A regular MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

april 23, 2024

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, April 23, 2024 at 9:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chambers, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Kirby Smith, Chairman; Douglas B. Shields, Vice Chairman; Sean Parks; Leslie Campione; and Josh Blake. Others present were: Jennifer Barker, County Manager; Melanie Marsh, County Attorney; Niki Booth, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; Kristy Mullane, Chief Financial Officer; and Josh Pearson, Deputy Clerk.

INVOCATION and pledge

Commr. Smith welcomed everyone to the meeting and noted that it was being streamed on the County website; furthermore, they were also broadcasting the meeting via Zoom.

Pastor Jim Mory, with Union Congregational Church in the City of Tavares, gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

virtual meeting instructions

Mr. Levar Cooper, Director for the Office of Communications, explained that the current meeting was being livestreamed on the County website and was also being made available through Zoom Webinar for members of the public who wished to provide comments during the Citizen Question and Comment Period later in the agenda. He elaborated that anyone watching through the livestream who wished to participate could follow the directions currently being broadcast through the stream; furthermore, he relayed that during the Citizen Question and Comment Period, anyone who had joined the webinar via their phone could press *9 to virtually raise their hand, and anyone participating online could click the raise hand button to identify that they wished to speak. He said that when it was time for public comment, he would read the person’s name or phone number, unmute the appropriate line, and the speaker would be asked to provide comments. He added that everyone would have three minutes to speak, and after three minutes an alarm would sound to let them know that their time was up. He added that they previously notified the public that comments could be emailed through 5:00 p.m. on the previous day, and those comments were shared with the Board prior to the meeting. He stated that anyone wishing to provide written comments during the meeting could visit www.lakecountyfl.gov/commissionmeeting, noting that comments sent during this meeting would be shared with the Commission after the meeting was concluded.

Agenda update

Ms. Jennifer Barker, County Manager, said that staff added an additional recommended action for Tab 16. She stated that for Tab 19, the midyear amendment resolutions were attached to the agenda item, and that Tab 22 was added to the consent agenda after the agenda was first published. She also requested to move Tab 16, which was a presentation regarding electronic game room facilities, to the beginning of the Board meeting following this agenda update.

Ms. Mary Ellen Stern, Executive Director for Economic Growth, said that part of the presentation included the Florida Gaming Control Commission, and she relayed her understanding that they were not currently present.

Commr. Smith indicated that they could address this item at a later time.

trust for public land presentation

Commr. Smith mentioned that he had several comment cards for this item, and that he would like to have the residents speak first and then have the presentation.

The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.

Ms. Patricia Duncan, a resident of the City of Eustis, asked for the Board’s continued support for the public lands referendum.

Ms. Lavon Silvernell, a resident of Lake County, thanked Mr. Will Abberger and the Trust for Public Land for their work in 2013 and 2014. She mentioned that she helped collect signatures to pass the Florida Water and Land Conservation Amendment which was on the ballot for the State, and that she found people very willing to sign that petition. She recalled that Amendment 1 passed with 75 percent of State of Florida voters, and that in 2004 Lake County voters decided to agree to tax themselves via a bond referendum to acquire and improve land to protect drinking water sources, preserve natural areas, protect open space from overdevelopment, provide parks and trails, and seek matching funds with citizen oversight review. She recalled that this referendum request was approved by 75 percent of Lake County voters, and she opined that when she when she brought up the subject of if one wanted to see another referendum passed to protect Lake County’s public lands and quality of life, most individuals wanted to preserve what they cared about in Lake County. She hoped to have a positive outcome on the current day.

Mr. Vance Jochim, a resident of Lake County, expressed interest in only charging the bond to the Cities that received the land and not all the taxpayers. He opined that some of the parks were not maintained by the Cities, and that some of them were not open to the public because there was no provision for a mandatory maintenance fund for maintaining, opening up the facilities, parking, etc. He opined that mandatory maintenance should be in place, and that if this passed, the Board needed to have their Inspector General review all of the purchase transactions; additionally, he opined that they needed to have better oversight on the value proposition for this land.

Ms. Sophie Ressler, a junior at Montverde Academy, advocated for the renewal of this referendum, and she opined that the positive effects of this referendum were evident in the flourishing ecosystems, the increased accessibility to outdoor recreational opportunities, and the enhanced quality of life for residents. She expressed concerns for the worsening state of their natural environments across the globe, and she urged the Board to consider the impact that their decision would have on residents.

Mr. Tim Sallin, with Cherry Lake Tree Farm, opined that growth and development was great for business and job creation, and he opined that housing developers were not the issue because people needed houses and jobs. He opined that people wanted to move to Lake County because they had great quality of life and natural resources, and that it was a great place to raise a family. He elaborated that it was a great place because they had hills, lakes, forests, springs and wildlife, and he advocated for balance. He indicated interest in having jobs, growth and development, and to take care of natural resources. He opined that there was not private sector or economic interest to ensure the sustainability of these natural resources, and that they needed this referendum.

