BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
December 8, 2020
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, December 8, 2020, in Room 1028 of the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.
Present:
Chairman Lee Constantine (District 3)
Vice Chairman Amy
Lockhart (District 4)
Commissioner Robert Dallari (District 1)
Commissioner Jay Zembower (District 2)
Commissioner Andria Herr (District 5)
County Manager
Nicole Guillet
County Attorney Bryant Applegate
Deputy County Attorney Desmond Morrell
Clerk of Court and Comptroller Grant Maloy
Deputy
Clerks Terri Porter and Chariti Colon
OPENING CEREMONIES
Pastor
George Stephens, Riverwalk Church of God, Sanford, gave the invocation. Commissioner Dallari led
the Pledge of Allegiance.
EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT UPDATE
Alan Harris, Chief Administrator for the Office of
Emergency Management, presented a PowerPoint (received and filed) and addressed
the Board to report on the COVID-19 situation in the county, around the state,
and in the nation. He noted today is day
271 in the Emergency Operations Center, which is clearly the longest activated
EOC operational period that they have ever had.
Commissioner Dallari requested a list of staff involved so they can be
thanked appropriately. All Board members
shared their comments and appreciation.
CARES
ACT UPDATE
County Manager Nicole Guillet presented the CARES Act
Update (presentation received and filed).
She advised they will have just about everything wrapped up with the
cities, agencies and Constitutionals by the end of the year. They will have to do a couple of
administrative accommodations for projects that will not quite be finished by
December 30th for the county, a couple of the cities, and one or two
constitutionals, but everything else will be wrapped up by December 30th. Their actual expenditures to date, which
include what they have actually cut checks for or have made commitments through
contracts, for instance the agreement with the School Board, are at $73
million. By the end of the year, they
expect to have spent everything except for about $4.5 million.
Ms. Guillet summarized that the County received $20
million up front. On November 16, they
got the second allocation, which was a little over $16 million, and on December
3, they submitted the paperwork to request reimbursement of the remaining $45
million. They are close to that number
because they were able to do the Public Safety salary reimbursement scenario
that they talked about at the last meeting.
She noted they had great cooperation with the Sheriff’s Office on that.
Ms. Guillet stated that she will ask them today to
authorize the overall allocations as she has at all the other meetings. They are not sure what comes next. Congress has been talking about another
assistance package. There are three
different versions being discussed. The
democratic version has quite a bit of money for state and local governments,
the Senate version has no money for state and local governments, and there is a
bipartisan compromise bill that has $160 billion in there for state and local
governments. She noted this will
continue to be an issue for them and the community beyond January 1 and
reiterated the County has about $4.5 million that they can set aside, and they
have some additional funds through the CDBG program for individual assistance
that do not expire until 2022. She did
ask the Deputy County Manager to reach out to their advocates in Washington to
try to see if there is a way that they can get some provisions put in that any
local government money would come directly to local governments and not funnel
through the state.
Commissioner Dallari stated he agrees with the County
Manager that they should be going to their federal lobbyist. He also thinks they should be going to NACo, which is the National Association of Counties as well
as NARC, National Association of Regional Councils. He noted he was the past president and would
be more than happy to help with that. He
added if they get the entire country through NACo or
through NARC, he thinks that would be advantageous.
Motion by
Commissioner Zembower, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt the
recommendation of the County Manager for the additional request for the
Seminole CARES Act Funding.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
AWARDS
AND PRESENTATIONS
Agenda Item #1 – 2020-2434
Motion by Commissioner
Zembower, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt a Proclamation recognizing United States
Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Nicholas F.J. Wyborski,
Retired, as Seminole County's December Veteran of the Month.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4,
and 5 voted AYE.
Agenda Item #2 – 2020-2437
Motion by Commissioner
Lockhart, seconded by Commissioner Zembower, to approve and authorize the
Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-140 recognizing Debra Edge, upon her retirement, for 35 years of service to Seminole
County Government and its citizens. The
resolution was presented to Senior Assistant County Attorney David Shields in
her absence.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4,
and 5 voted AYE.
Agenda Item #3 – 2020-2436
Motion by Commissioner
Herr, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to approve and authorize the Chairman
to execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-141 recognizing Joanne Fink as the
Artist of the Year. The resolution was
presented to the Seminole Cultural Arts Council in her absence.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4,
and 5 voted AYE.
COUNTY ATTORNEY BRIEFING
Bryant Applegate, County
Attorney, distributed an information package to the Board in connection with his
briefing today (received and filed).
-------
Mr. Applegate reported he
was on the phone a few minutes ago with the Governor’s Council’s Office, and
they are trying to work out a plan to have the appointment made for the Tax
Collector prior to January. He noted it
may necessitate his calling a special meeting. He thanked Susan Smith of the Governor’s
Council’s Office.
-------
Mr. Applegate said for
his end-of-the-year County Attorney’s Report, they exceeded over 1,200 formal
work requests, which does not include phone calls, litigation, special projects
or transaction work. He noted that he
summarized what each of the attorneys had worked on and special projects, and
with the hiring of a replacement for Debra Edge, he considers his office to be
at full strength, and that is with three less positions from when he started in
2011.
-------
The next report Mr.
Applegate talked about was on redistricting saying it just summarizes the
basics on redistricting. He will be
working with the County Manager, GIS (Geographic Information System) and
Information Services. Traditionally, an
ordinance is adopted, usually in the month of August when the redistricting
occurs.
-------
Mr. Applegate indicated
he asked David Shields, in light of the major amendment that the BCC members
approved to the Purchasing Code, to do a short memo summarizing the different
types of proposals, acronyms, and definitions of some of the basic contracts.
-------
Mr. Applegate noted the
Board is aware that the voters approved an amendment to their Constitution
preventing Counties from making Constitutional Officers Charter Officers. He reported on the Alachua County case that is
currently pending before the Supreme Court in connection with the Sheriff’s
authority to transfer funds once the budget is approved by the County
Commission. He will keep the Board
informed, but the Third District Court of Appeals ruled against Alachua County
and in favor of the Alachua County Sheriff ruling that they have the ability to
move items within their budget.
-------
Mr. Applegate opined they
all recognize that the new Tax Collector is going to do a great job, but the
citizens do not understand that the Commission does not have any authority over
the Tax Collector’s budget, even though they have objected in the past few
years over some of the absurd requests that were made. He noted it is up to the Department of Revenue
to approve that budget. So, in a memo,
he suggested some possible amendments to the statute on the Tax Collector’s
budget process that would give a Board of County Commissioners at least the
authority to (1) object in writing, and (2) require the Department of Revenue
to respond to those objections.
-------
In regard to opioid
litigation, Mr. Applegate advised, as predicted, when they first entered the
litigation a couple of years ago, they knew the State was going to get involved
at some point. It looks like a number of
State Attorney Generals are going to get involved and somehow, some way, they
are going to get the State involved on how the money is going to be
distributed. Some of the defendants have
recently declared bankruptcy.
-------
Mr. Applegate stated that
in the binder he provided is a summary of the Commission on Ethics Opinions he
referred to in their ethics training last week.
-------
Mr.
Applegate indicated he has asked Paul Chipok, Deputy
County Attorney, to provide a summary of the SunRail saga of 2020, a
compilation of key documents in chronological order. They are currently working on a memo regarding
issues they have talked about with agritourism in A-1. He has decided, unless the Board requests it,
that he is not going to request an Attorney General opinion, because he thinks
he knows what the answer will be. He
will let them know more on an individual basis as it goes on.
AWARDS
AND PRESENTATIONS (Continued)
Agenda Item #4 – 2020-2435
Commissioner Dallari
stated as MetroPlan Orlando’s Chair, he can attest to
the efforts that Bike/Walk Central Florida has been doing over the past number
of years. In fact, for around nine
years, they have immersed the values of the Best Foot Forward program by
bringing that to the community via MetroPlan. The draft of the MetroPlan
2040 plan shifted from significant road capacity building projects to more
complete street projects and multimodal projects improving bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure in this region, with an increase towards funding
those projects for equality of importance of educating drivers, such as kids
and young drivers, of the rules of the road.
He noted a few weeks ago, a Seminole County Citizen on Patrol struck and
killed an individual at a Seminole County crosswalk. A few days later, a female pedestrian was
struck and killed by a speeding vehicle.
Pedestrian fatalities are happening far too often, and they need to
continue working with their partners in the county and the region, and Best
Foot Forward is one of those partners.
He thanked Amanda Day for all of her hard work saying she actually
started Best Food Forward as a volunteer nine years ago. He thinks they have just scratched the
surface. Safety is one of the primary
things they have got to focus on here in Seminole County and Central Florida,
and they have all seen the report, Dangerous by Design. Central Florida is number one in the country;
Orlando or Central Florida is number three in the state. He opined education is the key. He added he appreciates the Executive
Director’s hard work and is looking forward to the presentation.
The Chairman recessed the meeting at 10:45 a.m., reconvening at 10:50
a.m.
Emily Hanna addressed the Board stating
she is the new Executive Director of Bike/Walk Central Florida, which is the
non-profit advocacy organization who administers the Best Foot Forward program,
and it is on behalf of their coalition partners. She advised she will present the Best Foot
Forward program, its history, Seminole County’s participation, and how Seminole
County can continue to put their best foot forward. (PowerPoint presentation received and filed.)
Commissioner Herr asked that they
display the slide entitled Driver Yield Rates Improve by 37% with BFF’s Influence. She said she thinks they are underselling
themselves because their rate increased by roughly 142% and the good work they
are doing is worthy of that press.
Commissioner Dallari said he wanted to
have this presentation because he thinks it is imperative that they continue to
educate the public about safety. It is
very difficult to adequate how much it actually should cost, but he believes
when they are bringing in an organization like Best Foot Forward, they can
leverage their programs that they have been doing in Orange and Osceola County
and through MetroPlan. He added he thinks they should be moving
forward with this to continue to educate their public. Speaking to staff, he believes that some of
the funds could easily be looked at through the educational piece of the
one-cent sales tax; he would like to see how they can leverage those funds with
the one-cent sales tax. Chairman
Zembower said he would support that request.
Commissioner Lockhart indicated when she
had an opportunity to meet with Amanda Day some months ago, she pointed out
that Seminole County is not one of their funding partners right now. She wanted to know what the total ask was
from Best Foot Forward at this point.
Ms. Hanna responded it is $60,000 annually for the program.
Commissioner Dallari remarked that as
much as he is in favor of Bike/Walk Central Florida, he does want to make sure
that the checks and balances are there.
He thinks they should be getting a presentation and reviewing it on an
annual basis to make sure that they are moving forward, because the number
could go up or the number could go down.
He is asking to fund Bike/Walk Central Florida through the one-cent
sales tax with the educational dollars.
Motion by
Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Zembower, to direct staff to
look into providing funding to Bike/Walk Central Florida in the amount of
$60,000, on an annual basis, through the one-cent sales tax educational
dollars.
Commissioner Zembower suggested a friendly
amendment to ask staff that if they cannot find the funds in the one-cent
sales tax dollars, to find them somewhere and bring back to the Board where the
funding would come from. Commissioner Dallari as the motioner
agreed.
Commissioner Lockhart added that when staff
brings this back that they include whatever metrics it is they are going to
monitor and what would be required in order to ensure that the annual funding
is still available to them. She believes
they need to make sure they have some measures in place, as with all of the
funds that they give to outside organizations and partner organizations. Chairman Constantine stated that there has
been a second friendly amendment which was agreed to by the motioner and seconder.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
CONSENT AGENDA
Ms. Guillet
advised that staff is pulling Item #29 because the vendor called yesterday and
withdrew. She asked that Item #41 and
#42 be added to the Consent Agenda.
Since they do not have the ability to renumber agenda items in their
system, they were tacked on to the end of the agenda.
With regard
to public participation, no one spoke in support or opposition to the Consent
Agenda, and public input was closed.
Commissioner
Herr requested that Item #8, 2021
Insurance Renewals, be pulled for separate discussion.
Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded
by Commissioner Zembower, to approve the following:
Business
Office
5. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute the First Amendment to Subrecipient Agreement between Seminole County
and Seminole State College of Florida relating to CARES Act Funding. (2020-2441)
6. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute the Second Amendment to the CARES Act Interlocal Agreement between
Seminole County Government and the School Board of Seminole County Public
Schools. (2020-2442)
7. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute the CARES Act Funding Agreement between Seminole County and BRE Apex
Property Owner, LLC d/b/a Residence Inn Orlando Lake Mary, a County
select-service hotel. (2020-2433)
