BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
July 14, 2020
The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held virtually, made permissible pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Orders, at 1:30 p.m., on Tuesday, July 14, 2020, via Communications Media Technology (CMT) through the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.
Chairman Jay Zembower (District 2)
Vice Chairman Lee Constantine (District 3)
Commissioner Robert Dallari (District 1)
Commissioner Amy Lockhart (District 4)
Commissioner Brenda Carey (District 5)
County Manager Nicole Guillet
County Attorney Bryant Applegate
Deputy Clerks Chariti Colon and Kyla Farrell
Commissioner Dallari led the Pledge of Allegiance.
AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
Alan Harris, Office of Emergency Management, addressed the Board to report on the emergency management response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
COUNTY MANAGER’S REPORT/CARES Act Funding Update
Nicole Guillet, County Manager, presented and reviewed a PowerPoint entitled CARES Act Update, Seminole Cares, July 14, 2020 (received and filed). Her recommendation is to allocate the funds as proposed on page 8 and hold off on the additional $36 million and allocate it by either replenishing existing programs or establishing new programs as needed. She suggests providing a status at every board meeting and discussing shifting money based on the community needs.
Commissioner Carey expressed concerns regarding home-based businesses where the owner is the only employee, because a lot of people have a home-based business that is really just a hobby and they have a full-time job as well. They will need to demonstrate business interruption or closure, and they should be able to show, through a tax return or Seminole County business license, that it is a valid home-based business. Otherwise, the assistance funds might run out for valid home-based businesses. Ms. Guillet advised an owner with no employees can apply for up to $5,000 assistance under the individual program. Upon inquiry of Chairman Zembower, Ms. Guillet explained businesses are required to have been in business January 1, 2020, and operating as of February 29, 2020, under this program because it is intended to address business interruption.
Commissioner Carey expressed they should not disqualify someone who is a true home-based business with no employees from the small business grant if they can show proper documentation. Ms. Guillet explained the difference of how funds would be distributed between the Small Business Assistance and the Individual program. It will be a policy decision that can be revised as needed by the Board. Chairman Zembower stated he is fine with the way it is currently structured with the caveat it can be restructured if needed. Commissioner Dallari suggested trying it this way for 30 days and then changing it if needed. Commissioner Constantine stated they have to start somewhere and they can change it later if needed as it's monitored. Commissioner Carey stated she would like to also monitor how many people apply that are individual businesses such as hairdressers and nail technicians.
Commissioner Carey stated since they are going to talk about this at every meeting, they should know by the next meeting in two weeks how it is working. Ms. Guillet advised the portal won't be ready for three weeks. It is taking most counties 30 to 60 days to get started. Chairman Zembower commented he had previously spoke with staff to put up a list of items that the applicants will need so they can gather them now and have it ready as soon as the portal is operational. The Chairman directed staff to email all of the Commissioners with a measurement of the applications received before portal setup so they understand how everything is going, and Ms. Guillet responded they will do so. Commissioner Lockhart advised she would feel better knowing what the criteria will be for the individual program in regards to the businesses with no employees. Commissioner Carey stated she would like the information on the website with easy links to make it easier for citizens.
Ms. Guillet reported they are working with federal and state lobbyists to try to understand what kind of FEMA reimbursement the County would be eligible for, for this particular crisis. Ms. Guillet discussed the expenditure deadline and explained there are some things that have been identified internally and with governmental partners that will take some advanced planning. She is requesting latitude to work with their partners on time-sensitive matters due to the expenditure deadline. To make sure the Board is fully informed on what is being done and how the CARES Act funding is being allocated, they are working on a reporting dashboard to provide an update at every meeting.
Ms. Guillet concluded her presentation stating she would answer any questions and asked for a "head nod" that they are moving in the right direction. Chairman Zembower stated he is not interested in expending staff time to create a dashboard and would prefer a weekly email update. Commissioner Carey responded a simple dashboard is always helpful and a visual for the public is helpful as well. She would like to see how many home-based, individual, and small businesses applied and were rejected with an explanation of why they were rejected.
Commissioner Lockhart suggested the Small Business Development Center could be a good resource for workforce development and also a resource to help fund additional allocations there. Commissioner Carey recommended sending applicants there to fill out the applications. Commissioner Lockhart stated her message to staff is they want to make sure that everything is aboveboard and they are complying with the intent of the funds, but she does not want them to be gatekeepers to the point they don't get the money into the hands of the community as quickly as possible. Staff needs to hear from the Board that the intent is to get the money distributed.
