Principal Williams Roberts of Lake Minnola High School in receiving the high school voters registration award, highlighting her continued commitment to civic engagement, youth leadership, and educational excellence within our community. Noel has been honored by
Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer for her contributions to the Central Florida community and her efforts to raise awareness for congenital heart defects, the most common birth defect in the United States. She's been recognized locally in the lake and style 40 under
40 uh as an honore highlighting her impact, leadership, and influence in our community. Additionally, she received national distinction as a top seven community service achievement finalist at Miss America's Teen 2025, recognizing
her work among hundreds of young women nationwide for exceptional service, leadership, and civic engagement. Noel also serves as as an American Heart Association youth ambassador advocating for proactive cardiovascular health education, CPR awareness, and heart
healthy lifestyles with a particular emphasis on engaging Gen Z and youth audiences. And through school visits, community events, public appearances, and digital outreach, she consistently represents Lake County as a positive role model for youth leadership, volunteerism, and
public health advocacy. As a Miniola High School alumni, um Noel's legacy continues locally through her support of the Heart of Minola scholarship, which recognizes students who demonstrate a commitment to living a cardiovascular
healthy lifestyle and who serve as positive examples for their peers, families, and the broader community. This scholarship reflects her ongoing dedication to investing in the next generation of Lake County leaders. That is a lot um a lot of achievements and
community involvement and we're just super proud of you. So, I'm going to come down there and give you a certificate on behalf of the board of county commissioners recognizing you for your hard work and dedicated service. Sure. >> Oh, thank you. That's actually saying
that. Well, hi everyone. My name is Noel Shinaki and I'm so honored to be here today in a room with so many incredible people that really are affecting our community in such a positive way. Um, as she had said, I have a 501c3 called Hope for Heart Kids that I started. My cousin Tyra was actually diagnosed with
hypoplastic left heart when he was born and at the age of 15 during his heart transplant. He actually ended up losing his life to it. So, I founded the 501c3 to continue on his legacy. And I'm just grateful to be able to stand in a room honoring him and being able to continue on his legacy in such a powerful way.
And it's so funny that you said public speaking. I literally said this is the one thing I would never do in my life. And I started competing in pageantss and now I absolutely love public speaking. So, even you just think that that was kind of like making me chuckle a little bit because it's so funny. Um, but I'm just grateful to be here in a room with
people who stand firm in their beliefs. My family has a couple of ministries. Jaywalkers is our worship collective, a women's ministry that we really just share our hearts and affect people in a positive way. So, I'm grateful to be here. Thank you so much for the certificate of appreciation. It's means so much to me and yeah, I'm just blessed
to be here. All right. Well, that was very cool. Yeah. Um, minutes approval. Um, let's see. Mr. Cooney, >> good morning. I have one set of minutes for your approval this morning. >> Do we have a motion?
>> Move for approval. >> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Thank you. All right. Um, moving along then to our citizen question and comment
period. Um, this portion of the meeting, the public can address items that are on today's agenda with the exception of any zoning items. Anyone who's joined our meeting through Zoom using their phone may press star 9 to virtually raise their hands. If you're particip participating Zoom online, please click
the raise hand button to let us know that you wish to speak. Everyone has three minutes to speak. Again, we just ask when you get to the part where the alarm sounds that um you will go ahead and conclude your comments. So, um
first, let's see. We've got Tam Tammy or Tommy Tommy Newberry. >> All right. Um here >> I even brought a post so you can look at it. Um uh good morning commissioners. My name
is Tommy Newberry and we reside at 35801 County Road 439 in Eustace. Uh we are here regarding the public dedication recorded in official records book 1068 page 1182.
This 1990 instrument dedicated a 50-foot uh strip physically located on our property for roadway purposes. Because the strip is technically public
but unmaintained by the county and we pay the property taxes on th that it has created a dangerous legal loophole that prevents the sheriff from protecting us on our own land as shown in the aerial views. There's two aerial views right
there and the 2022 survey that I'm providing on this as well as the packet of information I provided. Uh the easement is not a necessity for the
neighbor that lives behind us. Uh it is a luxury access to a paved road. That is all. Uh, the neighbor's property outlined in red has its original historical driveway access via old post
office lane. They are not landlocked. However, this 1990 dedication forces them across our private frontage, which has led to a documented a long documented cycle of criminal harassment.
Since we purchased the home in 2022, the neighbor has repeatedly used this strip to block our actual driveway and entrance, block access to our property for any of our deliveries and for visitors. And I have a picture from an
episode yesterday where six police officers were there from the sheriff's department, two of those being supervisors. Um, she does this for often for hours and sometimes for days as she refuses to
believe that she doesn't own all of that property herself and that we are all trespassing on her property. Um, despite the surveys, uh, we have had to call the police out many times. But because of
this dedication, law enforcement is told they cannot tow, they cannot arrest for what they view as a civil parking issue on a public road. The neighbor has been shown our officially recorded survey by
law enforcement at least four times that I can recall that I've witnessed uh proving that she does not own this land. We do, but to no avail. This individual has documented Lake County records for
multiple battery, multiple impersonating law enforcement, grand theft, and fraud. The county's 36-year-old record is effectively effectively providing a safe haven for a habitual offender to
unlawfully detain us in our own home, stalk and threaten my family. >> We are formally >> Are you near the end? Yes. Yes. And I should have been at three minutes, but I may add it a little bit. >> Okay. Just >> We are formally requesting that the board direct the county attorney to
initiate a petition to vacate this dedication under Florida statute 177.101. This roadway serves no public interest and vacating it will not leave the neighbor without access to the county road system. We need to return this land
to p private acreage so we can finally enforce no trespassing and stalking laws for our safety. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Um and we will have staff connect with you um on this.
Typically the typically a vacation petition is initiated by the applicant, the private land owner. Um those parties that >> No, it's done here. It comes before the board of county commissioners. It's reviewed by public works. Issues like
you referred to access, >> assuring that someone else is not going to lose their only access, that type of thing. Those things come into play with review of the application itself. >> Wonderful. >> So this would be something you would initially worked with public works on
>> public works then I need to contact them. >> Um yeah could we have is Jeff or somebody here that could talk to Tommy? >> Jeff Hart will be able to assist you out in the rotunda. >> Thank you. >> Okay. All right. Thank you for that thorough presentation.
>> Um Adam Edgington. Good morning, Madam Chair. Um, and commissioners, um, I wanted to speak about, um, the tree ordinance. Um, just a couple things I'd like to point out, uh, with each >> That's a public hearing. So, I'm sorry.
I should have let you know before you came up here. Are you okay to stay so that we we're going to open up for a public hearing when we get to that ordinance, and that would be the best time to Okay. Thank you, Adam. Um, and then Shane's here for uh, tree protection as well. Um, Cindy Newton,
Brit Road. Okay. >> It's on. >> All right. We're going to wait. Do we need to? >> Right. That's on the easement. Okay. All right. So, we'll get to those when we get to those items. And do we have
anyone online? I don't think so. Okay. All right. Then we're going to move ahead. Um, we've got a presentation. Um this is uh tab two. We would need a
recommendation of approval um on this. This is proclamation 2026. >> Move to approve. >> 19. >> All right. All in favor say I. I. >> Okay. All right. Um if we could have our surveyors come forward and we're going
to do a presentation. I'm just worried I'm not going to be able to read this. I'm so sorry I did not see. >> All right, I'm going to read this proclamation. Um, and it's pretty self-explanatory. This is one of my all-time favorite proclamations each
year that we we do. Um, see if I can do it without my glasses. All right. Proclamation 2026-9. Whereas surveyors and mappers are counted among the founding leaders of our country and were instrumental in the formation of the layout of property boundaries in the United States which
have provided our citizens the enjoyment of property ownership. Whereas George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and other former presidents of the United States served their fellow colonists as surveyors. And whereas the citizens of Florida recognize the valuable contributions of the surveying and
mapping profession to history, development, and quality of life in Florida and the United States of America and make important decisions based on the knowledge and expertise of licensed surveyor and mappers. And whereas the surveying and mapping profession requires special education training, the
knowledge of mathematics, um the related physical and applied sciences and requirements of law for evidence. And whereas surveyors and mappers are uniquely qualified and licensed to determine and describe land and water boundaries for the management of natural resources and the protection of private
property rights. And whereas the continued advancements in instrumentation have required the surveyor and mapper not only to be able to understand and implement the methods of the past but also to learn and employ modern technology and finding solutions to meet the challenges of the future. Now therefore, in conjunction with the
National Surveyor Week, the Board of County Commissioners of Lake County, Florida, proclaims that the week of March 15 through 21st of 21, 2026 shall be proclaimed as Florida Surveyors and Mappers Week. And the Board of County Commissioners recognizes the many contributions and the ongoing dedication
of surveyors and mappers to the citizens of Florida and the United States. And this proclamation shall be spread upon the minutes of this meeting and shall become effective upon adoption. So, thank you so much for all that you all do. Um, so much business and activity
and transactions in our county could not occur if it weren't for you and the work that you do out in the field in order to um accurately describe boundaries and facilitate u transactions and sometimes corrections to help solve boundary
disputes. Um, all kinds of things, protect the natural resources. So yeah, we're very very proud of you guys and and appreciative for what you do. Do you have a representative or should Are you
the main representative? Okay, absolutely. Thank you all. appreciate your work. >> All right. Um, clerk of court's consent agenda. Mr. Cooney. >> Good morning again. I have three items in my consent agenda for your approval. >> Approval. Second.
>> All right. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? That passes unanimously. Moving then to consent agenda. >> Move to approve. Second. >> All right, we have a motion for approval. We have a second. All in favor say I. >> I
wait to pull tab 11. >> All right. How do we undo that? >> Move to approve consent minus tab 11. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> All right. That passes unanimously.
