MARCH 14, 2017


     The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held at 9:30 a.m., on Tuesday, March 14, 2017, in Room 1028 of the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.


Chairman John Horan (District 2)

Vice Chairman Brenda Carey (District 5)

Commissioner Robert Dallari (District 1)

Commissioner Lee Constantine (District 3)

     Commissioner Carlton Henley (District 4)

     County Manager Nicole Guillet

     County Attorney Bryant Applegate

     Deputy Clerk Jane Spencer



     Pastor Ron Williams, Palmetto Avenue Baptist Church, Sanford, gave the Invocation.  Commissioner Carey led the Pledge of Allegiance.


The Business Spotlight video for Sound Stage 4 was presented.


Agenda Item #1 – 2016-550

Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt a Proclamation declaring the month of March as Women’s History Month.  

     Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

     The Proclamation was presented to Amy Lockhart, Chairman of the Seminole County School Board.  At Commissioner Carey’s request, all of the women in attendance came to the front of the auditorium for a photo. 


Agenda Item #2 – 2016-540

Motion by Commissioner Constantine, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to adopt a Proclamation declaring the week of March 27 through March 31 as Boys and Girls Club Week.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

The Proclamation was presented to Alicia Hodge and Syd Levy.  Ms. Hodge addressed the Board to express her appreciation to the County for their support of the Boys and Girls Club. 


     Chairman Horan advised that it has been requested that they show videos about two recent events, the opening of a park in Jamestown and a smoke alarm installation by the Fire Department.  These videos were presented. 

     Commissioner Dallari thanked County staff for going well beyond what is normally done.  He noted that the program that was put together for the Jamestown park was truly phenomenal.  With regard to the smoke alarm installation, Commissioner Dallari thanked the Fire Department and the American Red Cross.  Commissioner Carey stated they have had a great partnership with the American Red Cross and the County’s Firefighters.  Discussion ensued with regard to the smoke alarms being installed in various communities around the county.  Chairman Horan pointed out that there are so many things that add up day after day that County Government does and he is glad that now and then they set aside a little time to tell people and show videos of exactly what happens in so many small different ways to make the quality of life better.


     Chairman Horan recessed the meeting of the Board of County Commissioners at 9:56 a.m., and convened as the U.S. Highway 17-92 Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA).


Agenda Item #3 – A-2825-16

     Sonia Fonseca, CRA Program Manager, addressed the Board to present a request to either approve a Redevelopment and Construction Grant to 17‑92 Five Points, LLC, in the amount of $740,000, for demolition of the former Flea World site, located at 4311 South U.S. Highway 17‑92, Sanford; or approve a Redevelopment and Construction Grant to 17‑92 Five Points, LLC, in the amount of $1,380,039, for demolition and utility connections needed in preparation of redevelopment of the former Flea World site, located at 4311 South U.S. Highway 17‑92, Sanford.

     Ms. Fonseca stated that the Applicant, Syd Levy, is proposing to redevelop a 118-acre parcel, previously known as Flea World, which is within the U.S. 17‑92 Community Redevelopment Area.  Flea World was a popular shopping center and entertainment venue for nearly 40 years.  The shopping center closed in 2015 to make way for this new mixed‑use project.  Ms. Fonseca stated that the project complies with the CRA’s adopted definition of a catalyst project in multiple ways as listed in the staff report.  She explained that the grant request that is before the Board in the full amount, $1,380,039, represents 33% of the Applicant’s projected redevelopment costs, including landscaping and signage.

     Ms. Fonseca reported that the Technical Advisory Committee as well as the Redevelopment Planning Agency both recommended approval of this project in the full amount of the request, $1,380,039; however, staff is recommending approval of the costs associated with demolition in the amount of $740,000 to be funded as follows:  20% at the time that the demolition is completed and the 80% balance to be funded on a pro rata basis as vertical construction is substantially completed, the terms of which would be outlined in the grant agreement and development agreement.  She advised that there are representatives from the CRA staff, the Planning staff and the Applicant and his representative available to answer any questions.

     Commissioner Henley advised that he has met with Mr. Morris, Mr. Levy and others but no decisions have been made and a decision will be made based on staff recommendations and what occurs here today.  Commissioner Dallari advised that he had several conversations with the Applicant, both on the phone and in person, and has received various documents that will be submitted into the record (copy of ex parte communication received and filed).  He stated he will be basing his decision on the information that is presented here today.  Commissioner Carey advised that she will be submitting in written form, as she does at every meeting, her ex parte communication and contact with all of the individuals involved.  Chairman Horan advised that he has also had conversations with the Applicant and a number of people related to the Applicant concerning this matter.  Since it is not a quasi‑judicial matter, he does not know if those kinds of disclosures are absolutely necessary; but he thinks in the spirit of transparency, it is good that they make them.  Whatever happens with regard to this particular item, he will make a decision based on the information that is in the record and presented in front of the Board today.  Commissioner Constantine stated he had a very brief conversation with Mr. Morris yesterday.  That was the first person that he had talked to regarding this.  He added that he has extensively talked to staff and others regarding this item. 

     Nicole Guillet, County Manager, stated she wants to clarify what the recommendation is with respect to payout from staff's standpoint because it is a little unusual from what they would normally do.  She believes they might have gotten two elements of it confused in the presentation.  Ms. Guillet stated staff's recommendation is for funding of the demolition with a 20% reimbursement upfront when the demolition is completed and the remaining 80% to be paid upon substantial completion of the project consistent with the D.O.  She added that they define “substantial completion” to be when 85% of the development that was approved in the D.O. has been C.O.'d. 

     Ms. Guillet explained that there is a provision in the recommended agreement that would allow the Applicant to propose a phased pro rata reimbursement scheme that is based on taxable value tied to a return on investment, so there could be an alternative payment schedule that would come to the Board at a later date should the Board elect to fund this either as staff has recommended or as the Applicant has requested.  She reiterated that the pro rata would be something that would come back to the Board at a later date under an amendment to this agreement.  Commissioner Carey asked if that is regardless of whether it is demolition and utilities or demolition.  Ms. Guillet stated it is regardless of which elements the Board chooses to fund, if they choose to fund any of them.  She reiterated it would be 20% of the demolition upon completion, and then the remaining 80% of demolition and 100% of the utilities would be paid either at substantial completion or on a pro rata basis under an amendment to the agreement. 

     Randy Morris, representing the Applicant, addressed the Board to note that the project is solely owned by Syd Levy.  Mr. Morris advised that Mr. Levy is present along with Turgut Dervish, transportation engineer; Paul Partyka, the broker for the project; and Rick Wohlfarth, the project engineer.  Mr. Morris began a PowerPoint presentation (copy received and filed) entitled Reagan Center.  He reviewed the Project Overview and pointed out this overview of the site gives a sense of the proposed construction that will occur this year with the road connection from Hester over to the new Five Points entrance.  He discussed the new entrance. 

     Mr. Morris reviewed the bullet points on the Project Overview Continued slide.  He noted that the Townhome project, which is already under construction, is not within the CRA boundary but was part of the original project that was presented to the BCC.  That project is going vertical and coming in at a price point that they estimated to the Board, which is in the $200,000 range.  He reviewed the remaining bullet points; Commercial, Office, ROW acres, and Conservation acres.  The Demolition Plan slide was displayed.

     Mr. Morris reviewed the three Application History slides.  He stated they are asking for a revised payout request from what staff has recommended.  They are asking for the same 20% of the total grant, not just of demolition.  He pointed out the utility issue is actually emphasized more than demolition in the CRA requirements.  He reiterated that they are asking that 20% of the total amount be granted upon receipts accepted by the County for the work to be done.  They are asking that the additional 80% be paid for the approved receipts at the time of the issuance of building permits for at least 200 units of multifamily.  That will get the County their return on investment.  The County seeks a return on investment within 10 years.  Mr. Morris stated their forecasted return of investment is much faster. 

     Paul Partyka, 404 Park Lake Drive, addressed the Board to state that to date they have two major developers who have made offers on the entire project for a mixed‑use development.  They have had four offers in hand for multi‑family.  They are in negotiations right now with a charter school that has been approved previously in Seminole County.  They have had a lot of interest and calls from all around the country.  It seems that since January 1, things have picked up and there is a lot more interest. 

     Syd Levy, owner, addressed the Board to state it has been a long way to come from running a flea market to trying to develop Reagan Center.  Mr. Levy advised that he has found it is costing a lot more; the road that they thought was going to be about $3 million is probably going to be more like $4.5 million to $5 million.  Mr. Levy stated he is counting on Mr. Partyka to get Letters of Intent (LOI) into sales and dollars.  In the meantime, it is an expensive project.  They are into it for almost $2 million right now and there is about $4 million to $4.5 million to go.  He stated they could use some help.  It is going to be a first-class project.  He reiterated that going from running a flea market to Reagan Center is a big, big step and he never realized how expensive it could be.

     Mr. Morris continued his presentation and discussed the Request slide regarding Demolition of Existing Site and Utilities.  He emphasized that they had the choice of going with Sanford Utilities or Seminole County Utilities and they chose Seminole County, even though the connection is a little bit harder and is costing more money.  As Mr. Levy just mentioned, his expenses are going to total over $5 million for just this initial level of site preparation that is being discussed.  Mr. Morris commented that they believe that site preparation leads to far greater interest once people see the infrastructure is in place and the site is ready to be developed. 

     Mr. Morris displayed and reviewed Public Benefits regarding Employment, Tax Base and Increased Tax.  He advised that they worked with David Johnson, the Property Appraiser; and he reviewed the proposal.  Everything they are saying is as conservative as they can possibly be.  He emphasized that the return on investment numbers that they will show the Board only deal with the property tax; they do not deal with the utility taxes, the sales tax, or any of the other M1 multipliers that occur with employment; so the return to the County will be significantly faster than the projection he provided.  Mr. Morris concluded his presentation by discussing the Financial Benefits, such as Increasing the Tax Rolls, Repayment of Grant, and Secondary Benefits.  

     Richard Wohlfarth, IBI Group, addressed the Board to state (as Mr. Levy pointed out) that a great deal of money has already been spent.  Mr. Wohlfarth remarked that, as you can see from driving the site, the buildings are down; that was almost $400,000 that has already been expended.  With the townhouses under construction, they have now started to construct the pump station and the turn lanes along Reagan.  That is close to $1 million worth of work.  There were a lot of incidental costs to get up to where Mr. Levy was talking about spending $2 million in the first phase of the work being done.  Mr. Wohlfarth stated (as Mr. Partyka pointed out) that one of the things they have seen with the construction of 17‑92 is the effect it has had on people looking at this property.  The work in front of the project is starting to be completed.  Based on that activity starting in January, they are starting to see a lot more happening out there. 

     Chairman Horan left the meeting at this time.