Human Resources
8. Pulled for separate discussion.
Tourism Development
9. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-142 providing tournament personnel the
ability to utilize golf carts on a specific segment of Lake Markham and South
Sylvan Lake Roads for the Elite Clubs National League (ECNL) Girls' Tournament
on January 8-10, 2021, and the ECNL Boys' Tournament on January 22-24, 2021. (2020-2429)
Community Services
Business Office
10. Approve the re-appointment of Donna
Walsh, Health Officer, Florida Department of Health, Seminole County, for a
two-year (2) term to the Board of Directors of the Local Health Council of East
Central Florida, Inc. (2020-2446)
11. Adopt and authorize the Chairman to
execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-143 amending certain fees set forth in
Section 20.26 of the Seminole County Administrative Code pertaining to fees and
charges for services provided by the Seminole County Health Department. (2020-2410)
Development Services
Planning and Development
12. Authorize release of Performance Bond
#3238533 for pavement, curbs, and sidewalks, in the amount of $44,153.77, for
Allure on the Parkway; Carriage Encore, LLC, Applicant. (2020-2393)
13. Adopt and authorize the Chairman to
execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-144 vacating and abandoning a portion of
a (5) five-foot-wide platted Utility Easement on Lot 10, Woodbridge at the
Springs Unit II, as recorded in the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida
in Plat Book 21, Page 34, more particularly known as 110 Springside Court; 110
Springside Ct LLC, Applicant. (2020-2447)
14. Authorize release of Performance Bond
#CMS0339730 for water and sewer facilities, in the amount of $26,635.37, for
Cadence Park f/k/a Evergreen; M/I Homes of Orlando, LLC, Applicant. (2020-2407)
Public Works
Engineering
15. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute a Purchase Agreement in the amount of $4,750 between Shane J. Davis,
owner, and Seminole County for property interests necessary for the
construction and maintenance of a sidewalk along a portion of Longwood Hills
Road. (2020-2378)
16. Approve and authorize the Chairman
execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-145 and updated Drainage Easement
between Paradise Community Club, Inc., and Seminole County for property
interests necessary for the construction and maintenance of an upgraded drainage
facility to improve the water quality of Bear Lake. (2020-2406)
17. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute Amendment Number One to Lease Number 4770 between the Board of Trustees
of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida, as Lessor, and
Seminole County, Florida, Lessee, for the Cross Seminole Trail. (2020-2408)
41. Consent Agenda Item number not sequential
- Approve and authorize the Chairman
to execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-155 implementing Budget Amendment
Request (BAR) #21-020 through the Public Works Grant Fund in the amount of
$1,542,000 from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the design
of roundabouts on SR 434. (2020-2443)
42. Consent Agenda Item number not sequential
- Approve
and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-146 and
Off-System Construction and Maintenance Agreement, FM #415030-6-52-01, between
the State of Florida, Department of Transportation, and Seminole County
relating to the construction and maintenance of the County Road 419 portion of
State Road 426/County Road 419 Widening Phase II from Pine Avenue to Avenue B. (2020-2416)
Resource Management
Budget
18. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-147; and submittal of an Emergency
Medical Services (EMS) Trust Grant Application in the amount of $66,745 from
the State of Florida Department of Health to be used for the purchase of
Procure Image Trend Continuum Software Add-on and Cadaver Lab for the County. (2020-2418)
19. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute a State Financial Assistance Recipient Agreement, FDACS Contract
#27302, with the State of Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services Mosquito Control Program; authorize the County Manager to execute any
documents associated with the grant including amendments; and execute
appropriate Resolution #2020-R-148 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR)
#21-012 in the amount of $57,532.25 through the Mosquito Control Grant Fund
which includes additional $9,043.33 in grant funds and $48,488.92 in
carryforward funds from the Fiscal Year 2019/20 Mosquito Zika grant. (2020-2415)
20. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-149 implementing Budget Amendment
Request (BAR) #21-013 through the MSBU Program Fund to appropriate budget of
$362,000 from Reserves for MSBU Program Projects. (2020-2394)
21. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute Modification #1 to Subgrant Agreement, Contract #H0348, with the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
(HMGP) for the Oliver Road Drainage Project to increase the total grant funding
by $28,348.50; and execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-150 implementing
Budget Amendment Request (BAR) # 21-014 through the Federal Mitigation Grant
Fund in the amount of $28,348.50 to increase funding for the project. (2020-2420)
22. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-151 implementing Budget Amendment
Request (BAR) #21-015 through the Transportation Trust Fund to transfer $8,152
from Traffic Engineering Operating to Capital for the purchase of a new locator. (2020-2422)
23. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
appropriate Resolution #2020-R-152 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR)
21-016 through the 2014 Infrastructure Sales Tax Fund in the amount of $445,775
from Reserves for additional funding for the Smith Canal-Monroe Basin
Stormwater Study (CIP#02007111). (2020-2419)
24. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute a Federally Funded Subaward and Grant Agreement, Contract #R0300, with
the State of Florida Division of Emergency Management in acceptance of $23,000
for the WebEOC software project; and to execute
appropriate Resolution #2020-R-153 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR)
#21-017 through the Public Safety Grant (Federal) Funds in the amount of
$23,000 to establish funding. (2020-2423)
25. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-154 implementing Budget Amendment
Request (BAR) #21-019 in the amount of $226,850 through the General Fund to
carryforward remaining CARES Act funding for election activities. (2020-2448)
MSBU
26. Approve and authorize the Chairman to
execute the Satisfaction of Liens for the Rolling Hills Environmental
Remediation MSBU non-ad valorem capital assessments that have been paid in
full; Michael and Dana Coppola and Herbert and Patricia Hinely. (2020-2430)
Purchasing & Contracts
27. Waive the Procurement Process and
authorize a Proprietary Source Procurement SS-604021-20/LNF for the purchase of
belt filter presses for Andritz equipment refurbishment, currently used at the
Water Reclamation Facilities, from Andritz Separation Inc., Dallas, TX; and
authorize the Purchasing and Contracts Division to issue a Purchase Order in
the amount of $153,900. (2020-2412)
28. Award IFB-603974-20/CAR, Term Contract
for Hydrant and Valve Maintenance, Repair, and Flushing Services, to Hydromax USA, Plant City; and R&M Service Solutions,
LLC, West Palm Beach; and authorize the Purchasing and Contracts Division to
execute the Agreements. (2020-2426)
29. Pulled from the agenda request to award
RFP-603892-20/BJC, Interactive Voice Recognition (IVR) Solution, to Noble
Systems Corporation, Atlanta, GA; and authorize the Purchasing and Contracts
Division to execute the Agreement. (2020-2403)
30. Award IFB-603941-20/TLR, Term Contract
for Showcase Trails Landscape Maintenance, to Crew Labor Maintenance Management
Group, LLC, Sanford; and authorize the Purchasing and Contracts Division to
execute the Agreement (2020-2376)
31. Award RFP-603939-20/TLR, Consulting
Services for SunRail Transition Plan to WSP USA Inc., Orlando; and authorize
the Purchasing and Contracts Division to execute the Agreement. (2020-2297)
Risk Management
32. Approve a full and complete settlement of
any and all claims, rights, and actions whatsoever that the Plaintiff may have
against Seminole County for the total amount of $190,000, inclusive of
attorney's fees, in Case No. 2019-CA-0813-08-L, Gina Lovely vs. Seminole
County, Florida; and authorize staff and counsel to execute all necessary
settlement documents. (2020-2421)
33. Approve the County’s Workers’
Compensation, Property, Casualty Package, Boiler and Machinery, Cyber and
Internet Liability, Aviation Liability, Federal Flood Insurance, and Pollution
Liability Insurance Programs for calendar year 2021; and authorize staff to
bind coverages effective January 1, 2021.
(2020-2425)
County Attorney’s
Office Consent Agenda Item #34
34. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate
Resolution #2020-R-156 and approve, solely for the limited purposes of Section
147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, the issuance by the Housing Finance
Authority of Orange County, Florida, of its multifamily housing revenue bonds
for the purpose of financing the cost of acquisition, rehabilitation, and
equipping a multifamily residential rental apartment project located in the
County and owned by Stratford Point Apartments, Ltd. (2020-2257)
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Consent Agenda Item #8 – Human Resources
Commissioner
Herr advised she will be filing a Form 8B, Memorandum of Voting Conflict
(received and filed), and will abstain from voting on this item.
Motion by Commissioner Zembower,
seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to approve the insurance renewals and updated
rates for Symetra Stop-Loss Insurance and AIG Statutory Firefighter Death
Benefit; and authorize the County Manager to execute the renewal agreements. (2020-2417)
Districts 1, 2, 3, and 4 voted AYE.
District 5 abstained.
CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS’ CONSENT AGENDA
Clerk & Comptroller’s Office - Item #35
Motion
by Commissioner Zembower, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to approve Expenditure
Approval Lists dated October 20, 27, November 3, and 10, 2020; and Payroll
Approval List dated October 29, 2020. (2020-2414)
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Clerk and Comptroller’s “Received and Filed” is for
information only
1. Executive Orders #2020-051 and #2020-052 Extending the Declared Local State of Emergency for COVID-19; and Executive Orders #2020-053 and #2020-054 Extending the Declared Local State of Emergency to Include the Imminent Threat Caused by Tropical Storm Eta.
2. FPSC Order PSC-2020-0398-PCO-EI issued October 26, 2020.
3. Audit Report of Tax Collector’s Office (Letter to County Manager Nicole Guillet from MSL CPAs & Advisors dated October 30, 2020.)
4. Background Letter and Settlement Agreement with Edward Giovanni in connection with Retreat Road Drainage Project Purchase Agreement approved by the BCC on May 12, 2020.
5. Certificate of Costs of Abatement for Case #20-00300006, 734 Cherokee Circle, Michael S. Rosen, Heir.
6. Addendum #3 to Developer’s Commitment Agreement #20-20500032 for the Integra Crossings Phase 1 Planned Development; PRM Crossings/Lake Mary Owner, LLC; Ming Yen
7. Corrected Development Order #20-20500001, Woodbridge Commerce Center PD Major Amendment & Rezone, Lance Bremer.
8. Denial Development Order #20-30000073, 212 Monterey Isle, Richard and Carmen Dalrymple.
9. Approval Development Orders ##20-30000060, Lot 73 Lincoln Street, Michael Boffeli; #20-30000061, Lot 74 Lincoln Street, Michael Boffeli, #20-30000062, 1650 Augusta Way, Robert Mungovan, Sr.; #20-30000063, 2134 Shadyhill Terrace, Carlos Valentin; #20-30000066, 47 E 2nd Street, Jesse Huggins and Vicky Langston; #20-30000070, 321 Kimberly Court; #20-30000071, 1453 Bridlebrook Court, Chelsea Wallenquest; #20-30000072, 4800 Cliveden Loop, Kimberly Taylor; #20-30000073, 212 Monterey Isle, Richard and Carmen Dalrymple; #20-30000074, 516 Cinder Point, Stephen Engel; #20-30000075, 1224 Verdent Glade Place, Stephanie Espulgar; and #20-30000076, 470 South Cochran Road, Ian and Heather Clemens.
10. Associate Tennis Pro Agreement with Juan Carlos Rotjes.
11. Tennis Developmental Instructor Agreement with Arthur Viallaneix.
12. Natural Lands Contract for Services with Anna Berry.
13. Parks Contracts for Services with Ariane Moyer, Virginia Alston, Ron Prager, Briana Blackley, Tim Marzullo, John Charles Thaens, and Wesley Schoenberger
14. Tourist Tax Funding Agreement with ISSA Senior Softball for the 2020 Winter Worlds & USA Championship.
15. Tourist Tax Funding Agreement with Perfect Game Youth Florida, Inc., for the 2020 Fall Nationals.
16. Tourist Tax Funding Agreement with ProSwings.com, LLC for the 2020 Power 50 Invitational.
17. Tourist Tax Funding Agreement with USSSA Central Florida Fast Pitch, LLC, for the 2020 Winter States Warm Up Tournament.
18. Change Order #3 to CC-2739-19 with U.S. Veteran Contractors, LLC.
19. Closeout to CC-2793-19 with U.S. Veteran Contractors, LLC.
20. PS-2826-20 with Moffatt and Nichol, Inc.; Johnson, Mirmiran & Thompson, Inc.; Atkins North America, Inc.; Pegasus Engineering, LLC; Inwood Consulting Engineers, Inc.; and Dewberry Engineers, Inc.; Ranking List Approved by the BCC on July 28, 2020.
21. Change Order #1 to CC-3037-20 with Chincor Electric, Inc.
22. PS-3078-20 with Stearns, Conrad and Schmidt, Consulting Engineers, Inc. d/b/a/ SCS Engineers; Ranking List Approved by the BCC on September 22, 2020.
23. CC-3176-20 with Bearing Point Construction, Inc.
24. CC-3324-20 with Carlson Environmental Consultants, PC.
25. Sixth Amendment to IFB-602939-17 with Bound Tree Medical, LLC.
26. Bids as follows:
BID-603932-20 from Core & Main, LP; Ferguson Enterprises, LLC (Ferguson Waterworks); Fortiline, Inc. d/b/a Fortiline Waterworks;
IFB-603974-20 from EA Tapping Services, LLC; Florida Flow Control, Inc.; Hydromax USA; R&M Service Solutions, LLC;
RFP-603863-20 from Granicus, LLC; Property Registration Champions, LLC d/b/a Prochamps;
RFP-603882-20 from Vector Disease Control
International, LLC; Clarke Environmental Mosquito Management, Inc.;
RFP-603794-20 from Computer Power Systems, Inc.; Weissco Power, LLC; Tristar Power Solutions, LLC; Eola Power, LLC; DC Group, Inc.; Battery Systems, LLC;
BID-603930-20 from AED Brands, LLC; Altra Medical Corporation; Bound Tree Medical, LLC; Coro
Medical, LLC; CPR Savers & First Aid Supply, LLC; Enerspect
Medical Solutions, LLC; Heartsafe America, Inc.;
Henry Schein, Inc.; Medical Equipment Sales, Inc.; Rescue One Training for
Life, Inc.; School Health Corporation; Stryker Sales Corporation;
RFP-603947-20 from MSL, P.A.; Cherry
Bekaert, LLP; Carr, Riggs & Ingram, LLC; James
Moore & Co., P.L.; Plante & Moran, PLLC; and Purvis, Gray and Company,
LLP.
COUNTY MANAGER AND STAFF BRIEFINGS
Agenda Item #36 – 2020-2438
Rescue Outreach Mission Update
Chairman
Constantine introduced Bob Turnage, Chairman, and Mike Towers, Vice Chairman, of
Rescue Outreach Mission (ROM). Mr.
Turnage addressed the Board to provide an update on the Rescue Outreach Mission
(presentation included in the agenda memorandum). Commissioner Zembower discussed the history
of funding the Mission and stated if they are going to continue to fund this
long term, he thinks they need to have a very candid conversation. They need to review the agreements they
currently have in place and they need to understand where they are headed so
the community understands what funding they may want to allocate towards this if
they must continue to do so. He
understands the problems with raising funds during COVID, but at the same time,
homelessness is a problem and needs to be addressed in their community. He feels they cannot necessarily walk away
from the only resource they have. He
would like to see a long-term strategy plan from the ROM board come back to
this Commission to understand what kind of time frames they believe they may be
looking at before it can stand up on its own.
Ms. Guillet
congratulated the ROM board for all the progress they have made; they are in a
vastly different place with the Mission than they were a year ago when they
were talking about funding them through the General Fund. They had a false start with the original
Emergency Funding Agreement, and she thinks since the ROM board was able to
reseat the board in its entirety, they have really put in a lot of time and are
very passionate about this. One of the
challenges and one of the things the Commission asked for last year was a
sustainability plan. She noted that in
an email from Mr. Towers yesterday, he stated they are unable to provide a
sustainability plan because they do not have the financials. Ms. Guillet opined that Mr. Turnage laid out
a sustainability plan during his presentation and suggested they start putting
that on paper, because what he talked about today, like partnering with the
hospitals, is at least the beginning of one.
She encouraged them to start formalizing that because she thinks they
are closer than they think. So, until
there is an executive director and until the organization is stabilized and
able to be more self-sufficient and has a good solid plan, she knows they will
be looking for a funding agreement on any sort of additional funding moving
forward. She has been a proponent of the
Mission and keeping the Mission independent and it not becoming a county
agency. She said she does not know how
it has limped along for so many years based on what they know now, so she
thinks with the new leadership, it will be much more robust and there is a
greater opportunity there, but she thinks they need to continue to work together. She added there is not really anyone on the
ROM board and on the staff that is experienced in running a homeless shelter;
the County has resources that can help with that. And although they have not always agreed on
direction, if the County is going to be a funding partner, they need to be
engaged in helping ROM accomplish the great goals that they have outlined
today.