Moving then to tab 11 for discussion. Waiting on me. >> Um, this is >> good. Um, second page. Um, I guess we're buying five acres in a 1987 mobile home for
$550,000. Okay. What do we need all the property? U I think our public works um person is outside assisting a resident right now. >> Okay. Well, and and the other thing I'll move on. The the property appraised for
$499850 which is approximately 10% less than the appraised value. I don't understand that when we're paying $550,000 for it. >> Wait, say that again. You're saying that the assessed value is $499, but the appraised value is that what you're saying? a property appraised at $499,850
which is approximately 10% or $50,100 less than the appraised value. That makes no sense. >> It should be then >> I think this is a case to where we're buying a piece of property in order to get a road through. Correct.
>> Correct. The property is being purchased for the widening of 455 or Ray Good game to um John Lake Road. Uh Jeff, the question that Commissioner Morris originally had was, "Do we need all of the property, the entire four ac five
acres?" Excuse me. A lot of record if you >> This is for Jeff Heard Engineering. Um we do not need the entire four acres. This is to extend 455 down from where it kind of ends at Lost Lake down to John's Lake and then continuing through the CMX property down down to the end. Um that's
what we've seen historic. It's it's it's really I think about a half acre that we really need to to kind of do it. We were looking to purchase the entire property because when we do only a partial take, it cost almost as much as to do do the entire property. And then once we have we have the entire property, we would have the option to either resell it or
potentially use it for some other county purpose as a fire station or recreational area >> across the street. We we we paid more than this for just a uh a smaller portion of it. >> This is what you're paying. >> And is this federal grant money that
we're getting? This is a this is >> Yeah, >> this is this is state this is state matching funds. It's a 5050. We pay 50. They they >> So our our cost is $275,000 for a 1987 mobile home that we don't need five acres on. >> Correct.
>> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, I know. And it it does like when you put it that way, it sounds kind of silly. >> That is the way that that is the way. >> But you but you have >> imminent domain. Are we going to spend $550,000 to do eminent domain? Yes, you would spend more because you would be
doing a partial take. And when you do a partial take, >> by the way, the 550,000 is going to be plus whatever the relocation is. >> Yeah, the re there is there is relocation which could be >> see Brit road all over again. Yeah, it is up to $50,000 that we may be paying
for for relocation, but across the street for much less, we paid more than 500,000 for just a strip because that that was a partial take. And then you start getting into those other evident domain issues. >> You end up paying attorneys fees for the other side. You pay all of these
appraisal fees. You really get into a lot of cost. It this is a a pretty >> We have an appraisal on it. So, I don't I disagree with that statement, >> but okay. Can I just I I want to point out one thing about how eminent domain
works. Um, you get multiple appraisals and um and what you typically try to do if you're going to avoid eminent domain because it costs so much more. You typically work with the property owner because
you're trying not to force them off of their property because of a public need. you're trying to actually facilitate a transaction that is mutually agreeable and acceptable. So, it's kind of in its
own sort of realm when you try to finesse these things versus actually going the down the road of eminent domain. >> This this property, the original the the the woman that owned it passed away and her her her family, her son is and daughter, I think, are living in it. So,
they're they're they're a willing seller in order to do that. And part of the is if we go through this, I believe that we could surplus it and probably regain most of that money that we're that we're putting through. That's my hope if there's not another beneficial county purpose. >> So, I see this a little different. Um,
Commissioner Morris is that we have an opportunity to buy entire purchase of land, 10% more. It's a lot better than just buying a 50-ft strip for the same amount. Then we have the property that we can do whatever we want with. we can resell it
for to at least recoup our 275 we have in it or use it for county purposes. So al although um I know it can be um sometimes hard to swallow but people's land have they have the
opportunity to do what they want with their land and he's either going to sell all of it or none of it. So >> okay uh when are we going to do 455? That's a different item. >> How long we going to hang on to the land to do 455? >> The um the desire for this small
stretch. It's about two blocks. The Claremont is pushing um they would really like the connection at least down to to John's Lake. So the that's the uh we're planning to that soon assuming that that there's funding. Now, the connection down to Hartwood Marsh will take longer because that's going to
require CMX is actually looking at selling that large property to a developer and that developer will probably come in and construct the rest of the road from there down to connect to Hartwood Marsh. So, I would Commissioner Parks might have a better answer. My guess would be three to five years we'd be building that if not
sooner. Claremont would probably like me to build it in um next next year probably. And it's it's only about two blocks that we want to >> Yeah, there's already people that drive through that. They think I guess on maps it show on maps people were driving through the little what appeared to be
some kind of access road. >> Yeah, it's currently dirt and people can can use that. We have blocked it off a little bit because people are coming from Waterbrook down south and >> it's a uh >> Thank you. >> Yeah, >> got a lot of questions answered. Thanks.
Um, I I I do like the um the fact that Jeff brought up that once the property is purchased and then the actual amount needed for the road is utilized or it's determined what is needed that you can surplus it, you could sell it, you could
use it for a public purpose. So, it's there are options there um that you could actually re recoup a portion of what you're paying for it. Move >> to approve tab 11. Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. I. Any pass? >> I just want to know for the record, I do
appreciate Commissioner Morris bringing stuff like this to the attention, having a conversation, fleshing it out, asking hard questions. I do appreciate you doing it. >> Well, I just think a lot of times we are taking advantage of when it comes to these type and I know there are property rights and they can hold on to it as
long as they want to. Uh, I'm a no vote. >> Okay. So we I called for the vote and I believe there were four yeses and then >> one one against >> one against. So four to one. >> All right, that passes. Um that was
consent. Um, moving along then to tab 15. And this is the um discussion and direction regarding an application
received under um policy LCC69, naming county facil facilities and placement of memorials to name the soccer fields at Hickory Point Recreation Complex as the Mike Stone Soccer Complex. Did >> did you want to do those?
>> Wait a minute. >> Oh, I jumped over to I jumped over to 15. Sorry. Um yeah, let's get back to public hearings. Thank you. Appreciate that. Um I was trying to get ahead of ourselves here. All right. Um public hearings. This is on um the affordable
housing assistance trust fund and live local requirements. Melanie. >> So, this will be an ordinance of the board of county commissioners of Lake County, Florida, amending section 11-33, Lake County Code, entitled Lake County affordable housing assistance trust fund, updating eligible uses of funds for consistency with state law. Amending
section 11-40 Lake County code entitled affordable housing covenants and guarantees. Providing for regulations addressing the impacts of section 125.01055 Florida statutes, known as the Live Local Act, 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'll become
ordinance 2026-10. >> Okay. This is a um this is a public hearing. I'll open the floor. Is there anyone who wishes to speak on this item? Anyone online? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board. Um does anybody
need an explanation? I think everybody understands that there are certain requirements by state law that we have to comply with. um under the live lo local act. >> All right.
>> Move to approve. >> Second. >> All right. We have a first and a second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? That passes unanimously in accordance with what we're we are required to do under Florida law. Um tab
13. Um Melanie, >> this will be an ordinance to the board of county commissioners of Lake County, Florida, amending section 9.02.0, Lake County Code, Lane Development Regulations Entitled Tree Protection, clarifying tree removal requirements associated with the development project, 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 2026-11. >> Okay. All right. This is public hearing. Um I've got two speaker cards. Um I'm going to start with speaker cards. Um,
Adam, you're up again. >> Good morning, Madam Chair, commissioners. Um, okay. Just a couple of things on the tree ordinance. Um, one thing I wanted to point out right here on the agenda, it says there's no fiscal impact to the county
individually, perhaps not. Um, to the individual citizens, I think there is. um add every one of these additional regulations and ordinances that we're putting forward is creating additional bureaucracy in our in our local
government. Um, some of the ordinance, some part of this ordinance in fact recreates additional work for county staff, which I don't quite understand, but with each additional burden that we continue to put on these properties um
the cost of uh uh and I for the record like the trees, prefer trees, but nonetheless, the uh a simple uh basic tenant of a free market economy or a capitalist system says that the more regulations that we introduce, there's
more burdens to be carried by the people we're introducing them upon. And certainly the more regulations that we continue to put on these things, there may not be a fiscal impact to the people I'm sitting in or standing in front of, but certainly it does create additional
burden. Um, and some of this ordinance, in my opinion, creates additional burden on county and it creates additional burden on our citizens. And I think it's worth noting that when you say there's no fiscal impact, it's absolutely, my opinion, inaccurate. There is a fiscal
impact. Um, you can't add burden to business, individuals, land owners. Land owners now, in my opinion, are the worst hit. Doesn't matter if they're big, small, or not. they um effectively lose
land value and I would be surprised if the county does not hear from large land owners whether they're selling or not selling if they're uh just own large acreage it their value of their land will go down and I would expect that the tax collector and tax and the property
appraiser will see an increase in cases of people coming forward saying hey listen this land you say it's worth X I think it should be reduced and here's buy it doesn't have the same ability uh to be appraised at the same amount. So
when I when I see additional um burdens coming forward, I feel like it um has to be pointed out that there is in fact a fiscal impact to it um to the citizens, to the land owners, perhaps not to you guys um per se. Um
but certainly for the people who own the land, for the people who want to purchase the land, if more importantly the people who want to sell their land, um whether it's to anybody. So I do think that the tax collector and the tax appraiser will see additional
um arguments on values because this reduces property value to our citizens and it increases individual and additional taxes or burdens on our citizens. >> Can I just ask you a question because I'm a little confused. So you're saying
that by keeping large trees on property, you actually reduce the value of property or is it because it stands in the way of where somebody might want to put a road or lots or >> could be any of those items. But I mean
I would find it a hard argument to make that additional government regulation and burdensome creates value. Um I think throughout of the history of our society as a democracy we we know that adding burden does not boom um the economy. So
yes, whether it is for moving roads, uh redesigning developments, uh really anything that uh individual lot owners, I brought a photo which I should have prepared earlier, but it's 500 ft from my house in a neighborhood and it's got
two salvaged oak trees that now this person, the best I can read the ordinance, and I'm no attorney. Um these two lot owners, they're five and 700 feet from me. So really easy example for me to see. They were salvaged from the original developer. They're in a bowl.