     Mr. Wohlfarth referred to the offers they have received.  He pointed out that some of them have been turned down because quite candidly they want to see Reagan Center have the highest quality because it will set the tone for what will happen on 17‑92.  They are being maybe a little picky with regard to the first developer coming in, which they believe will be apartments; and they are looking for an upscale apartment project.  So far what they have received is sort of a step below that.  He reiterated that what they are looking for is to upgrade it because they believe that will set the tone, not only for the Reagan Center but for the whole redevelopment of 17‑92. 

     Mr. Morris advised that their request is for $1,380,039.  He pointed out this is the largest redevelopment project in the history of Seminole County and incorporates more than all other CRA grants that the Board has granted in the last three decades.  It is at a minimum of ten times the total build-out value to 50 times the build-out value of other CRA grants that have been done and a minimal request in terms of valuation to build-out.  He requested that the Board adjust the payout schedule.  The RPA made the recommendation that there be no delay in the payout from when receipts are submitted in total.  Mr. Morris stated they are listening to staff and understanding that this project needs to show that, aside from the townhomes being built, they are actually showing some portion of percentage of getting to build-out.  That is why they suggested 20% payout for any receipts that the County receives on both the two parts of this mission.

     Chairman Horan re-entered the meeting at this time.

     Mr. Morris stated the remaining 80% would be paid at building permit application for at least 200 units of apartments.  He explained that it is at 200 units because the valuation of that will be at a minimum of $30 million added to the tax rolls.  That gets the County to the ROI that they were talking about.  Mr. Morris concluded by noting that in this particular project, “roof tops” come first; commercial comes second.

     David Leavitt, 1000 Ridgepointe Cove, addressed the Board and read his letter (copy received and filed and distributed to the Board) into the record.  Mr. Leavitt stated that taxpayer money, in any form, should only be used to pay companies for goods or services provided back to the taxpayer; he does not believe in special taxing districts like the 17-92 CRA.  He pointed out that the developer, a former county commissioner, is going to make millions of dollars off of this project.  Mr. Leavitt stated that he has reached out to Florida Speaker Richard Corcoran and hopes to work with him soon to continue the trend in Florida of ending all corporate handouts of taxpayer money, including those handouts via so‑called Community Development Districts like the 17‑92 CRA.  With regard to the mention of return on investment and the public benefit, Mr. Leavitt stated that happens anyway, whether you give money or don't give money.  Every single business in Seminole County contributes in that way, but every single business in Seminole County does not get that same tax break, so that is really not an excuse to give away the money. 

     Commissioner Carey stated that there seems to be some misconception about what happens in the CRA.  There is no extra tax on the 17‑92 businesses.  She suggested they talk about when the CRA was created where this money actually came from so the public understands that this is just general dollars that they would be paying and anyone who wants to come and invest in the 17‑92 has an opportunity to apply for these funds. 

     Commissioner Carey requested that Ms. Fonseca review the history of the 17‑92 CRA.  Ms. Fonseca explained that at the time the CRA is created, there is a base year established.  That base year and its associated property taxes continue to go where they go as they always have done.  As property increases in value (and they incrementally increase by a small amount), a portion of that incremental tax increase as agreed upon by the taxing authorities that partake in the CRA gets deposited into the trust fund.  Those dollars are then programed out in a plan, which is called the community redevelopment plan, that the public has the ability to participate in crafting.  Those are the items that the money can be spent on and all of the dollars have to go back into those properties that are established in that boundary.  Ms. Fonseca stated in this particular case, they have five jurisdictions contributing to the fund.  With regard to all of those properties that are within those five jurisdictions, the RPA was created so that each one of those jurisdictions has the opportunity to have a voice in how the money is spent.  It doesn't come from the taxpayer; it comes from the jurisdiction, the taxing authority.  So every time that the taxing authority receives its tax dollars, it takes that portion that it agreed to deposit and contributes it into the fund.

     Ms. Guillet advised the CRA is an acronym for Community Redevelopment Agencies.  CRAs can only be established in areas where there is an identified special need; areas that have some type of blight or have experienced some type of economic downturn.  It is a tool that local governments can use to help lift up certain areas of the county.  She explained that in this case, the County elected to focus on the 17‑92 corridor because it was an older area of the county and deteriorating.  The County saw the Community Redevelopment Agency as a mechanic by which they could lift that area up and make some improvements. 

     Ms. Guillet explained that the funding that goes into the Community Redevelopment Trust Fund is tax increment financing, so any increase in value that occurred within the Community Redevelopment Area after the base year is rolled over into the trust fund.  The tax rate that is paid in the Community Redevelopment Area is the exact same tax rate that is paid anywhere else in the county.  The only thing that rolls into the Community Redevelopment Trust Fund is the increment of increase in value that the investments in the CRA are intended to generate.  She further explained that it is an opportunity to provide a mechanism at no additional cost to anyone in the county to provide some improvements in an area that has been identified to have special need.  The hope is by taking that increment and investing it in the corridor, everybody's property values come up.  It is not an additional tax or an additional fee that anyone within the redevelopment area pays.  It is just a portion of any improvement that is used and put back into that same area.  Ms. Guillet reiterated that it is not an additional tax.  Chairman Horan gave a brief example of a property located within the CRA area.

     Upon inquiry by Chairman Horan, Ms. Fonseca stated the amount of money the CRA has been able to collect since its inception in 1997 is approximately $28 million.  Ms. Guillet stated there is not an additional tax imposed in the district.  She stated it is actually an extremely equitable way to make investment into an area of special need because the area that is benefiting from that investment is the area that is contributing.  She emphasized that you don’t have other areas of Seminole County contributing to the improvement of special need; that the area is really helping itself.  Discussion ensued with regard to the limited purposes the CRA funds can be used for and the benefits of the investment in the 17-92 corridor.

     Mr. Morris stated it was just asserted to the Board that he had some development aspect in this or that he is a developer in this project or has ownership.  It has also been asserted in writing in the newspaper a couple of weeks ago.  He advised that he has no ownership in this project.  He stated he is a consultant to Mr. Levy and in fact, his contract doesn't cover the CRA; he has no benefit in being a former commissioner from ten years ago.  Mr. Morris stated that Mr. Leavitt is entitled to have an opinion to be against the CRA but he is not entitled to make up his own facts and make accusations against someone else.  Mr. Morris emphasized that, for the record, nothing the Board is voting on today literally has anything to do with Mr. Morris.  It is Mr. Levy's application and Mr. Levy's ownership.  Mr. Morris reiterated that he has zero ownership, no bonuses; there is nothing here regarding this request.  Chairman Horan assured Mr. Morris that all of the decisions that the Board makes are in the best interest of the people of Seminole County.

     With regard to public participation, no one else in the audience spoke in support or in opposition regarding Item #3 and public input was closed.

     Speaker Request Form for David Leavitt was received and filed.

     Commissioner Carey stated that, as the representative on the RPA, she wanted to elaborate a little bit on some of the discussions that were had on this particular item when it came to the RPA.  She stated the reason the RPA supported the demolition and the utilities was because of the fact that the grant application specifically states that if you are doing utilities including but not limited to relocation and improvements of the existing utilities, that that is an allowable request for grants.  Again, she kind of takes her cue from the BCC because she represents the BCC on the RPA.  This Board has said look at catalyst projects, infrastructure projects, and stormwater projects; and that needs to be the only focus.  They have all agreed that is the focus of this Board.  Commissioner Carey advised that the RPA made their decision based on the fact that there is $150 million worth of potential development to happen there, 2,500 permanent jobs, a tax base of $2.1 million after everything is constructed and certainly, in just transforming the Five Points area.  In talking about the County's own master plan and what happens at Five Points in the future, this developer could develop this property without making a connection to the County's driveway across the road and Hester Avenue, the public street across the road.  They did that because the County asked them to do that and it is going to cost Mr. Levy some additional funds to construct that road. 

     Commissioner Carey stated that she believes the reason that the RPA decided to unanimously support the request was because of all of those things that the County was asking the developer to do over and above.  With regard to the modified number, Commissioner Carey stated she was the motion maker for $1,380,039; and it was based on actual bids versus what the request was of the Applicant because the RPA had the benefit of having those bids at the time that it was taken up by the RPA.  Commissioner Carey stated she just wanted to give the Board a little background.  It was quite some time ago when the RPA actually heard this, May of last year; and it was a unanimous decision based on all of the facts and benefits to the traveling public and the residents of Seminole County.

     Chairman Horan stated his concern about the application at this time is payback.  He advised that if they approve the grant at this particular time, they have to condition it on some kind of vertical development.  The staff has recommended that the vertical development be tied to one of two options; either 85% substantial completion of verticality or a calculation based upon the increase in property value based upon developments down the road.  Chairman Horan stated that this project is a lot different than any other project that they have seen come in front of the CRA.  They don't know exactly what is going to be developed out there.  They have some information that there are developers who are interested in developing either mixed‑use, multifamily, or a charter school; but they don't have anything concrete in front of them in terms of a developer who is coming in and saying I am ready to break ground here and build this many apartments or what have you. 

     Chairman Horan stated he is a little bit troubled with the amount on utilities because he does not know when those utilities will be needed, he does not know what the utilities are going to be used for; he does not have a development plan here that has an actual developer who says I am going to do this right now.  He stated that what he is sure of in terms of the requirements of the CRA, is that CRAs are first and foremost to eliminate blight.  With all due respect to Flea World, which he frequented quite a bit, it didn't really fit into the development plan.  The demo of the project, the demolition itself, he thinks is clearly something that can be an appropriate subject of a grant from the CRA.  He stressed these are grants; they are not specific dollars for a construction project.  They are grants based upon the requirement of the CRA. 

     Chairman Horan stated he would like to hear what his colleagues' thoughts are on these other items.  He reiterated that he is very comfortable with the demolition conditioned as the staff has suggested in terms of payout.  He is also cognizant of the fact that they have already given a grant of $900,000 on the road, but he is not very comfortable about the utilities at this particular point.

     Commissioner Carey stated a project of this significance, a 118‑acre development right in the heart of Seminole County, just doesn't occur.  She remarked that she can think of very few 118‑acre developments that she has seen in her time on the Commission anywhere in the county.  There is an approved development order, but a project of this size is never going to happen all at once.  Commercial development is never going to come until there are residential rooftops there.  She believes it has to happen in phases.  Commissioner Carey explained that she liked the approach that staff recommended on the payout as it continues to develop.  That would be as the vertical starts to come out of the ground.  She pointed out you could argue the fact that the demolition has occurred and when it is finished, you could just pay for demolition because that is done; but then that is still no guaranty on the vertical.  She believes what staff is recommending is that even though the demolition is done, the payout from the CRA doesn't happen until they go vertical.  If they want to come back with some phased plan, she would be happy to look at that; but she is very comfortable with the recommendation that staff has as to how it occurs. 