Commissioner
Lockhart stated that after Commissioner Zembower was a member of the board for
some time, this Board directed her to represent them on the ROM board and she
tried to do that. She thinks the County
Commission’s role in being seated on that board, and she knows that
Commissioner Herr is going to be taking on that role, is one that needs to be
defined. There is a lack of consistent
understanding of the purpose of having a County Commissioner serve on that
board and it caused a great deal of tension.
She added she thinks that needs to be clarified in any sort of agreement
moving forward.
Commissioner
Lockhart said she believes she is hearing that someone from Sheriff’s Office
staff is acting in the role of the shelter manager right now. Mr. Turnage clarified that the title is
operations manager and they do not want that person to write checks or make
policy, so they have changed the title, but he is running it on a day-to-day
basis. Commissioner Lockhart noted that
it is wonderful that the Sheriff’s Office is continuing to make that donation
of a staff person, but this Board needs to acknowledge that it is still
Seminole County taxpayers’ General Fund revenue that is being assigned to fund
that. The agreement that they have in
place now is not being entirely adhered to and she does not know that that is
anybody’s fault at this point, but it is a reality that they need to acknowledge. She opined if they are going to have an
agreement in place, they need to stick to it.
And if the agreement they have in place right now does not fit with the
relationship, then they need to change it.
But they need to have something in place where all of these cards are on
the table. She agreed that the
sustainability plan that was just verbalized is great, but they need it on
paper. The hybrid thing has been hard to
manage for their staff, for the ROM board and their staff, and for the board
liaison; it has been difficult. She does
not think they have ever done anything quite like it before. It is definitely worth continuing to try to
perfect, but she is not under any illusions, nor does she want this Board to
think that it is in a great place right now; she is talking about the
relationship and the agreement.
Ms. Guillet
advised the agreement they have right now expires at the end of this month, and
the funding situation with ROM right now is that the only funding they have
coming to them are reimbursements under the existing CARES Act. So, they do have the opportunity for some
more funding after the first of the year, some additional Emergency Solutions
Grant and CARES Act-type funding. And
they have tried to identify some other funding sources. She agrees that Commissioner Lockhart is
absolutely correct in that they really do need to clarify the relationship and
the respective roles with regard to the County and ROM. She thinks a new funding agreement will give
them the opportunity to do that so they all have a shared understanding. She added they were in crisis mode at the Mission
during the last two agreements, so they were just trying to quickly put
something together.
Commissioner
Dallari thanked Messrs. Turnage and Towers along with their board stating it is
not easy to pick up the pieces and get running, and this Board asked them to
sprint. He mentioned their hard work
does not go unnoticed.
Commissioner
Dallari stated that Mr. Turnage mentioned they were trying to figure out some
issues with the hospital. Pathways to
Care and Pathways to Home actually have a model; he is sure that Father John Bluett could assist them in what that model could
potentially be because there may be a formula there. He feels it is important that they have open
lines of communication and full transparency.
As Chairman Constantine stated previously, he agrees that their
organization is too valuable to fail, and he thinks they need to make sure they
give them all the tools and the ability to succeed.
Commissioner
Zembower proposed they have the County Attorney meet with the existing ROM
board and the Sheriff’s Office and look at the funding agreement. One of the reasons that the bylaws needed to
be revised is due to the structure of the board and the power that the board at
the ROM has and what duties they are charged with. The reality is some of those positions are
not performing the duties that they are charged with under the current
bylaws. The second problem is, and he
has acutely become aware of it since being elected to public office, is
government does not work in minutes, hours, and days; it works in months,
quarters, years and decades. And they
have small business people that come to the table and are being forced under a
set of guidelines. When they are turning
third base and running for home, government is just leaving the batting
cage. The problem with that is, their
engines are all revved up and want to go, and they have a big anchor hanging
out the back of them. If they are going
to be successful, they are going to have to find a happy medium with getting
the bylaws adjusted and see what is going to work moving forward with a
sustainability study so that they do not alienate the fine people that have
given of their time away from their families and their businesses to help their
community by having an anchor tied around their neck because of what they do in
government. There has got to be a way to
find a hybrid version to accomplish the end goal. He said he would advocate having the County
Attorney’s Office look at the agreements that are in place, and work with their
liaison to try to ultimately get to a place where they have a set of rules that
can work for everyone to attain the ultimate goals.
Chairman
Constantine stated there is nothing more important than the service ROM
provides. He knows Commissioners
Zembower and Lockhart have done admirable jobs working with them, but he also
has watched Commissioner Herr in various boards that she has served on. He called her an action-type leader and even
though all the board members need to be involved, he believes she will bring a
perspective that will also be very helpful to their overall mission in guiding
them and getting that plan.
Commissioner
Herr said she thinks it will be helpful, as they all plan before full
engagement, to have the bylaws and the agreement in alignment, because if they
are not, they are going to be in continuous conflict. And if the bylaws haven’t been updated, maybe
that is okay because it can happen now in conjunction with the County
Attorney’s review. She is not saying
that they are going to step on the board’s responsibility for updating the
bylaws, but there is some talent there that they can lend that would be
extremely helpful. She referenced the
slide entitled “Our Commitment” stating that does not reference heads in
beds. If the intention is to keep heads
in beds or at least have them come into a bed and then transition out of a bed,
it probably needs to, because if the intention is not to do that long term,
then they need to be very clear with the public that that is not the long-term
intention.
In regard to
the next slide, “Outcomes,” Commissioner Herr stated that measurements of success
for her will have to be more granular than that and include things like HMIS
(Homeless Management Information System) compliance. Their current grade is C at best and they
have to get that up to speed and compliant.
She added that if in the past they had major funders such as possibly
the United Way, measuring success would be bringing back those funders. This is an end result and they have
measurements of success that have to happen between now and there, and in order
to get there, they have to be in the sustainability plan. She said she is not of the mindset that they
have it all and they just need to put it on paper. She thinks they have the construct of it;
they have some great ideas. But then
they have to get down to how does it happen.
Commissioner
Herr commented on the Org Chart that they are going from six full-time
employees and one part-time employee with someone on loan to 15 people and no
time frame associated with that, so they really need to figure that out how
they scale that over time and is that the right number, etc.
One of the
things that Commissioner Zembower referenced was that they maybe need to bridge
the difference, Commissioner Herr opined she is somewhere between “Let’s go
rocket fast,” like a small business, because they have taxpayer money involved
and so they just cannot do that, so she really asks for the extension of
appreciation for the fact that they are there to be protective of taxpayer
money and they have to be respectful of that or not ask for it. Those are the two positions and there is no
middle for her on that.
Commissioner
Lockhart asked if they have a time frame and whether they are coming back to
the Board. Mr. Turnage advised they do
have an action plan, but he would not present it because it is not good. They can now take this information with the
Board’s help and put a good plan together.
Ms. Guillet
suggested the folks that are going to be involved in continuing to work with
ROM sit down with them and figure out sort of where they are financially and at
what point they might want the County to step in again, and then figure out how
that relationship is going to work, bring the clarity that Commissioner
Lockhart suggested. She said they have
some operating capital so there is some time to bring something back to the
Board. Let them understand what is going
to happen over the next 6-12 months, from a funding standpoint, before they
allocate funds to something else, because they have a lot of need out
there. So, understanding what their needs
are is going to be important for the them to plan with the limited dollars they
have. She thinks they should start that
sooner rather than later.
Chairman
Constantine addressed the County Manager and stated they don’t want to sit
there and then six months from now get the next report. He said he thinks that this almost is
something that they need to have constant updates on. They all understand that unless something
happens from the federal level, there are going to be a lot of people that are
going to potentially lose their homes or where they are renting. It is not just the situation today, it is the
situation to come in the very near future.
He thinks they need to start moving on this sooner rather than
later. Commissioner Zembower thought they
should receive an update monthly, at least for the foreseeable future, with
Commissioner Herr as a liaison working with them giving them that update. He added they need to be looking at the
funding agreements that have been out there for two years and the provisions of
some of those and where they are ultimately going to be. Chairman Constantine confirmed that the
Commissioner is suggesting an update by county staff and Commissioner Herr and
not that the ROM representatives come back monthly.
Commissioner
Lockhart stated as they start looking at the timeline and bringing something
back to the Board, in terms of a revised agreement, she hopes they will make sure
that they have all of the chess board pieces accounted for in that
agreement. She knows in their briefing
last week, one of the comments was made that perhaps selling some of the assets
of the Mission, in terms of property, might be a solution for them to generate
some revenue, except this Board holds those deeds. There is a much more tedious conversation to
be had here, and all of that, in her opinion, needs to be identified in that
next agreement. She does not think they
cannot have an agreement in place.
Commissioner Zembower agreed, and Mr. Turnage stated then they should
start working on the agreement. He asked
when the Board would like to have the report, and Chairman Constantine said by
the next BCC meeting in January and in what form that comes, they will leave
that to the County Manager and the liaison.
Agenda Item #37 – 2020-2439
Slavia Road Improvements Design Update
Joseph Keezel, P.E., Dewberry, addressed the Board stating he is
the consultant manager for this project.
He presented and reviewed the Slavia Road Update, which was included in
the agenda memorandum.
Commissioner
Dallari stated he thinks it is important that they try to capitalize on the
reconstruction of SR 417, which is going to be happening with the bridge that
goes over Slavia Road. He thinks that is
something they should capitalize on since the Expressway Authority will be
absorbing that cost per the agreement with them. He added it is important that they plan for
the future, because by going back and only doing three-lanes, he thinks they
will have to come back to this pretty soon to actually figure out how to do
four lanes. He thinks the suggestion
about Pond 4 and the borrow pit is a great suggestion and they should be moving
it that direction, as well as working with the associated property owners,
which is the Lukas Nursery and The Master’s Academy. He opined the traffic signal makes sense and
also the proposed Alternative 2A makes sense because they will be able to work
with the Lukas Nursery folks to actually shift that to save their parking lot,
i.e. their business. He would like to
see them move in that direction, and after this, he will have a couple more
suggestions, but right now he thinks those are the kinds of things they are
looking for.
Commissioner
Herr agreed with the majority of Commissioner Dallari’s
comments, but would like to know why 2A versus Alternative 3. Mr. Keezel
responded that it is because of the bike lanes.
Commissioner Herr said then that is in preference to bike lanes as
opposed to the multiuse path. Mr. Keezel stated they have looked at several alternatives in
addition to the ones presented; they could do both bike lanes and a path, but
they would end up getting a couple more parcels with a partial take on the
north side.
Commissioner
Zembower indicated he likes Option 3 because he thinks they need to start
working to get bicycles off the roadways and get them into the multiuse
paths. They have a trail that is coming
right down through there anyway.
Commissioner Dallari said he is fine with that. Commissioner Zembower added he realizes it is
a couple hundred thousand dollars more, but the bicycles in the roadway are an
invitation for disaster. He thinks it
needs to be done.
Commissioner
Herr wanted to know if Alternative 3 would negatively impact the Lukas parking
lot. Mr. Keezel
responded that he would still recommend shifting the alignment to the
north. Right now
he shows a straight alignment; he would take Alternative 3 and shift that north
as well. Commissioner Dallari
agreed. Chairman Constantine asked if
that would cost more, and Mr. Keezel explained it
would save them money because of the parking lot, saving their impacts to the
parking. He estimates the savings would
be $300,000 to $400,000.
Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded
by Commissioner Zembower, to approve Alternative 3, with a shift to the north
including addressing the traffic light and Pond 4, and working with Lukas
Nursery as well as The Master’s Academy.
Districts 1,
2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner
Dallari asked that they show the slide that shows the aerial of Slavia going
from Red Bug to Aloma. He addressed Jean Jreij,
Public Works Director, and noted he would like to put the extension of Slavia
on the overall master plan of projects and have it come back to the Board as to
how they would actually do something. He
knows they have been looking at this at MetroPlan,
extending Slavia to 434. He believes
they need to put another east/west connector in this area, because Mitchell
Hammock is at a point now that something needs to happen, and they need to be
working with the City of Oviedo. He is
not asking that Mr. Jreij change the design. He is asking that he bring something back to
the Board so they can actually put a plan together to do that systematically,
going east from Slavia to 434. Also, he
thinks it is important that they talk to the City of Oviedo about some type of
a transportation JPA, so they can actually be involved with this and the County
is not acting on their own. He would
like to understand what those transportation elements could be and move forward
with that because he feels it is important that they have another east/west
connector, and it would be advantageous for them to start looking at that right
now.
Commissioner
Dallari stated he also thinks there needs to be a plan of transportation for
southeast Seminole including Winter Springs, Oviedo and UCF to see how they can
maximize their transportation in this area.
MetroPlan has some significant planning
dollars and he would like to access those dollars. He would like to have some type of scope
brought back to the Board so they can actually look at it.
Commissioner
Zembower said he concurs with the additional east/west connector. He advised Orange County completed a traffic
study in and around that corridor last year that was funded to the tune of
about $75 million for that whole region that they should use in and around UCF,
across McCulloch, etc., and he noted they have a JPA with Orange on
McCulloch. The issue he thinks they will
run into going east, is about two years ago or maybe three, the Duda family was in here and took a chunk of that land and
asked to put it into conservation.
Commissioner Zembower noted he was sitting on the Planning and Zoning
Board and raised the concern then that this really should be looked at. So they need to look
and see where that conservation parcel is now in place. Of course, they will have to go across the
sod farm if they are going further over to 434, which is obviously the viable
route. He thinks the expectation is sooner
rather than later before something else happens there. Chairman Constantine added he does not think
anyone knows, at this point, where the route is going to go, and it is
something that Mr. Jreij will have to look at. He thinks that everybody agrees that there is
nothing wrong with looking at it and trying to access MPO money.
-------
Chairman Constantine
recessed the meeting at 12:17 p.m., reconvening at 1:30 p.m., with all Commissioners and all
other Officials who were present at the Opening Session.
COUNTY INVESTMENT ADVISOR REPORT
Scott McIntyre, Managing
Director of Hilltop Securities, addressed the Board remotely to present the
Investment Advisor’s Report (received and filed).
Motion
by
Commissioner Zembower, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt the
recommendations of the Board’s Financial Advisor based on the presentation and
report submitted, and direct the Clerk to implement said Board-adopted
recommendations.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
COUNTY MANAGER AND STAFF BRIEFINGS (Continued from the a.m.
session)
Agenda Item #38 – 2020-2440
Boards and Committees Meeting
Requirements
Ms.