They're definitely going to die. There's no way to put a house on it. So yes, now costing burden to uh to pay, you know, it's a tax now on that individual to remove it both through burden and actual physical fees to get it removed permit-wise. And I just wonder to
myself, you know, expanding government and saying there's no fiscal uh impact in my opinion uh is doesn't jive. >> Yeah. I mean, I appreciate your opinion. And I just, you know, it's just kind of usually those trees die because the developers will actually put them in the
bowl and raise the land and then they'll create a situ or they'll cut the the um the root system or you know there there's reasons why the trees typically don't thrive. Hopefully um that won't be
the case. Um but um the way I read these changes, we already had our ordinance in place. these trees were already supposed to be protected. Um, and there was confusion over um at what point um
somebody that was developing um was supposed to actually adhere to the per to the you know ordinance. So, so we were just clarifying in this um ordinance change um because the law already existed. But my hope is that
developers would be more conscientious and actually think in terms of okay, I've got these big trees. These trees enhance my property. I want these trees to thrive and therefore I'm going to design in such a way that these trees actually enhance, you know, the value of
the property. But I I >> I can get you the al keys. The two that were saved in my neighborhood, which was developed as a PUD, I believe in 1995, were salvaging in and Osprey Point where I live, has a bunch of big oak trees that were brought in, and it's I
consider it one of the nicest neighborhoods around because of the mature oak trees. It's a beautiful neighborhood. Um, but these two particular trees were salvaged um by the developer and they weren't put into a bowl. Uh would be my guess. uh they weren't they weren't put into a bowl.
They were left uh to gain a credit or particularly save save something and they just pass the buck to the end buyer who now's got this burden of not only the tree removal but additional county regulations to get it removed. Um and then if that would be the case and I
know this is called cleanup but I did email multiple people to ask how many people retroactively are going to be affected by stuff that has to go back through re-re. I did not get a response. I'll just leave it at that. >> I looked at it a different way. I I
looked at it that this really isn't for the single resident. It might affect a few, but I I think we get a plot of of a plan when they come in and it shows all these roads, but we don't get to see the trees
on it and we just look at it and we vote on it that way. I think this is going to have the developers concentrate more on how to save these heritage type trees. And yes, it's going to cost them more money, but I would rather see that than
>> to have it just mowed down and agreed, >> you know, and and have and have little trees planted hoping they're going to grow in 20 years. >> So, I I just think it tightened it up because a lot of this stuff was already there. Adam, >> I I don't disagree. And but to suggest that like as you just said that means
that there's going to be additional regulations. You're going to have to move this, adjust that, re-engineer. No. >> Well, arguably you already had to. It's just that there was uh confusion over how this was. >> Well, section C seems to be a
retroactive punitive deal which could re which could cycle in the county to have to re-review. And our staff at PNZ is still hiring. And I would wonder then if section C is put in, which retroactively, that's page six, section C, that says that if it wasn't
completed, then the county staff would have to go back and re-review. What is the purpose of that if there's no and I mean I agree with with Commissioner Morris and yourself that um so I would wonder uh what what is the purpose of C
that requires that if it was brought up to a point and then completed why are we sending the staff back to redo the work if they followed the rules originally and they followed the rules today and it was and there's so I would just wonder what would that
ordinance was about how any developments that takes. Is that an additional burden on already strapped staff? It seems like it is, but I don't know. I didn't actually get a response to the email that I asked.
>> Yeah. I'm I'm sorry, Chair. I um just wanted to see if we could put up the code because you we briefly talked about this this this page six, section C that you're referring to. Can we go to that? >> Sure. He's pulling that. So, what section? You went past it. >> You passed it.
Eric, uh, Erin, go back. >> Right there. >> So, what this says is that for any development that has an approved zoning ordinance but has not yet submitted a site plan, preliminary plat, or master park plan as of March 1st, the developer shall be required to design around
heritage trees or obtain a variance. So, if they're already in the development review process, the staff isn't going to make them go back and redesign anything, although they should have already designed around heritage trees because the current code clearly says
removal of a heritage tree shall be prohibited unless it poses a danger to persons or property. >> So, that the that section should be wiped entirely if it was followed originally by the county. It's just additional language unneeded. That's an additional protection for people that
have submitted applications, Mr. Edgington. I mean, if the board wants to take it out, we can, but it's an additional protection for people who are already in the process. >> Well, certainly, um, additional rules and regulations and burdens on our citizens just doesn't seem arbitrarily
like a thing to do. Would just find a solution and then or get a solution put together to find a problem. I just don't understand it. I was looking >> I will think we had a problem though. We actually had people that were literally they were using their conceptual site plans and they were using this
conceptual site plan to say, "Oh, well, see, I'm allowed to take all of these out because this conceptual plan that was, you know, attached to a zoning ordinance, um it wouldn't have been approved this way if uh if you didn't want me to be able to take all these trees out." Yet, we had an ordinance
that said you have to keep those heritage trees. So it was because people were trying to circumvent the rules that we need to um address this as a clarification really >> because I didn't understand if it if it
was not really if everybody was following the rules in the beginning and everybody was creating um the site plans or or the uh >> well a concept plan is just like it was said earlier. It's a piece of paper and they plop it down. It's not a tree
survey, you know. So, they were using those to say, "Oh, well, look, I can just take everything out." Because >> that wasn't clear in the previous ordinance. >> Are you saying that your concept plan that y'all >> No, I don't give to the county engineered plans for the development.
>> No, sir. >> Okay. So, then you can't say that the concept plan >> uh not you're able to take out the heritage trees. So that's all we're that's all we're saying is the concept plan. They're using the concept plan as a getaround. This is just clarifying that
you can't do that. >> Okay. Because I I did ask and I wondered how much additional burden that created on the staff. How many additional developments has to go back through ENZ? >> I think I can answer that. Uh so you know when we talked about this you asked I bring this forward and I joked I said
no. Surprisingly I didn't bring this one forward. staff brought it forward because they wanted to be they want to be clear in how they're they're enforcing what's already in place. So this is this is like them asking us for more clarity, right? And so there's no
>> that's correct. And what creates an additional burden on staff is constant arguments with developers and developers attorneys over interpretation of the code. So rather than continue to argue with developers attorneys, which is where this came from, we are cleaning up language from a 2012 code so that we
don't have to argue with developers and developer attorneys any longer on the fact that heritage trees are protected trees. >> See, that's a very nice explanation. When I emailed, I just didn't receive a response. >> I did respond to you, Mr. Edgington and
I also responded to the HBA which you were copied on >> and I believe Miss Dial has also spoken to you about this. >> I did not receive a response from you from my question of how many developments had even affected or potential submissions that had been redone. I did ask that question. You did
not respond. Thank you. >> Okay, Mr. Gerwig comments. >> All right. Thank you. And just for our own edification, if if somebody could um and and of course to to let Mr. Edgington know too, if somebody will
take a look to see what I mean, is there I mean, if it you're in the pipeline, you still have to comply. I mean, you I I I'm a little confused on what the ask was. The ask was how many are
>> It appears that Mr. Edgington wanted us to go back and calculate how many projects were in the pipeline that may have heritage trees on their property where somebody may or may not have to redesign something. I don't believe the staff was going to spend the the time
undertaking that exercise because the point of the matter is if they're already in the development review process, if staff missed that comment, we're not going back and making them redesign. So, >> okay. So, I think that's the key here. You're you're not going to go back and
make them redesign if it was missed initially from this point forward per this language. I if it's being reviewed right now, then that would have to be >> correct. If they are in that development review process and the staff did not
make that comment to them, we're not going to go back and make them redesign or redo a preliminary plat or a site plan. I will also remind the board that since October of 25, we have been including a specific provision in every PUD ordinance or conditionals ordinance that comes to you telling people they
have to design around heritage trees. So that's not going to be new. That was all pending this organ this ordinance coming through to the board. >> Okay. All right. So I think at the end of the day when it comes to doing business and certainty is key and having
clear clear language is important. And so that's what we're trying to do here is make it clear so that we don't end up in disagreements over um what the ordinance actually says and is intended to do. We're just trying to make it
clear so everybody understands what the what the uh rules are. So, did um Okay. Do we have anyone online? Uh we do not. Bringing it back to the board for a motion.
>> I have I have one request and it's such a small request I even hate to bring it up, but it's one of these picky things that I do. It's under the protected trees. Um section 9002
number two. Um, I would just like to see that all of our measurements be consistent to 54 inches from the ground. The one I'm talking about here, the sand pine at 2 in is at measured at breast height.
Breast height is ambiguous. It depends on how tall the person is. I would just like to see a straight measurement of 54 in. >> That's it. >> 48 button. >> All right. So that's um if you make the
motion >> right you wanted to find DBH. >> Yeah. I'd like to make a motion that we approve this ordinance with the changes that all the measurements be um consistent with the heritage tree measurements at the height level.
