BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA

MARCH 22, 2011

The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held at 9:30 a.m., on Tuesday, March 22, 2011, in Room 1028 of the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.

Present:

Chairman Brenda Carey (District 5)

Vice Chairman Carlton Henley (District 4)

Commissioner Bob Dallari (District 1)

Commissioner John Horan (District 2)

Commissioner Dick Van Der Weide (District 3)

Acting County Manager Joe Forte

County Attorney Robert McMillan

Deputy Clerk Jane Spencer

Pastor Jody McKewen, First Presbyterian Church, Sanford, gave the Invocation.

Commissioner Henley led the Pledge of Allegiance.

AWARDS & PRESENTATIONS

Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt appropriate Resolution 2011-R-40, as shown on page _______, proclaiming April 5, 2011 as “Seminole County Farm Tour Day.”

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

Matthew Lollar, Extension Service Division, addressed the Board to thank them for recognizing the agricultural community. He reviewed the Farm Tour brochure from the packet (received and filed) that was provided to the Board, and invited all to attend the tour on April 5.

Imogene Yarborough, 186 First Street, addressed the Board to thank them for passing the sign ordinance which will allow the people in the County who grow and produce some type of agriculture to advertise. She directed the Board to an invitation included in their packets for the 2011 Annual Spring Ranchers Forum which will be held on Thursday, March 24.

The Board presented the Resolution to Ms. Yarborough and Mr. Lollar.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Dallari, Ms. Yarborough stated Seminole County did well with the Rodeo although they did not place first and that they are striving to have a Junior Ranch Rodeo on May 14.

-------

Motion by Commissioner Horan, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt an appropriate Resolution #2011-R-41, as shown on page _______, to acknowledge Bari Furniture, Industrial Lighting Products, JVI Appraisal Division, Millennium Luxury Coaches and Power Grid Engineering for being Seminole County companies that were nominated as 2011 “Florida Companies to Watch.”

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

William McDermott, Economic Development Director, addressed the Board to introduce Jason Hendren, President of Industrial Lighting Products and Bob Williams, who is representing the Figueroas from Millennium Luxury Coaches. Tom Tilaro, President of Bari Furniture, and Ron Nation, President of JVI Appraisal Division, were recognized but were not present. Mr. McDermott also introduced Fran Korosec, Director of Client Services for the GrowFl program and Florida Economic Gardening Institute, and advised that Mr. Korosec was responsible for putting on the program.

Mr. McDermott and the Commissioners presented the resolutions to Mr. Hendren and Mr. Williams.

-------

Chairman Carey recessed the meeting of the Board of County Commissioners at 9:45 a.m. in order to convene the U.S. Highway 17-92 Community Redevelopment Agency meeting.

U.S. HWY 17-92 CRA

John Metsopoulos, Program Manager for the U.S. 17-92 CRA, addressed the Board to present a 2010/11 Informational Project Budget Status Report. Mr. Metsopoulos advised that the unencumbered fund balances in Aid to Private Organizations are $193,557 in the Mini Grant program and $1,700,000 in the Development Grants. There is an unencumbered balance of $953,000 for Medians projects. He discussed Mast Arms and Lighting projects, stating they have not been tapped into yet, but the City of Sanford will come forth with some projects next year.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Metsopoulos stated that when they come forward with the Master Plan, they will be discussing a Stormwater Study which will identify properties along the 17-92 Corridor that will be needed for regional storm ponds. He stated that the Master Plan will hopefully be completed within this fiscal year.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Carey, Mr. Metsopoulos stated that the Plan should be completed by July or August.

Commissioner Dallari stated that they have been working on the Master Plan for well over a year and he voiced concerns about losing opportunities, especially in the downturn of the economy. He stated that the Plan needs to be finished up sooner rather than later.

Commissioner Dallari advised that the Master Plan will look at the “joint use” of several different things that are needed up and down the corridor, not just the purchasing of property for stormwater. Upon inquiry by Commissioner Horan, Mr. Metsopoulos stated that the consultant is VHB Miller Sellen.

-------

Mr. Metsopoulos presented a request to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the contract between the U.S. 17-92 CRA and French Avenue, LLC, and authorize execution of a Budget Change Request in the amount of $180,100. He stated that the properties are located within the city limits of the City of Sanford, have been vacated and are blighted. The owner plans to tear down the former service station and renovate the existing structure into a mixed-use development of retail and commercial. The applicant is requesting $180,000 to be used towards the $638,500 project.

Chairman Carey clarified with Mr. Metsopoulos that a new 2,000-square-foot center will be built and the 2,400-square-foot center that is remaining will be renovated.

District Commissioner Carey stated that she supports this redevelopment.

Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the Contract, as shown on page _______, between the U.S. 17-92 CRA and French Avenue, LLC, and authorize execution of Budget Change Request (BCR) 11-4, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $180,100 consistent with said Contract.

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

-------

Mr. Metsopoulos presented a request to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the contract between the U.S. 17-92 CRA and Pinter Enterprises Inc., and to authorize execution of a Budget Change Request in the amount of $53,769. He stated that the total cost of the project is estimated to be $144,123; and the applicant, Post Time Lounge, is seeking $53,769.

At the request of Chairman Carey, Mr. Metsopoulos provided photographs (received and filed) that were taken last week depicting the completed work.

Commissioner Henley reviewed the cost analysis page stating it lists $31,180 for landscaping, $17,000 for the parking lot improvements and $95,943 for the patio for a total of $144,123 with a funding request of $53,768. Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Metsopoulos stated that the 20% was figured on $112,000 which was the cost of the parking lot and the patio.

Commissioner Henley stated he believes some of the landscaping costs are extravagant. He stated that the current policy states that if the landscape is part of a larger project, it can be paid for 100% by grant. He believes the Board needs to revisit that from the standpoint of coming up with a percentage, or something of that nature, that the Board will pay.

Commissioner Henley stated that his other concern is whether or not this was submitted in phases since the application he has seen is not complete. He discussed the need for a clearer definition of when "work begins" since the current policy states that the application has to be submitted before work begins. When asked by Commissioner Henley who instructed him to do this project in phases, Mr. Metsopoulos responded that it was the former Planning Manager. Commissioner Henley advised that is a policy statement and only the Board can set policy, not the Planning Manager.

Commissioner Henley discussed about $6,000 worth of items that are not allowable, such as patio torches; and he feels they do not meet the guidelines.

Chairman Carey suggested that the Board may need to look at the policies and guidelines that they set in December of 2008 and redefine them.

Commissioner Dallari stated that the application presented to the Board needs to be complete, concise, and very accurate. There should be a solid recommendation as to what to do or not do. He stated that this application contains a lot of vagueness. He stated that his problem is not just that the dollar figure for some of this landscaping is high but also the timing aspect. He believes the project was broken up into two phases to skirt the timing issue the Board has that the application needs to be submitted before work starts. Because of that, he advised that he has a hard time supporting this project at this funding level.

Chairman Carey stated that she looks to the recommendations from the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the RPA as well as the documentation that comes to the Board. Both of those have unanimously supported this item.

Commissioner Horan informed the Board that he sat on the RPA which recommended this grant be done. He stated that at that same sitting, another grant application was rejected because it came in late. With regard to the strict application of the rule that you have to apply before construction starts, they strictly applied that rule. As he recalled, there was no issue on this particular project with regard to when construction started. Mr. Metsopoulos stated that is correct for Phase II, but there was an issue with Phase I. He further advised there are no costs in the grant for Phase I.

Commissioner Van Der Weide suggested that the business at hand is this particular project and he thinks they have crossed all of their t’s and dotted all of their i's. He stated there is plenty of room to make a lot of changes, not only in the landscaping problem but in the 3% in general that goes to highway landscaping. He stated he believes staff has done what they are supposed to do and doesn't see why this would be any reason to deny.

Chairman Carey stated she does not believe the landowner should get tripped up in the process if the process is not defined closely enough. People come forward to make these applications in good faith based on the rule that the Board has out there and what they are being told by staff. She believes this project made an excellent improvement at that intersection and she would like to see these kinds of projects continuing to happen, especially at major intersections.

Commissioner Henley stated the reason for the CRA being set up was to eliminate crime, eliminate blight and to improve and develop undeveloped land. He stated this site was not a blighted site. He discussed some concerns he has in reading some of the information contained in the application. Phasing did not enter into the information presented until it got to the Technical Advisory Committee. He stated that staff had at first included all of the things that had been done on the interior and windows and then excluded them. There was work that went on prior to submitting the application on September 24, 2010. The work has already been completed for everything out there. Commissioner Henley stated for those reasons and the way the policy is written, he cannot recommend the approval of this application.

Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to deny the authorization for the execution of the contract between the U.S. 17-92 CRA and Pinter Enterprises Inc., and to deny the authorization for the execution of Budget Change Request (BCR) 11-5, in the amount of $53,769 consistent with said contract.

Under discussion, Commissioner Dallari stated it is clear when you read the packet and the project was broken out into phases after the fact, and that is not per the Board’s policy.

Under discussion, Chairman Carey explained why she would not be supporting the motion.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Horan, Mr. Metsopoulos stated that both phases were not done under the same building permit and none of this money is going to a building permit that was pulled and work done prior to the application. Commissioner Horan stated he will not be supporting this motion.

Commissioner Van Der Weide explained why he will not be supporting the motion. He stated that he does believe that there are things that need to be changed in the process.

Districts 1 and 4 voted AYE.

Commissioners Carey, Horan and Van Der Weide voted NAY; whereupon, the motion failed for the lack of a majority vote.

Motion by Commissioner Henley to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the Contract between the U.S. 17-92 CRA and Pinter Enterprises Inc., with a reduction to the patio grant of approximately $7,000 and a reduction to the landscape grant by $10,000. Chairman Carey clarified the motion.