Guillet stated she put this on the agenda because she neglected to bring this
up at the last meeting when Alan Harris, Chief Administrator of Emergency
Management, had asked her to. She
explained this focuses on a requirement in Chapter 20 of the Code of Ordinances
that requires that the Animal Control Board meet three times a year. Mr. Harris stated due to COVID and the need,
the Animal Control Board only met twice.
He was looking for a formal waiver of the requirement for the third
meeting. She asked all the other
directors to ensure that they did not have any boards that were in a similar
situation so she could just bring them all to the Board at one time. She said it was vague and caused confusion so
she wanted to apologize for that. The
action she is looking for from the Board today is simply for them to waive the
three-meeting requirement for the Animal Control Board.
Motion by Commissioner Zembower,
seconded by Commissioner Herr, to approve the waiver of a third meeting of the
Animal Control Board in 2020.
With
regard to public participation, no one spoke and public input was closed.
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
Tricia Johnson, Deputy
County Manager, addressed the Board to speak about Legislative Session 2021,
but she also wanted to provide an update about the outcome of Legislative
Session 2020. She said the Board may
recall that the Legislature had a momentous finish in March as several folks
were quarantined, so the budget was not completed by the scheduled end
date. The session was extended by six
days and they had sine die on March 19th. All three of the County’s initial
appropriations requests were put into the state budget pre-veto period, and she
thanked Senator Simmons and Representatives Plakon and Smith for their advocacy
on these requests. Ultimately, two of
their three requests were vetoed. The
Governor vetoed about one billion dollars’ worth of requests before the budget
was approved the day before the new budget fiscal year began on July 1st. The Lake Jesup
Watershed project was funded for the County at $350,000.
Ms. Johnson stated the
biggest question that remains from 2020 moving into the 2021 session is what do
the budgets for the next fiscal year look like and how much money will be
allocated for individual department silos.
The State is projecting approximately a $3 billion budget deficit as
they move into 2021, and session will convene on March 2nd.
There are a number of
issues they are hearing about that may or may not come up as they get into
session, i.e. sovereign immunity and affordable housing. She has heard some of their government
partners talking about changing Sunshine Law to allow for virtual meetings
without a quorum, since many have seen the success with that over the COVID-19
pandemic. She would like to, over the
next few weeks, speak with each of the Commissioners individually to talk
further about their legislative priorities and appropriations requests. She noted she provided the Commission with a
copy of their 2020 Priorities just so they can see what they had on paper last
year. She is hearing from a lot of their
partners that they are kind of sticking with what they did for 2020 because counties
and cities anticipate being more on defense this year than on offense, so
putting too many new things forth may be a challenge.
In terms of
appropriations requests, it has been suggested that they stick to one to two
rather than their typical three and that those requests be focused on
shovel-ready projects that will put people to work and that are regional in
nature. She said she is working with
Public Works to ascertain what projects they have that they may be able to put in
requests for, as well as Kim Ornberg, Roads and
Stormwater Division, and her team, since they have had luck in the past with
respect to water quality and cleanup projects.
Oscar Anderson, The
Southern Group, addressed the Board and indicated the State is clearly going to
have a big hole in its budget. An
article in the newspaper last week reported it was about $2.7 billion; the
House and Senate members seem to think it is going to be closer to $3.5
billion. Mr. Anderson said he has heard
it as high as $5 billion. At the end of
the day, it will be hard from an appropriations perspective. They have a new House Speaker and Senate
President; he opined that Speaker Chris Sprowls and
President Wilton Simpson are great. He
does not believe they have the animosity towards local government as they have
seen in the last three or four years. He
added he is sure there will be a good share of those attacks that they have
seen, but the local governments are hopeful it will not be as bad this year as
it has in the past.
There are a lot of
things being talked about to solve some of the budget challenges. One of them is what they call the “e-Fairness
bill,” and he knows the Association of Counties is going to pursue that as
well. It would eventually enforce online
sales tax collection that could generate upwards of half a billion dollars a
year, which is a big step towards solving that problem. Another issue they have talked about is the
Gaming Compact, which had lapsed, and they haven’t been getting those
contributions for awhile and so they want to start that again. The problem with all of those things, of
course, is it is going to require legislation to get them passed, and they
won’t know the answer to that until the end of session. They will be making budget decisions as they
go along, so those numbers will not be baked into the budget; they will kind of
help backfill some reserves if they solve those problems, and hopefully things
will be better for the year after.
Mr. Anderson advised
the Senate has announced its committees.
With Senator Brodeur who knows his way around Tallahassee, he thinks
that will be helpful. Obviously, their
representatives came back, which is great because any kind of seniority and
understanding of the processes is helpful.
They’ve seen some leadership announced in the House Committee, but they
haven’t seen the actual committee structure yet and who is going to be on those
committees.
Chairman Constantine
addressed Ms. Johnson and Mr. Anderson stating what they want the Board to do
is over the next couple of weeks get with them to discuss their priorities
individually and then they will come back to talk to them. Their legislative delegation meets earlier than
most and they are meeting next week. He
said he thinks it is important, when they are talking about Home Rule, that they
also put a face on the home rule that Seminole is concerned about, and those
clearly would be ensuring that the rural boundary is protected and that the
Wekiva Parkway and Protection Act is protected, and there aren’t any changes in
either one of those.
Commissioner Dallari
mentioned that a couple of months ago, they were talking about the need that
their Fire Chief was talking about regarding additional fire suppression on
I-4. The Board Chairman at the time
wrote a letter to FDOT requesting that they change their policy, and DOT just
responded on November 16th stating it was a great idea but rejecting
it. He thinks they should all be briefed
so they can talk about that at the appropriate time. Commissioner Dallari said he feels it is
appropriate, but he wants to make sure that everyone is informed before they
start having that discussion.
Chairman Constantine
expressed one of the things that needs to be said when they are dealing with
the Legislature right now is that a $3 billion deficit is huge. They are talking about a $90 billion budget,
but so much of that is already taken off the table. Whether it is education or health and human
services, and certainly COVID will probably be looked at to get a boost. He thinks all the other discretionary issues,
which they are usually the ones they are asking money for, will probably be
very difficult. Local government is
always playing defense anyway, but anything they might get from the Legislature
he thinks might be a Hail Mary this year.
PROOFS OF PUBLICATION
Motion
by Commissioner Zembower, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, 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.
All five Commissioners
advised they are submitting their ex parte
communications into the record (received and filed).
Commissioner Dallari questioned the process for submitting ex parte communications.
Mr. Chipok addressed the Board to explain that
ex parte can be submitted either in hard copy or
electronically; however, if it is electronic, it must be available at the
meeting so that the public has the opportunity to review it during or prior to
the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Agenda Item #39 –
2020-2245
Board of Adjustment
Appeal
2391
Pandora Lane/Patton and Jacqueline Wasson, Applicants
Commissioner Zembower advised that the agenda memorandum shows this
item as being in his district; however, it is in Commissioner Dallari’s district (District 1).
Angi Kealhofer, Planning and Development Division, addressed the Board to present the request stating
it is a request to appeal the July 27, 2020 Board of Adjustment decision to
deny the request for a minimum lot size variance from 5 acres to
2.47 acres in the A-5 (Rural Zoning Classification) district, more particularly
known as 2391 Pandora Lane. She reported
the subject parcel is part of an illegal land split and is not a legal parcel
of record prior to July 28, 1970 and is within the East Rural Boundary
district. On August 10, 2020, Patton
“Andy” and Jacquelyn Wasson filed a Notice of Appeal to the Board of
Adjustment’s decision. The previous
owners of the property, Cody and Angie Alstott,
bought Parcel 10C at a tax deed sale in May of 2016. They were told in writing by staff in 2018
that the lot is not buildable due to the illegal land split. The parcel was created in the mid 1980’s
before the rural land use and zoning regulations were adopted, but the
Comprehensive Plan (Future Land Use Policy 11.15) states that the parcel had to
be a parcel of record as of 1991, when the Rural Zoning and Future Land Use
were established in order to be vested.
Unfortunately, this parcel was not a lot of record as of that date,
since it was not created through a county subdivision process.
The County adopted its subdivision regulations in
1971. Prior to 1991, the property was
zoned A-1 (one dwelling unit per acre) with a
Suburban Estates Future Land Use designation. If the zoning had not changed in 1991, there
would have been a way for the parcel to become legal through the subdivision
process. The parcel, if able to meet the minimum zoning requirements, could be
platted through the rural subdivision process, which allows lots to be
subdivided/platted on an easement.
Letters of support were received from the surrounding
neighbors and letters of opposition were received from Richard T. Creedon, Vice-President of Geneva Citizens Association Inc.,
and Linda Hornbeak, 3201 Curryville Road.
Ms. Kealhofer
stated based on the information, findings and conclusions included in the
agenda memorandum, staff recommends the Board uphold the decision of the Board
of Adjustment to deny the request.
Mark A. Watts, Cobb Cole Attorneys at Law, addressed the Board to
speak on behalf of the Wassons. He stated Mr. and Mrs. Wasson are in
attendance today and this appeal is the only option available to them to move
forward with the investment they have made in what they plan to be their
retirement property. They are asking for
the Board to consider an appeal of the Board of Adjustment’s denial of a
minimum lot size for what really has, since the mid-1980s, been a lot of record
from a tax standpoint in Seminole County.
Mr. Watts displayed a PowerPoint presentation (received and
filed). He stated the property is about
2.47 acres. It is actually 3.67 acres,
but when you net out the wetland areas, it is 2.47 acres and it is currently in
the area zoned A-5. He then reviewed the
Timeline of Events stating the parcel was created with a deed that was filed in
the mid-1980s, and there has been a separate tax I.D. number that has been
taxed and billed by the County since that point in time. The property was zoned A-1 then and was legal
at that point in time, but it did not go through the formal subdivision process
that was in place. In 1991, the County
adopted the revised regulations for the eastern portion of the county that put
in place the five-acre minimum. In May
of 1991, this property and the property located to the east of it were deeded
to that parcel owner, who still own the smaller parcel. They owned it until May of 2013 when they
lost the back parcel to a tax deed sale.
The County took back control of the property and auctioned it at tax
deed in 2013. Mr. and Mrs. Alstott purchased it who ultimately became the sellers to
his client. They purchased it in 2016
and in 2018, as staff mentioned, there was a lot research report done that
confirmed to the Alstotts that the property was not
buildable. The unfortunate part for the Wassons is that that was not noted on the parcel card and
it was not noted in the record, so when they came to verify the ability to get
a permit before their closing in May of 2019, it was confirmed to them that the
property was buildable at that point.
The unfortunate thing here is that their clients did everything right
from the standpoint of following all the steps.
They had an attorney that did their title work and handled their
transaction. They visited the county
building as to inquire as to the “permitability” of a
home, and they were told at that point in time that, yes, they could get a
permit, and yet they find themselves here now confirming after the fact that
without a variance or going through the subdivision process, they can’t
actually obtain a permit on the property.
So, they applied for the variance.
The slide entitled Variance Criteria was shown, and Mr. Watts
explained they were able to satisfy all but one. The one criterion that staff indicated they
did not believe that their application satisfied was that the request would not
confer on the applicant or petitioner any special privilege that is denied by
Chapter 30 to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning
district. He believes that the staff’s
response to that was issuing a building permit to a lot that is an illegally
subdivided parcel of land would be a right that is not commonly enjoyed by
other properties in similar circumstances.
He said, however, what they believe is that by asking for the variance
to the lot size to recognize the existing size of a parcel that has existed and
been taxed by the County since 1984 or 1985, they are not actually asking them
to issue a permit on a parcel that has not gone through the subdivision
process. They are asking the Board to
grant a variance that will allow them to take the parcel through that
subdivision process, to go through the process to establish it as a legal lot
and let it move forward with permitting.
He displayed an aerial showing the other parcels in that area, which are
all less than five acres in size and all created at a time when A-1 zoning
allowed there to be smaller lots. The
subject parcel is the only one that does not have a house on it at this point
in time.
Mr. Watts mentioned the letters of support from the neighbors included
in the agenda memorandum. He then
covered the failures in the process and procedures that led to where they are
today. He noted that one thing from a
policy standpoint that would have saved them from the situation they find
themselves in now is that in some of the other counties in the area, if a
non-conforming parcel is taken back by the County for unpaid taxes, it is only
offered to adjacent property owners. It
is not put back out through a general auction as this one was; it is only
offered to those adjacent parcels that could combine it into a conforming
parcel. He does not think that is a
policy that Seminole County has in place and he thinks it is a good one to
consider because it would help avoid a repeat of this situation that their
client finds themselves in. Also when there was a status report done in 2018 with the
prior owners, the notation on that parcel record that they had researched the
parcel and know it is not a buildable parcel would avoid the mistake of someone
coming in to see if they can get a permit for this and then being told that
they can. They are unfortunate
circumstances but their clients kind of have the
cleanest hands in the history of this.
Mr. Watts concluded by stating that variances do not set legal
precedent and cited Jacksonville v.
Taylor. He then thanked staff for
all their hard work.
With regard to public
participation, Jerry Edwards, 2411 Pandora Lane, spoke in support of the
request. No one else spoke in support or
opposition, and public input was closed. Speaker Request Form was received and filed.
Commissioner Dallari asked
the attorneys to discuss how they got to this place because he has an issue
that they have a nonconforming lot and an individual who is purely innocent
because they bought a piece of property on a tax deed sale. He wants to understand from a legal
standpoint how this all took place.
Attorney Chipok responded that the County
cannot restrict the sale of property from anyone to anyone. Their legal authority on regulation starts
with the zoning and the building permits.
So if somebody sells a non-conforming lot to
someone else that is not a buildable lot, the County cannot prevent the sale of
that lot. But again, they cannot provide
the appropriate permits for that because it does not meet the standard. Commissioner Dallari said then if they did a
title search, would it show up in that.
Mr. Chipok said that it should, but in this
case, the fact that the property was not buildable was not caught in the title
search. He indicated he has not researched
that but that is a private matter and not a county matter; they would not be
involved in the title search.
Commissioner Lockhart
stated she was a member of staff here years ago and they had a rash of illegal,
non-conforming lots coming forward, and there was a process in about 2005 where
they set up a system with the Property Appraiser to flag non-conforming
lots. She asked why that did not work
for this situation; how was the flag not existing there. Ms. Kealhofer
answered because that process was not in place at the time that the lot
research request was done. She then
explained the process that is in place currently. Rebecca Hammock, Director of Development
Services, addressed the Board to clarify what Ms. Kealhofer
talked about. She understands the
process was put into place within the last ten years, and this lot split was
created in the 1980s.