     Commissioner Carey stated it is the same thing with the utilities, which is why she does not have any heartburn on the utilities.  They are not going to be reimbursed until it has gone vertical and that may take a little bit of time.  She added the CRA is scheduled to sunset at the end of this year.  It is not like they will have an opportunity to come back at a later time and apply for a utility grant because the CRA is not going to be in existence.  Commissioner Carey remarked that she would love to hear from the rest of her colleagues what their thoughts are on this.  She reiterated that there is less than a year left in the CRA.  This is a huge opportunity for them to develop in the heart of Seminole County.  That is why it is called Five Points.  That is why they are looking at master planning their own facilities out there.  There is a shortage of mid‑range to higher‑end housing.  There are a lot of good things that will come from this project but the commercial development is not going to happen along 17‑92 until there are more rooftops there to support it.  She discussed the development in two CRAs in the corridor, Casselberry and Winter Park.  Commissioner Carey stated the fact that they are paying it out as they are going vertical makes her feel secure in her decision that she would support both the demolition and the utilities because it is not getting paid tomorrow.  

     Commissioner Constantine stated that unlike corporate tax incentives, which he has had concerns over, he is a big fan of tax increment financing and CRAs.  He discussed a CRA that was done in Altamonte Springs in 1986 for the downtown redevelopment.  To him, CRAs are something that can uplift a community.  He then discussed the changes that have occurred on 17‑92 from the 60s and 70s until today.  When he got on the Board, he was happy to see the other Commissioners really strongly support and stress infrastructure.  He suggested that with the CRA closing and the dollars still left, they need to really put an emphasis on infrastructure because that is what made the CRA in Altamonte Springs so successful.  If you build it, they will come and that is what they are trying to do here.  He really didn't struggle with this and looked at it and felt that the staff recommendation found a middle ground.  Commissioner Constantine stated he could not support the utilities but did feel that he could support, under the guise of the recommendation of the staff, the demolition. 

     Motion by Commissioner Constantine to approve the Redevelopment and Construction Grant to 17‑92 Five Points, LLC, in the amount of $740,000, for demolition needed in preparation of redevelopment of the former Flea World site, located at 4311 South U.S. Highway 17‑92, Sanford, to be reimbursed at 20% upon completion of the demolition, and the 80% balance of demolition costs to be reimbursed as contemplated in the associated Grant Agreement (85% development).  Chairman Horan surrendered the gavel to Vice Chairman Carey in order to second this motion.

     Under discussion, Commissioner Dallari asked the County Attorney, with regard to the CRA sunsetting, whether the CRA money sits there until someone comes and requests it.  He confirmed with Mr. Applegate that the money doesn't have to be spent before the sunsetting.  Commissioner Dallari stated his issue is the quality of the development; he wants to know what it is.  Commissioner Carey pointed out that is an unknown.  Chairman Horan stated that is the point he was making, he does not know what they have right now. 

     Commissioner Carey discussed the CRA that Altamonte Springs started 30 years ago and pointed out that it has just been in the last ten or so years that that CRA has really come to fruition.  She advised that the first things that got built were a seven‑story apartment building that was the catalyst of kicking that whole development off and the public infrastructure that was put into place as a result of that.  Regarding the County Attorney's comment, Commissioner Carey clarified that they can continue to pay out after the CRA has sunsetted.  As to whether people are still allowed to come and make application after the CRA sunsets, Commissioner Carey stated they are not.  She pointed out it isn't like someone can come and make an application after the CRA has ended.  They can continue to pay out until the money is gone and they can invest the money, whatever balance is left at that time, into infrastructure if they want to; but there is no application process once the CRA is closed.  At Commissioner Carey's request, Mr. Applegate confirmed her comments were correct. 

     Commissioner Henley advised that he has many of the same concerns that the Chairman expressed.  He stated they don't know for sure what they are getting but they need to recognize these are troubling and unsettling times in this country and throughout the world.  They know already that the Feds have said they intend to raise interest rates three times during 2017.  They don't know what the impact is going to be among the citizens regarding health care and taxes that are being implied.  Commissioner Henley reiterated that they are looking at, as Mr. Morris said, the largest proposal of a development they have ever had in the county.  That in itself is unsettling at this particular time to him because they are asking the CRA to make definite commitments of money and yet they don't have any definite commitments from the other side.  He stated that as mentioned, they have had interest but nobody has signed on the dotted line yet.  Over a ten‑year build-out period, many things can happen.  And they certainly don't want another Altamonte structure that has been there 10, 20, 30 years and not completed yet.  Things get started and then all of the sudden things fall apart because the developer at any time could become impatient over not receiving the return expected and decide to flip the property.  Commissioner Henley wondered what impact that will have on the money that they have already paid out.  That is the reason he was concerned about paying up front on some of these types of things.  He stated he cannot support all of the proposals that are there.  He would give consideration to one of those items as suggested in the motion and see how things progress.  Right now it is very unsettling.  Every time he gets a new packet to read, there is a little bit of difference or at least it is stated a little bit differently.  Commissioner Henley emphasized they need to know what the taxpayers are going to get as a result of this investment; and right now, they have a vision and that is it.

     Chairman Horan explained that is why he has a problem with the utility connection.  With respect to utility connection costs as stated in the agenda materials, this type of expenditure has not historically been considered an eligible reimbursement item.

     Commissioner Constantine left the meeting at this time.

     Chairman Horan pointed out that staff did not recommend the utility connection for approval; however, the Technical Advisory Committee said there is a public benefit stemming from the construction of the utility connections that could be considered vertical construction.  He stressed that if you are going to have utility connections, it is because you are going to have vertical construction.  But they are giving that particular grant now for that particular connection, so he has discomfort with that.  Chairman Horan remarked that with regard to the motion as stated, that he seconded, he would have no problem with the $740,000 conditioned as indicated in Recommendation Number 1. 

     Commissioner Carey requested that Ms. Guillet restate how the funds would be paid out, whether it be demolition only or demolition and utilities.  Ms. Guillet explained that there are two different options; demo only and demo and utilities.  Staff's recommendation with respect to the payout, regardless of whether or not the Board funds just demo or demolition and utilities, would be that they would pay 20% of the demolition costs as a reimbursement upon full completion of the demolition.  The remaining 80% of the demolition and the entire amount of the utilities would be paid at substantial completion, 85% of the development, or on a pro rata basis as the Board may approve at a later date.

     Commissioner Carey noted that regardless of what is approved, they will only get 20% of the demo at the time the demolition is complete and they will not get any more money until 85% of "this" is built, whatever "this" is.  She pointed out there is an approved development order on the property.  In the development order, it gives lots of flexibility because they are not crystal ball readers and don't know what is going to happen.  She added the development community doesn't know exactly how this is going to build out either and who may come along and want to develop.  There is a lot of demographic work that goes into that, a lot of market research.

     Commissioner Constantine re-entered the meeting at this time. 

     Commissioner Carey stated to her there is no real risk because they are not paying until they are 85% vertical.  As far as the eligibility element, it is right in their catalyst project grant program that utilities are one of the items that is listed.

     Ms. Guillet remarked that it would not be inappropriate for the Board, if it decided it was comfortable funding utilities, to fund them.  It would be consistent with the CRA policies.  She added that the Board has not however considered speculative development as an eligible expense in the past.  It doesn't mean that the Board can't do it.  Staff took a conservative approach with this because it is different from anything that the Board has seen previously.  It is speculative in nature as opposed to every other private grant that has been given which have been associated with a definitive development so the Board knew at the end of day what the project was going to be before reimbursement.  Mr. Guillet reiterated that the Board has not done speculative grants but that does not mean that they can't, and it wouldn't be an inappropriate move if that is what the Board decided it wanted to do.

     Commissioner Carey stated usually they are getting them in one piece of property with one plan and one grant; it is one and done.  This is a whole different ball game with the catalyst projects, and that is why the RPA supported it and why she will not support this motion because she does believe it is the right thing to do to encourage this development to move along as quickly as possible. 

     Commissioner Henley remarked that as they make these commitments, they are commitments for the complete build-out, 10 years, which means that those monies that have been committed would not be available to other projects that are needed in the way of infrastructure.  He then confirmed with Mr. Applegate that his statement was correct.  Commissioner Henley emphasized that they are tying up these amounts of monies that are being requested for potentially 10 years, assuming they would be approved as requested.

     Commissioner Carey pointed out that the CRA will sunset this year.  Commissioner Henley stated he understands that but many of those things that they discussed when they first started out haven't been done yet; and if they can't do new projects, then that money, if it isn't utilized in a ten‑year period, is sitting there with the CRA expired and nobody to deal with it.

     Commissioner Constantine suggested to Commissioner Henley that if he would like to make a friendly amendment for a period of time for the project to come back and be reevaluated, he would have no problem with that.

     Ms. Guillet explained that the money can be encumbered; however, once the CRA ceases to exist, she does not believe the Board has an opportunity to revise the contract.  They would have an existing contract that they can continue to honor after the sunset of the CRA.  If the money is not utilized in the CRA for a CRA purpose, it would be distributed back to the entities that had contributed it on a pro rata basis. 

     Commissioner Carey asked if there could be a friendly amendment to include the utilities and have it have to be paid out within five years or the money would revert back.  Commissioner Constantine stated with all due respect, he would find that an unfriendly amendment.  He pointed out that she can make the amendment but he would not consider it a friendly amendment.

     Commissioner Henley suggested it might be time for the Board to pause here since they are talking about a commitment but not a real commitment over a period time.  He stated it might be time to give some direction to the County Manager to get with the proposers and work out something that would be amenable.  He stated the total amount is the one thing that is bothering him right now in all of these proposals.  It needs to be worked out with clear understanding as to what is happening and amenable to how much they can accomplish with approving Option #1 and not the others.  He thinks that is the conversation that there needs to be.  Commissioner Henley suggested they then come back to this Board at the next meeting or so with a proposal that is agreeable that might get the support of the majority of this Board.

     Chairman Horan stated he can withdraw his second.  Vice Chairman Carey stated there is a motion on the floor and the second has been withdrawn.  She stated since the second has been withdrawn and the motion has been withdrawn, she will pass the gavel to Commissioner Horan to resume the duties of Chairman.

     Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to continue until March 28, 2017, and to take all of the information presented today into account, the request to either (1) approve a Redevelopment and Construction Grant to 17‑92 Five Points, LLC, in the amount of $740,000, for demolition needed in preparation of redevelopment of the former Flea World site, located at 4311 South U.S. Highway 17‑92, Sanford; or (2) approve a Redevelopment and Construction Grant to 17‑92 Five Points, LLC, in the amount of $1,380,039, for demolition and utility connections needed in preparation of redevelopment of the former Flea World site, located at 4311 South U.S. Highway 17‑92, Sanford; and (3) adopt Resolution implementing the associated Budget Amendment Request, (BAR) #17‑009, appropriating funds from the 17‑92 CRA Trust Fund, Reserve for Capital Improvements.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Chairman Horan recessed the meeting at 11:08 a.m. and reconvened at 11:15 a.m.  He then adjourned the meeting of the U.S. Highway 17-92 Community Redevelopment Agency at 11:16 a.m., and reconvened as the Board of County Commissioners.



     With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to the Consent Agenda and public input was closed.