Commissioner Carey stated any appeals should go to the County Manager. The Commissioner suggested the small business group at the Port would also be a good place for people to get help with the packets. Chairman Zembower added Career Source and the Chambers have also offered to help. Ms. Guillet advised they have engaged the Small Business Center. Commissioner Dallari stated the bottom message is they need to act quickly and concisely to make sure the money gets out to the public.
Chairman Zembower confirmed with Ms. Guillet that she had the consensus and direction needed from the Board. The Chairman also confirmed with Ms. Guillet that she was clear of the Board's expectations on reporting back to them.
With regard to public participation, no one spoke to the Consent Agenda, and public input was closed.
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Lockhart, to approve the following:
1. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Letter of Support to Ronald Batory, Administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), for FDOT’s Grant Application for the FRA’s Federal-State Partnership for the State of Good Repair Program in connection with SunRail Phase 2 South Capacity Improvement Project. (2020-2119)
2. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Purchase Agreement in the amount of $1,400 between property owners Malcolm McGinness and Janet E. McGinness and Seminole County for property interests necessary for the construction and maintenance of a sidewalk along a portion of Pressview Avenue and Highland Street. (2020-2110)
3. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the Interlocal Agreement regarding Cost Sharing in the amount of $220,000 to obtain Consultant Services between Seminole County, Orange County, Osceola County, Volusia County, and the City of Orlando; and endorse approval and implementation of the SunRail Consultant Services Escrow Agreement between the Central Florida Commuter Rail Commission (CFCRC) and the Seminole County Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller. (2020-2083)
4. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Purchase Agreement in the amount of $10,350 between property owner Linda Thomas and Seminole County for property interests necessary for the construction and maintenance of a sidewalk along a portion of Longwood Hills Road. (2020-2100)
5. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Purchase Agreement in the amount of $1,700 between property owners Lena Lindstrom and Kristopher W. Hofmann and Seminole County for property interests necessary for the construction and maintenance of a sidewalk along a portion of Virginia Avenue and Pineview Street; Warranty Deed. (2020-2101)
6. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Purchase Agreement in the amount of $2,920 between property owner Faramarz Sadri and Seminole County for property interests necessary for the construction and maintenance of a sidewalk along a portion of Virginia Avenue and Pineview Street. (2020-2099)
7. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the Amended and Restated Lease Number 4770 and the Partial Release of Lease No. 4770 between the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida, as Lessor, and Seminole County, Florida, as Lessee. (2020-2107)
8. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-72 accepting a (1) Drainage Easement, and (2) a Roadway and Drainage Easement, being donated by the City of Altamonte Springs to Seminole County related to the roadway improvements and continued maintenance of Pine Street running northerly off Bunnell Road. (2020-2087)
9. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Construction Agreement, and a Pedestrian Grade Crossing Maintenance Agreement with CSX Transportation, Inc. and pay them an advance deposit of One Hundred Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty-Four Dollars ($109,934) for crossing and signalizing at the Cross Seminole Trail Missing Link. (2020-2112)
10. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-73 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #20-066 through the 2001 Infrastructure Sales Tax Fund in the amount of $1,994,425 from reserves to provide additional funding for the Juvenile Assessment Center Expansion Project. (2020-XXXX)
11. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute Modification #1 to Subgrant Agreement #G0007 between the State of Florida, Division of Emergency Management, FY 2019/20 Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG), to reinstate and extend the term of the contract to September 30, 2020. (2020-2125)
Purchasing & Contracts
12. Approve Work Order #15 (Limited Scope Remedial Action Plan Implementation for the former Cumberland Farms Store #0980) under PS-1998-18/RTB, Master Services Agreement for General Environmental Services with E Sciences, Inc., of Orlando, in the amount of $234,013.32. (2020-2079)
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Bryant Applegate, County Attorney, explained the Tax Collector is selling a vacant lot at 750 Orange Avenue, Parcel #16-21-29-501-0000-0670, in Altamonte Springs. It is on the agenda because the title company will not issue title without the Board's approval of the sale, and he recommends approval.
Commissioner Carey stated she has no objection to the sale but did not see a closing statement in the documents. The Commissioner inquired of Mr. Applegate if he had seen a closing statement to see what the sale will net, and Mr. Applegate responded he did not.