>> Can Okay. Can Can you move that up on the screen so we can go back? I think it's Page two. >> Page two. One more. >> All right. >> Number two. >> Number two. >> So, um,
>> no, no, that's section two. Protected trees 9-02-02 section A2 >> the sand sign. >> So that that should be DBH and then DBH. That should be DBH. And then you want
DBH to be defined throughout the code. So it's the same exact height. >> Right. That's all I'm That's all I'm saying is it needs to be a consistent height. And >> we just use the heritage trees and change nothing else. >> Is the heritage tree at 54 in that you
measure. And I mean I'm assuming that that would make sense for these as well. I how I'm just trying to picture 54 in in >> usually DBH would be like 48 but 54 you know you would just say for purposes of
this code DBH will shall be defined as 54 in >> okay I'm looking at the tree people back there yeah but it's >> let me put it this way somebody 5'2 in
tall measures and somebody 67 measures >> we get that part of it I just want to make sure that because of the type of tree there isn't a reason why it's different. Um should it be 48 or should it be 54? Um asking for
>> not realize this is going to make this conversation this >> No. Hey, you know what? That's actually good to because that could be something down the road that causes a problem. So it's actually >> it's true. >> Yeah. >> Who's got a tape measure? For the record, Mike Fitzgerald and the Office
of Planning and Zoning Director uh restate the question, please. >> So, the only change I I would like to see in this ordinance is under the protected trees where it says sand pines be measured and scrub oats be measured
at breast height. I would like to say consistent with the heritage tree height of 54 in. >> Right. And that would be consistent with section 9.02.12 02.12 heritage trees B1 where the size is
measured at 54 in from the surface of the ground. >> Correct. >> And you're good with that? >> Do you want Okay. Do you want But it doesn't to Commissioner Smith's point, it doesn't say what height that you're making that measurement at. Breast
height is not If you're saying it's in another part of the code, is it is it defined >> diameter breast height? >> Yeah. with an with an actual >> I did not see Brett's height defined in >> I think that's defined. >> Yeah. So that I think to his point that's actually a good a good thing to what is DBH and what exact measurement
is it? >> We we can remove DBH and we can just say 54 in from the ground and then if you're at a certain measurement >> as long as it's consistent throughout the code, >> right? >> Yeah. Just I think that reference to breast height needs to be removed and
reference 54 inches from the ground. And since that's part of the motion, what we can do is go through and we'll make sure all the measurements are using the same standard. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. So, that's part of the motion. That's your motion. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> All right. All in favor say I.
>> I. Any oppose? That passes 40. Thank you, Mike. >> All right. Um 14 is pulled. Um, we're moving then to the regular agenda and now we are at tab 15, the naming of county facilities.
Morning, madam chair, commissioners. Bobby Benia, assistant county manager. The item before you is a request from the applicant Kathy Stone regarding the application to uh regarding the application Lake County policy LCC69 naming county facilities and placement
of memorials. Little bit of background history. Uh Lake County Water Authority currently owns the property at the Hickory Point. Uh back in n in 2016, they had uh set aside a portion of the soccer fields as in memory of Mr. stone.
In June of 2024, the Lake County Water Authority Board voted to uh rename the facility the Hickory Point Recreational Complex. We're currently working in conjunction with the visit lake staff in terms of the footprint and the amenities as Hickory Point continues to evolve and
the changes are taking place. Staff is seeking direction on the preference of the board in terms of what kind of memorial or designation for the facility. So, I just want to jump in as somebody who knew Mike and um and and just make
sure the record and everybody that maybe didn't know Mike and didn't know how instrumental he was in actually um making um those fields happen as well as other um recreational venues in Lake County. But this was something near and
dear to his heart. And way back, way way back, he began sort of this mission of having those soccer fields there. And so when he passed into it was it was I I remember the discussion that the board
wanted to honor honor him. And although um the soccer fields at the time they were owned by the water authority, um the county managed and oversaw them. I thought um I just remember that we had a discussion about it and it was decided
to put a sign out there in memory of of Mike Stone. Um so I don't I was a little um surprised that the water authority had actually like decided no, we don't want to honor Mike Stone anymore with
the signage. Um, and so I mean my preference is to find a way to continue to honor him um on at that location in a very visible way. >> I think the water authority board and I believe the county commission also
intends to uh honor Mike Stone's legacy. Again, the park is evolving. There's a lot of amenities and changes to the facility that would uh change the footprint. Uh it's more than soccer complex. It's multi-purpose field is used in many ways including uh folks who
are training in the track area. The Olympians are actually training at Hickory Point. So, it's changing based on the needs of today. >> And I appreciate the chair's uh comments. Yeah, I don't I mean, you know, I'm not sure why this is on the agenda today, and I don't
mean to be negative, but I think it could have been resolved before because I totally agree with the the chair's comments. Mike was amazing. Um, so his widow who was supposed to be here today, she's a teacher. She c she could not come in, but then you know, so she finds out she's got to fill out an application
for naming. The the intent has never been to to make it totally clear to rename what was done on June 12th. The Hickory Point Park name was changed officially to Hickory Point Recreation Complex. There was no discussion about
in there about name changing for Mike or anything like that in on that day. Um, so I'm not sure that they were even clear about they meaning the water authority was even clear about what would be the consequence of those fields going away being named for Mike and that
name going away. I think speaking for um Kathy Stone, the widow um sort of goes to what the chair said. Uh I I think if we're just able to make it clear, I know there's planning that's going on with the with the site uh and the the soccer
fields are going to be renamed or the soccer field is going to be all purpose fields, but I think if what we're able to do is make it clear from this board, there's not a name that's out front and that's never been a request. So that's why I don't think this is this was even necessary today to try to name the whole complex. I think it's just can we give
her the fields is it's not unlike I'm going to be a little it's a little bit of a stretch but like Bobby Bowen Field at Do Campbell Stadium. I mean that's a big leap. Although funny thing is is he was a big FSU fan. But I think it's just the fields and and having it
memorialized and giving him giving her some something that she sees even though the fields are going to be moved and there's going to be some reconstruction going on but that that being uh memorialized and it it being made clear and even in the time being if there's something like
I don't know when the when the whole project's going to be finished but if there's something to do in the time being for that as well. So, Commissioner Parks, I'm on the um parks and recreation board and um there is definitely um been discussion and absolute
agreement that Mike Stone will be honored somewhere. We just don't know where yet because the master plan is not fully developed yet, but once that's done, he'll certainly have a place in the fields. >> Yeah. Okay. Well, that's good to hear and I think we can make that clear to
her and maybe maybe staff can continue to work. I I mean I know it's a little harder because she's teaching and doing other things now, but I think I think um if you could give her some kind of an assurance. >> I know. Like I mean just a nice maybe a nice letter from us, a nice letter
>> explaining what we're doing and draw Yeah. Maybe a drawing of what's going to happen, some detailed explanation of what's going to happen. I think it this would that would take care of that and it would honor him. Yeah, I think it's unfortunate that it came across to her like we're we're asking her please apply so that you know
we can consider whether we're going to name these fields after your husband when what happened was after he passed it was initiated here at the deis let's do something to honor Mike Stone so we
started that process um back then so I just would love for us to be able to smooth over the fact that she was made to feel that she was asking for something something that had already been basically a agreed to and you know
and I think if the idea of maybe focusing just on the fields and so once the fields you you determine where the fields are going to be there could be a sign you name you know the Mike Stone soccer fields um or >> we took care too at the college uh Carlile Rogers Stadium uh with Mike
Matilia fields. >> Yes, there you go. I mean, so I mean, there's there's always a way to do it. >> Yeah. >> It's just I don't I I think we need to let her know that >> we're going to take care of it with in conjunction with the water authority or however we need to do it. I think once the deed passes, then we would be in the
position to actually be making that decision. >> Yeah, I appreciate that. Yeah, I think that's just and you're right. That's the way to handle it, I think. And it began because it was already done and >> yeah, >> really knew. >> Thank you. And just one more time, he was a great a great person, a great
leader, um great collaborator. He was out there trying to bring multiple people together to when those fields were just initiated to make it happen. Um but um I just I'm I'm glad to hear that everybody wants to find a way to
make sure that, you know, honoring him continues on. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um, tab 16. Um, this is a appointment. >> Yeah, that's
>> to the library board. Commissioner Morris, >> I recommend that we approve these applicants. All four. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> That passes 5. Uh, this is tab 17. This
is parks, recreation, and trails advisory committee. Um, this is commissioner. >> That's Smith. Well, really it's coming from my my district. >> Well, it's it's it's I'm the liaison. I'm the liaison here. And um this is for
the district 4, but there's um >> district five. >> District five, I'm sorry. But there is no there is no applicant for district five. And I think Amanda West would be a perfect fit for um the parks and trails >> and commissioner.
>> Are you is that a motion? >> Yeah, real quick. So the appointments I'm always going to defer to anybody on their own district. It's your district. Period. So this is his district, correct? This is Mr. This is Commissioner Morris's district.
>> District. >> Okay. Cuz I I just over the course of time always heard like, well, I'm I'm the leazison to this, I'm the leazison of that. But I'm a advent believer that whoever lives in that whoever has that district, they should get their person. So, I always defer to that despite my
opinions of who I think is best qualified for that board. I will always defer to my uh colleagues if that's the district that they represent. Even if it's from somebody outside the district, is of course you said in good faith it couldn't fund somebody in the district. That's fine. So, I'll be supporting her. >> All right. So, would you like to make
the motion since it's your district? >> I'll make a motion to approve uh Amanda Wetstein. >> Second. >> All right. We have a first. We have a second. All in favor say I. I. That passes 5-0. Um, moving then to
18. Um, this is with regard to the topic that came up at the last meeting and the rural boundary amendment. Um, Commissioner. >> Yes. Uh, yes, ma'am. I think um it would be I think it could be constructive to
write a resolution uh for us. >> It's attached. >> Okay. It is. Yeah, that right. So, the attached resolution um expressing opposition uh to the rural boundary amendment. This is was brought up last week obviously uh I listened in
on the Florida Association of Counties uh meeting again on Friday and they said, "Hey, it hasn't gone away yet. It's still got life to it." That you know, if you we if you board wants to express opposition, now would be the time to do it. that it uh it it that
amendment basically prohibiting us even if even though we are in our comprehensive plan process where we were more than likely probably going to establish some kind of a rule line with with uh you know no annexation on one side or rural areas on one side
at the very least and um more of the development on the other side establishing that line they are not going they're going to prohibit that statewide. So it's a big preemption thing. >> All right. So even if we had a JPA or interlocal agreement with a city, it still wouldn't this would just
completely >> wipe that out. >> Wipes it all out. Yeah. >> All right. Um, so I'm 100% in favor of the resolution and I think that we also need to make sure that somebody is completely on top of monitoring
um what's going on with this and and making not that I mean even if somebody tried to slide it in to something else um that we would at least be able to point out to our legislators, hey, you really need to take a look at this because it looks like something got
added um to to another bill cuz often we hear that, oh, I didn't even know that that got put into that bill. So, >> so I was I was going to bring this up. This this specifically calls out Senate Bill 208. >> Uh, I don't think 208 is moving forward.