     Motion by Commissioner Constantine, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to authorize and approve the following:

     County Manager’s Office

     Business Office

 4.  Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2017-R-32 to remove Section 24.15, Subsection 304.0(3)(a‑d) of Seminole County Administrative Code, which pertains to "Tuition Reimbursement," and approve a new Tuition Reimbursement Program section (Section 24.15, Subsection 304.1) that establishes the specific criteria, guidelines, structure and procedures for the program.  The Fiscal Impact of $50,000 was approved in the FY 16/17 budget.  (A-3276-17)


Development Services

Planning & Development Division

 5.  Adopt appropriate Resolution #2017-R-33 vacating and abandoning a portion of a platted Drainage Easement on Lot 26, Lake Sylvan Cove, as recorded in Plat Book 42, Pages 69‑74, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida more particularly known as 620 Grand Cypress Point; James Loisel, Applicant.  (A-3256-17)

 6.  Authorize the release of the Right‑of‑Way Utilization Maintenance Bond #0190026 in the amount of $12,351.21 for Aulin’s Landing at Oviedo (Enclave at Sanctuary); M/I Homes of Orlando, LLC, Applicant.  (A-3170-17)


Environmental Services

Business Office

 7.  Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the Conditional Utility Agreement for Water, Wastewater and Reclaimed Water Services for the project known as State of Florida Department of Transportation/RTMS Video Screens (FDOT). (A-3300-17)


Public Works

Engineering Division

 8.  Adopt appropriate Resolution #2017-R-34 and authorize the Chairman to execute a Local Agency Program (LAP) Agreement with the State of Florida Department of Transportation for the Construction and CEI of CR 46A Sidewalk Project from east of Old Lake Mary Road to west of Club Road. The total amount of the agreement is $121,535.  (FDOT ‑ FPN 427899‑1‑58‑01)  (A-3299-17)

 9.  Adopt appropriate Resolution #2017-R-35 and authorize the Chairman to execute a Local Agency Program (LAP) Agreement with the State of Florida Department of Transportation for the Construction and CEI of Intersection Improvements on CR 46A from west of Ridgewood Avenue to east of Marshall Avenue.  The total amount of the agreement is $2,572,239.  (FDOT ‑ FPN 429585‑2‑58‑01)  (A-3295-17)


Resource Management

Business Office

10.  Approval submittal of an application to the U.S. Department of Justice through its FY 2017 Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program requesting up to $300,000 in grant funding for the Mental Health Court; and authorize the County Manager to execute any documents and agreements associated with the grant application.  (A-3294-17)

Budget and Fiscal Management Division

11.  Approval submittal of an application to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) through its FY 2017/2018 Section 319(h) Nonpoint Source (NPS) Management Program Grant requesting up to $213,800 in grant funding for the implementation of AquaFiber’s®™ AquaLutions®™ water remediation technology on two lakes in Seminole County; and authorize the County Manager to execute any documents associated with the grant application.  (A-3291-17)

12.  Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2017-R-36 implementing the Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #17‑037 through the Fire Protect Fund ‑ Casselberry in the amount of $102,916 to establish funding and appropriate budget for the repair and replacement of concrete and tile at Fire Station 21.  (A-3297-17)

13.  Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2017-R-37 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #17‑039 through the Home 16/17 Grant Fund in the amount of $3,510 for appropriation of program income through grant assistance payoff.  (A-3298-17)

14.  Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2017-R-38 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #17‑040 through the General Fund and 2014 Infrastructure Sales Tax Fund in the amount of $14,122 to adjust budgets for two projects where expenditures posted after carryforward balances were calculated.  (A-3308-17)

Purchasing & Contracts Division

15.  Award RFP‑602684‑16/TLR, Contractor Services Agreement for Digital Conversion of the Audio/Visual Equipment in the Seminole County Emergency Operations Center, to Audio Visual Innovations, Inc., Altamonte Springs, for the fixed amount of $142,429.66; and authorize the Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute the agreement.  (A-3268-17)

16.  Award RFP‑602697‑16/TLR, Term Contract for Roadway Landscape Maintenance Services, to BrightView Landscape Services, Inc., Longwood; and authorize the Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute the agreement.  The estimated annual usage of this agreement is $990,000.  (A-3253-17)


Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.



Clerk’s Office


Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to approve the following:

17.  Approve Expenditure Approval Lists dated February 13 and 20, 2017; Payroll Approval Lists dated February 9 and 23, 2017; and the BCC Official Minutes dated February 14, 2017. (A-3304-17) 


     Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.



     The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s “Received and Filed”:

1.  Performance Bond #1053851 for Water and Sewer Systems in the amount of $317,020.22 for the project known as Lukas Landing.


2.  Performance Bond #1053852 for Roads, Streets, Drainage in the amount of $1,075,471.83 for the project known as Lukas Landing.


3.  Development Order #17-27500003 for Alcoholic Beverage License for the project known as Boutinot USA, Inc., 1450 Kastner Place; Paul Stacey, Applicant.


4.  Development Order #16-30000087, 1316 Raspberry Court, Anthony and Vickie Corpuz.


5.  CDBG Subrecipient Agreement for Program Year 2016-2017 with Kids House of Seminole, Inc.  (One-Year Action Plan approved by the BCC on August 9, 2016.)


6.  CDBG Subrecipient Agreements for Program Year 2016-2017 with The Seminole County Coalition for School Readiness, Inc. d/b/a Early Learning Coalition of Seminole; Goldsboro Front Porch Council, Inc.; The St. Johns River Festival of the Arts, Inc.; No Limit Health and Education, Inc. Public Service for Education; and Virginia Miller Helping Others In Need Ministry, Inc. d/b/a Kidzkare Preschool and Childcare Center.  (CDBG Program Administration Interlocal Agreement between the City of Sanford and Seminole County approved by the BCC on June 10, 2014.)


7.  Tourist Tax Funding Agreement with Suncoast Athletics Sports Group, Inc. for the Spring Kickoff NIT Classic.


8.  Tourist Tax Funding Agreement with Florida Travel Ball, Inc. for the Frozen Ropes Classic.


9.  Parks Contract for Services with Susan Dodd; and Associate Tennis Pro Agreement with Phillip Murray.


10.  Change Order #3 to CC-0194-15 with Prime Construction Group.


11.  Change Order #3 to CC-0266-15 with Masci General Contractor.


12.  Change Order #1 to Work Order #7 to CC-0559-15 with C.E. James, Inc.


13.  Notice to Proceed for Work Order #13 to CC-0559-15 with Southland Construction, Inc.


14.  M-1263-17 with Southland Construction, Inc.


15.  Amendment #1 to Work Order #13 to PS-1666-07 with Inwood Consulting Engineers.


16.  Amendment #9 to Work Order #32 to PS-5190-05 with CH2M Hill Engineers, Inc.


17.  Amendment #2 to Work Order #33 to PS-5190-05 with CH2M Hill Engineers, Inc.


18.  Work Order #28 to PS-7643-12 with Southeastern Surveying and Mapping Corp.


19.  Work Order #29 to PS-7643-12 with Southeastern Surveying and Mapping Corp.


20.  Work Order #18 to PS-8072-12 with Albeck Gerken, Inc.


21.  Amendment #1 to Work Order #4 to PS-8146-12 with Amec Environment & Infrastructure.


22.  Work Order #18 to PS-8146-12 with Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.


23.  Amendment #1 to Work Order #57 to PS-8148-12 with Keith & Schnars, P.A.


24.  Amendment #1 to Work Order #52 to PS-8148-12 with Keith & Schnars, P.A.


25.  Work Order #26 to CC-9192-13 with Corinthian Builders, Inc.


26.  Work Order #4 to PS-9462-14 with Ayres Associates, Inc.


27.  Work Order #7 to RFP-9601-14 with Revere Controls Systems, Inc.


28.  Assignment of RFP-600933-10, Lease Agreement for Management Software Services between Copytronics Information Systems (Assignor), Konica Minolta Business Solutions U.S.A., Inc. (Assignee), and Seminole County.


29.  Bids as follows:


     RFP-602702-16 from Grubbs Emergency Services, LLC; DRC Emergency Services, LLC; TAG Grinding Services, Inc.; Bergeron Emergency Services; AshBritt, Inc.; Phillips & Jordan, Inc.; TFR Enterprises, Inc.; Ceres Environmental Services, Inc.; and Graham County Land Company, LLC.


Sheriff’s Office


Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to approve the following:

18.  Approve expenditure of $47,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to provide for a contribution to the Foundation for Seminole County Public Schools for the following programs:  Take Stock in Children ($14,000), Project Graduation ($6,000), Midway Safe Harbor ($25,000), and Red Ribbon Campaign ($2,000).  (A-3325-17)

19.  Approve contribution of $4,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to provide funding in support of scholarship programs sponsored by the Rotary Clubs of South Seminole and Winter Springs.  (A-3314-17)

20.  Approve expenditure of $25,500 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to provide for a contribution to the Central Florida Council, Boy Scouts of America.  (A-3313-17)

21.  Approve expenditure of $5,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to provide funding to Inspire of Central Florida, a not‑for-profit organization providing training and work opportunities for adults with developmental disabilities.  (A-3312-17)

22.  Approve expenditure of $5,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to provide funding in support of the United Negro College Fund.  (A-3309-17)


     Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.


Agenda Item #23 – A-3227-17

Angi Kealhofer, Planning & Development Division, addressed the Board to present a request for a Special Event Permit for the Seminole County Fair to occur from March 24, 2017 through April 1, 2017.  Ms. Kealhofer reviewed the conditions of approval as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum. 

Commissioner Constantine stated that two years ago he went to the fair and it really bothered him that they had some exotic animals that were on the endangered species list in very small cages.  He noted that staff has informed him that there will not be any live exotic animal shows at this particular fair.  He believes that is a good thing.  Ms. Kealhofer confirmed for Commissioner Constantine that his understanding was correct. 

     With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to Item #23 and public input was closed.

     Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to approve the Special Event Permit for the Seminole County Fair, 440 Hickman Drive, March 24, 2017 through April 1, 2017, with the findings that the proposed event is reasonably compatible with nearby existing development, does not pose an unreasonable safety or health risk for patrons or neighbors, and with the condition that the event complies with the conditions of the Special Event Permit.  The Special Event Permit Conditions of Approval are contained in the Special Event Permit.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.


Agenda Item #24 – A-3225-17

     Patt Hughes, Planning & Development Division, addressed the Board to present a request to waive the Code Enforcement Board liens of $127,900 for Case #09‑85‑CEB and $271,000 for Case #13‑80‑CEB, on the property located at 1010 Dunbar Avenue, Sanford, Tax Parcel #20‑19‑30‑501‑0000‑1970, James Bradwell Jr., Owner, and James Bradwell III, Applicant.  Ms. Hughes reviewed the background timeline as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum.

     James Bradwell, III, Applicant, addressed the Board and introduced his wife, Natasha Boyd Bradwell.  Mr. Bradwell stated he did not have a presentation but is open for questions.