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Lockhart, to approve Agreement for Sale and Purchase of Property, for vacant property located at 750 Orange Avenue, Altamonte Springs, Parcel #16-21-29-501-0000-0670, in the amount of $800,000, between property owner Seminole County Tax Collector and Flagship Companies Group, LLC. (2020-2130)
Under discussion, Chairman Carey stated she would like Mr. Applegate to request a copy of the closing statement. Mr. Applegate advised he had a discussion this morning with Acting Tax Collector Cynthia Torres, who was the assistant to the former Tax Collector, and their legal counsel. He will distribute the closing statement to all the Commission offices when it is received.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Item #14 – 2020-2126
Annual Urban Bear Management Update
Mike Orlando, Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC)
Mike Orlando, Bear Coordinator with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, addressed the Board and presented the Urban Bear Management Update (included in the Agenda Memorandum).
Chairman Zembower inquired since lockdown due to COVID, has there been an increase or decrease in call volume of bear sightings or complaints. Mr. Orlando responded call volume was very low and opined it was due to people being home and doing a lot of work on their homes and yards which kept bears away. However, since reopening, calls have started to increase.
Commissioner Dallari commented the recommendation in the presentation is that the eastern part of Oviedo will be under the Bear Management Program, and he wants to make sure the Oviedo City Council is the one actually helping dictate the boundaries. The Commissioner inquired if they have officially taken a stance. Meloney Lung, Assistant County Manager, responded they have. The Oviedo City Manager sent a letter, and staff has made the change to the ordinance which will be presented at the July 28th meeting. Upon inquiry of Commissioner Dallari, Mr. Orlando stated the FWC is supportive of anything the County suggests or recommends in making sure people are paying attention to the fact that they have bears and knowing the right things to do when they have bears.
Chairman Zembower recessed the meeting at 3:17 p.m., reconvening at 3:31 p.m. Deputy Clerk Chariti Colon was replaced by Deputy Clerk Kyla Farrell.
Item #15 – 2020-2127
Attainable Housing Strategic Plan Follow-up
Ms. Guillet advised there are some references in the presentation to the mobility fee and asked the Chairman if she should talk about that now or after the presentation, and the Chairman advised to do it now because he isn’t sure it’s detailed enough in the presentation for the public to understand the mobility fee aspect.
Ms. Guillet noted the presentation isn’t about the mobility fee but it is referenced and it may generate some discussion. She stated the mobility fee is scheduled to go before the Board on August 25. Staff started working on the mobility fee in 2018 as a replacement for the existing transportation impact fee. There have been a number of work sessions on it, and there was also a mobility fee working group set up with staff members from all of the cities to make sure that they were engaged. They worked out a system where a developer would not be charged a mobility fee from the County and the City as well.
There has been a lot of discussion on this with the Board and with staff. There was a Planning Commission meeting held in July and the item was tabled by that commission. It is rescheduled to go back to that commission in August and then before the Board. Unfortunately, a lot of what is being discussed in the community is not correct. There is a lot of misinformation so she thought it would be good to talk a little bit about it. She would like to postpone action on it at the August 25 meeting as well as any other fee revision that would burden citizens or the business community. She would like to postpone it for about six months and see what’s going on with COVID-19 and make sure that the right information gets out into the community. Ms. Guillet reviewed what a mobility fee is and noted it is a way to make sure that taxpayers aren’t burdened with infrastructure improvements. She advised it is not a tax. Discussion ensued.
It was determined the direction from the Board to Ms. Guillet was to proceed as scheduled. Ms. Guillet stated staff is prepared to proceed as scheduled. She explained currently it is structured so that it would become effective January 1. She asked if there is interest of the Board to adjust that or if they want to adjust it after the fact if they need to. Mr. Applegate advised at the time of the ordinance’s adoption, if the Board decides to adopt the mobility fee, they can decide at that point at the conclusion of the public hearing what date they want it to be effective.
Rebecca Hammock, Development Services Director, presented Attainable Housing Strategic Plan Follow-Up Work Session (received and filed).