Chairman Carey called for a second to the motion three times, without response, whereupon the motion died for the lack of the same.

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Horan, to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the Contract, as shown on page _______, between the U.S. 17-92 CRA and Pinter Enterprises Inc., and to authorize execution of Budget Change Request (BCR) 11-5, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $53,769 consistent with said contract.

Districts 2, 3 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioners Henley and Dallari voted NAY.

-------

Mr. Metsopoulos presented a request to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the contract between the U.S. 17-92 CRA and Ho Pi Inc., and to authorize execution of a Budget Change Request in the amount of $32,766.

Mr. Metsopoulos stated that Ho Pi is the home of Hirina’s Fish Market and is an underdeveloped and blighted property. He described the changes that have been made by the applicant to the property. Since the lease with Hirina’s Fish Market will end soon, the applicant will be seeking an upscale tenant to go into the new and improved building and is requesting $32,766 from the CRA.

District Commissioner Carey recommended approval of the request.

Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to execute the Contract, as shown on page _______, between the U.S. 17-92 CRA and Ho Pi Inc., and to authorize execution of Budget Change Request (BCR) 11-6, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $32,766 consistent with said Contract.

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

-------

Chairman Carey adjourned the meeting of the U.S. Highway 17-92 Community Redevelopment Agency at 10:19 a.m. and reconvened the meeting of the Board of County Commissioners at 10:20 a.m.

COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA

Joe Forte, Acting County Manager, addressed the Board to advise that an item has been added to the Consent Agenda, Item #11A, Approval of the NSP3 Grant Agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). He stated that with regard to Item #16, Renewal Grant Agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the sentence that states “The anticipated funding would be included in the proposed FY 2011/12 budget” has been stricken.

Mr. Forte advised that Items #19 and #20 are BAR items and request funding from the Fire Fund reserves. If both items are approved, the balance of reserves after funding both items will be $28,862,807. Regarding Item #37, he stated that the date on the Chairman’s signature line has been changed to correspond with the March 22, 2011 meeting date.

Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to authorize and approve the following:

County Manager’s Office

Purchasing & Contracts Division

7. Award RFP-601033-11/BJC - Term Contract, as shown on page _______, for the Lease of Landfill Equipment to Nortrax, Inc., Orlando, Florida.

Central Services

Support Services Division

8. Approve and authorize staff to settle two workers' compensation claims for previous employees in the amount of $193,405.86 inclusive, for Claim Numbers 192966 and 193507.

Community Services

Community Assistance Division

9. Authorize staff to amend and submit the 2010-2011 One-Year Action Plan within the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan to allow previously approved acquisition funding to be used for both the acquisition and rehabilitation of the new Recovery House location.

10. Approve and authorize staff to submit to Florida Housing Finance Corporation the underline and strikethrough technical amendments, as shown on page _______, to the 2007-2010 and 2010-2013 Local Housing Assistance Plans (LHAP).

11. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the Modification of Agreement, as shown on page _______, between the Florida Department of Community Affairs and Seminole County. The Modification provides an additional Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) award of $92,897 to the original award of $230,875 for a total award of $323,772 granted by the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs; and approval of the re-allocation of $18,580 for the required cash match.

11A. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the NSP3 Grant Agreement, as shown on page _______, with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to administer and implement the Neighborhood Stabilization Program 3 in Seminole County.

Environmental Services

Business Office

12. Approve the release of the original Water & Sewer Maintenance Agreement with Letter of Credit #F853608 for the project known as Acuera in the amount of $363,638.20. (C&G at Markham, Inc.)

13. Approve the release of the original Water & Sewer Maintenance Bond #105076192 for the project known as Alaqua Country Club Subdivision in the amount of $4,499.50. (Steel Curtain, LLC)

14. Approve the release of the original Water & Sewer Cash Maintenance Bond for the project known as International Parkway Village in the amount of $750.00. (Nations Investment Group)

Fiscal Services

Business Office

15. Approval to submit an application to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection requesting $200,000 through their Recreational Trails Program; approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-42, as shown on page _______, for such application; and authorize the Acting County Manager to execute any other documents as may be required for the application.

16. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Renewal Grant Agreement, as shown on page _______, with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in acceptance of $249,120 in additional funding through the Shelter Plus Care Program.

Budget Division

17. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-43, as shown on page _______, implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #11-35 through the Public Works Grant Fund in the amount of $6,704,708 to recognize grant revenue and establish budget from an agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the SR 436/Red Bug Lake Road Interchange project.

18. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-44, as shown on page _______, implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #11-39 through the General Fund in the amount of $66,000 to reduce current funding to the Documents Management Program by $20,000, and reallocate the remainder towards updating the OnBase Enterprise Content Management software system.

19. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-45, as shown on page _______, implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #11-41 through the Fire Protection Fund in the amount of $73,100 for replacement of fire suppression units for three (3) Woods Trucks.

20. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-46, as shown on page _______, implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #11-42 through the Fire Protection Fund in the amount of $26,200 for the renovation of two (2) 2.5 ton vehicles.

21. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-47, as shown on page _______, implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #11-43 through the Public Works Stimulus Grant Fund in the amount of $240,197 to recognize revenue from the Florida Department of Transportation and budget the funds for the design and construction of a pedestrian overpass over Red Bug Lake Rd at Aloma Avenue.

22. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-48, as shown on page _______, implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #11-44 through the Public Works Grant Fund in the amount of $312,812 to reduce revenue from the Florida Department of Transportation and reduce the budget for the construction of a sidewalk on Ridgewood Street, Alpine Street, and Palm Springs Drive.

23. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-49, as shown on page _______, implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #11-45 through the Public Works Stimulus Grant Fund in the amount of $433,744 to recognize revenue from the Florida Department of Transportation and budget the funds for the replacement of the Orange Boulevard Bridge at Lockhart Smith Canal.

24. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-50, as shown on page _______, implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #11-46 through the Public Works Stimulus Grant Fund in the amount of $314,374 to recognize revenue from the Florida Department of Transportation and increase 2001 Infrastructure Sales Tax reserves to offset project expenditures made on the resurfacing of Rinehart Road from CR 46A to Towne Center Boulevard.

25. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-51, as shown on page _______, implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #11-48 through the Public Works Grant Fund and Natural Lands/Trails Fund in the amount of $600,000 to recognize grant revenue from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and budget the funds for Phase 4 of the Seminole Wekiva Trail.

26. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2011-R-52, as shown on page _______, implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #11-49 through the Community Services Block Grant Fund in the amount of $173,126 to increase funding for the Community Services Block Grant Program.

Leisure Services

Greenway & Natural Lands Division

27. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute both the renewal of the Memorandum of Agreement No. AQ166, as shown on page _______, for Landscape Maintenance on the I-4/17-92 Interchange as prepared by the Department of Transportation (FDOT) and appropriate Resolution 2011-R-61, as shown on page _______, attached as Exhibit "A" to the Memorandum of Agreement.

Tourism-CVB Division

28. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute an Agreement, as shown on page _______, with the Central Florida Zoological Society, Inc. in the amount of $225,000.

Public Works

Engineering Division

29. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2011-R-53, as shown on page _______, accepting a Perpetual Easement, as shown on page _______, from the State of Florida Department of Transportation for property identified by FDOT as Parcel Number 861.1, Part B, and determined to be necessary for the Lake Mary Boulevard Station in conjunction with the Commuter Rail (SunRail) Transit System.

30. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2011-R-54, as shown on page _______, accepting a Quit Claim Deed, as shown on page _______, from the City of Sanford for property necessary for the construction of a sidewalk adjacent to a portion of Upsala Road.

31. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2011-R-55, as shown on page _______, accepting a Quit Claim Deed, as shown on page _______, from Emory Green and Eddie Green for property necessary for roadway improvements on Brisson Avenue and 20th Street.

32. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2011-R-56, as shown on page _______, accepting a Sidewalk Easement, as shown on page _______, from the City of Sanford for property necessary for the construction of a sidewalk along a portion of Central Park Drive.

33. Approve and authorize the release of a Right-of-Way Utilization Permit Maintenance Bond (Number OFL0579254) in the amount of $5,920.00 submitted for roadway improvements to Airport Boulevard in conjunction with the BUB Warehouse Project.

34. Approve and authorize the release of a Right-of-Way Utilization Permit Maintenance Bond (Number FLC55507) in the amount of $20,391.00 submitted for roadway improvements to Old Lake Mary Road in conjunction with the Shoemaker Mini Warehouses Project.

35. Approve and authorize the release of a Private Road Maintenance Bond (Number 105076193) in the amount of $35,625.80 submitted for roadway improvements in conjunction with the Alaqua Country Club Subdivision Project.

36. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Preliminary Engineering Agreement, as shown on page _______, with CSX Transportation, Inc. for a proposed multi-use railroad crossing for the Cross Seminole Trail - Winter Springs "Missing Link" Project.

Traffic Engineering Division

37. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the State of Florida Department of Transportation E-Verify Form, as shown on page _______, for the Locally Funded Agreement between the State of Florida Department of Transportation and Seminole County for Interchange Modifications at State Road 400/Interstate 4 and State Road 46. (FDOT FPN:407573-1-52-01)

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

COUNTY ATTORNEY’S CONSENT AGENDA

Commissioner Dallari stated that he had not yet been briefed on Item #38, the proposed negotiated settlement relating to Case #09-CA-6402-15-K, Central Florida Environmental Corp. v. Seminole County, and would like to continue it until he can receive additional information.

Robert McMillan, County Attorney, addressed the Board to review the item and explain why it is time sensitive. The item was continued until today’s afternoon session.

CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS’ CONSENT AGENDA

Clerk’s Office

Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to authorize and approve the Expenditure Approval Lists, as shown on page _______, dated February 21 and 28, 2011; and Payroll Approval List, as shown on page _______, dated February 17, 2011; and approval of the BCC Official Minutes dated February 22, 2011.

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

-------

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

1. Denial Development Order #10-30000118, as shown on page _______, for Elizabeth Castilo and David Attard, 321 Kingsbury Avenue.

2. Development Order #09-20000008, as shown on page _______, for Island & Village of Geneva Rural Heritage Center, Inc., Rural Heritage Center, approved by BCC on October 26, 2010.

3. Consummating Order from Florida Public Service Commission regarding Petition by FP&L to recover Scherer Unit 4 Turbine Upgrade costs.

4. Conditional Utility Agreements, as shown on page _______, for water and sewer with JP Morgan Chase Bank.

5. Parks Contracts, as shown on page _______, with James L. Speake, Jr., Maria Virginia Toledo, Adrienne Dienst, Sabine Blaha, Greg Sobosky, Jim Nista, Tammy Childs and Rina Srinivassan.

6. Work Orders #74, #75, #76, #77, #78 and #79, as shown on page _______, for CC-1741-07.

7. Change Order #1, as shown on page _______, for CC-4614-09.

8. Change Order #2, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #23 for CC-2184-07.

9. Change Order #1, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #48 for CC-1075-06.

10. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, for IFB-601015-10.

11. Third Amendment, as shown on page _______, for IFB-600855-10.

12. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to IFB-600963-10.

13. Work Order #89, as shown on page _______, for PS-5120-02.

14. Change Order #3, as shown on page _______, for CC-5018-09.

15. Work Order #3, as shown on page _______, for RFP-5465-10.

16. Group Voluntary Cancer Plan Policy, as shown on page _______, award approved by the BCC on October 12, 2010.

17. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, for IFB-600926-10.

18. Amendment #1, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #10 for PS-2564-07.

19. Work Order #58, as shown on page _______, for CC-1284-06.

20. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, for IFB-600966-10.

21. Amendment #1, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #7 for PS-5172-04.

22. Work Orders #35 and #36, as shown on page _______, for CC-2184-07.

23. Amendment #1, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #65 for PS-1529-06.

24. Change Order #2, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #22 for CC-2184-07.

25. Change Order #2, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #26 for CC-1284-07.

26. Change Order #2, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #25 for CC-2184-07.

27. Change Order #9, as shown on page _______, for CC-4813-09.

28. Surety Bond Change Rider, as shown on page _______, for CC-4923-09.

29. Amendment #1, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #1 for PS-5438-10.

30. Amendment #5, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #69 for RFP-4214-04.

31. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to RFP-600063-06.

32. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to IFB-600847-10.

33. Demand Letter of Understanding, as shown on page _______, to Clarkson Concepts for RFP-4277-09 regarding 2601 Marshall Avenue, 444 Marathon Lane and 208 Cabana View Way.

34. Demand Letter of Understanding, as shown on page _______, to Ruby Builders, Inc., for RFP-4277-09 regarding 1025 Spring Garden Street.

35. Demand Letter of Understanding, as shown on page _______, to Miller Construction Services, LLC, for RFP-4277-09 regarding 525 Hillcrest Street and 1732 Canterbury Circle.

36. Demand Letter of Understanding, as shown on page _______, to Woodard Construction Company for RFP-4277-09 regarding 391 Brittany Circle.

37. Amendment #1, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #60 for PS-1529-06.

38. Release of Lien, as shown on page _______, for Code Enforcement Case #09-136-CEB, Christine N. Wolfe, as authorized for execution by the BCC on February 8, 2011.

39. Bids as follows: IFB-601086-11 and CC-6210-11.

REGULAR AGENDA

Request to schedule and advertise a Public Hearing to amend Chapter 30 of the Land Development Code to address manufactured housing and churches in the A-1 (Agriculture) zoning district, and bed and breakfast establishments in specified agricultural and residential zoning districts, presented.

Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Horan, to approve a request to schedule and advertise a Public Hearing to amend Chapter 30 of the Land Development Code to address manufactured housing and churches in the A-1 (Agriculture) zoning district, and bed and breakfast establishments in specified agricultural and residential zoning districts.

Under discussion, Commissioner Van Der Weide asked if any of the churches that will be affected had been consulted. Chairman Carey stated the amendment would require any church going into an A-1 zone to have a Conditional Use but would not affect the churches that are there today.

Commissioner Dallari stated he would like to look at performance-based criteria instead of the way that it is stated; so both sides could be looked at and the pro's and con's weighed. He requested staff to present that to the Board before it is advertised so both can be advertised at the same time. He would like to have some of the issues worked out before it is advertised so everyone understands what the Board is looking at. and he thinks performance-based criteria would be the proper way to go.

Commissioner Henley stated he had trouble with 5,000 square feet and doesn't believe that will stand up under the RLUIPA (Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act) law. You cannot be more stringent upon churches than you are to others within your County. As a matter of fact, it goes on to say that you have to be more lenient with churches.

Commissioner Dallari stated if they are going to be looking at performance base, they should have some guidelines so there can be open discussion with the public and the Board.

A discussion ensued with regard to the sizes of churches. Commissioner Horan stated that a 5,000-square-foot church would be a relatively small church, a church with a congregation of 330 to 340. He believes more detail needs to be added.

Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he believes considerable more detail is needed, along with a lot more input. He suggested getting some of the churches and organizations involved to see what they have to say.

Chairman Carey asked if the Board would like to continue this item until the second meeting in April.

Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to continue the request to schedule and advertise a Public Hearing to amend Chapter 30 of the Land Development Code to address manufactured housing and churches in the A-1 (Agriculture) zoning district, and bed and breakfast establishments in specified agricultural and residential zoning districts until the appropriate time that staff feels it appropriate to bring back.

Under discussion, Chairman Carey advised that there are some things in this item that do need to be addressed that deal with manufactured housing, mobile homes and also bed and breakfast establishments. She asked if the Board wanted to separate those portions out and go ahead and approve this item, less the church portion, and then come back with the church portion.

Commissioner Dallari stated he believes when talking about A-1 Rural, there needs to be more performance-based criteria in all of this. If the item is continued, staff will have the ability to bring it back and to separate it.

Chairman Carey suggested the church issue be separated out and bring the other items back at the next meeting.

Commissioners Dallari and Henley agreed to that amendment to the motion.

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

-------

Ian Sikonia, Senior Planner addressed the Board to present the request for approval of the Final Site Plan and Developer’s Commitment Agreement for the Bill Ray Nissan PCD, consisting of 13 acres, located on the north side of Hickman Circle, approximately one mile north of the intersection of Hickman Drive and SR 46. The applicant, R & R Investments, LLC, is requesting approval of the Final Site Plan consisting of a car dealership with accessory buildings that will encompass a total maximum building size of 94,285 square feet. Mr. Sikonia described the proposed permitted uses and stated that those uses are compatible with the existing zonings located within the Hickman Industrial Park.

Mr. Sikonia explained that this PCD will be phased and only Phase 1 of 4 will be accomplished through this Final Site Plan. He further stated that the applicant is requesting that approval for Phase 1 of the Final Site Plan remain valid for three years. He described minor changes to the landscaping requirements being requested by the applicant within the Florida Power and Light and Progress Energy easements located on the east side of the development. He added that staff recommends approval of the Final Site Plan and the Developer’s Commitment Agreement.

Commissioner Dallari stated that he would like to change the length of time the Final Site Plan remains valid from three years to five years due to the economic times.

District Commissioner Carey stated that she is in support of this item and would support the five years.

Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to approve the Final Site Plan and Developer’s Commitment Agreement, as shown on page _______, for the Bill Ray Nissan PCD, consisting of 13 acres, located on the north side of Hickman Circle, approximately 1.0 mile north of the intersection of Hickman Drive and SR 46, R&R Investments, LLC; and authorize the Chairman to execute the aforementioned documents based on staff findings and the changes discussed.

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

-------

Chairman Carey requested that staff bring information back to the Board with regard to extending the period of time for site plans and development orders so people won't have to come back through this process again. She added that a year ago, DCA extended everything for two years.

Chairman Carey further requested that staff get together with the power companies. She stated that the County continues to require plantings under power lines; and that continues to be a problem for the power companies, who just come along and cut the trees down because they are in their easements and their rights-of-way. They could probably plant the proper material if they think about it ahead of time. She requested that staff work on these two items.

Commissioner Henley stated he believe it is a reasonable suggestion in view of the fact there seems to be reluctance to make loans on these large projects and they need more time.

COUNTY MANAGER’S BRIEFING

Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to accept the Informational Budget Amendment Status Report FY 2010/11 for the period ending February 28, 2011.

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

COUNTY ATTORNEY’S BRIEFING

Mr. McMillan advised that there has not yet been an Order issued in the case of Allied Veterans of the World, Inc., et al. v. Seminole County, Case No. 6-11-CV-155-ORL-28DAB, and he cancelled the closed strategy session with County Attorney staff and private counsel to discuss pending litigation. He requested that the Board authorize the closed meeting under the same terms and conditions as today’s meeting to be held at the end of the morning session of the Board’s next meeting.

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to authorize the scheduling and advertising of a closed strategy session with County Attorney staff and private counsel to discuss pending litigation in the case of Allied Veterans of the World, Inc., et al. v. Seminole County, Case No. 6-11-CV-155-ORL-28DAB, in accordance with Section 286.011(8), Florida Statutes, on April 12, 2011 at the end of the morning session.

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

-------

Mr. McMillan updated the Board with regard to Sun State Trees. He stated Sun State Trees has a hearing this week in bankruptcy court where several of their creditors have moved to move them from reorganization to liquidation.