     Commissioner Carey stated that she knows that Mr. and Mrs. Bradwell have recently returned to the area and are trying to help Mr. Bradwell's dad and she appreciates that.  She reminded the Board that 1010 Dunbar is one of the houses that the County was considering as a public nuisance that they were going to demolish.  Mr. Bradwell had come before the Board and asked for some time to try and repair some of the houses.  The house has been demolished.  Commissioner Carey informed the Bradwells that there are two other properties that Mr. Bradwell owns in that neighborhood, 4511 Richard Allen Street and 4601 Gilbert Street, that are on the County's list of properties that they are concerned with as being public nuisances.  Mrs. Bradwell stated they did not have any idea the houses were on the County's radar.  Once they realized that, they had Paul Watson with the Building Department come out on the 24th to look at the other properties to see what they needed to do.  She advised that if they cannot be repaired, they will be knocked down, like one on Dunbar.

     With regard to public participation, no one else in the audience spoke in support or in opposition regarding Item #24 and public input was closed.

     Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to approve a total waiver of the Code Enforcement Board liens of $127,900 for Case #09‑85‑CEB and $271,000 for Case #13‑80‑CEB, on the property located at 1010 Dunbar Avenue, Sanford, Tax Parcel #20‑19‑30‑501‑0000‑1970, owned by James Bradwell Jr., due to medical and financial hardships; and authorize the Chairman to execute the Release of Liens.

     Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.


     With regard to the public hearings this afternoon, Ms. Guillet announced that staff has requested a continuance until April 11 for Item #25, Chapman Apartments Large Scale Land Use Map Amendment and Rezone.  The Applicant for Item #30, Estates at Wellington PD Rezone, has asked that the item be continued until March 28.  The Board will consider those requests this afternoon.


     The Board recessed the meeting at 11:32 a.m., with all Commissioners and all other Officials, with the exception of Deputy Clerk Jane Spencer who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Terri Porter, who were present at the Opening Session.


     Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to authorize the filing of the proofs of publication for this meeting's scheduled public hearings into the Official Record.

     Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.





Agenda Item #25 – PH-2016-505

Continuation of public hearing from February 28, 2017, to consider a Large Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment from Industrial to Planned Development and a Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) and PD (Planned Development) to PD (Planned Development) for a mixed-use development on approximately 42.32 acres, located on the southeast corner of SR 417 and Chapman Road, as described in the proof of publication; Bryan Potts.

     Brian Walker, Planning & Development Division, addressed the Board to advise that staff is requesting a continuance to the April 11th BCC meeting.

     With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to a continuance, and public input was closed.

     Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Constantine, to continue to April 11, 2017 at 1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, the request to consider transmittal of a Large Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment from Industrial to Planned Development, and the associated Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) and PD (Planned Development) to PD (Planned Development), for a mixed-use development on approximately 42.32 acres, located on the southeast corner of SR 417 and Chapman Road, as described in the proof of publication; Bryan Potts, Applicant.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.


CHAPTERS 20, 72 AND 85


Agenda Item #26 – PH-2016-556

Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider adoption of an Ordinance amending Seminole County Code Chapter 20, Animals and Fowl; Chapter 72, Emergency Management; and Chapter 85, Fire Safety Code; providing an effective date, received and filed.

Alan Harris, Office of Emergency Management, addressed the Board to present the item as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum.

With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to Item #26, and public input was closed.

Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Constantine, to adopt Ordinance #2017-7 amending Seminole County Code Chapter 20, Animals and Fowl; Chapter 72, Emergency Management; and Chapter 85, Fire Safety Code; providing an effective date, as described in the proof of publication.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.




Agenda Item #27 – PH-2016-555

Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider adoption of an Ordinance amending Seminole County Code Chapter 85, Part 3 - Fire Safety Code, Burn Ban Implementation Procedures, amending the protocol for instituting and terminating burn bans within Seminole County, received and filed.

Mr. Harris presented the item and explained this amendment to the Code would remove the automatic burn ban and will allow the Fire Department and Emergency Management to issue and rescind burn bans based upon weather forecasts and conversations with the Florida Forest Service.  He noted that staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance.

With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to Item #27, and public input was closed.

Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt Ordinance #2017-8 amending Seminole County Code Chapter 85, Part 3 - Fire Safety Code, Burn Ban Implementation Procedures, amending the protocol for instituting and terminating burn bans within Seminole County, as described in the proof of publication.

     Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.


5440 EDICOTT PLACE/Robert Wood


Agenda Item #28 – PH-2016-516

Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider an appeal of the Board of Adjustment’s decision to approve a variance for a front-yard setback from twenty feet to seven feet for a privacy fence in the R-1BB (Single Family Dwelling) district, and more particularly known as 5440 Endicott Place, Robert Wood, received and filed.

     Denny Gibbs, Planning & Development Division, addressed the Board to present the item and stated the Board of Adjustment approved a variance for a front-yard setback to seven feet for the privacy fence.  The Applicant’s original request was for a front-yard setback from twenty feet to zero feet; however, the BOA only approved it for seven feet.  The request was appealed to have the matter brought before the Board of County Commissioners.

     Ms. Gibbs advised staff recommends the Commission uphold approval of the front-yard setback from twenty feet to seven feet, and deny the variance for a front-yard setback from twenty feet to zero.

     Commissioner Dallari explained he asked that this item be brought to the Board because when driving down the street, you can see the hedge is closer to the sidewalk than seven feet.  He thinks the fence should be in alignment with the hedge so there is consistency in the neighborhood.  Upon inquiry by Commissioner Carey, Ms. Gibbs displayed the site plan and discussion ensued.  Commissioner Dallari expressed his desire to hear from the Board as well as the public.

     Commissioner Constantine questioned whether the fence now exists.  Ms. Gibbs replied that a fence exists on the property, but not in the location being discussed; the Applicant wants to reconfigure their yard and add additional fencing.      Commissioner Carey noted on the site plan drawing it looks like the request is for the fence to come off the hedge and then go straight to the corner of the house.  Chairman Horan stated he believes their request makes sense.

     Commissioner Constantine asked if the fence would obscure any of the neighbors’ views of the lake across the way.  Ms. Gibbs responded that there is a subdivision behind this home, and County Manager Guillet noted there is a tall hedge behind the house.

     Robert H. Wood, 5440 Endicott Place, addressed the Board to clarify a comment made about the existing fence.  He indicated they purchased this property in August of 2016, and at that time, they were under the 20-foot setback requirement from the property line.  They pulled a permit for a fence in order to enclose a portion of the yard so their dogs and daughter would have some safety in that area.  He explained that is why the existing fence is there.  They did put it up there intending to apply for the variance, which is what brings them here today.  The intention is simply to carry the fence from the corner of the house to where the hedge is on the adjacent lot, which would enable them to encompass as much of their property for personal purposes as possible.  He noted they could put in a hedge rather than a fence without going through any of these procedures; however, they prefer the privacy and safety of a fence. 

     Mr. Wood commented that they did apply to their Homeowners’ Association for approval before today, and the HOA did approve a two-and-one-half-foot setback from the property line along the sidewalk.  He noted they are asking for approval of a zero lot line and if approved, they will go back to their HOA for their approval also.

     Commissioner Carey asked if the HOA has covenants and restrictions that require the lots adjacent to the sidewalk to be set back two and a half feet, or whether that is part of the easement for the sidewalk.  Mr. Wood advised the HOA does not; the HOA’s Architectural Review Committee made the decision of the two-and-one-half-foot setback.  Commissioner Carey confirmed there was nothing in the covenants and restrictions Mr. Wood received when they purchased their home that indicated that a setback requirement exists.

     Mr. Wood responded to Commissioner Constantine’s question about site lines by stating that already at the back of the property is an existing six-foot fence that is actually higher because of the slope of the land than the fence that they are wanting to put in.  He doesn’t believe the view will be restricted.

With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to Item #28, and public input was closed.

Speaker Request Form was received and filed.

Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to grant the appeal, thereby overturning the Board of Adjustment’s decision to approve a variance for a front-yard setback from 20 feet to 7 feet for a privacy fence, and approving a variance for a front-yard setback from 20 feet to 0 feet, for a privacy fence in the R-1BB (Single Family Dwelling) district, and more particularly known as 5440 Endicott Place; as described in the proof of publication, as presented today; Robert Wood, Applicant; Approval Development Order.

     Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.


2323 TUSKAWILLA ROAD/Ravin Persaud


Agenda Item #29 – PH-2016-515

Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider an appeal of the Board of Adjustment decision to deny the request for a Special Exception to establish a 32-bed Assisted Living Facility in the A-1 (Agriculture) district, more particularly known as 2323 Tuskawilla Road, Ravin Persaud, received and filed.

Ms. Gibbs noted the timeline as presented in the Agenda Memorandum.  She stated the property has been approved in the past for several commercial-type uses including a dog kennel, a 20-bed ALF (Assisted Living Facility) and an adult daycare.  The primary use of the property has been some sort of commercial or group home.  The property is a 1.65-acre parcel that accesses directly onto Tuskawilla Road.  It has an existing two-story structure on the property, which is about 10,000 square feet of living area.  The property is approximately one-half mile north of Aloma Avenue, and the intersection of Aloma and Tuskawilla establishes a dense commercial corridor. 

Ms. Gibbs advised surrounding the subject property are single-family residential subdivisions that have developed around this parcel, and this parcel is not a platted parcel.  To the north is Tuskawilla Acres which has A-1 zoning; to the south is Tuskawilla Estates, which is PD zoning with lots that are generally in the 10,000-square-foot range; to the east is a large drainage and wetland tract for the Bear Creek subdivision; and to the west is a Seminole County pond and Tuskawilla Road, which is an urban minor arterial roadway.  Ms. Gibbs pointed out that ALFs are residential in nature, and when located with direct access to a road like Tuskawilla, it is not out of character with this residential community.

Ms. Gibbs stated that staff recommends the Board overturn the decision of the Board of Adjustment and approve a special exception to establish a 32-bed ALF in A-1 zoning with the following conditions:  the special exception will apply only to an ALF as licensed under Florida Statute Chapter 429.01; the facility will have no more than 32 beds; parking for the facility is provided for staff, visitors, and client services vehicles only; and the residents of the facility will not drive.  The buffers will be as follows:  to the north, a 10-foot landscape buffer with a 6-foot masonry wall; to the east, the buffer is provided by an adjacent platted drainage conservation easement; to the south, there is a natural buffer that will remain consisting of approximately one-half acre of wetlands; and to the west is a 10-foot landscape buffer.  Parking lot lighting is prohibited except as required by a county or state agency for safety or welfare.  Wall lighting is limited to low-impact wall packs.  Access movements and drive aisle configuration shall be determined at site plan review and shall comply with all Seminole County regulations.  All deliveries including garbage pickup shall be made between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. 

In regard to signage, Ms. Gibbs said she is requesting that the Board consider a limit of six feet for the sign height.  She noted the Applicant is agreeable to this deviation from the proposed Development Order included in the Agenda Memorandum.