Upon inquiry by Chairman Zembower, Ms. Hammock confirmed Orange County, the City of Orlando, and Osceola County are involved in the study. Commissioner Dallari stated he knows they have various key stakeholders but he wants to make sure they actually ask some residents as well for their input. One thing he has been talking about is the transportation element and how to define it. No one has been able to articulate what that transportation element needs to be and at what distance it needs to be. He wants to make sure that they are identifying what that definition is. When they look at inclusionary zones, he wants to make sure they look at how that’s going to be played out when it comes to transportation and that those zones are in close proximity to transit. Commissioner Dallari asked if staff has heard any input from the public and advised he thinks they should be making presentations to the public. Ms. Hammock replied they could do that if that’s what the Board wants.
Commissioner Lockhart stated this is a complex topic and certainly information and input from the public is great. Along with asking for input from the public, she would hope they are also offering the public the opportunity to give educated input so they know how all of these different elements can ultimately benefit the affordable housing stock in the community. Chairman Zembower suggested they have a standing FAQ for each and every one of these issues that come along that the public can access on the County’s website. Commissioner Carey stated the easiest way to educate people who are interested is hearing from them and then responding back to them.
Stakeholder presentations began with Kody Glazer, Legal Director, Florida Housing Coalition (presentation received and filed).
Commissioner Lockhart expressed her concerns regarding inclusionary zoning. However, she does think there is some merit to having a mixed product, and she is interested in how to incentivize that. She asked how they can work with the folks who are just in the marketplace in the regular for-profit realm to make it a little bit more of a velvet sledgehammer. Mr. Glazer responded it is very important to have a conversation at the very beginning about what kinds of incentives will get people interested. A lot of tools the local government has, they can waive: things like density, parking, impact fees, even rezoning a piece of land from agricultural to residential. It starts with a conversation with the developers, knowing the numbers about the cost of development locally, and knowing how much it would cost to build affordable units. Commissioner Lockhart stated when they talk about working with other organizations and non-profits, the state college has just implemented a housing foundation and there’s an opportunity to maybe do something cooperatively with them in the realm of student housing and affordable housing on some property. She asked Mr. Glazer if he knew how affordable housing and student housing might possibly live together. Mr. Glazer answered it depends whether or not the college is willing to front the land or front some of the development cost; it depends on the partnership. Commissioner Lockhart asked if he knows of any other partnerships in the region or in the state that would have an educational provider, someone in higher education, partnering with local government to do that, and Mr. Glazer responded he can do some research and get back with her. He discussed school boards using surplus land for affordable housing.
Commissioner Dallari asked if there are any examples in and around the state of Florida, besides Seaside and Baldwin Park, that they should look at and would this also promote student housing in neighborhoods. Mr. Glazer stated it really depends on the geographic region what they want it to be; they can exclude neighborhoods, have it just around mixed-use corridors. It can be very flexible in terms of where in the county they target these programs. In regard to examples besides Seaside and Baldwin Park, Mr. Glazer discussed Lake Nona.
Commissioner Carey stated when you look at Seminole County, there aren’t really any huge tracts anymore to be available. While nobody called it inclusionary zoning or affordable housing or attainable housing, when they did Heathrow, there was every kind of housing variety there from $110,000 condominiums to $3 million to $4 million homes. She thinks that’s how they used to develop subdivisions and they have kind of gotten away from that, but the key is that the incentive has to be appealing enough to really encourage the private developer to want to do it. She added having all the tools in their toolbelt is important moving forward to really reach their goals.
Chairman Zembower asked if Mr. Glazer has done any studies to see whether or not there is going to be a greater need for affordable housing due to the impact of COVID-19. Mr. Glazer replied at the very early stage of the pandemic when things were shut down quite a bit, housing construction did swell. Florida has had an affordable housing shortage for a while now, so one solid way to fix that is supply. They are looking at the number of new homes being built while the pandemic is going on. They are also keeping an eye on evictions and foreclosures.
Commissioner Lockhart advised in a memo she had received May 3 from the County Attorney’s Office, Mr. Applegate had recommended they pull together a chart of the moderate-low, very-low, and extremely-low categories; a chart listing median income, median price of homes, and the median price of one-, two-, three-, and four-bedroom apartments; along with the starting salaries in Seminole County for teachers, firefighters, nurses, law enforcement, and service industry employees. She stated if they could get that relevant information for Seminole County all on one chart, it would be helpful.
The next stakeholder, Scott Culp, Atlantic Housing Partners, Inc. and Seminole County AHAC Representative, provided his presentation (received and filed).