Commissioner Lockhart
remembered that at some point in time, there was a concerted effort to scour
the county for illegal non-conforming lots in the mid-2000s, and there was some
sort of effort on the part of the County because there was a realization that
these non-conforming lots existed and people were in an unsuspecting situation
purchasing these properties, recognizing it was not the County’s responsibility,
but they were somehow involved in helping to identify these. Kathy Hammel, Planning and Development,
stated that Commissioner Lockhart is remembering correctly but that it was
platted lots that they were looking at.
It was where people were splitting existing platted lots; this is not a
platted lot, it is a parcel, and that is the difference. It was an issue that came to their attention
because there was a sale of a platted lot that someone had divided illegally
and that is how they were able to track it.
Commissioner Lockhart confirmed the reason this was not caught in that
is because it was not platted.
Commissioner Lockhart
questioned if they had any more lots like this in the county. Ms. Hammock replied they have probably quite
a few lots that are in a similar situation, and they do have this quite
often. They try to work with people as
much as they can to come up with a resolution.
The interesting thing about this case too is that the property owner
owned both lots, 10C and the lot to the west 10D, but then because of the tax
deed sale where lot 10D was sold, now the other lot is also illegal and
non-conforming.
Commissioner Zembower
opined the rural referendum in 2004 is what triggered some of these to become
non-conforming. His discussion with the
Property Appraiser revealed that in the last several years, those are now
designated as to whether they are conforming or non-conforming. Ms. Hammock said she would have to confirm
that. When they called the Tax
Collector’s Office to inquire about the process for the tax deed sales, they
were just referred to the Florida statutes, so they were not able to get
specific information. Ms. Hammock shared
that their Comp Plan does have a policy already that does vest legally created
parcels that were done through the subdivision process that were created prior
to the adoption of the rural area in 1991, so the parcels that are illegal or
non-conforming and cannot hold building permits are those that did not go
through a legal subdivision process that was in place in 1971 in the county. Commissioner Zembower stated they heard from
Mr. Watts that other counties, which he did verify, do have in place if it is
non-conforming and if it comes on the tax deed, it can only be offered to
surrounding parcel owners, which cures the problem right then and there, of
course. In talking with the Applicant,
they have attempted to go the legal route, it is his understanding, and get
restitution from the seller if it dead ends.
As a property owner in Chuluota himself, he sees that all the parcels
around the subject property are basically the same size with homes already on
them, so he does not have a problem with this request.
Chairman Constantine
mentioned the subject property is 10C and asked whether there was a home on
10D. Ms. Kealhofer
answered that there is. Chairman
Constantine expressed that the owner of 10D stopped paying the taxes on 10C
when they owned that property. He could
not build anything on it and stopped paying taxes so the County took it. He wondered if they are setting themselves up
for unintended consequences.
Commissioner Dallari added that is also his concern because there are a
lot of other parcels out there that do not conform and where do they draw the
line. Chairman Constantine indicated
they do not want this to happen again.
They need to find a mechanism to prevent it and if other counties have
that, it should be easy to find out what they do and maybe be able to plug it
into what they do here.
Mr. Watts said he
appreciates the concern about setting a precedent, which is why he included the
last slide to assure them from a case law standpoint that variances do not set
precedent. He stated he thinks the
distinguishing characteristic that they can look to here is that the property
passed through the County’s hands. He
said he is not casting aspersion in any way, but there is an opportunity for a
check and balance there, so this particular property got through without
getting that flag associated with the parcel number. He addressed Chairman Constantine’s concern
about the property owner that may have two tax parcels and decides that they
may want to let one go because it is not the one their house is on. He said if that comes through as a
non-conforming parcel and you have the checks and balances in place from a
policy standpoint, this would not happen again.
Commissioner Dallari asked
if this piece of property was purchased through a real estate agent, and Mr.
Watts advised it was actually purchased from a real estate agent. The gentleman that was the seller is a
broker. Commissioner Dallari wondered
whether that real estate agent has the fiduciary responsibility to disclose
this information. Mr. Watts said he
believes that they do, but again he thinks what they ultimately get to is a
judgement that is not enforceable. They
can spend a lot of time and effort going down that road and get to a judgement
that they cannot collect on.
Commissioner Herr wanted
to hear from the County Attorney in regard to setting or not setting a
precedent. Mr. Chipok
stated that Mr. Watts is correct that from a legal standpoint, a variance
should not carry any weight as precedent for other variances. However, as a practical matter, when a
variance is granted it tends to sometimes change the character and the
development of the area, so it does have that affect at times. In this particular situation, this is a very
unusual circumstance because with the new lot that was created, 10C, the
property owner did go and get an easement to reach a public right-of-way, but
the property itself is not on a public right-of-way. Other properties that are out in the rural
area that are substandard and not legally conforming that are on public
rights-of-way can come in and go through the subdivision process to create a
subdivision of that existing lot that is less than five acres on the existing
right-of-way. That way it can become
legitimate through the subdivision process as a lot that is
non-conforming. In this situation since
it is on an easement, that is not available under the way the Comprehensive
Plan is written at this time. So, this
is a very unique circumstance.
Ms. Hammock added they do
allow subdivision on parcels that have access from an easement in the rural
area, so in this case they did have an established easement, so if they were
granted the variance, they could come in and go through the rural subdivision
process to have access. They have
officialized lots previously through the process like Mr. Chipok
explained where they were not legally subdivided in the past but they have road
frontage, so they were able to officialize them as long as they met zoning and
future land use. Here they do not meet
zoning or future land use; however, she thinks maybe the unique circumstance or
the hardship may be the fact that parcels 10C and 10D probably should have been
combined and should not have been able to be sold separately. There were two separate parcels but they
should have been combined to make one legal parcel; however, they were separate
parcels and because of the failure to pay the taxes, 10D was sold in the tax
sale, therefore making 10D also non-conforming.
Commissioner Dallari questioned why they allowed that to be subdivided
illegally to which Ms. Hammock explained that was something probably property
owners did in the past through the property appraisers and that was prior to
where they had that failsafe in place where the property appraisers required
people who were subdividing, doing a lot split or a lot combination, to come to
zoning to make sure that it met zoning and future land use. Unfortunately, back in the 1980s the property
owners probably did not know that was required and the property appraisers were
not requiring it at the time.
Commissioner Zembower said
he wanted to address the character of the area.
If you are going to change the character of this area, that is one
thing, but they are not changing the character of this area significantly based
on what is already there and what is already built. It will be consistent with what is there
except for the one owner who is here who supports it. He thinks it is very telling that all the
neighbors have written letters of support and they do not have an issue with
it. He added as far as precedent
setting, this is what the variance process is for. It is a set of circumstances that they must
consider that are unique to a request.
Commissioner Lockhart
asked staff that if for some reason this variance is not granted, what could they
envision that property being used for at this point in time. You cannot put a house on it. Ms. Hammock replied that the property could
be used for agricultural uses, but it would not be eligible for anything that
requires a building permit, but anything that is a non-residential farm
building is not required to go through building permitting. Commissioner Lockhart confirmed that if they
wanted to start breeding pigs, they could do that on that property, and if they
wanted to have a chicken coup and have a bunch of chickens and start producing
eggs, they could do that. She opined
that maybe the neighbors out there recognize what the alternative is to having
a nice new set of neighbors. She knows
that an existing neighbor shared that things that were happening out there
before were not good and it is now being cleaned up. Her understanding was that it was not
pretty. She added she is not sure what
else they would gain as a community and as a county by not allowing this to go
forward.
Upon inquiry by
Commissioner Dallari, Ms. Hammock explained if the subject property were to
become a legal lot through the variance approval, then it would be required to
go through their rural subdivision process to create a one-lot, legal
subdivision. Commissioner Dallari noted
that someone mentioned that it does not have access to a road, it only has an
easement, so it could not go to a subdivision plan. Ms. Hammock replied that she thinks the
reference there is for a lot split. They
could do a legal lot split, which the Code does allow, and it is called “one
free lot split,” but you have had to have been a legal parcel as of 1971, and
you might be entitled to be able to split your lot as long as it meets zoning
and future land use, but you do have to have public road frontage to do that.
Commissioner Dallari
asked that the lot sizes be read out loud and stated the subject lot is not the
smallest one and its not the largest one, but it is on the upper size of the
surrounding lots. Ms. Hammock added it
is not out of character with the lot sizes in the area. Commissioner Dallari opined the issue here is
it does not adversely affect the surrounding area.
Motion
by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Zembower, to grant the appeal
by overturning the Board of Adjustment’s decision to deny the request, thereby
approving the request for a minimum lot size variance from 5 acres to 2.47
acres in the A-5 (Rural Zoning Classification) district, more particularly
known as 2391 Pandora Lane; Patton and Jacquelyn Wasson, Applicants;
Development Order.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman Constantine
stated he believes there is consensus that they direct the County Manager to,
at the minimum, look at the policy that other counties have where they will not
sell property like the one in the BOA appeal they just voted upon, other than
to adjacent owners. But also what they have outstanding is whether or not they need
to establish a policy so this does not happen again, including a person letting
their taxes go on a separate property that they have thereby making both of
them non-conforming. Commissioner Herr
stated she thinks the sale for past-due taxes is separate from the issue of the
County’s internal recordkeeping and whether or not the notes are added to the
records so there can be no question as to whether that information is given
out. She said she consistently heard
through this process that that does not happen, and so that piece needs to be
addressed as well. She thinks they have
internal processes that need to be addressed in addition to working with the
Property Appraiser and the Tax Collector, which is a bigger issue. Ms. Guillet pointed out that clearly internal
processes need to be clarified and she believes Ms. Hammock wants to address
that. She thinks they recognize they
need to be on top of that in making sure that when they have those kinds of
notations and they do that kind of research that it makes it into the
file. Secondly is the issue of policy
with respect to non-conforming lots going to tax deed sale. She added it would be easy to bring a policy
forward that would be a Board policy that they would establish.
Ms. Guillet remarked she
heard discussion earlier about trying to identify all illegal, non-conforming
lots in the county. She would like to
talk with the County Attorney’s Office about that and do a deeper dive because
she does not know what sort of obligation they would be taking on there. If they take that on and miss something, they
might end up buying lots. She requested
they have a little more internal discussion on that and report back on what
they find and what the issues might be.
Commissioner Zembower
noted he sat on the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee five years ago as the
Planning and Zoning Chair, and they had a discussion specifically about needing
to identify all non-conforming lots throughout the entire county for another
purpose, which was the discussion of people wanting to put tiny homes up. They wanted to know if there were an abundance
or any significant amount of non-conforming lots that could be possibly a
discussion for tiny homes. Staff was
looking into that then, and he said he has brought that up because maybe some
of that groundwork has already been done.
Ms. Hammock indicated she
is not sure that the effort that she is aware of is directly related to that,
but she thinks it may be. She knows
there were some code changes that occurred regarding antiquated plats that had
lot sizes that did not meet zoning and those specifically identified for
affordable housing allowing homes to build on them especially in CDBG areas,
even though they did not meet the minimum lot sizes, and they would be allowed
to be permitted without the need for a lot size variance, but they would have
to meet zoning for setbacks. So that may
have partially addressed that.
Commissioner Zembower added that Chuluota was one of those areas because
it does have a water source, an actual fresh water source, through a
utility. You could not have well and
septic for affordable housing; you had to have sewer and a potable water
supply.
Ms. Guillet remarked she
thinks identifying non-conforming lots for that purpose is one thing, but
identifying non-conforming lots to protect buyers is another and maybe not
something they want to get into, but they can talk about that some more.
Commissioner Lockhart
commented that she thinks that a lot of that was already done and that the
County already stepped into that realm many years ago and already did that in
terms of platted lots. She believes
maybe the only ones left to identify are those that are not platted. She understands the County Manager’s concern,
but hopes that will not delay her bringing back the information. Mr. Guillet confirmed it would not.
Ms. Hammock wanted to
clarify one issue stating what they are going to do in the future, if it is
acceptable to the County Manager and County Attorney’s Office, is that on their
lot research requests, they can record those in Land Records. They do not currently do that, so that if
someone does do a title search, then they should find it in Land Records. There
was consensus of the Board.
--------
Chairman Constantine
recessed the meeting at 3:07 p.m., reconvening at 3:15 p.m.
COUNTY MANAGER AND STAFF BRIEFINGS (Continued)
Ms. Guillet
stated she sent the members of the Board an Assignment related to Florida Power
& Light and their Load Control Agreement.
Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded
by Commissioner Zembower, to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the
Amendment to Assignment and Assumption of Florida Power & Light Company’s
(FPL) CILC (Commercial Industrial Load Control
Program) Agreement with
the Seminole County Board of County Commissioners.
Districts 1,
2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
--------
Ms. Guillet
reminded that all the Commission Offices recently received a request from the
Seminole County Bar Association to name a couple of courtrooms in the Criminal
Courthouse, and that they cannot discuss that via email with one another. The County does not have a protocol in place
for naming buildings, just parks. She
advised she asked Meloney Koontz, Assistant County Manager, to start putting
together a protocol for the Board to consider moving forward for naming
facilities. She noted that someone needs
to respond to the BAR Association and she questioned whether this request is
something they want to move forward with now.
Commissioners Zembower and Dallari both stated they are not opposed to
it but would like to see the protocols first.
Commissioner
Lockhart stated they obviously need a policy.
She pointed out that she does know one of the individuals that the BAR
is recommending they name a courtroom after, and she knows that he is wonderful
and she does not know who the other person is.
However, at the School Board they had a policy that they didn’t want to
name things after people who are still alive and still had room in their lives
to make decisions that would reflect poorly on a building being named after
them. It is the Board of County
Commissioners’ building, a building of the public, and she shared she was
somewhat surprised, with no offense to the BAR Association, that they felt that
basically if the County did not respond, they were going to do what they wanted
to do, which took her back a little bit.
And then she found out that they have already named a couple of rooms in
the courthouse apparently. She wondered
if they know how and when that happened.
Ms. Guillet and Commissioner Zembower both stated they were not aware of
that. He noted that he hasn’t seen any
courtrooms named after anyone, they are usually Courtroom 1A, etc. Commissioner Lockhart added this Board needs
to decide if they even want to get into the business of naming rooms inside
buildings for people; is it even something they want to undertake. And what is the process for that and do names
need to be submitted from the public.
Does the BAR Association really have the authority? She thinks there is a whole can of worms that
this Board needs to have a discussion about.