Ms. Gibbs continued to review the conditions of the development permits as follows:  the layout of the proposed uses shall be substantially consistent with what is depicted on the Special Exception site plan; prior to the issuance of development permits, a final site plan that meets the requirements of all other applicable code requirements must be approved; and the Development Order shall expire one year after approval unless a development permit based upon and incorporating the Special Exception is obtained within the one-year period, however, one six-month extension may be granted by the BOA.

Thomas Sullivan, GrayRobinson Law Firm, addressed the Board on behalf of the Applicant.  He stated they are excited about this project because there is a real need in the community for an assisted living facility of this size and character.  He noted the particular facts are unique in that there is an existing structure and not a vacant lot or green field, which he believes is different from the usual requests.  They agree with all the proposed conditions detailed by Ms. Gibbs and found in the proposed Development Order, including the amendment regarding signage.  He said he believes the historical use of the property is an important fact for the Board to consider because it had actually been an ALF group home and an adult daycare in the past.  He opined an adult daycare is a more intense use than what this assisted living facility would be particularly because the residents of the facility will not be driving; traffic will only be generated by employees, visitors and deliveries primarily.

     Mr. Sullivan displayed and discussed photos (received and filed) of the existing structure and examples of a proposed gate and lighting.  He noted the building has been abandoned for years.  He then discussed improvements they would make including a six-foot masonry wall, a ten-foot landscape buffer, the brick paver access road would be widened, and a gate would be added.  Also, some portions of the building would be enclosed but the envelope would not change so the size of the building that Ms. Gibbs mentioned is accurate.  In regard to lighting, there will be limited landscape lighting; they have tried to be sensitive so the neighbors do not have any spillover lighting that would be disruptive.  Commissioner Dallari confirmed that these are the standards that they are willing to uphold.

     Chairman Horan surrendered the gavel to Vice Chairman Carey and left the meeting at this time.

     Robert Donenfeld, 14430 Winterset Drive, addressed the Board in support of Mr. Persaud, the Applicant.  Mr. Donenfeld stated his wife passed away in January and she had been living in assisted living.  He remarked that she had only one visitor in the last year who was her son.  So he believes the conversation about traffic coming to a place like this is a bunch of nonsense because you feed, clothe and educate your children, and then they pick your nursing home and don’t come to visit.  His main point is that traffic will not be a big issue.  He noted that one of the biggest complaints that senior citizens have is that they don’t have enough visitors.  Commissioner Dallari confirmed that Mr. Donenfeld is in favor of the project.

     Commissioner Horan returned to the meeting at this time, and Vice Chairman Carey returned the gavel to Chairman Horan to resume the duties of Chairman.

     David Alexander, Esquire, 11 S. Bumby Avenue, addressed the Board and noted he is an attorney with the Bradford Cederberg law firm in Orlando.  He advised he owns two properties located in Tuskawilla Acres, which is just to the north of the subject property.  He stated it is a residential area and it has been a residential area.  He added the BOA meeting lasted over 1 hour and 20 minutes, and the consensus of that board that decides special exceptions decided to deny this project outright.  He believes this Commission should honor that denial.  He noted that Mr. Hattaway on the BOA agreed that this project was improper for the area.  Mr. Alexander said the community to the south, Tuskawilla Estates, has homes that are being marketed and sold for between $800,000 and $900,000, and they are bordering the subject property.  Mr. Alexander said the only difference between the time of the BOA meeting (December 5) and now is that they built two more houses that are directly adjacent, so the only issue that should be addressed is whether it is more residential than it was in December, and it is.  He concluded by saying that like he told the Board of Adjustment, this is a 1974 single-family block home, and what they want to do to it is turn it into a 32-bed facility and that is improper.

     Mr. Alexander pointed out that the first floor of the building square footage is only 4,500 square feet.  He added that the pictures being shown are not the property, and what they did not hear from staff is that this was denied in 1996.  An ALS was requested for this building in 1996 and was denied outright.

     Ruth Wood, 4651 Parker Court, addressed the Board saying she received a notice because she is within 300 feet of the subject property.  Ms. Wood stated she is concerned because the “paperwork” (property card information received and filed) shows that there are two owners, but the application affidavit (received and filed) shows one owner.  On the application for this Special Exception it states it is Residential A-1/Adult daycare with 20 beds.  Ms. Wood indicated it has never been an adult daycare, and she said she came and fought against that.  She indicated it was too costly for the woman to do it, so she turned it into an illegal ALF and got arrested.  She displayed floor plans and pictorials (received and filed) that they had been shown and pointed out there were no stairs.  Ms. Wood stated she disagrees that it is used as an A-1 residential home because it is not used as anything currently; it has been abandoned since before 2006.  It has never been an adult daycare as stated; it has been used as an unlicensed youth facility and other things.  She read from the BOA Meeting Minutes (Draft) from December 5, 2016 (received and filed).  She submitted an excerpt from the Land Development Code (received and filed) and read an excerpt regarding A-1 zoning.  Ms. Wood then submitted and read from a copy of 2016 Florida Statutes 419.001(3)(c)(3) regarding single-family zoning.  So, she said she politely disagrees with everything everybody is saying.

     Ms. Wood displayed an aerial photo (received and filed) from the Property Appraiser’s Office and pointed out the footage between homes.  She said it is less than 500 feet and it is 199 feet to the fence, so this is not prudent for this particular area.  She suggested they uphold the denial.

     George Woodruff, 4562 Tigua Island Court, addressed the Board to state he is the assistant president for the Homeowners Association across the street at Antigua Pointe.  He said he feels this proposal is out of character in that they are a residential area that goes from his neighborhood of 600 approaching 2 million.  They are directly across the street from the subject property.  Chairman Horan clarified that Mr. Woodruff’s neighborhood is across Tuskawilla Road.  Mr. Woodruff pointed out that he begs to differ with the traffic problem because there is no access lane or exit lane coming south to get into the property.  He added if one car turns off, they are okay; if two cars try to turn off, they are going to have a problem.  He said they talked to the Seminole County traffic engineer yesterday and he agreed with that and said that they do have a problem.  He noted that is their position and they are against the program.  Commissioner Carey asked for the name of the traffic engineer they spoke with.  Ms. Wood noted they spoke to “Charlie” from Traffic. 

With regard to public participation, no one else in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to Item #29, and public input was closed.

     Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.

     In rebuttal, Mr. Sullivan submitted a petition (received and filed) signed by two different owners on Parker Court, and he displayed a map showing that their properties at 4611 and 4631 are immediately contiguous to the site (received and filed).  He said this shows they have the support of the most directly affected owners and they are closer to the subject property than the folks that spoke in opposition to the request.

     Mr. Sullivan stated although there is no requirement to do a traffic study and he believes that comes at final engineering, they did have a trip generation memo done by Luke Transportation Engineering Consultants (received and filed).  He stated this concluded that the property would get a total of six morning peak-hour trips and 10 afternoon/evening peak-hour trips.  In addition, they did get some preliminary site plan review comments from staff that will require a left-turn lane into the site, so they are fully expecting to do that, and they will have to dedicate additional right-of-way for that.

     Mr. Sullivan stated his firm was not representing the Applicant at the time of the BOA meeting, but he reviewed the minutes of that meeting and it talked about how the building would evacuate.  He believes Mr. Anderson had alluded to that in terms of the square footage of the building.  Mr. Sullivan noted that in the Development Order under (3)(a), it requires this facility to meet all the Florida statutory requirements for an assisted living facility of this nature.  A floor plan was included in the Agenda Memorandum that shows the stairs and elevators; there will be more than adequate ingress and egress from the building.  They will meet all the requirements that apply.  Chairman Horan and Commissioner Carey mentioned they will need to meet all the statutory requirements for the ALF and the Fire Safety Codes.

     In regard to another point that both Ms. Wood and Mr. Alexander made about the use of this property being out of character with the area, Mr. Sullivan stated this property has been approved for more intense uses previously.  The structure already exists and they think it is very much in keeping with what is already there.  He noted it will only look better than it does now.

     Mr. Sullivan stated, in conclusion, they believe this Special Exception request meets the County’s Land Development Code criteria as set forth in Section 30.43(b)(2), and there is competent substantial evidence in the Agenda Memorandum, including County staff’s report and recommendation as well as the items he has submitted.

     Chairman Horan asked specifically what facts meet those particular requirements.  Mr. Sullivan referred to page two of the staff report and opined it does a great job of applying them.  He said he had only touched on them and did not directly apply them so he read from the staff report and reiterated that the building is already there and the more intense uses on the exact same property have been approved previously.  He further noted that the County Code identifies this use as a Special Exception in A-1 and concludes that it is residential in nature.  He added people may have different opinions about that but he thinks the Code is clear in that regard.  He also touched on staff findings with regard to traffic patterns and noted the diminished traffic they previously discussed and the restriction in the Development Order that prohibits the residents from driving.  Finally, he stated the report talks about meeting any additional requirements specified in the Code and said they have talked about the buffering and the wall, and believes they have met all the requirements and have exceeded them.  He added he believes the staff report that is incorporated into the record goes into additional detail on those elements.

     Commissioner Henley asked whether what has been proposed here alters the nature of the area.  Mr. Sullivan replied that he does not believe that it does.  Commissioner Henley questioned whether this proposal was for an assisted living facility or a senior living facility because they are different.  Mr. Sullivan stated it is an assisted living facility.  Commissioner Henley stated then that they will have people there who need care, medical and so forth.  Upon further inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Ms. Gibbs advised that this project was denied by the BOA with a vote of three to two, so it was not unanimous as someone stated earlier.  She pointed out that the BOA generally responds to community concerns.  The concerns were in regard to fire codes and things that are done by other agencies or the State or the County’s Fire Safety people and they had less to do with the character and the use.  She noted Chairman Horan’s point that the State has regulations they have to meet and the County has other regulations they have to meet, and all those address health, welfare and safety.  Commissioner Henley confirmed that staff did not see this as a problem, and Ms. Gibbs added that staff considers this a compatible use in the area and it is residential; in fact, more residential in nature than any commercial that could actually happen in A-1 property.  As to the traffic, Ms. Gibbs stated this property’s land use is LDR, so it could actually have four houses on it, which in her opinion would have equal traffic impacts including if the residents drove.  She added in this case they are restricted from driving, so the impacts would be far less on traffic.

     Commissioner Constantine noted Mr. Sullivan had mentioned that this had previously been approved for higher intensity.  He asked whether Mr. Sullivan felt that the higher intensity he was referring to was the adult daycare with 20 clients.  Mr. Sullivan responded in the affirmative and explained that use would entail the residents being driven to and from the facility each day, so from a transportation standpoint, it would be less intense.  Upon further inquiry by Commissioner Constantine, Mr. Sullivan stated there is a floor plan included in the backup and he believes there are minimum sizes regulated by the State, and this meets and exceeds those.  They are mostly one-bedroom units and this would be geared towards a high-end facility with activities for people in the central areas.