Chairman Zembower asked Mr. Culp what the percentage is of seniors that take advantage of affordable rental properties, and Mr. Culp replied they have a number of senior communities in Florida and they are even part of the workforce. Mr. Culp continued, they see a lot of seniors on fixed income and taking part-time jobs; and they are also a very strong contributor to their communities. Commissioner Dallari asked what the biggest mistakes are that Mr. Culp is aware of so the County can be aware of them and not repeat them. Mr. Culp answered his biggest personal mistake would be thinking that the housing solution for the workforce and seniors was also a solution for the homeless and by providing housing you could somehow solve some of that. He has learned through difficult experiences that partnering with the social service groups, and the people that know that well and those professionals, is extremely important. The homeless issue in Florida and all over the nation is a social services issue, it’s a mental health issue, but it’s not really a housing issue. Commissioner Carey stated she really liked the idea of calling it “capacity enhancement” because inclusionary zoning does conjure up all kinds of ideas. The incentives have got to be really meaningful or otherwise for-profit developers are just not going to do it. Commissioner Lockhart stated she was always under the impression that developers did not like the phrase “capacity enhancement.” She may be looking for a different phrase because one person’s phrase means something entirely different to another group of people.
Chip Tatum, Chief Executive Officer, and Lee Steinhauer, Government Affairs & Legal Counsel, Apartment Association of Greater Orlando (AAGO), presented their presentation (received and filed).
Commissioner Constantine advised Chairman Zembower needed to leave. Commissioner Carey stated the federal programs have so many requirements and restrictions on them and you have to have the right location. All of the demographics have to line up and you have to be able to find a site in that area. She thinks that having the right incentives to encourage people to do this is the most important part and having those conversations with the people that provide that kind of services is how they will understand what is most meaningful. Commissioner Lockhart asked if Mr. Steinhauer would agree that the single-family homebuilder has similar thoughts as the Apartment Association, and Mr. Steinhauer answered he would fully agree on the single-family side. Commissioner Lockhart asked if he is tracking development in communities where inclusionary zoning is in place since 7103. Mr. Steinhauer replied they have not seen any good examples currently in regard to inclusionary zoning ordinances that predate 7103, and they have not seen anyone who has been able to satisfy 7103 effectively or any new inclusionary zonings that didn’t predate 7103 being in affect; and Mr. Tatum agreed.
Kelly Pisciotta, Habitat for Humanity, discussed the Cost of Home Coalition and its three goals. She wanted to make sure the Board was aware they have a group of business people who are working on this issue for over ten months at this point. There were no questions from the Board.
George St. Pierre, Fidelity, was scheduled to present, but Ms. Hammock advised she received an email from Mr. St. Pierre stating his laptop died. She informed him that there is a call-in option, but they may need to move on to the next speaker. Commissioner Constantine advised Chairman Zembower has returned.
Frankie Elliot, VP of Government Affairs & Foundation Relations, Orlando Regional Realtor Association, gave her presentation (received and filed). Commissioner Lockhart stated she didn’t realize they didn’t have the Orlando Regional Realtors Association as a stakeholder a part of the conversation. Ms. Elliot replied Ms. Hammock has been great and she has had a great working relationship with her and Mr. Tatum and Mr. Steinhauer. They always work together on these issues.
That concluded the stakeholder presentations.
Ms. Hammock reviewed Next Steps of the Attainable Housing Strategic Plan from her presentation. She pointed out once they finalize the strategic plan, staff will present it to the Board for acceptance at an upcoming meeting.
Melody Frederick, Community Services Compliance Officer, discussed HB 1339, Required Board Appointment to Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. She advised it requires a Commissioner to serve on the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee going forward. As part of that, the Commissioner who is serving is required to participate in two work sessions each year, and the participation in those work sessions can be tied to the SHIP funding, so if there’s not participation from that member, the funds could potentially be held. On top of that, there’s some additional reporting and items that they’d have to provide as a result. At some point the Board will need to decide who would like to serve on the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. Ms. Frederick indicated they have to have that nomination of that person completed by October 1. Chairman Zembower stated he sat on that committee before, and wondered if they still have somebody from Planning and Zoning that sits on that committee. Ms. Frederick answered they do, but the requirement for a Commissioner is in addition to that person. Chairman Zembower announced he is happy to serve on that committee if it’s the will of the Board, but he’s also happy to let any others serve.