-------

COUNTY MANAGER’S BRIEFING (Continued)

With regard to Item #37, Mr. Forte stated that the Board had approved adding the language for E-Verification into the state contract. He stated there will be a number of these different federal and state contracts that will need this language added. Mr. Forte requested that, instead of bringing all of these items to the Board to include that language, the Board authorize the County Manager or his designee to make that amendment to each of the contracts.

Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Horan, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2011-R-60, as shown on page _______, authorizing the County Manager or his designee to sign on behalf of Seminole County all amendments to existing contracts adding the employment verification requirements as delineated in Executive Order Number 11-02 and all affidavits attesting to the County’s compliance with such requirements.

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

-------

Mr. Forte discussed the request for an extension to the Little Wekiva River Watershed Management Plan. He explained that the St. Johns River Water Management District is extending the contract time frame and advised that he doesn't have the authority to accept or grant that extension. Mr. Forte requested the Board to authorize him to sign this extension.

Antoine Khoury, Public Works, addressed the Board to explain the need for the extension. He explained that on the top page of the Change Order there is a place to acknowledge receipt of the time extension.

Chairman Carey verified that this is only a request to accept an extension that the County requested and was granted by the Water Management District.

Motion by Commissioner Horan, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to authorize Mr. Forte to execute Change Order #3 to Contract SI440AA, as show on page _______, Little Wekiva River Watershed Management Plan.

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

-------

The Chairman recessed the meeting at 10:45 a.m., reconvening at 1:32 p.m., with all Commissioners and all other Officials with the exception of Deputy Clerk Jane Spencer, who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Eva Roach, who were present at the Opening Session.

PROOFS OF PUBLICATION

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, 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.

LAKE FOREST DRI CHANGE & MAJOR PUD AMENDMENT/

Integra Land Co. & Orlando Lake Forest Joint Venture

Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider the proposed Settlement Agreement pursuant to Section 70.51, Florida Statutes, facilitating a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) Notice of Proposed Change Substantial Deviation Determination and proposed PUD Major Amendment; 540.30 acres, located 600 ft. east of the intersection of Henderson Lane and SR 46, Integra Land Co. and Orlando Lake Forest Joint Venture, received and filed.

Donna Wysong, Assistant County Attorney, addressed the Board to state this item was previously heard at the June 2, 2010 Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission meeting, and at the July 27, 2010 BCC meeting, at which the BCC denied the original application. The applicant filed a Request for Relief under Section 70.51, Florida Statutes. A full-day mediation was conducted on December 16, 2010 and settlement negotiations continued for several weeks after the December 16 hearing to work out additional details. Those settlement negotiations included representatives from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to discuss a traffic signal for that location. The Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval of the request. She stated copies of the documents created at those meetings are incorporated in the agenda packet and may be considered when the BCC makes their decision today. The parties to this settlement agreement, if approved by the BCC, will include the Integra Land Company, Inc., Orlando Lake Forest Joint Venture, and Seminole County. She reviewed the five development conditions that are incorporated in Addendum #2 as outlined in the agenda memorandum. She pointed out that no other changes to the DRI or PUD amendment have been made other than those referenced in the settlement agreement. She stated the Board’s consideration today should be focused solely on those items contained in this settlement agreement. Therefore, testimony and other evidence taken today should be limited to those items as well. Copies of letters and e-mails from residents opposing the Lake Forest DRI change were received and filed.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Ms. Wysong advised whatever happens today will likely continue in litigation.

Commissioner Henley stated it sounds like this is an attempt to muzzle the people today and he has some concerns with that.

Robert McMillan, County Attorney, stated the point is the Record is already there and a new full presentation by the developer or opponents was not needed because it is already on the Record. He stated the Board can discuss whether or not they believe these new five conditions in any way mitigate against what their decision was previously and how that will affect their prior decision. Staff doesn’t see any need, for clarity of the Record, that the BCC needs to do everything over that has already been done because, to some extent, it is going to be repetitive.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Dallari, Mr. McMillan advised other than these five conditions, the proposal was the same and the Board does not have to rehash everything; but, the Board can pursue how some things may interrelate to what happened before.

Chairman Carey stated she feels they have agreed to go into a settlement discussion versus filing for litigation and they wouldn’t have another public hearing. She stated she believes the applicants were instructed not to bring their team of staff and she doesn’t want to make it unfair.

Attorney Miranda Fitzgerald, Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor, & Reed, addressed the Board to display a PowerPoint Presentation (CD and copy of slides were received and filed). She stated they went through a process that was beneficial and allowed a lot of additional discussion in a more candid way than they did at the last hearing. She displayed and reviewed a list of the five conditions in the settlement agreement. She displayed a graphic showing the location of the proposed development and she reviewed the dimensions of the nearest residential buildings, the wetland/swamp area that will not change, and the Robertson property. She stated Integra originally was planning to bring a piece of the Robertson property into the DRI and put in additional units. There were more wetlands on this site than anticipated and they have decided to drop that parcel. The applicants have withdrawn their application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The application only includes the 11.15 acres of the undeveloped commercial portion in the original boundaries of the Lake Forest DRI.

Attorney Fitzgerald reviewed the location of the proposed 8 ft. vinyl clad fence and the concerns of the residents. She stated there have been bear sightings in the area; and one solution was to fence the entire area and impede anything from crawling over that fence. She added that the applicant has committed to not put balconies at the end units near Forest Glen as the residents had concerns with people living on the top floor being able to have visual intrusion into their back yards. The applicants have committed to not have any further negotiations to acquire any portion of the Robertson property. The applicants have also agreed, in a PUD document at the P&Z meeting, that the commitment would be binding on successors and assigns and it will run with the land. Integra has also committed to include color renderings as part of the PUD commitment agreement.

Attorney Fitzgerald displayed a copy of an aerial photo of what the project will look like. She stated there has been a lot of correspondence that these apartments will be a low-income facility and that will not be the case. She displayed and reviewed photos (copies received and filed) of existing projects that Integra has developed in the surrounding area (Orange City Clubhouse exterior view; interior view of the Daytona Beach facility; and interior view of the Championsgate clubroom). She stated these will be part of the PUD commitment. She displayed and reviewed the traffic impact that is likely to be anticipated from this change to the project.

Attorney Fitzgerald reviewed an aerial (received and filed) showing a closer look of Henderson, the potential change to the Henderson and SR 46 intersection and how that will impact the people living in the community. She stated the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) asked their traffic engineer to come up with four alternatives for different types of intersection improvements. That was submitted to FDOT and their answer was that, from a safety perspective, they are not going to approve a signal. She displayed an aerial (received and filed) showing the potential change to the Henderson intersection with a U-turn added and explained what the residents will need to do when they get to and come out of Henderson. She stated Integra has done everything they can to convince FDOT to allow signalization at that intersection. FDOT has indicated that they do not believe it is appropriate, and she expressed one of FDOT’s concerns relating to Holy Cross Academy and how it weighed heavily on their decision.

Attorney Fitzgerald stated as a result of FDOT’s decision, Forest Glen elected not to be a part to this settlement agreement. She explained when Lake Forest rejected the settlement.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Dallari, Attorney Fitzgerald advised Integra did a signal warrant study and a signal is warranted. She was told there are intersections all over the state where signals are warranted, and FDOT will not allow them.

Commissioner Henley stated FDOT Secretary Downs has indicated that Integra’s staff has indicated in their study that it wasn’t warranted. He stated he is not supporting this unless the Board can get Integra support the light and help pay for it. Secretary Downs didn’t seem to be strongly opposed to it but her staff was.

Chairman Carey stated regardless of what happens, at some point when that property develops, she believes a light will be warranted. She stated she believes a U-turn is more dangerous than a light.

Attorney Fitzgerald stated Integra’s traffic warrant study shows that today, with nothing on that site, a signal is not warranted; but when they include the traffic projection from the 209 multi-family units, it would indicate that when those units are on the road, it would be warranted. She added the requirements in the FDOT’s Green Book standards indicate that it would be too close to the signal at Orange Blvd. She stated they have done everything they can to get warrant approval and they are willing to do anything to make it happen. She concluded by displaying and reviewing the future Wekiva Parkway and the Lake Forest DRI area. She asked the Board to consider their request.

Attorney Fitzgerald explained for Commissioner Horan how the residents of the apartments would access Lake Forest Blvd. to get onto SR 46. She also explained the proposed traffic solutions and access configuration, how the approved units in the DRI will work and where they are on the amount of commercial units under the DRI.

Attorney Fitzgerald informed Commissioner Henley that the multi-family is not a new use to the DRI. She stated that originally it was all multi-family which was changed. They are bringing it back and asking now to convert some of the single-family to multi-family.

Attorney Fitzgerald advised Commissioner Dallari that this is the last piece of commercial property that is being developed.

Discussion ensued between Attorney Fitzgerald and Commissioner Horan relative to changing the current zoning to multi-family.

Mr. Forte and Mr. McMillan left the meeting at this time.

Sandra Salter, 5267 Shoreline Circle, addressed the Board to address the traffic flow and commute time of the apartment dwellers within these new apartments. She stated renters of the apartments may have quicker and safer access by using the Lake Forest exit; but it will cause a delay for the residents of Lake Forest. She addressed the type of problems that people renting the apartments will cause.

Brenda Dalman, 564 Bent Pine Ct., addressed the Board to discuss the lives and property values being at risk. She asked the Board to carefully weigh their decisions and look at what is best for the community and not what is best for the corporation.

Gib Lundquist, 159 Majestic Forest Run, addressed the Board to state he doesn’t understand why the applicant is allowed to put up a chain link fence when he doesn’t know if it is allowed by the County Code. He discussed whether the legal description of the Robertson property is going to be tied to the sale of their property if it changes hands, the issue of the traffic light and what the impact on the nearby residents will be when on vehicles make U-turns while traffic is going 55 mph.