     Commissioner Carey discussed the difference between independent living, assisted living, and skilled nursing.  She opined people want the facility to be close to the area they are from and they do not want to move to the other side of the county or another county because they are trying to stay in the same neighborhood where things are still familiar and where their families can still visit.  She feels this is a residential option as people start to age and they want to age in place, and having these options to stay in the neighborhood are a good thing for the community.

     Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to grant the appeal, thereby overturning the Board of Adjustment’s decision, thereby granting the request for a Special Exception to establish a 32-bed Assisted Living Facility in the A-1 (Agriculture) district, more particularly known as 2323 Tuskawilla Road, as outlined in the proposed Development Order included in the Agenda Memorandum, with the amendment to the condition of signage limiting the sign height to six feet, as described in the proof of publication; Ravin Persaud, Applicant; Approval Development Order.

     Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.



Agenda Item #30 – PH-2016-539

     Continuation of a public hearing from February 28, 2017, to consider adoption of an Ordinance enacting a Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PD (Planned Development) for a 24-lot, single-family residential subdivision on approximately 36.79 acres, located on the south side of Mikler Road, approximately one mile south of Red Bug Lake Road, as described in the proof of publication; Jim Mehta.

     Rebecca Hammock, Planning & Development Division, addressed the Board to advise that the Applicant is requesting a continuance to the March 28th BCC meeting.

     With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to a continuance, and public input was closed.

     Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to continue to March 28, 2017 at 1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, the request to consider a Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PD (Planned Development) for a 24-lot, single-family residential subdivision on approximately 36.79 acres, located on the south side of Mikler Road, approximately one mile south of Red Bug Lake Road, as described in the proof of publication; Jim Mehta, Applicant.

     Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.


     Meloney Lung, Assistant County Manager, addressed the Board to present the Legislative Update (copy of report received and filed).  She talked about the County’s five Appropriation bills and noted HB 3475 in regard to the County’s $2 million request for CAD replacement was heard and approved unanimously today.  In regard to SB 1158 (Local Regulation Preemption), which is similar to HB 17, some cities and counties are providing resolutions to their legislative delegation.  Ms. Guillet noted her recommendation would be to formally adopt a resolution in opposition and Commissioner Dallari agreed.  He noted they should bring it back to the Board on March 28th. 

Ms. Lung reviewed SB 596/HB 687, the utility bill for cell towers, and advised they have asked their lobbyist to work on ensuring there is wording in the bill that excludes traffic control devices.  Ms. Guillet noted they are opposed to the bill; however, the FAC and the League of Cities are trying to get some language in the bill should it pass to at least be protected from a cost standpoint, because there would be not only Home Rule issues but also some cost impacts because they would be able to connect to the County’s facilities under this bill.  She explained these are the small utility poles in the right-of-way and if you live in a subdivision, it could be right in front of your house, so it is really invasive.  While everyone is supportive of enhanced cellular service, there needs to be some reasonable application.  Commissioner Dallari asked whether they can put these up and down the Florida Turnpike.  Ms. Guillet stated she will have to check, but DOT is excluded so she imagines that would capture the Turnpike Authority also.

Ms. Lung reviewed HB 13 regarding CRAs and pointed out that all funding must be allocated by October 1, 2017; existing funding for CRAs can be extended until 2037, but any new CRAs cannot be created after July 1, 2017.  Commissioner Carey expressed it infringes, again, on Home Rule.  Ms. Guillet remarked it may not have a huge impact to the County’s U.S. 17-92 CRA, but it will impact some of the cities’ CRAs in which the County participates.  Commissioner Carey opined it would prevent future Boards from being able to create a 17-92 CRA 50 years from now if they chose to.  Ms. Guillet indicated it is strange to her that they would oppose CRAs because it is not an additional tax, and she is not even sure what the opposition is to this other than it is an imposition on this Board’s ability to make decisions about how they want to finance improvements within their jurisdiction.  Commissioner Carey stated they might not understand how the financing works.  Commissioner Constantine said he recalls there were two reasons he would hear from legislators who were opposed to CRAs and one was because they felt it was an increase in taxes, which shows they did not know.  He noted that few actually have locally elected experience.  The second reason was circumstantial to individual CRAs that some of them were not being watched as well as they should have been from a financial standpoint.  There were a couple down south that were spending wildly, and it was usually directed by Miami-Dade Representatives that wanted to get a handle on that.

Commissioner Carey suggested if they are going to send a resolution, they should include all of these that step on their authority to home rule.  Commissioner Constantine noted that Speaker Corcoran is putting out a lot of things that will have to be addressed by the Senate at the end of the session.   Commissioner Carey added they are playing a lot of games in Tallahassee at the expense of the citizens back home.  Ms. Lung stated they will prepare a resolution and have it on the next Board Agenda.

Ms. Lung discussed HB 7005 and HB 9 related to economic development and tourism.  Commissioner Carey stated there are no senate companion bills to these.  She added this County has been the recipient of so many of these jobs that have been created by Enterprise Florida.  In looking at the 67 counties in Florida, Seminole is probably in the top 3 to 5 of the beneficiaries of these great high-wage paying jobs.  She said she is very disappointed with their representatives for going along with this, and it aggravates her when their elected leadership are playing games and politics in Tallahassee instead of thinking about what is going on back in their home district.  She opined without Enterprise Florida and these partnerships, the County would not have Verizon or Deloitte Touche or a lot of these high-wage paying jobs and manufacturing jobs.  Discussion ensued regarding incentive programs.  Commissioner Constantine remarked that the Americans for Prosperity have been around for a while and have been complaining; it is just that now they have a very strong voice in the Speaker of the House of Representatives.  He believes this is why they are hearing more about this and why it is going forward because it seems that the House is following the leader.  Commissioner Carey added there is something to be said for standing up to a leader when what he is saying has not been true to your own district. 

Ms. Lung stated the last three bills on her report are related to taxation.  She covered SJR 76 regarding non-homesteaded properties and HB 7063 about maximum millage rates.  Commissioner Dallari questioned whether there is any data from the rating industries.  Ms. Lung replied there is nothing out there yet and she does not believe there is staff analysis on this one.  Finally she reported on SR 1774 about an additional $25,000 for exemption on homesteaded properties.  She advised that David Johnson, Seminole County Property Appraiser, will provide more information at the March 28th Financial Update workshop.


     Ms. Lung gave a short report about the bear-resistant trash cans.  The price will be $157.50 for the Toter cans.  Another option for a smaller can was also discussed.


Ms. Lung concluded her report stating if there was anything in particular the Board members would like her to update them on to please let her know.


District 5

     Commissioner Carey reported there has been a lot of discussion between the residents at Lake Forest and Mr. Hattaway’s group that has the sign out on SR 46.  She has spoken to both sides to encourage everybody to try to come to a friendly resolution on this.  She noted there are a lot of moving parts and the community believes the sign should not be there.  The sign has been damaged, and she advised she has talked to staff about this ongoing situation.  She is hoping they can come to some kind of resolution between the residents and Mr. Hattaway.  (Letter from Lake Forest HOA regarding a permit submittal by Mr. Hattaway for repair of the billboard was received and filed.)


     In regard to the Central Florida Expressway Authority meeting, Commissioner Carey stated they received notice from the Turnpike Authority of the termination of their Interoperability Agreement, which is a statewide agreement about toll collection and who will collect it and how the money will be distributed back to the various people.  There are over a billion tolls collected per year, and just in Central Florida for electronic tolls only, they collect $340 million of which 60% are SunPass and 40% are E-Pass.  The agreement is set to expire in 180 days from the date of the notice.  She noted they were supposed to have a draft in February but they have not received it yet.  Commissioner Carey said she talked to both the Governor and Secretary Rachel Cone last week, and Secretary Cone assured the Commissioner that they should have it sometime this month because the attorneys now have it in their hands.  Commissioner Carey added hopefully they will have an opportunity to sit down and negotiate a new Interoperability Agreement with the State.

     In addition, Commissioner Carey stated further discussions are going on about the purchase of SR 417 as well as other sections of turnpike property within the four-county area.  Also at their last board meeting, there was a unanimous vote to look at Brevard County to be included in the Central Florida Expressway.  There was a Governor’s task force who looked at transportation and where it should go in the future.  Commissioner Carey noted there are several roads they felt should be extended to the east of Orange County and that brings Brevard County into play, and in Osceola County.  The chairman from Brevard County was at the meeting and said that his board has voted on it unanimously and it has been sent to the Legislature for direction.

     Commissioner Carey reported that Laura Kelley, the Executive Director of the Expressway Authority, will be meeting with Secretary Cone next week in Tallahassee.  The Commissioner indicated to her that she would also like to meet and would rather not do it when she is in Session.  She noted that Ms. Kelley is new to the position; she has been on the job five weeks.  She added they had a very positive conversation.


     Commissioner Carey thanked Gretchen Venn for bringing in pies for Happy Pie Day and she also wished everyone a Happy St. Patrick’s Day.


     Commissioner Carey submitted her ex parte communications into the record.

District 1

     Commissioner Dallari stated he received a notice that the Emergency Management Preparedness Grant that Seminole County gets from Washington is on the “cut” list, and that would potentially cost Seminole about $100,000 annually.  He asked that they get their federal lobbyist involved to see how they can potentially save that.  Ms. Guillet advised they are, especially with the new administration, keeping an eye on anything that will impact this county locally.  She opined this is a great specific item they can bring up with them though. 


     At the MetroPlan meeting last week, Commissioner Dallari reported that Mayor Buddy Dyer presented a letter from the Governor stating that they were willing to discuss with the Expressway Authority the potential sale of portions of the turnpike.  He thanked Commissioner Carey for her leadership on that.

Commissioner Dallari noted they also discussed Complete Streets for the region, about how Complete Streets look at all forms of transit.  He added they also talked about bringing that forward regionally, not just from a MetroPlan perspective but from a regional planning board perspective, and they are trying to get all the cities and counties on board to move that forward.

District 3

     Commissioner Constantine congratulated and thanked Commissioner Dallari for his leadership regarding Complete Streets.  He added that the Commissioner was the one that was really pushing the issue, and he thinks it is wonderful for the County, the Regional Planning Council and the MPO to get behind that and really make an impact.


     In regard to the Legislative Executive Committee conference call from the FAC, Commissioner Constantine expressed he believes the joint resolution will be very much discussed next week.  He added they are very concerned and going all out on HB 17 as the County is.


     Commissioner Constantine thanked Commissioner Carey for bringing up the issue with the billboard.  He said they will follow her lead on that because it is in her district and he feels it is something that all of their constituents are concerned about.


     Commissioner Constantine reported that he and Chairman Horan will be at the Regional Planning Council tomorrow.  Also, tomorrow is the Zoo’s Annual Meeting.  He added the Historical Commission meeting is on March 16th.


     Chairman Horan indicated there has been a request to have a special agenda item on April 11, a report from the Zoo in regard to their business plan.  Commissioner Dallari asked that they get the report prior to that meeting, and Ms. Guillet noted her Office will need it by March 30th in order to get it into the agenda packet.  Commissioner Carey asked that Mr. Davis speak to the board about what they had discussed.