Commissioner Carey stated she thinks they need to figure out a better name for inclusionary zoning but that it is a good tool to have and a great tool to use to do an overlay area where they really want to encourage redevelopment where there is transportation. She added that the incentives need to be the right incentives and the only way they’re going to understand what they are today is to talk to the development community and understand what really is meaningful. They need to look at where they want development to occur. Commissioner Carey advised she doesn’t think that they need a housing finance authority at this time because they have not had any issues. It is important that they try to make sure affordable housing is in areas where there are good transportation options. Regarding impact fee studies, she thinks they are doing that now. She thinks they should not be shortsighted on looking for the amount of time they want to be affordable because that’s been part of the problem. She shared her opinion about linkage fees. The Commissioner stated they’ve talked about this for a long time and it’s a hard problem. It’s really not the homeless issue; affordable and attainable housing is not the homeless-issue solution. This is workforce. This is people that need to be able to live here in our community and not have to commute. Having a mix of price point and options, whether it be for rent product along with for sale product and townhomes with single-family homes, that provides the flexibility to provide a variety of housing options in one location. Those are some of the things she thinks they should focus on moving forward with.
Commissioner Constantine noted on Next Steps, he believes staff needs to reach out to the citizens and have a work session with the citizens because it’s their future that they’re dealing with right now with affordable housing. Many of them have a misunderstanding of what affordable housing, attainable housing, and workforce housing really is. They really need to get out front of this. Commissioner Dallari agreed they need to be educating the citizens and getting their input. He added there was a lot of great information today and they need to move forward with it. He thinks renaming some of the terms so they don’t have a negative connotation would be the right thing to do. He also wants to make sure citizens and realtors are involved.
Commissioner Lockhart stated she is not as enamored by inclusionary zoning no matter what they call it in its current form as presented. Maybe if there’s some other way that it could be implemented on a smaller scale or in a particular corridor that they identify, but she sees more heartburn over that than hope. She is not interested in charging impact fees for accessory dwelling units, she doesn’t see any reason to go down that path. Commissioner Lockhart inquired about the draft ordinance, and Ms. Hammock stated the draft ordinances were originally provided as part of the work session materials back in February. This work session was just a follow-up with the industry experts and stakeholders, but she did resend a copy of the draft strategic plan because one of the offices asked for it. Ms. Hammock noted there are no changes from the draft ordinance that was distributed in February. Commissioner Lockhart is a little concerned about waiting for feedback from the community at large on this topic in order to move forward just because it is such a weedy topic. She loves hearing from industry experts and stakeholders and other folks in the community that they can identify, but she doesn’t know how they’re going to get feedback that’s necessarily usable for staff in a short period of time that’s going to be able to be implemented just from the general public. Chairman Zembower stated he agrees pretty much with what his fellow Commissioners have said. He would like to see it move along and he’s happy to participate in any community outreach meetings. The FAQs that they talked about would go a long way in the public understanding what’s really going on. Commissioner Dallari noted his issue with inclusionary zoning is how it would affect existing communities.
Chairman Zembower asked Ms. Guillet if she is clear on what the Board wants and is looking for in the way of informing the public in a quick, expedient, easy-to-follow format on this topic. Ms. Guillet replied they will figure it out. She added she is more interested in Ms. Hammock understanding what it is because she will be doing the heavy lifting. She commented she thinks it’s a great idea to have current topics on the website and FAQs.
With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke, and public input was closed; and the Chairman adjourned the work session.
Chairman Zembower noted the time and asked if the Board would like to proceed with the next work session, and the Board decided to proceed.
Item #16 – 2020-2128
Infrastructure Sales Tax Assessment
Phil Kutz, Jacobs Engineering
Phil Kutz, Program Manager, and Matt Lamb, Program Principal, Jacobs Engineering, began a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Seminole County Sales Tax Referendum Program Improvements – Update” (received and filed). Chairman Zembower asked if the projects that are listed in the presentation are all sales tax projects, and Mr. Kutz answered they are projects that are listed in the referendum, master plan, and defined as “not on the list.” There was an extensive question-and-answer period between the Chariman and Mr. Kutz.