What we're really concerned about is the amendment and the wording of it. So, could we change the actual bill number to any amendment that reflects this wording? >> So, it Excuse me. It does say that. It says Senate Bill 28 208 or any
substantially similar proposal. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I think and to your point I think um you know our lobbyists should definitely provide us you know Chris can provide us uh every couple days provide you
>> should an update on this now especially now that we've done a resol resolution is a pretty big deal for us and I will say personally I've as you know I've been pretty patient with trying to work with legislator on some of the home rule stuff and at you know at this point I
keep seeing a lot of this preeemption stuff coming in. >> That's what we call you patient parks. That's your nickname. >> I mean, I've been and maybe too patient, but but I think the >> way too patient parks >> the attack well on some things, but sometimes patience works. So, I will say that. Um, but on on some things, I think
I'm making this as a general statement. I do think the preeemption stuff is just it's just becoming endless now and there's no So, I I resolution is pretty serious. I would uh hope that our our lobbyist would um you know could update us. >> How about
>> make a motion to approve. >> All right. >> Second. All right. And then in discussion just I think the request is that our lobby in fact update us. >> Yeah. Update us. And then again I'm not trying to draw this out. I think today's gonna be a quick meeting, but I will say for the next not the next agenda, but
the next workshop where we discuss these things more in intentionally that we definitely need to to make sure we emphasize to whatever lobbyist we use that we expect them to go 100%
in for war for the few things that we do ask them to when it comes to policy. >> Not a scatter shot. Hey, send a note on these 12 bills. like literally we will do anything it takes. Like we need a hardcore lobbyist. I >> I mean I see I I agree because I think that I think it's important to have the
lobbyist that finesses your own agenda through, right? That's working on your legislative priorities. But then you need a lobbyist that's your bulldog, that's your advocate, that's going to really go to bat. And it's hard for that first one to be that person because they're,
>> you know, they work off of building relationships. True. Not arguing that something's a bad idea, you know. So, we really need to look at this process. >> Another way to explain it is whoever that I mean, it's what you're saying, but I'll just be more direct about it. They're going to burn relationships.
They're going to fight so hard for a a certain appropriation or a certain policy that you want. So, you need to get it like an independent lobby who's just going to go to war. Now, of course, I made a motion for that on the property appraisers budget thing. I think that our lobbyist group has to work with our legislative delegation. I think there's
an interior conversation that that would it would have been better a job to have the outside guy. That's fine. It's a learning moment. We'll move forward. We'll figure it out. But but when this stuff happens like where it's not like, well, it's tinkering with home rule. It's literally just erasing it. It's gone. >> Destroying it. >> Yeah. I mean, listen, it's like a it's
like a scale, right? like the home rule stuff was always declining since the '90s, but like now it's like like an acceleration almost >> to the point where literally in the next 10 years, I could say being that we are we are where we were before 1968 where if you didn't have the modern Florida
Constitution, every single bill that had any local effect had to go through Tallahassee. Literally, that was the whole state. No matter what, you could just try to build a road had to go through Tallahassee. So, that's a problem. We don't want that. Um, it's not an accident that's happening. It's
because money and power is concentrating so heavily in in lobbyist uh efforts in Tallahassee. And it's so much easier to affect something in Miami through Tallahassee than it is in Miami. So, that's why it's happening. Hopefully, we can fight it, but sorry, I didn't mean to draw it out so much. >> All right. So, that was under our
discussion. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? That passes 5. >> All right. Um, fire rescue. Um, David Kilbury, public safety director, is going to give us an update on wildfire threat.
>> Good morning, commissioners. David Kilbury, public safety director. So, we have had a increase in the KBDI, which is normal for this time of year. I'll start out with uh the first uh overhead slide of uh this past week. We had 15
incidents. Um, five of those 15 were related to escape fires from uh what would be termed legal burning. Uh, and then there's some that are certainly unknown. We had somebody use fireworks. We had a vehicle fire and a vehicle crash. So, not outside the norm. Most of
those are small in size. I believe the largest was actually six acres in size. So, I'm going to go through our typical uh presentation here. This is the Florida fire danger index throughout the
state and we're in a moderate and so you can see pretty much everything south of the I5 I4 corridor is extremely dry. The next slide is going to be the average by county as of yesterday.
>> Moderate we're in moderate but that was the fire risk danger. Now we're going to talk about KBDIS on the drought index. Currently we're at 491. So we are really close to our ordinance to enact a burn ban. So Florida's fire danger and they take in fuels, weather, wind and things
like that. So we are in a uh index there that is moderate in size to low that I just showed. So on the KBDI you can see we are in the uh average area of under 500 but we are close to approach that.
Uh I know we do have some rain forecasted for this week. So it will be curious if it is enough to to prevent us from going into the burnband and this is the uh overall uh heat map of the fire danger through the drought index for the
state of Florida. So you can see we uh are slowly moving from a green yellow to more toward red throughout the state. And then the last one is actually the KBDI as I highlighted in yellow, the Lake County corridor. And you'll see
that we went up four uh points from last week. And in the column in the center, the midmax, you can see our lowest uh drought index is 400, but we do have areas in the county that are approaching 600, which is an extreme fire condition.
And then over to the right of the column, if you'll notice, when we first started this, we had about 26% in the high uh index of fire danger of the drought index that has moved. Now we are close to a 6040 split. So, uh, again, we
are are are getting close in that time of wildfire where we're going to ask the public to, uh, or ask the board, uh, for our ordinance to enact the burn ban just to prevent that that burning until we get below that. So, in the pink at the bottom, that's Marian County. You can
see they've had a little bit of >> lift it up a little bit so we can't see it. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Sure. That would make it far easier. So Marian to our north um is actually done a little bit better than we are. Uh last week they were higher than us. So that means that they've had
some rainfall to bring their KBDI. And then down and then the next one is all of our our bordering counties just so you can get a look at it. Um Orange County is around 452. They were actually below 400 um a couple of weeks ago. So
everything's uh slowly throttling up. We are almost a carbon copy of Sumpter County right now. They're at 491 as well. So, uh, this weekend's weather forecast will really be determinant within a few numbers of whether the burnband takes effect through the the
county manager keeping a a notation on that daily uh report to her. So, we're getting close to enacting the burn ban. >> All right. So, if we hit that number, then it'll automatically you guys will get the word out. Um, but the ordinance that we talked about that's similar to the Oyola one, is that going to come
back on our next meeting? Is that the plan? >> That's to give you the ability. >> It is through the process right now of advertising in that. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, then that would like in a situation like this where we're what did you say? We're 491.
>> Yes, ma'am. And considering h how the percentage that's actually way over 500 right now that this might be one of those times where you would already said all right everybody quit burning because this isn't uh but that would be your call as the experts.
>> So if if we were able to adopt that ordinance. >> Um but this is helpful. I mean, I think that it it really helps us to see what's actually going on and and how, you know, many resources are actually being deployed right now and how often it has to do with somebody that's actually
burning in their backyard that these things take off. >> And I'll tell you, we do get a lot of phone calls into the the fourth floor Fire Rescue asking if we're in a burn band. We've got some really conscious residents that are concerned about the fire dangers. And as >> that's what I've noticed is that people,
it's an inconvenience when you do, you know, rely on on burning and you live on rural property and that's how you get rid of a lot of your stuff that you need to get rid of debris wise. Um but um yeah, everybody's really concerned. They don't want and and they're concerned rightfully so because they don't want
what somebody else is doing to end up causing them to lose their home and you know their property and >> Absolutely. So I'll be back next week and we'll see where we're at next week. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um this is tab 20. Um
Melanie. Oh, okay. All right. >> Yeah. Wait, I skipped over uh the annexation report. If we want to bring Mike up here first before we move to that easement.
Thank you, chairman. For the record, Mike Fitzgerald. I'm the office of planning and zoning director. I have three annexation reports to present today. All three of these are for the city of Leburg. Uh, this is not working.
>> Erin, can you advance the screen, please? >> The first one is an annexation by the city of Leburg. All three of these uh annexations will be heard by their city commission on their uh at their March 23rd meeting. The first one is an
annexation of 9.26 acres. This is located north of Dewey Robbins Road east of US Highway 27. Current Lake County zoning is agriculture. Proposed city zoning is small planned unit development. Current Lake County flu is rural. Proposed city flu is a state
residential. By comparison, the county density is one dwelling unit per five net acres. The proposed city density is 2.6 dwelling units per 1 acre. The intent is to develop the property with uh residential uses.
Lake County Office of Solid Waste uh has stated that the properties will remain within the Lake County residential solid waste program through September 30th, 2026. And that is because they've paid for the service through that time period. Lake County Public Works has
made comments that turn lanes are required at Dewey Robbins Road, additional right ofway will be required at Dewey Robbins Road, and a traffic impact study will be required when developing the putt. If we can just advance to the next couple of slides,
we'll show the aerial of the property and then I believe the next slide has this is the future land use and zoning currently in Lake County. Next slide. This illustrates where the property is located uh within
the Leburg development. Th this is a snapshot of Leburg's story map on their for their website. And right in the middle of the screen, sort of just south of where it says Turkey Lake, that's where this property is located. So, this will be an
infill to the development that is going on in the city of Leburg. It's not really an infield though because it's not connecting right. It's it's going to create another enclave. >> It does. You're correct, sir. It is. It
is connecting to the city boundary. It is creating an enclave to the property just to the east. I did inquire with the planning and zoning director at Leburg pursuant to the ISBA. They can create an enclave if they agree to supply city
services to it. And they have confirmed with me that city water and sewer service is available to that to that enclave. >> Yeah. >> Okay. We can move on if there are no questions. >> Well, I mean my I think that we What's that? I >> you don't want to create
>> Well, I I mean I I get it that the ISBA may say that. I mean, I think it's still worth raising the issue, but I'm mainly concerned with I mean, we were not in favor of all of these other things. So, I think we should express concern over
one unit to five acres going to 2.6 to the acre. I mean, that's >> if we could just back up one screen and keep going till it comes to keep going right there. I believe their municipality estate residential allows
up to four dwelling units per one gross acre. So they they are actually under what the city would city maximum would allow. >> That I mean a state residential is four dwelling units to the acre. That that's what their land use is. I mean that doesn't sound like a state residential.