Chairman Carey stated she has had correspondence from and discussions by Mr. Lundquist outside of this public hearing.

Attorney Brent Spain, Theriaque & Spain, addressed the Board to speak on behalf of Lake Forest Homeowners Association and Jerry Schwartzberg.

Mr. McMillan reentered the meeting at this time.

Attorney Spain submitted a notebook (received and filed) consisting of exhibits submitted on behalf of Lake Forest Master Community Association and Dr. Ira Schwartzberg. He stated the binder consists of materials that were introduced at the hearing in July in addition to the denial development order (received and filed), and they are also in the Record. He stated he wanted to renew the Lake Forest Master Community Association’s standing objection from the prior hearing based on the lack of cross examination in this matter. He echoed Commissioner Henley’s comments regarding any limitation of testimony in this proceeding especially since the membership of the BCC has changed after the July 2010 hearing.

Dr. Ira Schwartzberg, 5336 Lake Bluff Terrance, addressed the Board to state the BCC denied this project last July due to it being incompatible with the surrounding area. The project is now back before the Board essentially unchanged. The applicant is proposing to put up a chain-link fence around the stormwater retention pond and eliminating a couple of balconies to the west. Neither of these design changes resolve or address the BCC’s compatibility concerns regarding the project.

Mr. Forte reentered the meeting at this time.

Dr. Schwartzberg stated a high density, multi-family rental apartment is incompatible with the low density, single-family homes in Lake Forest. Rental apartments in the subdivision will lower the property values and that will take tax revenues away from the County. He stated there was no mention of apartments being part of the PUD when he purchased his home in Lake Forest, but he was shown a shopping center area where the developer now wants to build the apartments. He said he feels the land should be used as they originally intended to use it, for stores and restaurants for the residents of Lake Forest. This property is required to be developed as a retail shopping center as exemplified by the declaration of restrictions and reciprocal easement agreement.

Attorney Spain stated there is a history of the subject property being designated and planned for Neighborhood Commercial for 700+ homes; and the residents, in good faith, relied upon the action of this Board. He stated the proposed project is not compatible with the surrounding area and he requested the Board to deny the request.

Commissioner Horan noted the original application went before the P&Z Commission and they voted to approve it. The settlement agreement also came before the P&Z and it was approved by a 6-0 vote. He said if there is litigation on this particular issue and it goes to Circuit Court, the Circuit Court will apply Snyder. He stated under that standard he would like Mr. Spain to explain what the County’s position should be regarding the consistency of the application with regard to the Comprehensive Plan, zoning regulations and public policy. Attorney Spain explained his position and stated he believes the Record from July has more than ample competent substantial evidence for the denial. Discussion ensued with regard to evidence.

Mr. McMillan stated the County believes there was competent substantial evidence from both sides at the prior hearing. The Board is free to make a decision. There doesn’t have to be an expert witness. The Courts have upheld citizens’ testimony as to the facts that they witnessed and they are testifying to what they have actually seen and what they actually experienced.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Horan, Attorney Spain advised he would contest if commercial was put on this property it would generate four times more traffic than the apartments.

Commissioner Horan stated the traffic study was submitted by the applicant.

Attorney Spain stated, based on the July hearing, there is a difference between commercial traffic that is spread out throughout the day versus residential development traffic.

Chairman Carey advised that she has previously met with Dr. Schwartzberg as well as other residents from the homeowners association.

Upon inquiry by Mr. McMillan, Commissioner Horan advised that he has reviewed prior records from the previous hearings.

Commissioner Dallari advised that he has met with Dr. Schwartzberg and a couple of residents in his office with regard to this issue. Commissioner Horan indicated that he has done so as well.

Keith Boyd, 5322 Shoreline Circle, addressed the Board to discuss the Board considering a design that would make a public safety issue tremendously worse and the amount of traffic driving during the morning hours. He discussed the FDOT’s Wekiva/SR 417 Projection Presentation indicating that the safety problems now exist on SR 46.

Melanie Marsh, 202 Majestic Forest Run, addressed the Board to ask the Board to look at this from a different perspective by going back to one of the basic fundamental principles of Chapter 70.51. She explained what that process entails. She stated Integra does not own this property yet; and if they don’t get approved, they can walk away from this contract. Integra is not vested in this community like the residents are. She explained how the residents in the proposed development will drive to get across two lanes of traffic to make a U-turn at Henderson, and how that will pose a problem for the residents of Forest Glen.

Chris Puccio, 5471 Glen Oak Place, addressed the Board to state he represents the Forest Glen HOA, The Heritage, and Holy Cross Lutheran Academy. He stated when they met in July, they came up with four or five arguments; and since that process, they went to a 70.51 process. The residents of Forest Glen do not agree with any of the five conditions at all. There was a mediation settlement and the residents did not get a chance to find out what the special magistrate decided. The five conditions do not address any of the items that the residents addressed.

Mr. McMillan left the meeting at this time.

Mr. Puccio stated the residents do not like the language concerning the Robertson property as it is not clarified. The Forest Glen residents contend that Item #4 (artistic renderings) conflict with Item #1 as the 8 ft. chain link fence is not shown. He stated the residents gladly participated with Integra and they fought hard with FDOT in trying to pitch justification as to why a light should be there. Unfortunately, FDOT decided it was not in their interest to put a light there. A second meeting was held with FDOT and the residents were not included in that. He feels that there was no opinion from the special magistrate or from staff, and he doesn’t understand why they are here again on these five conditions which the residents have issues with the traffic.

Chairman Carey stated there is a cross access easement over the Publix parking lot and regardless whether it is commercial or residential, the citizens have a right to cross over that parking lot. Mr. Sikonia stated he believes there is some possible litigation on the cross access easement.

Nicole Guillet, Planning & Development Director, addressed the Board to state she understands there is a cross access easement but she doesn’t know if there is litigation or the status of it.

Chairman Carey stated this Board is going to rely on their experts and FDOT. FDOT has the last word on the access along their road to make sure there is safe access and it doesn’t matter if it is residential or commercial. When that site is developed, something is going to have to happen to the transportation access. She stated she believes anything that is heard today is not necessarily going to be what may ultimately occur when this property is developed, and that is going to have to be addressed.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Dallari, David McDaniel, Integra Land Co., addressed the Board to state after they met with FDOT, their Traffic Engineer came up with four or five different options. They showed the options to two members of Lake Forest. The Traffic Engineer of Integra only met with FDOT to discuss the options and FDOT preferred the one that was shown on the overhead, based on the different studies and traffic counts.

Chairman Carey stated she met with Mr. Puccio in meetings outside of this hearing.

Nick DiGiorgio, 5476 Glen Oak Place, addressed the Board to state he has been a resident in Seminole County since 1977 and he feels this apartment complex should not be constructed. He stated people are thinking twice about living in the Sanford area. This apartment complex will not only bring a larger volume of traffic to the area, but it will also bring transient people and that will downgrade the community. He asked the Board to leave the parcel alone as sometimes change is not good. He said with all the foreclosures throughout the County, they don’t need anything that will bring property values down. He displayed an article (received and filed) in the Orlando Sentinel displaying 10% devaluation of properties in the four-county area. He advised that the Property Appraiser’s office indicates single-family homes median sale prices for Seminole County are $150,000, and the residents of Forest Glen Subdivision paid twice as much as that. He added he doesn’t need apartment complexes stuck right in the middle of a nice neighborhood. He submitted a letter (received and filed) from Manuel Richardson, GMB Engineers, summarizing the traffic study and he indicated that Mr. Richardson is no longer available to discuss the study.

Fred Tepper, 4985 Fawn Ridge Place, addressed the Board to state he is President and CEO of a growing company in the I-4 Industrial Park. He expressed his feelings about people living in rentals. He believes the Board will denigrate the neighborhood and Seminole County if they approve the project.

Kevin Downs, 118 Majestic Forest Run, addressed the Board to discuss the difference between residential traffic and commercial traffic. He stated the vinyl fence is not going to be compatible with the area. He asked the Board to put a guarantee in that the compatibility issue is going to be fixed. There is going to be 200 more apartments and more children in the area.

Loretta Talley, 5495 Glen Oak Place, addressed the Board to state she researched the property before she bought her house to see what was supposed to be built there. She said she sent an e-mail explaining how she feels about apartments. She has lived in this area for nine years and she may have seen a “for sale” sign twice on this property during that time. There are only six shops in the shopping center that are not occupied at this time. They are in a very bad economic situation but that property will eventually go commercial if they give it a chance.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Speaker Request Forms and Written Comment Form were received and filed.

Attorney Fitzgerald stated Commissioner Dallari questioned whether there will be any additional commercial on the site. She said there is a vacant bank site that has been sold and is not yet developed. There has been a lot of discussion about this being incompatible. She stated staff previously recommended that the maximum allowable building height be 35 ft. and they feel multi-family development is compatible and consistent with the existing trend of development in the area. It is consistent with the regional growth of “How Shall We Grow”. There was no finding made that this project was not compatible.