Commissioner Carey stated the annual validation process is a critical piece of this. By having all of the projects loaded and ready to go, including the 2040 plan, if they have excess dollars, they know where to spend then and if they are short, they know what they need to do. Her main concern is that they make sure that they get into the construction piece of what’s been committed in the third generation and make sure they get first, second, and third generation done as soon as possible. The Commissioner expressed one of the big issues they’ve had is trying to get it pushed out. Having mandatory procedures and processes in one depository and being able to have everybody access it and get any of the information is so important to the success of the project. It also eliminates a lot of redundancy. If the County Manager, Department Manager, everybody in that department, and leadership don’t require the procedure to be followed, it is going to fail. Commissioner Carey stated she is glad to know that they can take Prolog and run the various reports and whatever somebody might be asking for, but she thinks it’s incumbent on the County Manager and the departments to make sure that they have processes, procedures, protocols, training, and mentoring. She thinks they need the integrated process to make sure they have the experts to get that done.
Commissioner Dallari stated they need to make sure when changes are made, people have the right access capabilities so that not just anyone can change numbers. He discussed congestion management. He advised part of the water and sewer project was a water-wheeling project on how to move water from one side of the county to another, and he wants to make sure they’re only ripping up the road once and that they’re taking advantage of the road or corridor once they go into construction. Mr. Kutz replied he spoke with the Environmental Services director regarding prioritization.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Lockhart, Mr. Kutz discussed P6 and Prolog. Commissioner Lockhart asked who ultimately is going to be able to determine whether or not external resources are qualified, hired, and brought on board. Mr. Kutz answered the external resources are the consultants. Any other external resources are teams they already have in place, like external design managers and local engineering firms that are doing the design work as well as CEI services; they are already existing contracts. They then discussed ten FTEs and who was responsible for filling those positions. Ms. Guillet stated Commissioner Lockhart’s concerns are related to the project management side and not the program management side. It’s a little bit different, and that’s going to get absorbed into this. They were having some challenges and maybe some disagreement as to who was qualified and who wasn’t, but it was a different circumstance than what they’re talking about right now. Commissioner Lockhart confirmed with Ms. Guillet that they shouldn’t encounter those challenges with this. Commissioner Lockhart noted she agrees with Commissioner Dallari regarding congestion being heavily weighted in prioritization moving forward. She likes that they are proposing to utilize SharePoint because she thinks it is a great tool and easily accessible for everyone. She asked when the contract with Jacobs expires. Jean Jreij, Environmental Services Director, answered they have two contracts with Jacobs. One will expire in December 2020 and the other will expire April 2021. He noted it shouldn’t impact the rollout of anything because they will issue work orders and advertise for a new contract. Discussion ensued.
Commissioner Carey stated having seamless continuity in these programs is extremely important because getting the program rolled out is the primary purpose of hiring a consultant to start with. She asked how many design teams they have, and Mr. Jreij answered they have five consultants and that contract expires at the end of the year. They just advertised and selected six to go to the Board for approval at the next meeting.
Commissioner Carey advised her opinion is Option 2 is the best way to move forward and discussed why.
With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke, and public input was closed.
Chairman Zembower asked if staff was clear on direction. Ms. Guillet replied she would like to hear clearly from the Board if they want staff to move forward as recommended which is Option 2. Chairman Zembower advised they are not going to take a vote on it, they will just give consensus of where they are at. He stated he doesn’t have a problem with the recommendation, but he would like to see a little more detail on Option 2. Commissioner Dallari agreed with Chairman Zembower. Commissioner Lockhart agreed with Option 2. Commissioner Constantine stated he is okay with Option 2, but he would also like a lot more information. Chairman Zembower asked if whoever needs to can supply the additional information that is being requested. Ms. Guillet answered they will. She explained she is going to work with staff and Jacobs and they will move in the direction of Option 2. While they are moving in that direction, they will get with everyone who needs more information just so they can make sure everybody is on the same page, but it sounds like conceptually everybody is there.
Chairman Zembower stated he doesn’t care to know how the process works, how the program works, who designed it, how to look it up, or anything like that. He wants to see some numbers on what the investment is, what the return on that investment is for the number of projects that are getting pushed out, and the time frame. This is going to be an expensive undertaking so he needs to have a comfort level on what the cost at the end of the day is going to be versus what actually gets pushed out the door and gets done. Ms. Guillet stated perhaps they could take the next couple of weeks and bring something back for more of a formal blessing on July 28.
Listing of Speakers and Final Registrants received and filed.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 7:42 p.m., this same date.