That sounds like pretty high density. >> That's our that's our urban >> that's our urban designation. our urban density. >> Is there is there a consensus to express off? >> Well, I'm going to write a letter to them and ask them if they would at least
um go with our onetoone density. >> Well, I mean, shouldn't we be talk talking? It's kind of It's kind of hard to I I think I'm going to ask for the one to one density, >> but Okay. So, you're going to write a
letter. Can I write a letter that says one to five? I mean, how are we going to handle that? I mean, >> you want to put >> Well, it we got to be we got to be >> we we have to be consistent in our message. >> Yeah. And
some places we blow out our transitional zone that just happened. In other places we're we're wanting to absolutely have it stick. I'm thinking a one to one's good. Um it's a transitional zone designation.
I think everybody can swallow that. Um, and it's consistent with what I've been doing this entire time is trying to protect our transitional zones. >> And I like to look at the facts of a situation >> and I like to look at what's going on on
the actual property. And so I don't know. I just this whole like blow out the transitional zone when you've got somebody who had they had real prop they had rights on their property for 30 years and then you start taking them away over time and
they come in and they want to do a master plan on property that they previously had rights that have been taken away. I think you look at those situations differently. I'm just saying because I know you want to keep using the phrase blowout the transition and I want to actually look at what somebody had that was already being taken away by
the government. >> That is absolutely your priority. But as far as sending a consistent message, I mean, I think we just need to know is the majority of the board wanting to say acknowledge um
our one to five rural land use um and we're opposed to it or is the majority of the board wanting to say >> I I would just like to give them something that they would actually consider. They would not consider a one to five and they just throw it out. I'm
thinking a one to one's better because they may consider that one one. Uh they will not consider a one to five. >> Have they g has anybody given you any >> mean that's only two homes on this whole property. So >> yeah it's an estate it's an estate type scenario.
>> Absolutely. But >> estate is what I was saying. It would be an estate. >> It would be an estate type scenario with oneacre dwellings. Um, but the city of Leburg has all the right in the world to annex it in. We
just need to try our best to do what we can with the property and hopefully they can see that we are trying to keep our somewhat of a rural density in the area. I know that Dewey Robbins Road has just absolutely been hit hard. Uh, it was an
old orange grove dirt road when I was a kid and we used to dove hunt. I mean, we used to um ride around over there. So, um, what's happened to Dewey Robbins Road is is in my opinion terrible, but there's nothing we can do about it. We
can only just go with what the best possible plan forward. And if you go with the city of Leburg saying one to five and that's it, they're going to turn it down. >> So, >> be and be done with it. But if you give them something that they can actually look at and and say, "Okay, maybe we can
do a oneto one." >> So, why not couch it this way? Our preference would be that it would be one to five. We understand that the city might find this unrealistic and therefore we could support one to one if the city would consider a compromise.
>> I am absolutely okay with that. >> And can I add that um another way to look at is how much of an enclave is this going to create? Because this I will know >> it's a one lot enclave, right? >> Yeah. because I'll know that >> it's one single parcel that is to the
east of this is two I'm going to guesstimate here this is two alternate keys at 9.26 26 acres. The one that's left over is about five acres in size, a five acre enclave. >> Yeah. I mean, because you know, this is the the problem with the ISBA and you
know what I will note that what I would say is get rid of ISBA and do joint planning agreements where you wouldn't create enclaves um without some big at least some big master planning done between the county and the city in this case. But so I don't know if you want to put that in
there somehow, but um but yeah, >> I you know I think that you know I I can appreciate trying to get them to something that would be better than 2.6 units to the acre. Um and I can appreciate the fact that they might take a letter that says 1 to five is all that
we'll be happy with and throw it in the trash. So you know in order to try to get them to a place that that would be a compromise, I think it's just how we word the letter. We let them know that our preference would be one to five. Our pre, you know, but we understand that
might not be realistic and that we would um but but that we would appreciate if they would consider >> well the ultimate goal would be them not to annex it in. That would be my ultimate goal and I won't be making phone calls requesting that. But >> well then maybe we that's where we start
then. Um >> but we need to have a letter follow up and that's and that's that's what this all >> right. So our preference is that they don't annex. If they annex, keep it 1 to five. Obviously that's not going to happen. That's not a consistent urban density. So really the ask is not to
annex. If they do annex, we're asking that they would consider >> a onetoone which would So is there is there a consensus to that or a motion to to go that route? >> I don't think you need a motion, right?
>> No, you can do it by consensus. Um, who will be the signatory on the letter? Chairman or district commissioner? >> I can send it. >> Okay, I can prepare something for you to look at. >> Okay. Um, next one.
>> Next item is an annexation that is 25.07 acres. The location is south of Gospel Hill Road, east of Number Two Road. Current Lake County zoning is agriculture. The proposed city zoning is planned unit development. Current Lake County flu is rural transition. The
proposed city flu is a state residential. Lake County density is one dwelling unit per either one to five net acres depending on the open space. And then the proposed city density is three dwelling units per 1 acre. The intent is to develop the property with a
residential use. Lake County Solid Waste has stated that there are certain AKs that will remain under Lake County service through September 30th, 2026. Lake County Public Works is stating that there are deed easements
there are deed easements for road drainage and utility that are named Gospel Hill and Helgs Road that will need to be transferred to the city of Leburg or vacated with future development of the property. And those certainly will become comments that
public works will make as this property if this property develops. These are the zoning and land use maps for Lake County. As you can see, this is surrounded by the city of Leburg. That's indicated by the hashmark.
And then this is the story map as well for the city of Leburg. All that blue is where they are developing. This is going to be included, I believe, as the Lake Margaretta development. I'll back up just one. You can see the Lshape that is
outlined here in red. That fills in the middle part to the right of where it says Lake Margareta. With that, I'll answer any questions. >> I think we should ask them not to annex it. >> Yeah, this is outside their ISPA, isn't
it? I thought number two road was their ISBA boundary. >> No, sir. This this is within their they can annex this property. This is contiguous to Leburg and it's it's inside their ISP. >> Can you um go forward a little bit? Maybe I'm looking at this thing a little
>> or you can't >> I can't I can't zoom this. >> And now are they in a rural protection area? >> They are in They are not in a rural protection area. No, sir. Okay, move forward one where it shows the whole density.
You want to see the density? >> There you go. There you go. So, how close is this to number two that comes loops around and goes back up to 48 starting on 19 and loops to that series of roads?
>> There's two roads in there. I'm trying I can't think of the name of the other one. Maybe the other think go back one more not I'm not sure how >> there's a north south road it comes off of 14 does loop around the back side of highway number two I think >> number two road number two
>> the other side of the the left hand side of the next parcel is where number two road is >> I think I think this is the one you can see here you can see county road 48 to the north >> because whatever whatever happens any development in that area now that there
should be some plan for number two, not to bring up the number two topic again, but about what to do with that road long term from 48 all the way down to 19. They need to contribute to that. >> So, we have had discussions with Leburg
about number two road and um they have agreed to take um number two road that'll be coming forward in a road transfer agreement shortly. Um but from their development, it's just um north of the big curve when
it's going back up to 48 and then north to 48. >> But this other one, okay, I'm sorry. We're still on this one. Okay. >> Go back to the other map. There we go.
So, number two road runs up to the east of 400 306 and 237 right al codes. >> Where is it in relation to this? >> Over here I think. >> Let let me go back to this map. You can
see that number two. >> Number two road runs north south just to the west of Lake Margaretta County Road 448 comes up to north. If this is added to that Lake Margareta >> subdivision, now you're just you're putting more over on number two.
>> Yeah. >> So, >> I say that we ask them >> not in the rural protection area. >> No, >> but it is in our rural transition land use designation.
So you could ask >> it is a planned development >> with a master plan, right? >> And they're going to take over the roads and they're going to provide water and sewer%. >> Yeah. What's the open space? Is it is it commiserate to our >> Well, this is a zoning thing. We don't
have concept plans. Their proposed open space is 30. >> And this is this isn't even our zoning. >> Here it is. is what they are required by their code 35%. >> You mean could we ask for 50% open
space? >> I think the ask should be um not to annex if they do annex that they would honor our rural transition open space requirements. That might be a way to suggest a compromise. I
>> mean our world transition would be one to one would be your highest density at 50% open space. One to one is 50%. >> One to one would be 50. Yes, ma'am. >> But theirs is three to one.
>> And yet if they annex in, they're going to get water, they're going to get sewer, they're going to get new roads, right? So all their infrastructure and it's a planned unit. Okay. >> Correct. >> Yeah. And then one would argue with the 50% that there would be more uh
clustering. So it actually could be more efficient for them if they're going to provide water and sewer. But through the PUB process, you're right. >> I think you just re, you know, you just ask recommend that they would consider
consider that. So that just to make sure do we have consensus for this one to send a letter again requesting no annexation but if they're going to annex to honor our rural transition open space at 50%. Okay. And then just to clarify um
Jennifer's comment um they are taking the road transfer to the city council on um March 23rd and it will include two it include about nine roads, one of which is number two road from county road 48
to the terminus of the ISBA. >> Should we wait before we send this letter to see what they do with the road? >> When is this annexation? >> March 23rd is the date of all three of these. So, could you include it in a letter that you would like to see that the road agreement go through? I mean,
that that's a critical part of this that I mean, that's a that's a key part of it. >> That would that would be part of your if they decide to annex it, you would like them to go ahead and take the road and do the 50% open space?