     Charles Davis, Central Florida Zoo, addressed the Board and advised that Phil Flynn, the Zoo’s President and CEO, sent out the business plan which will be only part of what they will present.  He stated the last time he was at a BCC meeting, he told them they would provide a detailed report.  He advised that report has been sent to the County Manager’s Office and each of the Commission offices.  Mr. Davis pointed out that is part of the package but they will be adding more to it.  The business plan is what the Zoo is doing internally for growth, but there is more that they need to add.  Also, they wanted to get in front of the Board for Q&A so the Board can ask any questions they might have.


     Chairman Horan stated every year the Board needs to evaluate the County Manager and County Attorney.  He noted he prepared a form that basically goes through the core competencies of their contracts and he did send these to each of the Commissioners.  He noted they can choose to use it or not; it is there for instructional reasons.  He believes the evaluations should be discussed one on one with the County Attorney and the County Manager, and then if need be, they could discuss it at a Board meeting.  Commissioner Carey opined she would not want to discuss these at a Board meeting, and they could give the forms to the Chairman to evaluate the information he receives and be the one to share it with the two individuals.  She added if they are just having one-on-one discussions, nobody really collectively knows what everyone is thinking.  Traditionally that is how they have done it.  Chairman Horan stated his intent was just to provide a vehicle for the individual reviews.  Commissioner Henley talked about how they handled the performance reviews at Lynx and advised they were also asked to do a self-evaluation of what they had been able to accomplish or what they needed or wanted to work on.  Commissioner Carey commented that she likes the idea of a self-evaluation.  Commissioner Henley noted they get a lot more information when they are told about some of the things people had done because some of those things he hadn’t even been aware of. 

     Chairman Horan determined that the consensus of the Board was that they would like the self-evaluations provided to them by the next BCC meeting and the Board members will complete their evaluations after that.  The Chairman asked that they keep in mind that these will be considered public record.


     Chairman Horan reported in regard to the Homelessness Strategy Action Board, they are doing really well in terms of housing chronic individuals; however, they are about 50% on the family goal.  The reason is they just cannot seem to find the case management necessary for that.  So, they will be focusing for the rest of the year on philanthropy and funding for the additional case management component to see if they can get to that goal of 120 families.


     In regard to the Constitutional Review Commission, Chairman Horan remarked that the Governor has made his appointees.  Commissioner Carey added all of the appointees have been made now by the Speaker and also the President of the Senate.  Chairman Horan said he brought this up as a reminder that once again they have to schedule the process for their own Charter Review Commission.  He added they need to schedule a workshop or an agenda item for the appointee process and this needs to be done by June.  Commissioner Carey noted that Sheriff Eslinger is one of the alternates for the Constitutional Revision Commission.  Chairman Horan stated they should have that coming up within the next couple agendas so they know what the process is and who has what cities, etc., and they should be thinking about those people they want on the Charter Review Commission. 


     Chairman Horan stated he was asked to report that on March 30th between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. at the Youth Camp Recreation Hall, the Wekiva River Basin State Parks will hold their public workshops for their Unit Management Plan.


     Chairman Horan advised the Seminole County Public School System, following their Interlocal Agreement, has formed a citizens’ advisory group, and he confirmed with Ms. Guillet that they have a representative on that.  Ms. Guillet noted it is not a formal appointment by the BCC, but is someone who the School Board selected to represent Seminole County’s interests, and the appointee is Jay Zembower.  Chairman Horan reported they are going to hold a meeting on April 11 at 6:00 p.m. and the topic will be the Present Impact Fee Ordinance and the Alternative Impact Fee Study.  Therefore, he believes the Alternative Impact Fee Study will be available by April 11th.  The Chairman asked whether they would be setting up a meeting after that and Commissioner Carey informed him that a joint workshop is already on the calendar.


     Chairman Horan reported he had a visit from two gentlemen from the Greater Orlando Aviation Authority, Paul Wyche from Wyche and Associates, and George Morning, who is the Director of Small Business Development at OIA.  They are doing a major small business initiative outreach, specifically to small businesses in Seminole County concerning their $1.8 billion terminal expansion program.  PCL and Turner are the primary contractors and they will be funneling information through the Chairman’s Office and through the County’s economic development people to get information out to small businesses in this county with regard to the economic opportunities that are available for employment on those particular jobs.


     The following Communications and/or Reports were received and filed:

1.      Letter dated February 27, 2017, from South Seminole Community Association for Progress, Inc. to Seminole County Board of County Commissioners re: Appreciation of support for the Winwood Community.


2.      Letter dated February 28, 2017, from Chairman Horan to Ray Eubanks, Plan Processing Administrator, Department of Economic Opportunity, re: Transmittal of Proposed Large Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment to the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan - Expedited State Review Process.


3.      Letter dated March 8, 2017, from Grant Maloy, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller, to Chairman Horan re: Investment Policy Update.


4.      Letter dated March 9, 2017, from Chairman Horan, to Grant Maloy, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller, re: Response to letter regarding Investment Policy Update.



Brian Holmes, 2371 Westwood Avenue, addressed the Board and advised he is the Director for Florida Consumer Water/Wastewater Alliance (FCW Alliance).  He read a statement (copy received and filed) into the record in regard to their opposition to a request for a rate increase by Utilities, Inc. and the accountability needed that revenue generated matches the expenditures for upgrades and maintenance.  Copies of the following were also received and filed:  (1) Letter dated 3/6/17 from the City of Longwood to the Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC), and (2) Letter dated 2/21/17 from State Representative Bob Cortes.

Commissioner Dallari asked when this was going in front of FPSC and Ms. Guillet replied it will in May, to which the Commissioner stated they have a little bit of time but not much.  He then asked if they could use their state lobbyist to talk to FPSC as well.  Ms. Guillet advised they do have legal counsel that specializes in water resources that is working on the County’s behalf.  Commissioner Dallari asked if they could get an update from legal counsel on anything that is non-sensitive and Ms. Guillet replied they can.  Commissioner Dallari added that even though they have an expert in the field working on this, he suggested they get their state lobbyist to work on this also.  Commissioner Constantine noted that Commissioner Jack Mariano of Pasco County has been very strong on this also, so they have an ally in this.  Commissioner Carey stated she would imagine there are more than just a couple of counties that are impacted by the consolidation effort going on.

Ann Marie Ryan, 11436 Windstar Court, addressed the Board stating she is the leader and organizer of the Summertree Water Alliance, which is a community of 1,200 homeowners who have trouble with Utilities, Inc. of Florida (UIF).  Because of the problems they are having with UIF, they spoke to all their legislators and the Office of Public Counsel, and they decided to start the organization called the Florida Consumer Water/Wastewater Alliance to unify the customers across the state who are having the same problems with Utilities, Inc.  She stated they thank the Board for their quick and efficient way of letting FPSC know that this latest consolidated increase is really horrific. 

Ms. Ryan noted there are several communities throughout the state who will benefit from this consolidation, but the majority will not.  Their community would have benefitted from a decrease, but the decreases are fueled with inflated, stand-alone rate increases which are going to be “put into a pot” and then divided by the 60,000 customers.  So, they decided to put aside any kind of benefit they would have and go for reform to help everybody because they think that this latest measure is dangerous. 

Ms. Ryan stated they are opposed to a rate increase and they are looking for legislative reform.  She submitted an information packet (received and filed) and explained the packet includes a list of the dockets from the inception of when Marty Friedman, a counsel for utility clients, had put in for the consolidation working up to all the financial aspects of what was going to affect Seminole County.  Also included is a letter of intervention that was submitted by Erik Sayler, the attorney for the Office of Public Counsel, to make this a full-blown rate case. 

Ms. Ryan remarked there are all kinds of data and evidence that is coming in after March 6th so it will not be brought into the hearing.  They are asking the Board to write a letter or get in touch with Commissioner Brown (FPSC) or Erik Sayler to ask for anybody from the county or any leader from the counties to have the opportunity to speak at the May 8th technical hearing.  She stated they have generated almost 2,000 documents since the close on March 6th and they won’t have a chance to bring any of that information forward.

Ms. Ryan advised they found out when Mr. Sayler made the request on behalf of the FCW Alliance that Marty Friedman was very adamant that he does not want any customers or elected officials to have an opportunity to speak at that hearing.  Without this Board’s help and the help of other leaders throughout the state, none of the information including the letter that came from the City of Longwood’s mayor will get into that docket. 

Ms. Ryan said they worked side by side with Senator Simpson.  They were up in Tallahassee on October 11th for an agenda hearing and she noted there is a link to a video included in the information packet which shows Senator Simpson standing up for all of the constituents and the people of the State of Florida who have to deal with Utilities, Inc.  The Senator promised those commissioners, and he came back a second time, that he is writing legislation to prevent them from continuing in the business manner that they have. 

Ms. Ryan stated their community has 1,200 homes and since 1991, UIF has not put any major infrastructure changes into their community.  UIF has unbelievable business practices and without reform, they can continue to do what they do.  She added that even though their community reduced their consumption by 46% and they went from potable water to well water for irrigation, UIF is allowed to charge them $186,000 per year in perpetuity for lost revenue, and these are practices they are doing across the state.

Ms. Ryan noted she got in touch with Corix, who is the holding company for UIF.  They also got in touch with British Columbia Investment Management Corporation, the holding company for Corix.  They responded with a letter stating they feel their constituents should hold to better business practices. 

Ms. Ryan expressed they believe that the legislation is possible and that Senator Simpson is committed to helping the people of this state.  She said the Senator feels that water is a right and people have the right to get it at a fair price.  Ms. Ryan thanked the Board for their initiative and stated if there is anything the FCW Alliance can do to support or assist, they would be happy to do so.

Chairman Horan questioned who from the County will be attending the hearing to which Ms. Guillet replied staff will be there along with representatives from Ed de la Parte’s (lobbyist) office.  Commissioner Carey asked if Mr. de la Parte would be attending himself and Commissioner Dallari added they should request that he be there.

Ms. Ryan said she wanted to mention that she spoke to their counsel, Mr. Sayler, and he asked that she bring up to this Board and the City of Longwood that they can actually file a request to intervene in this docket that would allow them to sit as a chair and be able to depose UIF.  They would just have to get in touch with Mr. Sayler and that information is included in the information packet she submitted.  She added they would be able to file documents into evidence.  Commissioner Carey suggested the County Manager speak to Mr. de la Parte regarding this.  Chairman Horan spoke about Mr. de la Parte’s expertise.

Mr. Ryan submitted a petition (received and filed) from The Woodlands into the record.

Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.



     Bryant Applegate, County Attorney, noted that Assistant County Attorney David Shields sends out a master list of legislative bills to each lawyer who is charged with following up on the bills that impact the areas in which they represent their clients in the county, and they will continue to report back to Meloney Lung on that as well.


     There being no further business to come before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m., this same date.