Commissioner
Herr stated they are having two different conversations right now and she is
purposely abstaining from one of them for obvious reasons. She will not participate in the naming of
rooms in the courthouse locally, but with regard to the larger conversation
around whether they even want to be in the business of naming rooms in
buildings, that is a really worthy conversation. Commissioner Zembower agreed with Commissioner
Lockhart stating he does not necessarily believe it is a great idea to name,
whether it is a courtroom, a bridge, a road or anything else, after somebody
that is still alive that could at some juncture fall out of good graces with
their name. Maybe the County Attorney’s
Office can weigh in on that as well.
Ms. Guillet
clarified with respect to the request from the BAR Association, the Board is
not prepared to move forward on that, but they would like staff to bring them a
protocol to discuss.
Commissioner
Lockhart wondered if there is a time sensitivity that created the urgency to do
this with or without their response and Ms. Guillet responded there is nothing
that she is aware of. Commissioner
Lockhart then asked who is going to actually interact with the BAR Association
and Ms. Gullet responded her office would.
Commissioner Lockhart inquired who would be communicating with him and
Ms. Guillet replied she has and Ms. Koontz has, and she will likely ask Ms.
Koontz to handle the discussions.
Chairman
Constantine said he could name one incident where this Board just recently
named a road for a person who is still living, and he thinks it is important
that they have some sort of process.
Commissioner Lockhart added the unintended consequence of that was the
descendants were very upset that they were not even brought into the discussion
or notified that the road was being renamed because it had been named after
their father.
ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA
No public requests to speak were received.
Commissioner Lockhart stated the only thing she would like the Board to contemplate, and it is something that she had discussed with Rick Durr, Leisure Services Director, had to do with the level of service of their parks in relationship to how much developed space there is in an area. It was mentioned in one of the agenda items as a criterion for approval of a planned development that they reviewed. She asked about that and asked what their goal is as part of their parks plan, and she thought that Mr. Durr felt like he needed some direction to explore that further. She remarked if they are going to have it as a part of their mechanisms for determining whether a PD is appropriate or not or if there is enough park space in the area, they should probably know what their goal is, and at this point she does not think they know what their level of service is that is good or bad. Maybe it is and she does not know, but she thought she would bring it up as a part of the discussion for something they may want to be looked at in the future. Ms. Guillet mentioned that to some degree, it should have been established in the Comprehensive Plan with respect to the parks and recreation element, but she will speak to the Director of Development Services a little more about it.
Joe Abel, Deputy County Manager, addressed the Board to speak as the previous Leisure Services Director. He advised there is language in the Comprehensive Plan about level of service. He thought it was interesting that Commissioner Lockhart brought this up because there was just an article in the National Recreation and Parks Association magazine written by a local person, David Barth, who has done some after planning here. There is a push to change and look at the way you do planning from a level of service used for parks and recreation, because it is unique to every community based on the expectation and what the desire of the community is. He and Mr. Durr have had conversations about following up on that, but that is a planning effort and would be something they would want to work with Development Services on moving forward and looking at that as they look at the master plan for parks and recreation, especially now that they have new numbers from the census and the development review that they are doing right now.
Commissioner Lockhart asked that Mr. Abel highlight that and ensure the Board has a conversation about that when the time comes, and he agreed.
DISTRICT REPORTS
District 2
Commissioner Zembower recognized Jason Sutton, a
Public Works employee who was involved in an unfortunate accident. He noted he is recovering much better
now.
He also brought up the unfortunate and untimely death
of Sgt. James LaRue of the Sheriff’s Office.
COVID-19 unfortunately took his life.
Their prayers remain with the families.
--------
Commissioner Zembower mentioned the Thomas Stable Road
repair, the Retreat Road drainage project; the Lake Harney drainage issues, and
the cleanup of the excessive weed growth at Sunland Park.
--------
Commissioner Zembower said he knows they brought up
the Sanford JPA the last time. He wants
to know where that stands and where they are headed with that. He talked to the Mayor of Sanford this
week. There seems to be some confusion
about what is being requested and what is actually happening with county staff
versus their staff. He spoke with the
former Mayor and current Mayor stating instead of cherry picking, they should
open the JPA up because there are things that should be discussed globally for
the transportation costs, firefighter costs, the roads and drainage, and all
those types of things that need to be looked at. He asked that staff give the Board an update
as soon as possible on where they really are with that and where they need to
be headed. What he heard last time is
that they were waiting for Sanford to get back to them on whatever had been
discussed at the staff level, but that is not the understanding of the Mayor of
Sanford.
--------
Motion
by Commissioner Zembower, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to appoint Jeannine
Ellenson to the Historical Commission for a two-year term; Dr. Gerardo Viscarindo to the Animal Control Board for a one-year term;
Joe Humphreys to the Parks and Preservation Advisory Committee for a three-year
term; James Depot to the Contractor Examiner Board for a one-year term; and to
reappoint Bob Hughes to the Historical Commission for a two-year term; Brian
Wilson to the Animal Control Board for a one-year term; and both Clay Archey and Jim Hunter to the Agricultural Advisory Committee
for two-year terms; all effective beginning January 2021.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
District 5
Commissioner Herr stated she served her last meeting
at CFX, as Chairman Constantine will be taking over on that committee as the
elected there. The good news is that the
toll revenue variance year over year is well above what the revised COVID
projections were. The rebound to people
actually driving, which she thinks is an indicator of the economy, is
uplifting. Work with Brightline
continues and they look forward to connectivity to South Florida and the
Orlando Airport.
--------
She thanked staff for helping her in the first month
of doing this and she particularly thanked, Sam Tucker from the County
Manager’s Office, for simply jumping in front of her and handing her things as
she walks down the hallway so she looks well informed and ready to go. She said she has really been fantastic.
--------
Commissioner Herr presented a small plaque to
Commissioner Zembower in appreciation of his time as chairman.
District 4
Commissioner Lockhart reported she and Chairman
Constantine attended the Florida Association of Counties Legislative
Conference. She suggests that any of
them that has the chance to plug into FAC and participate in any of their
conferences or the new member orientation or any of the certified County
Commissioner programs should take advantage.
Every time she goes she learns something she didn’t know that she needed
to know. She mentioned there was a
discussion about a statewide broadband initiative. The small counties have kind of taken the
bull by the horns and they have determined that they are all going to get
together and get behind this initiative to support it. While Seminole is not technically a small
county, they certainly have a great portion of their county that could benefit
from a statewide broadband initiative.
Ms. Guillet agreed.
--------
Commissioner Lockhart reported that the Board will be
hearing from a group of citizens from the East Crystal Chain of Lakes. They have gone through the MSBU process and
have achieved the required number of votes from their surrounding properties,
so they will be coming before the Board.
She remarked an entire chain of lakes is coming together with the sole
intent of making sure that these lakes’ water quality improves and does not
degrade. This is an older part of the
county where the lakes are utilized for stormwater and the City of Lake Mary’s
stormwater. These residents recognize
that as waterfront property owners they get a benefit, but they also realize
there is a responsibility.
-------
Commissioner Lockhart said as their representative on
the superintendent search committee for Seminole County Public Schools (SCPS),
she is pleased to report that the committee did a phenomenal job. The have selected five names to go forward to
the Seminole County School Board for consideration. Of course, the board has the opportunity to
pull up any other names that were not included.
The candidates are all within the State of Florida and there is one
internal candidate, and one candidate from Lake County who, interestingly
enough, had been an elected superintendent in another part of the state where
many of the smaller counties have elected superintendents. And three applicants are from Orange
County. As the chairman of that
committee, Commissioner Lockhart stated they will be presenting the Committee’s
work to the School Board on December 15th.
--------
Commissioner Lockhart said there are two things she
wanted to bring up that this Board had talked about before with staff and she
does not mean to do it ad nauseum, but she is trying to find the magic
bullet. The situation this morning with
the item that was on the agenda that really was a memory marker, she is finding
more and more with items on the agenda that they do not get backup for them, so
she tends to wait until the last day before the Board meeting at the end of the
day to see if there is stuff that is being distributed. And she does not know how to fix that, but
she is not always here and she is not always waiting by her email on Monday
afternoon to get anything that might be coming.
She wanted to bring this up again as a point of conversation. Commissioner Zembower stated he concurs. For example, he just received some documents
yesterday about the public hearing scheduled for 6:00 p.m. this evening from
Public Works in an email. He knows they
have discussed this multiple times, and he knows sometimes things fall through
the cracks or you need something last minute, but he thinks they should be
looking at some kind of policy that if they don’t have
everything gathered up, it either is removed from the agenda and gets
rescheduled or has some kind of process for vetting it. He added he does not want to say it is about
being perfect, but it is about being more consistent, because it does happen
quite a bit. They get documents at the
last minute or he will show up the morning of the hearing and his aide will
hand him more stuff that just came in.
Is it important, is it not important; he does not know until he looks at
it, but it has to have their attention given to it for consideration. So, he would like to see some kind of process
put in place that says if you don’t have all the documents ready to go, then
don’t put it on the agenda. If they are
significant documents that are going to show up at the last minute, then maybe
it just needs to be pulled from the agenda and rescheduled.
Chairman Constantine noted they had a discussion after
the last meeting, and the staff is well aware of the concerns they all have on this
issue. He is not making excuses and he
gets the point, but many of the things that they get are from outside sources
and then they get the dilemma as to should they give it to the Board or not. This Board has the choice, if they feel they
received far too much information to make an honest decision, to just postpone
it if they have to. He believes
Commissioner Lockhart brings up a good point, but he thinks that staff is
sensitive to it and is going to try to make their best effort to ensure that
what they provide is given to them in a timely fashion.
Commissioner Lockhart said she wants to expand on this
and look at it from less of a myopic perspective and more from the perspective of
the public, because they see agenda items and there is nothing for them to
click on to learn about what it is, and this Board has a relationship problem
right now with their community. There is
some distrust and some opportunities for better communication, and she thinks correcting
this could probably help with that. If they
were to take themselves out of the positions that they are in in this room and
put themselves as a member of the public who is interested in what is going on
in local government, their perception of what is happening here is not probably
terribly positive, given all of the blank pages, because it doesn’t then always
get uploaded. The public does not see all
of the stuff that is handed out to the Board at the last minute. Selfishly for herself, yes, it is troublesome
to get things later, but she is looking at it from a more global perspective
and seeing that they are continuing to have and not help themselves to improve
their relationships with the public right now.
And this is maybe one way that if they can get a handle on this, that
might be a step in the right direction.
They are teeing it up for people to say, “Well look, there isn’t even
any backup on the agenda.” And when
there is a good and valid reason, she is all about it, but it is happening too
frequently that they are creating their own problems, which is her concern.
Commissioner Dallari stated he would like staff to
give them a hard date of when the agenda will be uploaded and basically
frozen. He believes that may be the
answer. Chairman Constantine questioned
whether he means the agenda or backup information. Commissioner Lockhart clarified she is
talking about the agenda with fill-in pages that say “backup coming.” She thinks they had four or five in just this
agenda. Commissioner Dallari added they
do not need to do it today, but he would like staff to report back to
them. Ms. Guillet stated if the Board
wants, they can say if it is not ready to go on agenda day, it will wait until
the next meeting. She noted it is a
little difficult because in the 90 days between the end of October and the
middle of January, there are two meetings, so often times they know they only
have one shot. They have two shots during
that 90-day period to do business before the Board. They can just say if they cannot get it done,
it just doesn’t get done until January 12.
She expressed that she is hearing that they don’t want anything added
onto the agenda or even placeholders put on the agenda, so it just needs to be
scheduled for the next meeting. If that
is what the Board wants, they can do that.
Commissioner Herr stated she thinks what they are
asking for is that if November and December are problematic, then when they
come back with a plan that you indicate that for ten months of the year, it
operates this way, and then for November and December, they request the
exception to be able to whatever. She
thinks there is flexibility.
Commissioner Dallari expressed he was fine with that. Commissioner Herr added her sense of it is
that there was frustration prior to November and December.
District 1
Commissioner
Dallari shared that there was an Orlando
Sentinel newspaper article a day or so ago that Sergeant First Class Alwyn Cashe, who died in 2005 at the age of 35 while in action in
Iraq, was decorated with the Medal of Honor.
Commissioner Dallari would like to do something in Chuluota for
him. He thinks the Medal of Honor is
significant enough to do something.
--------
Commissioner Dallari reported he was driving on SR 417
around University Boulevard a couple of weeks ago and it was shut down. He sat in his car for almost 30 minutes. He realized that Duke Energy was changing out
their power lines in Orange County.
Since then, he had a meeting with Duke and they will be doing the same
thing in Seminole County from the Orange County transmission line by
University, their substation, all the way to the Howell Branch substation in
Seminole County. It is the Winter Park
East Transmission project and it will take a little over a year to
complete. They have already put in some
poles and they are going to put in some temporary lines, and they are going to
change out the transmission lines that go through a small portion of southeast
Seminole County. Sometime in January,
they will be launching a website showing all the things that will be taking place. There will be roads closed but they do plan
to coordinate with first responders as well as dispatch.
--------
Motion
by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Zembower, to reappoint Dennis
Langlois and Tom Mintor to the Agriculture Advisory
Committee for two-year terms; Michael Fratrik to the
Contractor Examiner Board for a one-year term; Desta Horner and Paul Zuromski to the Historical Commission for two-year terms;
John McGrath to the Animal Control Board for a one-year term; and Don Peterson
to the Code Enforcement Board for a three-year term. (Letters to appointees received and filed.)
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
--------
Motion
by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Zembower, to approve and
authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2020-R-158
recognizing Matt Brown, who was on the Planning and Zoning Commission for 16
years, thanking him for his dedication to Seminole County as a volunteer.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
District 3/CHAIRMAN’S
REPORT
Chairman Constantine echoed what Commissioner Lockhart
stated about the conference in Duval County.
He reported that the broadband effort is going to be a top priority for
the Florida Association of Counties, and although the small counties are taking
the lead, it is for all the rural areas.
For example, Palm Beach has one of the largest rural areas in
Florida.
--------
Chairman Constantine expressed he had mentioned before and
wanted to reiterate that if any of the Commissioners cannot attend their
outside board or committee meetings, he thinks it would be great if they could
notify their alternate so he or she can attend and represent Seminole
County. He added there are meetings
coming up that they may have been appointed to and he’d like them to be
cognizant so they are available and can get all the information they may need.