>> Yeah, because they're happening the same night. So, I >> mean, none on the county's land use map, nothing out in this area has ever been designated urban or urban low that I know of. Is it at Triumpy Place and
those are those urban? >> We have a we have rural transition in the area to the east and we have some rural there to the southeast. Most of the property that's surrounding it is uh in the city of Leburg, right? >> Okay.
>> No, I was just trying to get if I mean >> what was it before? >> What was it before? I mean, I don't think there was urban out in this area. >> I don't have that information. Uh unfortunately, I don't think so. >> That's why we were not happy about all of the land in on Dewey Robbins being
annexed is that it was rural. Okay, we have one more. >> Yes, ma'am. >> The next annexation uh to be heard by the city commission on March 23rd. The size is 202.6 acres. This is east of
County Road 33 south of Lake Bride Street, west of County Road 33, south of Desert Lane. Currently, county zoning is agriculture. Proposed city zoning is planned unit development. Current Lake County flu is rural. Proposed city flu
is a state residential. Current lake county density is one dwelling unit per five net acres. And the proposed city density is 2.47 dwelling units per one acre. The intent is to develop the property with residential uses.
Uh there are certain AKs that will remain within the Lake County residential solid waste program through September 30th, 2026. It's important to note that a roadway improvement and impact fee a uh impact fee credit agreement for county road
470, County Road 48 at County Road 33 intersection improvements was approved by the board of county commissioners on September 9th, 2025. So that was for improvements to the intersection at County Road 33. Lake County Public Works has indicated
major comments for County Road 33. Turn lanes are required at County Road 33. Additional right ofway will be required at County Road 33. A trail uh fronting county road 33 will need to be accommodated and a traffic impact analysis will be required.
This is the zoning and the land use in the area for uh currently for Lake County. It's a little harder to see on this map. Uh this is this property is south of where you're seeing Preservation Place. This is a this is a
non-ontiguous annexation. You can see on this map uh just barely where the hash mark is for the city of Leburg up up on the top of the map. And then that is where Preservation Place is. And then this property is generally
to the south of that. It's and it borders east and west of County Road 33. The best the best way to get a a perspective, a vantage point, if you see that tree area with uh that heart-shaped
lake in the middle, if I back this up, you can see the tree area with the lake in the middle. And that is the property that is being annexed highlighted in yellow. And then if I come back down, there's the heart.
>> It's it's in that area. >> So yeah, I remember going out and seeing this preservation place. This is where there's actually the um water authority has that easement over there and you can go underneath the turnpike. We took kayaks and we went underneath the
turnpike and then went um through there. And I just remember it was heartbreaking to be on that property and think that it was going to be completely um developed like just and I think there's a lot of flood plane in
that area too. Um that that particular property after we had a lot of rain, it had a lot of water. I think there was an issue where our public works department was trying to work with city of Leburg because there was so much of that preservation place property that that was holding water and that was
they had lots and roads that were actually in areas that were flood plane. Um anyway, our our designation is one to five. It's not contiguous. Um I don't think we should I think we should oppose it. We should >> absolutely.
>> But and I just wanted to point out this board did approve intersection improvements from this development already. >> But the intersection improvements are on 33 470. It's the 33470 intersection.
Correct, Mike? >> Or was that Bridges Road? >> I'm sorry. >> Where were the improvements on this map? >> Jeff, >> I do not have an 70 and 48. morning. They're at 33,470
and 48 right where the barber shop is and the um the gas station. >> And the the the developers agreement says that within six months of them getting their approvals from from the the city that they would construct the new um turn lanes and the traffic signal there. They were estimated to be about
$2 million. So that but that agreement is based on the con the idea that Leburg was going to move forward and annex this. So the best we could do is try to get some road improvements.
I mean, that's I mean, I appreciate the getting the road improvements out of it, but I still think it's a horrible. I think it's >> absolutely not not a fair tradeoff. I support a letter of opposition.
>> Should it and should it go forward? I mean, we understood that these road improvements would happen in accordance with the development agreement. I'm Can you keep just toggle back a little bit to the all key numbers?
>> You want to say the aerial? >> Yeah, the aerial. >> Mike, how far is um 48 to the north? Uh, I'm going to guess a mile, two miles. >> Sorry, I'll try to get back to the
aerial. And And you mentioned a trail. the trail was going to be along third 33. >> A comment that we have received is that a trail along the development road frontage for county road 33 will need to be accommodated.
>> Okay. And that would go in parallel to that heart-shaped lake right there then. >> Yeah. If the if the PD&E study says it's goes on that side. I mean, was there anything um from like
environmental resources and I mean flood planes? I think chair mentioned that earlier, but I mean that looks like a like a system that kind of loops around all the way to the larger wetland system there. We do not have comments at this time, but certainly uh
through our intergovernmental coordination, we should be seeing some we should be seeing uh the development plans for this and if there are issues with the flood plane, then we we'll certainly comment on it. Yeah, just looking look at it and see um
with my environmental hat on um conservation hat, better word. Um the you know concern about um wildlife corridors. No, it's not an officially designated state wildlife corridor, but but at a lower level kind
of regionally or within Lake County, what if that's going to be solid development there, what that would impact I mean the the effects on on any kind of connectivity. >> Yeah, certainly alternate key 1044189
would be a great candidate for some conservation. >> Yeah, that's what I'm >> the the 1044189. Is that what you're talking about? Yeah, >> that's what I was asking about the the resources on the site. Maybe that
doesn't look like it was citrus. maybe at least in a long long time or ever. >> So maybe maybe in the request it we you know we're we're we're opposed the annexation. We understand that it's likely to move forward. We have a new
development agreement for road improvements, but we're asking that they would consider um the opportunity for the alt key 1044189 to be reviewed for >> Yeah. Yeah. in in conservation purposes
and wildlife preservation >> connectivity >> connectivity. What do you think? Do we have a consensus? >> Absolutely. >> Me, >> right? Anymore? >> That's it. >> That's all. >> He's the charm.
>> That's That's because all Sean's been annexed in. >> You don't have anything down there, right? Um, no, I still got Ferndale and Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Um, all right
then. Moving to tab 20. This is Melanie. >> Actually, Jeff or Jeff, >> good morning. Jeff Eard engineering. I don't have any fancy maps to show you, but this is the associated with the Brit road reconstruction where it washes out washed out. This is to acquire
approximately 0.12 acres on the uh west side. We we we acquired the project piece and this is just a little bit of right of way and a little bit of pipe going out into the pasture land on the other side to complete to show that we definitely own it by by deed and not
just by by right. It's about um I think it's 14 $14,500 and they're they're open to to moving forward. And that will be the last piece of rightaway that that we need, which we then we would just need to finish the
permit with St. John's and then DOT would give us the uh approval to bid the project. >> So, we did send a purchase agreement out to the um property owner's attorney. I think it's WDL is the name of the property owner. Um we sent that out Friday. We got it back this morning with a couple of minor comments that I think
we can fix quickly. Um nothing major. So, we're hopeful that they will sign that today and that we can quickly move this to closing. Um, one of the items that we are asking for you to do today is to wave the due diligence that we usually undergo. Um, we already have the
survey from our in-house folks. Um, as far as environmental or those types of things because this is adjacent to the right ofway. Um, I don't foresee that there's going to be any issues with that. So, we're comfortable asking you to wave that. And our plan is to hopefully get it to closing um no later than 30 days, but certainly sooner than
that if we can make that happen. So, if it goes to closing um I mean, let's just say it goes to closing in a week. Um you literally could start your bidding process for the actual Brit Road um construction. At that point, >> we would I'm expecting comments back
from St. John's today on on the permit there. So once we get that that that that permit then it DOT would deem everything complete and then they supposedly have four to six weeks to give us permission to bid. Then after that point we'd be able to bid the project. >> But they know that how urgent this
urgent sat in the room with it would likely be expedited but that's what they have shared with us is >> yeah those >> and then we would begin working. >> Yes. As soon as possible. Yes. And so go ahead. >> Is W DL Property Holdings 8 LLC
is that the f uh the uh nursery? >> They lease the propert the the the nursery leases the property from WDL Holdings. So they're that's where the nursery is, but they're not the ones operating the nursery. They're just the property owners. And this property is actually about it's
it's most of 0.1 acres is between the edge of pavement and the fence line. And then 0.02 is just a little bit going out. so we can extend our storm water pipe and make the grades better. >> These are the same people that we asked previously to sell us a portion of their property so we could do Brit Road on the
other side. >> Correct. Those are the same people that we talked about maybe putting a pond over there and other stuff and they were not interested in selling property that would diminish their future. >> This is the forever project, isn't it? It's taking forever for sure, but I
think it's promising. The fact that they were the ones that that wouldn't sell to us before, but they're willing to do this drainage easement. I think that's very positive, it it makes the project better. Um because when the water's flowing in from that property going
under that road, um having an actual drainage easement is is really important. Um, is this a going to be a 50-50 match also or I I see that purchase price is still being negotiated
but is not anticipated to exceed $30,000 without further board approval and the fiscal impacts $14,500? >> Yeah. >> So, is it a 50-50 match? >> So, so there's no grant funding for this purchase. This is just straight coming from whatever funding source Jennifer
has. The reason we put a cap in there is because at the time we put the agenda item in, we had not heard back from the property owner. So, we weren't sure whether or not they would attempt to negotiate the price, but it appears that they are fine with the price because that is not one of the comments that they have made. >> So, they're fine with 145,
>> I believe. So, >> and the pipe that was under the road that's all crushed and gone now, but that basically connected where the WDL property is down towards the >> Yeah, the the pipe go went under the the road and that this is this was needed to
extend that pipe a little bit further, make the the grading the grade back to ground at something less than one to one. So, we like one to four. So, it ties in much better. All right. Any other questions? And we get a motion.