Attorney Fitzgerald stated there have been comments about the chain link fence not being appropriate for the character of the area. They offered the fence in discussion with the Forest Glen and Lake Forest residents at the hearing and mediation. It is going to be completely invisible along the swamp on the back end and next to the Robertson parcel, which is heavily treed. The fence will completely become part of the vegetation and will serve the purpose of keeping people from traversing into the adjoining neighborhoods. The CC&R’s that are in place envisioned the entire site being developed as commercial and they provided that the owner of the site could unilaterally amend that provision and they have done that. The only issue that is in litigation is whether they did that properly and she believes they have done that. It is not a relevant issue for this zoning and the CC&R will be dealt with separately. It does not affect the cross access in any way. There has been discussion about traffic and it is hard to envision how they want commercial but don’t want traffic. If they don’t change the use of this property, there is not going to be less traffic. This is a way to restrict the traffic and allow a reasonable use of that property. She stated she appreciates the Board’s support in allowing a reasonable use, which is Class A multi-family, on this site.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Attorney Fitzgerald advised Integra is willing to put in whatever safety device that FDOT will approve. FDOT will dictate what will happen at that intersection and Integra will pay for it.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Carey, Attorney Fitzgerald advised she estimates that it will take about $75,000 if they went forward with the improvements to the directional medians. She stated it would be nice to resolve the issue before those improvements go in, and not have to rip them out.

Chairman Carey stated if this moves forward, as a District Commissioner, she will work to not have that kind of action going on.

District Commissioner Carey stated the amount of residential required to successfully support commercial will be difficult to achieve in this particular area. She said anything west of Orange Blvd. cannot be developed for commercial. She stated there are a lot of commercial designations along I-4, International Drive, as well as vacant commercial sitting around in that area. She said regardless of what happens, whether it be commercial, multi-family or office, FDOT is going to dictate what improvements will be made on SR 46 and they will have the final say. The traffic will be greatly reduced in this area when the Wekiva Parkway is built. She recommended approval of the request.

Motion by Commissioner Horan, seconded by Commissioner Henley to approve the Settlement Agreement, as shown on page ________, associated Fifth Amended and Restated Development Order, as shown on page _______, and Addendum #2, as shown on page _________, to the First Amended Commitments, Classification and District Description, for the Lake Forest DRI/PUD on 540.30 acres, located 600 ft. east of the intersection of Henderson Lane and SR 46, and authorize the Chairman to execute the aforementioned documents, as described in the proof of publication, Integra Land Co. and Orlando Lake Forest Joint Venture.

Under discussion, Commissioner Henley stated he is not overly pleased with this Settlement Agreement as he doesn’t think it is significant. He stated his main concern is the safety for that area and he doesn’t believe what FDOT stated that needs to be done is the safest thing that can be done. He added it puzzles him that they have stop lights at almost every other block in this County but one is not warranted here until the development takes place. He seconded the motion because he has difficulty in saying that it cannot be built because of the entitlement that is already there. He said he doesn’t think the County will prevail in court if they turn this down and that is why he is supporting this.

Chairman Carey stated in her opinion, there is nothing more compatible to single-family residential than multi-family residential and that is why she is supporting it.

Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he will not be supporting the motion as the original developer requested one thing and the homeowners came in with the idea that that was going to be there, and now the developers find themselves in a situation where they cannot do what they originally planned. The applicants are asking the taxpayers to give them a break so they can do what they can to make it work.

Chairman Carey stated it is not uncommon for PUDs and DRIs to come back to ask for changes.

Commissioner Dallari stated basically this is a PUD and it is a working document that allows them to negotiate different types of land use so they can figure out what best works for the community. The PUD was amended to allow “X” amount of residential and “X” amount of commercial. He stated he indicated at the last public hearing that his issue was doing away with commercial and he sees nothing in the settlement agreement that addresses that.

Commissioner Horan stated he sees this coming in front of them on the basis of a proposed settlement agreement and the reason for that is he presumes there is going to be litigation. He stated when he looks at the record and the substantial competent evidence in the Record; he determines that the County would not fare well in that litigation. That is the primary reason he is going to vote for approval of the settlement agreement. The point that Commissioner Dallari raised is PUD zoning is negotiated zoning and what they have heard is a number of residential units that is not going to change. He does not think it is a substantial deviation to lose 100,000 sq. ft. of commercial when there is a lot of commercial in the area. He said he feels the County would lose this particular decision if the applicant petitioned the court. However, he is deeply concerned about the proposed solution that has been devised by FDOT. He added the only reason for denying this is on the basis of public safety; and at this point, he doesn’t think they have enough competent evidence to show that there is going to be a public safety element to this that’s going to be aggravated in light of the fact that the substantial competent evidence shows that the commercial development is going to generate more traffic than the apartments are going to generate. That is the primary reason why he will be supporting the motion.

Upon inquiry by Ms. Wysong, Commissioner Henley advised the intent of his motion is whatever they are able to work out Integra is going to agree to as it relates to the light. If they are unable to get a light, they will proceed with what FDOT has indicated.

Commissioner Horan stated Condition #5 should be changed to correctly reflect in a very clear way that the developer will continue to push for the better way to solve traffic problems than what they have now.

Ms. Wysong stated if a traffic light is warranted, the developer will pay for that in its entirety.

Chairman Carey stated it would be approved by FDOT to best serve the public from a safety standpoint.

Mr. McMillan stated he assumes they have agreed to do Condition #5 unless they can get FDOT to approve a signal in lieu of this one.

Commissioner Henley stated the last sentence says “to allow U-turns, or such other improvements as may be required by FDOT”, which he believes could be a light.

Mr. McMillan stated the applicant is going have to either put in the turn lane or the light depending on FDOT’s decision.

Chairman Carey stated this still has to go through the site plan process as well as other steps.

Commissioner Horan stated the developer will pay for what FDOT is requiring.

Commissioner Henley reiterated that he is not pleased with this and if he thought the County could prevail in court, he would be voting against it.

Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioner Dallari voted NAY.

-------

Chairman Carey recessed the meeting at 3:45 p.m., reconvening it at 3:50 p.m.

-------

ORDINANCE/Use of Fixed-Point Restraining Device

Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider an Ordinance adopting Section 20.39, Use of a Fixed-Point Restraining Device, received and filed.

Tad Stone, Public Safety Director, addressed the Board to present the request, stating a number of nationwide agencies and organizations strongly recommend against chaining of animals. The Center for Disease Control indicated that a chained animal is 2.8 times more likely to bite or attack than an unchained animal. The Seminole County Animal Services staff also feels that chained animals will maintain a more aggressive posture. This ordinance will clean up, on the enforcement side, that the animal is not in any harm’s way. He stated he would like to commend Carla Wilson for her efforts in bringing this forward.

Bryan Wilson, 702 Heather Lane, addressed the Board to thank the BCC, on behalf of Animal Rights Coalition, for considering the proposed ordinance. He reviewed what happens when dogs are chained up. A copy of an e-mail and brochure relating to dog attacks were received and filed.

Andrew Siva, 1237 Quintuplet Ct., addressed the Board to speak in support of the ordinance. He stated dogs that are chained up are more likely to bite, attack other animals, and more likely to choke themselves by trying to jump over a fence or other items.

Carla Wilson, 702 Heather Lane, addressed the Board to state she is glad to see that dogs in the county are being heard today. She said it is a sad sight to see an animal chained up, forgotten and have no freedom. She supports the anti-chain ordinance.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Speaker Request and Written Comment Forms were received and filed.

Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Horan to adopt Ordinance #2011-7, as shown on page _________, adopting Section 20.39, Use of a Fixed-Point Restraining Device, as described in the proof of publication.

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

VACATE AND ABANDONMENT/Alberto Bustamante III

Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider request to approve a Resolution to vacate and abandon approximately 14,266 sq. ft. (0.32 acres) of the public right-of-way known as Lake Howell Lane located immediately east of Howell Point, Alberto Bustamante, III, received and filed.

Brian Walker, Growth Management, addressed the Board to state the subject portion of right-of-way is within the San Pedro PUD. This portion of the right-of-way is not needed for public access and the proposed vacate will not hinder access to adjacent properties. The applicable utility companies have no objections to the request. Staff recommends approval of the vacate request.

Javier Omana, representative of the Diocese of Orlando, addressed the Board to state he concurs with staff’s recommendation.

No one spoke in support or in opposition.

Upon inquiry by District Commissioner Dallari, Mr. Omana advised there are no other vacate requests at this time.

Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Horan to adopt appropriate Resolution #2011-R-57, as shown on page _________, vacating and abandoning approximately 14,266 sq. ft. (0.32 acres) of the public right-of-way known as Lake Howell Lane located immediately east of Howell Point, as described in the proof of publication, Alberto Bustamante, III.

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

VACATE AND ABANDONMENT/Seminole County

Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider request to vacate and abandon a portion of the plat known as Sanlando Springs Tract 49, as recorded in Plat Book 5, Pages 16 of the Public Records of Seminole County, received and filed.

Alan Willis, Growth Management, addressed the Board to state the applicant is requesting the vacate for the purpose of removing the underlying rights-of-way and parcels where the Sanlando Park has been built. The applicable utility companies have no objection to the request. Staff recommends approval of the request.

No one spoke in support or in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Dallari to adopt appropriate Resolution #2011-R-58, as shown on page _________, vacating and abandoning a portion of the plat known as Sanlando Springs Tract 49, as recorded in Plat Book 5, Pages 16 of the Public Records of Seminole County, as described in the proof of publication, Seminole County.

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

ORDINANCE AMENDING SEMINOLE COUNTY CODE

Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider an Ordinance amending the Seminole County Code Chapter 235 with updates addressing insurance requirements, agency names and allowable sizes of residential garbage cans, received and filed.

William (Johnny) Edwards, Solid Waste Division, addressed the Board to present the request, stating Chapter 235 currently requires firms to submit proof of insurance coverage when applying for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (COPCN) to collect waste. The update would allow the County to accept policies from companies rated A- or better, which is also categorized as excellent by A.M. Best. The amendments would also update the Code to reflect the correct names of specific agencies. The update would also increase the size of residential garbage cans from 32 to 50 gallons. Staff recommends approval of the request.