--------
Motion by Chairman Constantine, seconded
by Commissioner Zembower, to reappoint Rex Clonts,
Jr. to the Agriculture Advisory Board; Marianne King to the Animal Control
Board; and Donna Bundy to the Historical Commission.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
--------
Chairman Constantine advised there
was a request received by one of their favorite hoteliers about a resolution
for Rich Maladecki,
who is retiring as President and CEO of the Central Florida Hotel & Lodging
Association. He is requesting that they
put that resolution on a future BCC agenda for a meeting date closest to his
retirement date.
--------
In regard to recognitions and resolutions, Chairman
Constantine requested that the members of Board be more inclusive than less. They do not want to overburden, but he asked
that they please make sure they get it through his office and they will try to
accommodate everyone’s requests.
--------
Chairman Constantine expressed they are looking forward to
hearing results about the change to their notification policy [in connection
with notifying residents regarding development projects]. Ms. Guillet said she has a final draft that
they plan to send out this week and advised staff is already utilizing some of
those procedures. She noted they are not
going to adopt it as part of the Administrative Code so they can make adjustments to it as they see they need to. They welcome any feedback from the Board on
the policy.
--------
Chairman Constantine remarked they have talked time and time
again about the Oviedo JPA, and he would like them to start at least
communicating with them to see if they can start working on something. Commissioner Zembower noted they have been
working on Winter Springs and Oviedo since he and Commissioner Lockhart
arrived. Ms. Guillet reminded that
Winter Springs has declined, and they received communication from Oviedo this
week saying that staff was going to confer with the city manager and they would
get back to this Board. She added Ms.
Hammock has been checking in with them regularly.
--------
Chairman Constantine expressed they are looking at a time in
the near future that they can put together another retreat to clarify some of
the things the Board would like to see as far as real benchmarks that they can
accomplish as they move forward. He
asked that they contact the County Manager’s Office with any suggestions. Commissioner Zembower remarked they had all
given clear direction and ranked their priorities and a lot of that is still
ongoing. He inquired whether the
Chairman is asking to add more on top of those without an understanding of a resolution
on what has already been asked. Ms.
Guillet explained she had talked to the Chairman about doing a planning session
with the Board some time after the first of the year just to understand what
the priorities will be moving forward.
They would certainly revisit the key strategic issues that they
established at the last retreat. They
have the track or the action plan that they continue to update. There may be some things they want to adjust
or augment; she thinks there are some other initiatives that could fall under
those key strategic issues. The one that
comes to mind, just based on what they have been seeing recently, is the land
use policy and having maybe a broader discussion over the coming year with
respect to that. Their meetings seem to
be significantly involved in land use issues and she thinks maybe having some
clarification and maybe even a conversation with the community about that might
be something they want to talk about.
She said she uses that just as an example of the kind of thing that she,
from a staff standpoint, would like to get some direction from the Board
on. They are starting to do planning
meetings with all of the directors and the senior management staff. She would like to hear from the Board as to
how they feel about what they established last fall over a year ago and maybe
identify some things that they would like to work on in the coming year. And not just from a staff standpoint, but she
thinks there are some things maybe the Board might want to work on.
Chairman Constantine commented that last time he thought it
was helpful, not only to those that had been here before, but to the new
Commissioners when they did that, and now they have another new
Commissioner. The group dynamics that
are developed are important.
Commissioner Herr said she ran for a governing role, and she
thinks these are governing roles. She
just offers that if there is a strategic plan that is built and it is coming
back to a governing board for input, that it is coming to them with
recommendations and suggestions prior to coming to them for the white
board. She does not think this is the
place where the white board can happen.
Commissioner Dallari agreed. She
said she is happy to build camaraderie in a meeting but opined the Board should
be giving input and not giving direction.
Commissioner Zembower added their role is basically to set policy and budget. They have to rely on the experts, which is
staff, to give them direction, give them advice, find those individuals or
consultants that are experts and bring them in, but ultimately it is at this
Board’s direction. Commissioner Herr
added that they are two different things from a strategic planning perspective,
so giving direction is different from her walking into a meeting and
whiteboarding where they think they are going.
She opined that is a dangerous position to be in. She would think that Ms. Guillet’s
team would want to do that before they get to the Commission.
Chairman Constantine stated he believes it has been a long
time since they really had a deep dive look into land use and comp planning,
and if there is one thing that they continually have battle after battle about
is that. And they heard that on the
campaign trail. He agrees that the Commissioners
are not the experts. They are the board
of directors and they can bring ideas to this Commission to help them move
forward, and he thinks that is what they are talking about.
Ms. Guillet stated she will use land use policy as an
example because that seems to be a topic that comes up at every meeting. There is a land use policy that was codified
years ago by the Board, and the land use decisions that they are making are not
necessarily consistent with that policy because things have changed, conditions
in the county have changed. From a staff
standpoint, it is difficult for them to try to give them recommendations and
tell them this complied with their policy, because the policy says one thing,
but the Board’s actions and application of the policy have been different. She thinks reconciling those things is
important. It is important for the
Board, for the citizens, and for staff so that the stated policy that people
who live in this county and people who may want to develop in this county can
rely on reflects where the Board’s thinking is.
Getting to the 10,000-foot level on those kinds of things so they can
then help them craft land development regulations and more of the operational
things that staff does is important, and understanding what their expectation
is, for example, Orange Boulevard.
Things have changed and getting an understanding of where the Board is
on that, she is not sure they can tell them at a meeting, but identifying that
this is something they want clarified and this is a priority from a governing
standpoint, then staff can do some work on it and bring something back with a
recommendation. She would like to identify
where the Board wants staff to focus their resources. She noted they may just say they like what
staff did in October of 2019 and just keep doing that. Her gut is, at least from a land use policy
standpoint, they need to start spending some time on that and some energy. She wants to make sure they are doing that in
a way that is reflective of a governing philosophy.
Commissioner Lockhart noted for the record, they did
actually stick things on the wall at their retreat. Commissioner Dallari added that they did
stick. She said she thinks the gentleman
they used to facilitate that was wonderful, but she understands that he has
left the area; he is maybe across the country now. She would highly recommend that they have
someone still to facilitate that.
Commissioner Zembower advised he has already been in contact with him and
informed the County Manager’s Office, because they are coming up on review times.
Chairman Constantine said he would like to leave it in the
hands of staff to start working with each of the Commission offices so they can
come up with a time that accommodates all of their schedules. Ms. Guillet confirmed that the desire of the
Board is to go ahead and to try and get Dr. Larry Ross back in, which from a
staff standpoint would be great.
Chairman Constantine remarked that consistency and continuity would be
great.
--------
Chairman Constantine distributed the BCC Liaison Appointments
and the Board Appointments for 2021 (received and filed). He had emailed it earlier so the Board would
have a chance to review it and make any comments. He said he tried to be fair and consistent
and that everyone has six committees.
Motion by Commissioner Zembower, seconded
by Commissioner Dallari, to approve the list of board appointments for 2021.
Under discussion, Commissioner Lockhart shared that she was
appointed to the Alliance for Regional Transportation last year and they never
responded to her inquiries about when and where they actually met. Chairman Constantine advised that they just
had a seminar, and since they have something to do with transportation and the
MPO, that is why he appointed Commissioner Dallari.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
District 5 (Continued)
Motion
by Commissioner Herr, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to approve the
reappointment of Imogene Yarborough and Barbara Hughes to the Agriculture
Advisory Committee for two-year terms; Gayle Hair to the Animal Control Board
for a one-year term; Bill Young to the Contractor Examiner Board for a one-year
term; Raychel Garcia to the Library Advisory Board
for a two-year term; and Emily Hanna and Daniel Roy to the Parks and Preservation
Advisory Committee for three-year terms.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
--------
Motion by Commissioner Herr, seconded by
Commissioner Dallari, to approve appropriate Resolution #2020-R-157 in
appreciation of Jennie Hayes for her service on the Board of Adjustment.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
COMMUNICATIONS AND/OR
REPORTS
The following Communications and/or
Reports were received and filed.
1. Letter dated November 6, 2020, to the Board of County Commissioners Seminole County, Florida from Deborah L. Pedraza, Senior Director, Foundation for Orange County Public Schools, re: Thank you for your gift of $8,000 to the Central Florida NAF Academies Fund, a fund of the Foundation for Orange County Public Schools.
2. Letter dated October 26, 2020, to the Honorable Jay Zembower from Charles Lacey, Mayor Winter Springs, Florida, re: Communicating Preliminary Interest & Support for Lake Management Services – Little Lake Howell (a/k/a Tuskawilla Lake).
3. Letter dated November 11, 2020 to “Ladies and Gentlemen,” as transmitted to Seminole County Manager Nicole Guillet, from Traci R. Houchin, City of Sanford Office of the City Clerk, re: Ordinance No. 4541, passed and adopted by the City Commission of the City of Sanford, Florida on November 9, 2020 that annexes 299 Monroe Road, Sanford, Florida.
4. Notice of Public Hearings to the Board of County Commissioners Seminole County from Planning & Zoning Board and Mayor and City Commission of City of Lake Mary, re: Public hearings 12-08-20 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting; 01-07-21 Mayor/City Commission meeting First Reading; 01-21-20 Mayor/City Commission meeting Second Reading on Amendment to the SWELL at Lake Mary Planned Unit Development to add 134 N. Lake Street to the Development.
-------
Chairman Constantine
recessed the meeting at 4:30 p.m., reconvening at 6:00 p.m. Deputy Clerk Terri Porter was replaced by Deputy Clerk Chariti
Colon.
Agenda Item #40 –
2020-2424
Development Order
Appeal/Geneva Ski Lake Subdivision
Richard Creedon, Geneva Citizens Association, Appellant
Katrina
Shadix, Bear Warriors United, Appellant
Mark King, RPR, Stenographic Court Reporter with Kerr &
Associates, was present for this item only.
Chairman Constantine announced this is a quasi-judicial matter and
explained Florida law requires that the Board's decision be supported by the
competent substantial evidence presented during the hearing. Mr. Chipok stated
this is an appeal of the Geneva Ski Lake Development Order #19-55100016. Two appeals were filed. At the request of the Appellants, the cases
will be heard separately but sequentially.
The first case will be Case #20-33000005 by the Geneva Citizens
Association followed by Case #20-3300006 by Bear Warriors, Inc. Mr. Chipok reviewed
the rules and procedures to be followed for a quasi-judicial hearing.
Danalee Petyk, Planning and Development, addressed the Board to
present the request as outlined in the agenda memorandum.
Ex parte was submitted from all districts
(received and filed). Commissioner Dallari announced he at one time was a member of the Geneva
Citizens Association, but he does not know if his membership is still
active. Commissioner Herr advised she is
a current a member of the Geneva Citizens Association and has been receiving
their newsletters for approximately 20 years.
William Barfield, Esquire, on behalf of the Applicant, displayed and
reviewed conceptual plans for the project (received and filed). He explained the lake is being excavated to
be designed as a slalom course amenity for the exclusive use of the 12
subdivision residents. Mr. Barfield
reviewed the Development Order and required bonds. In regards to the additional conditions staff
provided that the Board may want to consider, he advised the Applicant has
reviewed those and only has a problem with Number 3, which suggests a third
bond that is 110% of the cost to construct the lake which will be in place for
five years or until 75% of the lots are sold.
Mr. Barfield discussed water levels and lake functions to explain why
they do not agree with the additional bond request. Commissioner Zembower
inquired if their engineering has arrived at any kind of assurance that the
lake will actually fill with water, and Mr. Barfield responded yes. They know what the groundwater level is and
they have done borings. There are more
borings that will be addressed during the engineering process.
Richard Creedon, Geneva Citizens Association
Vice President, briefly explained the reasons why they filed their appeal. He stated the appeal could have been avoided
if staff had required a Seminole County borrow pit permit and had used and
abided by the commonly accepted definition of conserved open space that is
expressed in the rural cluster subdivision provisions of the Land Development
Code and Comprehensive Plan.
Nancy Harmon, Geneva Citizens Association, reviewed and discussed
Section 30.109 of the Seminole County Land Development Code and why they
believe this project is not in compliance with that code. She reviewed rural cluster subdivision
requirements and stated the standard has been set up to preserve agriculture
land so that land would be available any time somebody chose to utilize it for
agriculture purposes. She commented with
this plan the way it is, the land is gone and it destroys the concept of what
the cluster subdivision requirements were set forth in the Comp Plan. She discussed open space easements and having
one dwelling unit per five acres of net buildable land.
David Bear, Esquire, on behalf of Geneva Citizens Association,
distributed a binder to the Board (received and filed) and reviewed the legal
issues in the Development Order and why they believe it was not issued in
compliance with the Seminole County Development Code.
Chairman Constantine recessed the meeting at 7:28 p.m., reconvening at 7:36 p.m.
With regard to public
participation, Chairman Constantine advised written comment forms in support of
the appeal were received from the following:
Oliver Henry, 291 Seminole Woods Boulevard.; Don Epps, 144 Peacock Drive;
Janice Jourdenais, 4165 North County Road 426; David Jourdenais, 4165 North County Road 426; Greg Loebl, 450 Scott Road; Bridget Geiger, 4020 North County
Road 426; Emily Turner, 1797 Tangled Oaks Court; Carole Buzby,
1295 Settlers Loop; Benjamin Buzby, 1295 Settlers
Loop; Dylan Rodriguez, 362 Seminole Avenue; Karleen Babcock, 4355 North County
Road 426; Dana and Ron Myers, 1651 Old Mims Road; and Bea Imhoff, 1711
Swallowtail Lane.
The following spoke in
support of the appeal and addressed concerns including borrow pits, rural
boundary, ski lake's ability to maintain water, dump truck traffic, the Geneva
Bubble, groundwater tables, wells running dry, environmental impacts, five-acre
lots, wildlife, and boat noise: James
Miller, 1320 Cochran Road; Wafa Esposito, 5040 Hawks Hammock
Way; Keri Thompson, 925 Liberty Lane; Bill Holmes, 210 East State Road 46;
Douglas Geiger; 4020 North County Road 426; Sharon Digby, 2490 Snow Hill Road;
Natalia Rodriguez, 362 Seminole Avenue; Cindy Haller, 1731 Beacon Drive; David
McDonald, 153 Whitcomb Drive; Diane Oliver, 916 Harrison Road; Deborah Poulalion, 1367 Cor Jesu Court; Cali Adams, 1011
Mockingbird Lane; James Rupe, 631 Scott Road; George Sellery, 5231 Shoreline Circle; Michael Crowthers,
180 Peacehill Place; Deborah Selsor,
371 Lake Proctor Court; Michelle Bernstein, 2075 Retreat Road; Joseph
Humphreys, 883 Cardinal Pointe Cove; Tom Shafer, 921 Harrison Road; Melody
Gaston, 921 Harrison Road; William Wills, 495 Still Forest Terrace; Kim Buchheit, 252 Spring Run Circle; Tamara Dowling, 5130
Morning Dew Loop; Adam Hirst, 1475 Devany Court; and
Rebecca Wilkinson, 1240 Brumley Road.