>> I'm just going to make a a statement. I'm going to vote against this uh because I don't believe that um we should have been we should have brought the broad check property in the first place for that outrageous amount of money. So, this is just on on me and my
my stance on that. >> All right. That's my sentiments exactly. >> So voted against it also. >> All right. I'm I'm hoping we have three votes because Brit Road is critical as a north south connector from State Road 44 down to Wolf Branch Road and without it,
it is creating huge problems for the residents of Lake County. >> Well, we've already bought the property over broad check. So there's nothing we can do about that now. >> But we can get an easement so that we can make sure that the drainage works as properly as it possibly can. I'm saying is there's nothing we can do about the
broad check property now. So, let's move forward. >> All right. Um, >> I'm strong support. Move to approve. Second. >> All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? >> I.
>> All right. Moving to reports. All right. County Attorney, >> County Manager. No reports, >> Commissioner Sabatini. >> Just that we're in the last week of the legislative session. It's already announced that they're going to continue or have a special session or two special sessions. So, keep keep focused on the
bills. We've already talked about it. The blue ribbon bill is a real problem. Um, we talked about a bunch of different uh bills over the last couple months, so I won't beat a dead horse, but you know, definitely pay attention because the next 72 hours is the most important 72 hours of the session. Thanks. That's all I
>> Commissioner Parks. >> Yeah. Uh, similar comments. Watch what's happening right now with legislature and I guess we can we'll have a chance to talk about it again at our next meeting, but really appreciate and I think it's a good idea the resolution we did today. So, um, it's it's uh cool that we all
did that. Um, also fire, I just wanted to thank again to if you could relay from all of us, I'm sure uh we can't do it enough, but I know they're working hard uh right now, especially with some of these fires and everything. So definitely I know they're busy and doing some doing a lot of extra work. So
appreciate that. Wanted to express that uh to you to express to them. And then finally reminder commissioners um the application process is open for the public lands and trails acquisition committee. That's ongoing as you know we did that about a month ago now. There's
still a period of time. there are opportunities and I know I've seen as I get out more and more in Lake County there are sites now that I see um where you can combine them with there's there's combination opportunities with public lands uh the rule and family
lands protection act money so just remember if you don't know you probably know this already but that has been funded to like 500 million or plus okay Florida Forever is not funded I think is only like $25 million in that which is like it went from hundreds of millions
down to only 25 million. I think that's the last number I heard. >> But there's the alternative is there's lots of money in the uh rule and family lens protection act under Commissioner Simpson. And I see opportunities again that I can't stress enough maybe people don't know about them but to get those
applications in that might be good opportunities for us where you can combine both a working lands and a component with an environmental conservation u kind of component as well to the land and that partnership opportunity makes it more likely or probable could be potential that we
could acquire that uh to protect the lake county that we know and love so much. So that's all up to you. Just keep getting those in your people in your district, you know, to apply. They can How long do they do we have? Another month. April 17th. Okay. Yeah. So, a
little over a month. >> Okay. >> That's all I got. Thank you, >> Commissioner Smith. >> Uh, the only thing I have is um I hope that everybody uh keeps the thoughts and prayers of our service members and their thoughts and prayers during this during this time.
Commissioner Morris. >> Uh the only thing I have I would like us to start considering a position underneath the county manager for a governmental affairs person. Um, I did send a synopsis of what I thought would be a good one to uh the
county manager if she would forward that on, maybe mark it up and what what you would think and so we could have a start having a discussion with uh somebody that's going to be able to go with us possibly to the city meetings. Uh go to the meetings that Jennifer has to go to
a lot that takes a lot of her time. Uh maybe working with people in Tallahassee along with our lobbyist. But I think we've grown uh large enough now that that should be a position that we need to look at >> and I'd be I'd be supportive of that discussion. Um I think there is some
ways to maybe restructure uh and having a person like that could be a benefit uh directly to us by the way to all the the ability for all five of us that if one or two of us are at FAC or you're at some at something that's important or you're at something
that's important uh to go to either Tallahassee or legislatively to meet with our local delegation that could be a could be a real benefit to that. So I'm I'm open to that. I'll look at the description. I'm a little confused. >> Yeah, I I'm very hesitant. I'm openminded the conversation. I'm
hesitant to make a final decision this early. Dollar for dollar, if the goal is to get something done, hiring an independent lobbyist for a specific issue of Tallahassee is going to be 10 times more effective than somebody that's sort of a catch-all generalist, especially if they're
focusing on local stuff like going to local government meetings. My fear, I'm not suggesting this is where it's going to result, but my fear going into the conversation is you end up with one of these gladhanders where the name tag just goes to every single meeting and it's like, "Hello, how's everyone? I work for the count and doesn't actually do anything." That's my fear. I'm not
saying that's likely. I'm just saying like we don't want to end up with that. >> What we want to end up with is a targeted killer lobbyist. >> When you see what the synopsis is that you'll see it's just not somebody that's a glader. It is it is they're they're going to be very focused on what they're
doing. >> And you know and you know what we could do sorry to interrupt but we could we can look at those numbers because if you to your point I agree that you know you do hire there are some specialist lobbyists that do a great job but if we have like 10 specific issues it might be this huge number to hire you know three
or four different lobbyists for that. >> I I would like to see what he's proposing before we decide to beat it up. >> Right. >> Yeah. Before we beat it up, I think we all have um you know in our mind we're thinking >> well it's a good start. It it is. >> Yeah. Let's start the discussion. >> I think can I just say one more thing? I
think it's this conversation has to happen synonymously with what it is we want out of our normal routine lobbyist too. I think the two definitely go hand in hand. So we should talk about it. >> My understanding is that contracts up anyway, right? Is on a renewal.
>> It's it Yeah, it it the last renewal is this year. It expires on December 31st of this year. So, we'll be going out to bid sometime over the summer. >> But, >> okay. >> That's just a good time to put anything in the in the bid that we would want.
>> Yeah. >> Right. To define the scope. Is it somebody that's smoothing over and trying to get legislative priorities through versus somebody who's advocating against or for particular pieces of legislation? >> Yeah. And so that that bid's going to go
out >> this summer. >> This summer. So you might want to start thinking about that. >> But I welcome the discussion and I it's you know that's good. It's it's brave to bring it up. But um but in a good way. No, I and I appreciate that because I've seen what other counties and there are
some good examples there. There might be some bad examples, too. But I know I think I welcome the discussion. I'll just leave it at that. >> Yeah. >> All right. Well, when will we see that? I will email the synopsis out today. >> Okay. All right. Very good. And that's
it. Okay. Um on my report, um I was able to um I had the honor of being at the Florida Greenways and Trails Foundation meeting on March the 5th um to um welcome everyone that was there um to
Lake County. And um it was a great event. um Gallas was was there and he did an excellent presentation of all things happening lake te in Lake County trail-wise. Um I was so impressed with it that I thought that it would be a
really good time for us to maybe host a couple town hall meetings where people could come and see the different trails that are um planned under construction. um the ones that are um I mean a lot of them are happening in South Lake where
you have um developers are being required to build this or build that to connect to something else. Um we there it's just all over Lake County there. There it would be a great time to update the public and people that are interested in that topic. So I just wanted to see if there was support to to
to host some town halls about trails. >> Totally supportive. But my my request would be if you could include the fiscal situation and how much trails cost and and I don't know how you work that in there with just a little bit of
a educational component to that. Um that here's the plan, but we're not we have this far to go to make it cost feasible if you will. Um >> yeah, you just have to figure out the way to work it in whether this is like an opportunity for people just to get
that overview and to keep tabs on what's happening around them and what they can be excited about. You know, I feel like the discussion about, you know, the funding, the maintenance, all that is more of a workshop for the county commission. Um, I I just would hate to
lose the opportunity just to engage the public and keep them, >> you know, >> that's always the goal, but at the same time, if you, you know, I just think you those are great meetings, but sometimes there's a okay, that's great and they think it's going to happen and then it, you know,
takes year like the roads workshops that we do. >> Yeah. And I was, I mean, my focus was what's on like not necessarily the here's the master trail plan. That's great. you know, we don't know. Some of these things are many, many years out, but I was f I wanted to focus on what's actually happening right now. I mean,
the list I was impressed with the things that are like literally going on at this moment and I think that that's really what where I wanted to focus. We do have to update our master trails plan. So there is going to be that like formal process of having meetings to get input
and I would think that would probably be a really good time to have that fiscal discussion as you're talking about um the master trails plan and looking way out. This would be more of just letting the public know where we're at right now, what's been built, what's just
right on the horizon, that type of an update. I think it also be a good idea to include the cities to see what they're building trails to connect it to our trails. >> Yeah, it's a great chance for them to see and our plan and for us to look at
what what they've got going and all right, so we're good. We're in agreement on that. Um the other thing I wanted to bring up was I have an apology for Cindy Newton because she wanted to talk about Brit road. Um, and Cindy, if
you want to come up under my report and have your comments. No, she's okay. >> Well, you I mean, we're welcome to hear hear your comments um if you'd like to come up.
Okay. Um and then let's see. The last thing is this afternoon I'm going with um the county manager um with with David Kilbury, John Well, John Simpson. We have a a whole whole group that are going on the ambulance uh update for the
city of Claremont. And so we're going to be able to um provide an update on everything that's happened since we had those discussions back in October and November. And we've got some really great exciting news to share as far as number of
ambulances that are out on the street and uh response times as well as um ongoing needs for locations inside the city limits. >> So, so has the city agreed to allow our ambulance inside their city?
I'm going today in the hope of delivering a really positive message and that that will create the synergy necessary for us to um have those agreements. Um >> yeah, I think >> honored that are currently in existence
>> of Claremont. >> Absolutely. >> Some good news. >> There is good news and there's the opportunity for even better response time. >> I thought Claremont had had agreed to allow us in there. I didn't know they hadn't yet. So, good luck. >> Okay. All right. Well, thank you. Thank
you very much. Um, and did you have a closing remark about how special today is? >> I know. I know everybody. And this is actually a good one. Um, because today is National Pack Your Lunch Day. >> I didn't pack a lunch.
>> It's National You have time. You have time now to go pack your lunch. >> Come back. >> There you go. All right. Will we stand adjourned?