No one spoke in support of in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Horan to adopt Ordinance #2011-8, as shown on page _________, amending the Seminole County Code Chapter 235 with updates addressing insurance requirements, agency names and allowable sizes of residential garbage cans, as described in the proof of publication.

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

BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL/Calvin & Regine Mills

Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider request to Appeal the Board of Adjustment’s decision to deny a front yard setback variance from 25 ft. to 1 ft. for an existing privacy fence in the R-1AA (Single-Family Dwelling) District; located on the north side of Dover Road, approximately 300 ft. north of Wood Lake Drive, Calvin and Regine Mills, received and filed.

Ian Sikonia, Planning, advised he submitted a revised staff report (received and filed) revising some of the language that basically states that the Building Division made a mistake issuing the permit and they actually did not. The appellants were then notified that they need to apply for a variance. The appellants applied for a variance and were denied by the BOA.

Mr. Sikonia clarified for Chairman Carey that the appellant applied for a building permit that showed their proposed front gate and wooden fence. A permit was issued for the portion for the front gate and for the portion of the fence that is not within the 25 ft. front setback. The appellants applied for a variance and were issued a permit for the front gate and the fence outside the variance. If the Board overturns the BOA, the appellants would have to modify the existing building permit to include the front portion.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Carey, Mr. Sikonia advised that the permit was issued for the gate in the front and for the wood fence setback at 25 ft.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Van Der Weide, Ms. Sikonia advised this is not a traditional front yard and he indicated on the site plan the location of the fence. Discussion ensued with regard to the setback and location of the fence.

Regine Mills, appellant, addressed the Board to state she did apply for the fence permit and they were told verbally that the permit was granted. She stated she was told they needed a variance and at that time, they had started the fence. She added she applied for the variance but was denied. She said since that time they removed the wood fence in the front and they have gradually improved the property. She stated their fence is 12 ft. away from the property line and the wooden fence has been there since they purchased the house.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Carey, Ms. Mills advised the privacy fence back goes back to their property line (22 ft.).

Ms. Mills stated what they are trying to do is improve their property and maintain security. The neighbor on the other side built a fence and they want her to put a wrought iron fence all the way around, but that would not be symmetrical for the entire area. She said if they have to take down the fence, then there would be no privacy.

Pictures showing the view from her neighbor’s house, neighbor’s yard, windows of the neighbor’s house that the wood fence blocks the view, and replaced fence panels were received and filed.

District Commissioner Van Der Weide stated at first he felt this request was extraordinary, but when he looked into it and saw pictures, it is hard to tell where the front yard is.

Mr. Forte left the meeting at this time.

Calvin Mills, 853 Dover Road, addressed the Board to state he cleaned up the vegetation and orange trees so they could actually see.

Mr. McMillan left the meeting at this time.

Victor McNeese, 244 Wood Lake Drive, addressed the Board to state a permit was applied for in November for replacement of a dilapidated fence and a wrought iron fence was installed in front. He stated the wood fence was not dilapidated nor was it removed or replaced. A section of the fence extending farther than 50 ft. was added to the end of it. The permit that was applied for and what was actually done were entirely two different things. The County informed the appellants that this was unacceptable.

Mr. Forte and Mr. McMillan reentered the meeting at this time.

Mr. McNeese stated he has an objection as far as the aesthetic value of the fence. He stated no one in the neighborhood has a compound fence that comes out to the road and they want to keep the integrity of it in that fashion. The appellant added a fence back-to-back with another fence and they placed a number of line voltage lights within three feet of the cul-de-sac. Since then, the County has forced them to remove the lights.

Jay Wolk, 857 Dover Road, addressed the Board to state he is the beneficiary of the adjoining subject property. He stated he opposes the Mills’ request because he feels what they are requesting is completely inappropriate in the circumstances of the neighborhood. He said the prior owners of the Mills’ property had a preexisting stockade fence that was in conformity with Seminole County’s regulations. Once the Mills received a permit, they proceeded, without approval, to build a portion of fence that is not in conformity with the County’s regulation. One advantage of them going ahead without the necessary approval is it makes it easy for him to show how the end result looks. He reviewed copies of photos (received and filed) showing the end of the circle, a view from his garage and the improvements looking down the property line showing how close they are to encroaching on his property.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Carey, Angie Kealhofer, Building, addressed the Board to advise according to the Land Development Code, the front yard setback is measured between the two side yard property lines at the right-of-way, no matter which way the houses faces. Ms. Kealhofer stated she informed Ms. Mills of the 25 ft. that could not be done without a variance approval. She indicated on the photo what sections Ms. Mills would be doing. That is why she has indicated that there is a 25 ft. front yard setback and it was for the wood privacy fence only. The wrought iron could go to the front property line.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Carey, Ms. Kealhofer advised the stockade fence can run down the property line, but they cannot start it until it is 25 ft. back.

Chairman Carey stated the photo shows one full section of aluminum fence running down the side of the property in each direction. If the aluminum fence is 25 ft. back, the appellant does not need a variance. Ms. Kealhofer concurred.

Ms. Kealhofer stated they would need to revise their site plan because that is not what they indicated on it.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Carey, Nicole Guillet, Growth Management Director, advised if the wrought iron fence along the side lot line is setback 25 ft. from the front of the lot, then it is allowed.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Speaker Request Forms and Written Comment Form were received and filed.

Commissioner Henley stated it is his understanding that the 25 ft. came into play when there was a possibility of blocking traffic vision and he doesn’t see that. Discussion ensued.

Mr. McMillan stated if the Board granted the variance as requested, the appellant could take down the wrought iron fence and put up a stockade fence. He stated staff will have to visit the site to measure.

Chairman Carey stated the appellant indicated that that is not their intent.

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Dallari to overturn the BOA’s decision in denying a front yard setback variance from 25 ft. to 1 ft. for an existing privacy fence in the R-1AA (Single-Family Dwelling) district; located on the north side of Dover Road, approximately 300 ft. north of Wood Lake Drive, as described in the proof of publication, Calvin and Regine Mills, and grant the setback variance as illustrated in the photo provided in the agenda memorandum, and to refund any fees that the applicant had to pay for the variance request, an approval Development Order, as shown on page _______.

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

-------

Chairman Carey advised that the 4:00 p.m. Budget Work Session has been cancelled and will be held on April 12, 2011.

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

Sabrina O’Bryan, Assistant County Manager, addressed the Board to give an update on the Legislative program and activities. She requested authorization for the Chairman to execute a letter opposing any and all measures that would allow bigger and heavier trucks on the highways.

Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to authorize the Chairman to execute a Letter, as shown on page ________, to their lobbyists opposing any and all measures that would allow bigger and heavier trucks on highways.

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

Commissioner Dallari requested that the letter be sent to their Federal lobbyist as well as to the National Association of Regional Council.

--------

Ms. O’Bryan submitted a Resolution relating to Mental Health funding and in conjunction and partnership with the Seminole Behavioral Center that receives crisis funding for mental health. She stated staff understands that that funding is in jeopardy and they are requesting approval of the resolution.

Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Horan to adopt appropriate Resolution #2011-R-59, as shown on page _________, requesting the State to continue funding of mental health and substance abuse services.

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

-------

Ms. O’Bryan stated the third issue relates to a fertilizer ordinance that was requested by the Florida Stormwater Association. She stated this is an item that has been a priority in the past and if they can approve the resolution as requested, it may help in preserving the Board’s local authority to be able to pass an ordinance in the future. If the Board chooses to do that, it would be more stringent than the model ordinance that is being prepared at the State level.

Chairman Carey stated she has not had an opportunity to review this resolution. She stated this issue has been an ongoing discussion with the Wekiva Task Force and she believes the Board will want to preserve their Home Rule right to pass rules and regulations, if required.

Ms. O’Bryan stated this resolution helps specifically for SB 606 and HB 407 which would not allow the Board to come back at a later date and pass ordinance more stringent than the ones they are proposing.

Chairman Carey stated she believes the Board needs to further discuss the issue of fertilizers.

Commissioner Horan stated the County is required to meet certain federal requirements regarding water quality and a lot of the measures that counties and cities take are to comply with them, and now the State is saying that local governments cannot do that. He stated he has a problem with that.

Chairman Carey stated she would like to postpone this issue until they have had an opportunity to review it. Staff can put it on the Board’s next agenda for consideration.

Commissioner Horan stated the only concern he has is issues are flying through the Legislature and they may have already passed it by that time.

Chairman Carey stated there have been a lot of debates about the fertilizer issue and she doesn’t want to take action until she has time to review it.

At the recommendation of Commissioner Dallari, Chairman Carey stated rather than a resolution, she will send a letter, as shown on page ________, to the Legislature stating that the County wants to protect their Home Rule by being able to make their own rules in their own county. The Board had no objections.

-------

Ms. O’Bryan updated the Board on a bill (SB 270) that would allow for an early payment and a discount on property taxes. She stated Fiscal Services gathered some rough estimates on the impact to the General Fund. She stated the House Bill was withdrawn. It is anticipated that $5 million will impact the General Fund impact, $1.6 million in the Fire Fund, with additional $500,000 in Solid Waste and about $90,000 in MSBU.

Chairman Carey stated since the House Bill was withdrawn, hopefully it won’t come up with a companion bill.

-------

Ms. O’Bryan stated Representative Dorworth is requesting HB 381 that non-homestead property tax caps be reduced from 10% to 3%, and FAC is trying to negotiate something in the middle. She stated she has forwarded FAC’s talking sheets to the Property Appraiser.

Chairman Carey stated there will be a 3% cap across the board for all tax increases annually.

Ms. O’Bryan stated she contacted the Property Appraiser’s office to see if they could estimate what type of impact that would have. She stated it would be a guesstimate for them based on the economy and property tax values. Staff would continue to monitor that.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Horan, Ms. O’Bryan advised the companion bill is SB 658.