No one else spoke in
support or opposition, and public input was closed.
Public Comment and
Speaker Forms received and filed.
In rebuttal, Mr.
Barfield stated what really is at issue tonight is what the ordinance provides
and whether or not they are compliant.
He introduced their geotechnical engineer Devo Seereeram,
Devo Engineering. Mr. Seereeram reviewed his education and qualifications. He advised in the early '90s he was appointed
by Seminole County to be their hydrogeologic expert on the Geneva Task Force,
and that committee did the original Geneva Freshwater Study. Mr. Seereeram
reviewed the borings that have been done on the site, the different layers and
depth of the aquifer, and the Geneva Freshwater Lens. He discussed the surrounding wells and the
excavation site. He noted he heard
concerns that the lake will not hold water.
However, the lake level they are proposing is going to be overwhelmed by
the groundwater and will actually have too much water. They have proposed using a flashboard system
on the lake so there is no discharge and they are not wasting any
freshwater.
Upon Commissioner Zembower's inquiry, Mr. Seereeram
advised how many wells immediately around the site were accessed. The Commissioner noted there are several
immediately adjacent that were not accessed.
Commissioner Zembower confirmed with Mr. Seereeram based upon his expertise, training, and
experience, this will not be a dry hole but will actually hold too much
water. The Commissioner requested any
residents present in chambers and who live adjacent or immediately around the
property advise, by a show of hands, if they were contacted by Mr. Seereeram. No hands
were raised, and the Commissioner noted nobody present was contacted.
Commissioner Dallari stated he would like to add the condition that a
geotechnical report demonstrating the lake will have no negative impact to the
Geneva Bubble must be presented prior to final engineering approval and Board
approval. Mr. Seereeram
advised they are working on a final report right now. The preliminary report was submitted and
staff requested additional borings so they have added six more borings for a
total of ten.
Upon request of
Commissioner Lockhart, Mr. Seereeram explained the
borings were completed in two stages.
The first stage is when they had a concept sketch of where the ski lake
would be constructed. When they got the
final plan, there was a shift in the final configuration of the ski lake a bit
more to the west so they did a second series of borings further to the
west. That last set of water table
readings was completed on December 2nd, and the information was sent to Jim Potter,
Engineering Division, within the last four or five days. Commissioner Lockhart commented she was
concerned about the borings that were done.
She looked at the St. Johns Water Management District's response, and
their second response on September 30th expressed a concern that there was not
yet enough information provided to them showing there would not be negative
impacts. Mr. Seereeram
responded he has provided a response to St. Johns in regards to that. Chairman Constantine stated he contacted St.
Johns today and was advised they have not received that response.
Mr. Barfield stated
they have not completed engineering and do not have all of their permits. They are working with St. Johns. However, that is not the issue that is in
front of the Commission. The issue is
whether or not the Applicant has complied with the ordinance that the County
has in place. When looking at the staff
report in the agenda memorandum, it goes through each element of the
appeal. There are four or five issues
raised, and they address each element from a standpoint of whether it complies
with the ordinance or not. Staff has
been very clear the Applicant is in compliance with
the ordinance. Mr. Barfield addressed
the concern of an excavation permit and reviewed the requirements in the
ordinance. He expressed they are exempt
from obtaining a permit in the platting of a subdivision and the material does
not have to stay on the site. He
reviewed Section 30.109, open space requirements, buffers, the size and
intended purpose of the lake, and the Geneva Lens in rebuttal to concerns that
were raised. He expressed they are
compliant with the ordinance, and this appeal should be denied on the basis
that the arguments put forth are unfounded and not supported by any facts.
Upon request of
Commissioner Dallari to address why they oppose the
suggested condition for an additional bond, Mr. Barfield explained the only way
to correct the lake level in the event of a drought would be to supplement the
water by way of a well or dig the lake deeper, which nobody wants to do. Once a drought was over, the water would go
back to its normal level and the lake would be fine. A bond would not address that problem. Upon inquiry of Commissioner Herr, Mr.
Barfield stated there is nothing in the ordinance that says open space cannot
be used for recreational purposes.
In the Appellant’s
rebuttal, Mr. Bear noted the geotechnical evaluation, which is the only
geotechnical data that was made publicly available, has only four SPT
borings. He reviewed the findings of
those borings. He stated if more borings
have been done, those should be shared with everybody and evaluated before
coming before the Board, which is why Chapter 65 is configured the way it is
and why St. Johns Management's report is supposed to be already completed. He stated the predicate language to all of
those seven subsections in Chapter 65.1 state excavated dirt has to stay on the
land. Mr. Bear addressed open space and
the size of the ski lake. He expressed
this process should be going through Chapter 65, which is a procedure set up to
make sure the Board has an opportunity to get it right, not so that opportunity
is taken away and given to unelected staff.
Upon Commissioner Zembower's request, Ms.
Harmon clarified agriculture open space.
Chairman Constantine recessed the meeting at 9:54 p.m., reconvening at 10:03 p.m.
Commissioner Zembower requested a legal opinion on the Codes stated
during the hearing and those that were relied upon by staff. Mr. Chipok
explained when looking at statutes, you apply the plain meaning. He reviewed case law regarding plain meaning,
Section 65.1, and borrow pit permits. He
noted Subsection F is the one that staff has said is applicable in this situation,
excavation in conjunction with platting of a subdivision when the activities
are approved by the development review engineer of the public works or
both. There is no reference to the
excavated material having to stay on site.
He noted the subject property is private property and not federal,
state, or county property.
Commissioner Lockhart
wondered if the Board when they adopted this code contemplated this would be
the type of subdivision that could be platted.
She inquired how many other subdivisions there are in the county that would
have ever excavated this amount of material.
Mr. Chipok advised if the end result is
something that the current Board does not like, it is within their parameter
prospectively to direct staff to plug the holes or get rid of the potential
unintended consequences.
Commissioner Herr
inquired if it is contemplated that a ski lake is open space in regards to
Section 30.109 and if the calculation is being done appropriately. Ms. Petyk responded Section 30.109 states the
area not devoted to development shall be preserved through a perpetual open
space easement. For this particular
development, what staff and what the Applicant was considering the perpetual
open space easement area is the approximately 50 acres of wetlands which are
being preserved. Condition N of the
recorded Development Order says all remaining areas not platted as a ski lake,
right-of-way, or single-family lot will be dedicated as open space on the final
plat. This open space easement will be
perpetually restricted to open space. It
may be utilized for active agriculture use, included but not limited to citrus
or other fruit or vegetable crops, grazing and pasturing of animals, and in
some cases silviculture. That is where
staff applied the optional cluster provision for the open space, and the ski
lake is not considered open space. The
wetlands area and the buffer tracts are the open space areas. Commissioner Herr stated there seems to be a
difference of opinion with the lawyers with regard to the wetlands being
counted or not being counted as open space.
Ms. Petyk explained A-5 is exempt from the open space provision. The only requirement for open space for a
subdivision in A-5 is if they do the cluster that the area not devoted to
development shall be preserved through a perpetual open space easement. The ski lake is considered part of the
development. There is no requirement for
what the open space is, where it is, or how big it is.
Upon Commissioner
Herr's request for clarification on the density, Ms. Petyk explained the ski
lake area is counted towards the net buildable area because it could
potentially be built on it. It doesn't
have to be that ski lake so it's counted towards the developable area when
doing the density. Commissioner Zembower inquired about the differences between the
proposed D.O. and a borrow pit permit.
Mr. Jreij responded the conditions of the
borrow pit are incorporated into the proposed D.O. and will be reviewed during
the final site plan approval.
Commissioner Zembower confirmed with Mr. Jreij the only thing omitted in the whole process would be
a public hearing.
Commissioner Lockhart
requested clarification on when a St. Johns permit was required prior to the
issuance of a borrow permit. Mr. Jreij responded they cannot start construction before they
get a permit from St. Johns Water Management.
Ms. Guillet explained it's more of sequencing
issue. There are things with a borrow
permit application that would be provided in advance of the borrow pit because
they're doing the final engineering for the borrow pit. But because they're doing the final
engineering for the subdivision, the permitting and everything else comes
before the final approval of the final engineering plans for the subdivision.
Commissioner Zembower confirmed with Mr. Bear their main issue is there
was no public hearing for a borrow pit permit.
Mr. Bear added as presented, this development is not okay according to
Geneva Citizens Association because it doesn't comply with multiple sections of
the code. If it didn't have the pit,
then they wouldn't have an objection.
After questions and
discussion regarding the recommended third bond, Ms. Guillet
explained the intent of the bond was to address any engineering defects that
might manifest. It's a
longer-than-normal bond period because there were some concerns that some engineering
defects might demonstrate down the road, so staff wanted to give it a little
bit more time to make sure that it functioned as a lake. It wasn't intended to penalize anybody for
normal water fluctuations just like any other lake would face.
Commissioner Lockhart
commented clearly there was enough of a concern on the part of staff to include
a lot of the elements of a borrow pit in the development order. She requested staff explain how the decision
was made to handle this. Mr. Jreij responded there was a lot of discussion with staff
and Development Review staff about what is the best way and what is the
understanding of the Code, and then they determined if it's done with the plat,
it does not require the permit.
Commissioner Lockhart confirmed with Mr. Jreij
staff opted to go with the route that would not require the public
process. Ms. Guillet
clarified the Board that established this code created an exception with
respect to platted subdivisions, so there was intention to provide an exception
with respect to that. Staff determined
there was an exception in these provisions for excavation.
Commissioner Lockhart
confirmed with Mr. Chipok somewhere along the lines
someone contemplated there might be something that staff would determine to be
appropriate and maybe even the attorney would consider to be consistent and
appropriate, yet there would still be the ability to appeal. The Commissioner requested what would be the
legal basis for the Board to grant the appeal.
Mr. Chipok explained staff is obligated to
apply the regulations as they are written.
In certain circumstances, the regulations may have unintended
consequences. In certain circumstances,
that is why there is the appeal right, and the Board looks at the broader
policy issues rather than the strict application of the law. The Board's decision has to be based on
competent substantial evidence and it cannot be arbitrary. If there are policies in the Comp Plan or
application of the Code that are different than staff has interpreted them, it
is within the Board's purview to address and direct.
Commissioner Lockhart
confirmed with Mr. Chipok if staff can suggest
conditions to the Development Order and there are modifications that could be
made to the development order, the Board can make modifications and suggestions
of sequencing in the Development Order.
Ms. Guillet reminded if the decision is made to allow this to
continue forward, whether or not additional conditions are put on that, the
Applicant still has to get through final engineering review with staff. One of the requirements is the geotechnical
report and having a third-party review.
The Board can put conditions on it, and it still might not get through
it at the end of the day. A discussion
ensued regarding what motions and options the Board can consider.
Chairman Constantine
closed the public hearing at this time.
Motion by Commissioner Zembower to deny the appeal,
thereby upholding the Development Services Director’s decision to approve the
Development Order for the Geneva Ski Lake Subdivision, located on the east side
of County Road 426.
Chairman Constantine
called for a second to the motion, without response, whereupon the motion died
for lack of same. Chairman Constantine
suggested they grant the appeal and ask the applicant to start over under the
other conditions discussed as far as coming back and doing it through the
process of public process.
Motion by Commissioner Zembower, seconded by
Commissioner Lockhart, to grant the appeal, overturning the Development
Services Director’s decision, thereby denying the Development Order for the
Geneva Ski Lake Subdivision, located on the east side of County Road 426 and to start the process under the
conditions that are outlined in the appeal.
Under discussion, Commissioner Lockhart requested confirmation that
legally the motion is appropriate. Mr. Chipok responded Motion Number 2 on page 756 is to overturn
the Development Service Director's decision to approve the Development Order
for the Geneva Lake subdivision.
Chairman Constantine added they always have the right to come back and
start the process over.
Commissioner Zembower restated the motion
for clarification as follows:
Motion by Commissioner Zembower, seconded by
Commissioner Lockhart, to grant the appeal, overturning the Development
Services Director’s decision, thereby denying the Development Order for the
Geneva Ski Lake Subdivision, located on the east side of County Road 426.
Commissioner Zembower confirmed with Mr. Chipok that accomplishes the relief requested.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman Constantine inquired of Katrina Shadix,
Bear Warriors United, if her appeal still needed to be heard. Ms. Shadix
responded it did not and requested a refund of her appeal fee. The Chairman stated he thinks the Appellants
brought a very important issue to the Board's attention. He suggested it would be appropriate to ask
staff to immediately plug the hole and refund the appeal fee to both
Appellants.
Motion by Commissioner Zembower, seconded by
Commissioner Lockhart, to refund the $1,000 appeal
process fee to Richard Creedon, Geneva Citizens Association, Appellant,
Case #20-33000005; and Katrina Shadix, Bear Warriors
United, Appellant, Case #20-33000006.
Chairman Constantine inquired if there was consensus to move forward
on directing staff to plug the hole. No objections were voiced.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Ms. Shadix stated that notice requirements
were not addressed and adjacent property owners did not know about this
proposed project. She suggested using
the County's texting system to let citizens know about zoning and development
process. She also stated it should not
be this confusing and take this long for a public hearing to be held. She suggested forming an environmental
advisory board or committee or group to attend meetings with staff and
developers. Ms. Guillet advised the Development
Advisory Board is a private group and the meetings are not public, but staff
sometimes gets invited to those meetings.
Ms. Hammock clarified they did go out 2,000 feet for notifications for
this, posted on Nextdoor, posted the property with
two placards, and advertised it in the newspaper.
Michael Crowthers, 180 Peacehill
Place, stated he owns several properties adjacent to the subject property and
has seven wells total listed as 120, 150, and 180, none of which were ever
inspected even though the Applicant stated they did. His property is fully fenced and gated. He requested on any case going forward that
deals with water, if the Applicant is going to have to do water testing or
inspection of any sort, they get approval from the property owner to go onto
the property and have something signed saying they were there.
Sharon Digby, 2490 Snow Hill Road, advised after she saw notification
on Nextdoor, she contacted Commissioner Zembower's Office and spoke to someone and was misinformed
that there would be a County Commission meeting on this, so those that were
concerned had absolute assurance that it was going to come before the Board the
first time around.
--------
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 11:33 p.m., this same date.
ATTEST:_____________________________Clerk___________________________Chairman
tp/cc