Chairman Carey stated the biggest concern she would have is the Property Appraiser indicated at the budget work session that the non-residential properties are being written down 10% to 40% in value. That could financially impact the County. She stated the Board should be discussing this issue with the district representatives.

The consensus of the Board was to send a letter to the district representatives addressing their concern on this issue.

Ms. O’Bryan stated the Florida Association of Counties has attempted to do some negotiating to increase that fee. They have proposed amendments to the legislators involved but they haven’t received any support on that.

-------

Ms. O’Bryan stated the final item relates to library funding. She stated staff is receiving word that State Aid is at risk. Leisure Services advised that they are currently receiving $147,200 for library funding for a number of programs that are in jeopardy.

Commissioner Van Der Weide asked if there are any legislative issues that will affect government employees.

Commissioner Dallari requested that Ms. O’Bryan provide the Board with the Florida Retirement bills that will impact the employees. She stated she can provide the Board with a matrix showing which ones are most active now and how they will impact the employees.

COUNTY ATTORNEY’S CONSENT AGENDA (Continued)

Mr. McMillan stated he briefed the Board on Item #38, Approval of a proposed negotiated settlement agreement relating to Case #09-CA-6401-15-K, Central Florida Environmental Corp. v. Seminole County. He stated there is no problem defending this case as he feels they have a strong case. He summarized the worst case scenario if the County litigates the dispute and the best case scenario if the County accepts the settlement agreement.

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Horan to approve the proposed negotiated settlement relating to Case #09-CA-6402-15-K, Central Florida Environmental Corp. v. Seminole County, in the amount of $270,000 inclusive of all claims, damages, interest, attorney’s fees and costs.

Under discussion, Commissioner Dallari stated he will not be supporting the motion as he feels this is pending litigation and there is not enough information.

Commissioner Carey stated she will be supporting the motion and the information provided indicates that a change order had been issued and not signed. She stated when something is being issued, that work should not start until someone with authority has signed the work order.

Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioner Dallari voted NAY.

CHAIRMAN’S REPORT

Chairman Carey stated the Board received a letter from the city of Longwood requesting action be taken on the revenue cap legislation (TABOR). She stated she addressed the County’s concerns with the delegation about TABOR and caps on local spending. She added she doesn’t think it would hurt to send another letter to the representatives reminding them that the County would be opposed to placing caps on local governments. The consensus of the Board was to send a letter, as shown on page _________, to the Legislative Delegation opposing same.

-------

Chairman Carey stated there was quite a bit of discussion at the MetroPlan meeting on March 9. The Board received a sample resolution to be sent to the Governor and State Legislature in support of SunRail.

Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Henley to adopt appropriate Resolution #2011-R-64, as shown on page _________, supporting SunRail.

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

-------

Chairman Carey discussed the positive outcome that came out of the 60 Minutes news story highlighting the homeless families and children in Seminole County. She stated Jeno Paulucci generously made a contribution designated to Pathways to Home. She said a couple hundred cases of food was also distributed by Mr. Paulucci. She added she also spoke to Associate Pastor Danny Dearmas, First Baptist Church in Orlando, and they have committed to raise over $5 million to support this particular issue. The pastor is working on how the money is going to be distributed and they are going to try to look at doing the distribution by where the money comes from.

-------

Chairman Carey noted that Pathway to Homes has been selected as one of the Community Innovation Award recipients from the United Way of Florida and they will be receiving that award on April 4 in Tallahassee. She stated if there are no objections from the Board, Father Bluett would like to give an update and highlights of the programs they are doing at a later date. The Board voiced no objections.

-------

Chairman Carey reiterated that the Budget Work Session scheduled following today’s meeting has been postponed and it will be held on April 12, 2011, after the morning session if there is time.

COMMUNICATIONS AND/OR REPORTS

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

1. Letter dated March 1, 2011 to residents and businesses in the Geneva area from the St. Johns River Water Management District re: Inventory of wells in the 22 square mile area known as “the Geneva lens or bubble”.

2. Letter dated March 2, 2011 to the Seminole County Board of County Commissioners from Doug McLaughlin, Commodore, Orange Boating Club, re: a thank you for their support in the restoration of Lake Jesup.

3. Letter dated March 4, 2011 to Brenda Carey, Chairman of the Seminole County Commission, from Brad Loar, Director, Mitigation Division of FEMA, re: agreement on settlement of lawsuit which alleged that the NFIP (National Flood Insurance Program) encourages development along Florida beaches that is harmful to 5 species of threatened or endangered sea turtles.

4. Letter dated March 4, 2011 to Seminole County Board of County Commissioners from Raymond Bradick, Bowyer Singleton, re: recommendation of David Heath for County Manager.

5. Letter dated March 6, 2011 to Brenda Carey, Chairman of the Seminole County Commission, from John Bistline re: appreciation for the resolution acknowledging his contribution over the last 20 years.

6. Letter dated March 7, 2011 to Seminole County Board of County Commissioners from Hugh Maloy re: his opposition to the renewal of the one penny sales tax.

7. Copy of letter dated March 7, 2011 to OCPS School Psychologists from Seminole County Parks and Recreation thanking them for their $200.00 donation in memory of Tom Guest.

8. Letter dated March 7, 2011 to Brenda Carey, Chairman of the Seminole County Commission from Charles Pritchard re: Negligent performance of duties with regard to the Seminole County Water and Sewage Utility ref: 799 Cricklewood Terrace, Lake Mary, FL 32746.

9. Letter dated March 11, 2011 to Brenda Carey, Chairman of the Seminole County Commission, from Gary Causey, Director Community Planning and Development, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, re: NSP3 funding approval and Grant Agreement B-11-UN-12-0018.

10. Letter dated March 14, 2011 to Commissioner Brenda Carey from Larry W. Nelson, Vice President, The Jeno and Lois Paulucci Family Foundation, re: donation to support Pathways to Home.

DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS

Commissioner Dallari stated Pathway to Homes was also recognized nationally from the Realtor’s Association.

-------

Commissioner Dallari stated he received a resolution (received and filed) from the city of Sanford expressing support of the Seminole Science and Simulation Consortium.

-------

Commissioner Dallari recognized the Purchasing Department for receiving their annual Excellence of Public Procurement award for 2011. He stated he wants to thank staff, particularly the Purchasing Department for a job well done and for continuing to excel year after year in that.

------

Commissioner Dallari stated the Board has been asking for the Halogen evaluation and he would like an update on same. He said he has several issues on that. One is it is too subjective and it doesn’t foster relations not just with staff among staff, but customer services. He stated he feels staff members are not be graded accordingly. He added he has been getting a lot of e-mail referencing the lack of customer service and he has asked the County Manager to have customer service training. He said he hopes something will be presented to them, especially during the budget work session, so they can understand what is taking place.

Chairman Carey stated performance reviews have been over time tied to, “I get reviewed and I get a raise”, or “I get reviewed and don’t get a raise”. She stated she doesn’t think performance reviews should be tied to money at all. Even though the salaries are frozen, people should still be evaluated based on their performance. If an employee is not being evaluated correctly because there is no money in the bank to give them a raise, that is unfair to them. She stated she feels the best time to discuss this is when the Evergreen Study comes back.

Commissioner Dallari stated he believes a County employee should be graded on the merit of what they did over the past year. He stated to grade an employee and not be able to give a 2.6 because they are only allowed to give 2.0, is not doing what is in the best interest of the County.

Chairman Carey stated she feels the pay and the review should not be tied to the other. She stated whether they do it really well or do it with room for improvement is really what should be evaluated and there should be some room for improvement in that area.

Commissioner Dallari stated he feels a thank you or a job well done goes a long way.

Chairman Carey stated she feels it would be helpful to discuss that issue and the Evergreen Study at the same time.

-------

Commissioner Horan stated with regard to Pathway to Homes, he has forwarded to Beth Davalos and Father Bluett names of various people who have responded to requests to adopt a family. The Planning Department is in the process of adopting a couple of families and John Metsopoulos is going to be the point person for that.

Commissioner Dallari commended Beth from the School Board for doing a phenomenal job on that issue.

-------

Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he is well aware that employees have not had a raise and he is looking forward to the Evergreen Study. He said the County needs to do something about that as soon as they can.

------

Commissioner Carey stated she has a situation in her district where a gentleman is developing a shooting range for his own personal use near the Heathrow Elementary playground. She stated the Land Development Code doesn’t really address having a private shooting range, but she believes there is something in the County Code that speaks to disarming of firearms within so many miles of a residential section. She said if someone misses the range, it could go over to the playground at Heathrow Elementary. She asked Mr. McMillan and Ms. Guillet to get together on this issue.

Mr. McMillan stated the Code says that it shall be unlawful for any person, unless exempted by Subsection B, to discharge a firearm or firearms in a repetitive or continuous manner on a parcel of land within 500 ft. of a residence. Subsection B states it shall not apply to law enforcement officers in the line of duty, nor a private individual lawfully defending this property, nor to the operation of a firing range approved by the Board of Adjustment or otherwise permitted under the Land Development Code. He stated the firearm cannot be discharged within 500 ft. of a residence unless there is a legally permitted firing range.

Ms. Guillet stated this would not fall under that exception.

Chairman Carey requested staff to contact that individual to let him know that he cannot be disarming firearms.

Ms. Guillet stated staff has heard through the grapevine that he has already abandoned that effort.

COUNTY MANAGER’S REPORT

No Report.

COUNTY ATTORNEY’S REPORT

No Report.

ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA

John Horvath stated he has a deacon at his church that is working with the Christian Sharing Center regarding the homeless and he is going to contact them and the Board to see what they can do as well.

-------

There being no further business to come before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.

ATTEST:_______________________Clerk_____________________Chairman

js/er