Ms. Katherine de Jongh, a resident of Lake County, commented that investing in conservation areas and public lands had been an American tradition since the creation of the Yellowstone Park in 1872. She opined that it was important to determine the needs of the present and future for this bond issue, and that in light of the rapid growth that the state and county were experiencing, it was vital to continue a program of this type. She opined that not only did it protect their natural resources, but that it also ensured the value of their personal property. She asked the Board to consider the possibilities for these public lands, opining that not all of them needed to contain a playground, sports field or boat ramps. She said that her personal priorities included a network of connected wildlife corridors, lands that allowed for more equestrian and hiking trails, and the purchase of historic cemeteries and access routes to them. She commented that only three of the parks purchased by the previous bond referendum which included Ferndale Preserve, Neighborhood Lakes and Pasture Preserve, permitted horse activity; however, she did not consider Neighborhood Lakes Trail to be a safe place to ride. She opined that wildlife corridors were ideal for horse trails and wildlife, and she expressed concerns that as developments encroached on abandoned and forgotten historic cemeteries, there was a growing risk that these places would be lost. She opined that it was their duty to preserve these locations, and that the maintenance should not be a deterrent to including the purchase of these lands and other historically or culturally significant lands in the public lands referendum. She opined that the benefit extended beyond the cities and the county borders, and that people visited to enjoy Lake County and spend money there. She hoped that the Board would allow voters to participate in this direct democracy.

Mr. Marty Proctor, a resident of the City of Groveland, said that he had faith that the Board would move forward with this referendum and that the public would support it. He emphasized the need for a wide variety of stakeholders to be involved in the land selection, and he opined that they were currently in a high interest period. He suggested to possibly issue half the bonds initially, and then wait a period of time and reissue the second half of the bonds, noting that they may potentially get a better price. He opined that there was a significant amount of land acquisition and protection going on around Lake County, and he did not believe that they could look on the current day and say what was going to be most important in five or 10 years because of other things which had been purchased; additionally, something which may appear to be unimportant may move up the list in five or 10 years. He opined that it was also vital to create and execute site and use specific master plans for the existing and new properties.

Mr. Banks Helfrich, a former Lake County Soil and Water Conservation District Chairperson and current candidate for State House of Representatives District 25, recalled that in 2004 the public voted for a referendum and that it passed. He mentioned that this resulted in Hiawatha Preserve, which was 220 acres in the City of Clermont area, noting that it was a collaboration with the City of Clermont who maintained the preserve. He commented that they had another chance to do this in 2024, and he asked the Board to allow the public to decide this and to decide where they wanted to preserve the land.

Ms. Kim Dinkins, Policy and Planning Director for 1,000 Friends of Florida, said that in December 2022 her organization conducted a workshop in Lake County to highlight how thoughtful planning and conservation could preserve significant land and water resources. She expressed support for the initiatives that would be outlined by the Trust for Public Land and give Lake County voters the opportunity to continue their local land conservation program. She relayed her understanding that most Floridians recognized that protecting the environment was essential to maintaining a healthy economy and high quality of life. She opined that the proposed investment for Lake County taxpayers would be modest, but that the returns would be considerable and continue to protect waterways, increase groundwater recharge, and preserve habitats for wildlife and humans. She opined that keeping their tourism and agricultural sectors healthy was a win-win for their environment and economy; additionally, she opined that the more that strategic land acquisitions were proposed, the more the cost would rise and increase the burden on taxpayers to protect them or risk losing them. She commented that funds raised at the County level were almost always used to leverage at least as much, if not more in private, State and Federal funds. She opined that Counties throughout the state that gave constituents the opportunity to do this were now at the head of the line for matching from other sources, and that waiting to do this would place Lake County at the back of the line. She urged the Board to place the bond issue on the ballot and let voters decide.

Ms. Susan Fetter, a resident of Lake County, opined that ecotourism brought much revenue to the County, and she expressed concerns for trees being removed and marsh areas being filled with orange clay. She opined that rule changes in the past few years lessened residents’ and the Board’s ability to have a voice in the process, and that residents deserved a chance to voice their opinion. She asked that the Board continue to gather information and listen to these organizations and residents, and she opined that a common thread in comments from residents was that they needed more conservation lands and less concrete. She also asked the Board to encourage citizen input, and to have this complete in time for residents to vote in November 2024.

Mr. Greg Gensheimer, a resident of Lake County, thanked the Board for voting for the match for the taller Green Mount Scenic Overlook tower. He recalled that 20 years prior he was a member, Vice-Chairman, and Chairman of the Land Acquisition Advisory Committee, and he spoke about the acquisition of Ferndale Preserve. He opined that it benefited everyone, and he mentioned all of the open land which had been covered with asphalt and trees. He opined that even if they did not get the maximum use out of these properties, it would be green space and a place to visit.

Mr. Trampis Bonjorn, a resident of the City of Clermont, mentioned recharge space, and he hoped that the opportunity for the aquifer was a consideration.

Ms. Gabbie Milch, with the St. Johns River Keeper Organization, opined that natural lands were a great investment, and that they had to consider the social aspect, the recharge area, water quality, places for habitat, and the wildlife corridor. She relayed her understanding that 71 percent of people in Lake County had previously voted for this, and she opined that it was a great way to have recreational opportunity. She indicated her understanding that Lake County had previously purchased slightly over 3,000 acres, which was about $11,000 per acre, which she opined was a good deal. She encouraged the Board to consider the future and to make Lake County a place where people would be proud to live.

Ms. Jane Hepting, President of the Lake County Conservation Council, said that her organization was in favor of a referendum to continue setting land aside for conservation. She relayed that going green meant protecting their natural resources, and that using public funds to acquire land for conservation purposes was an important tool to do this. She opined that Lake County should be proud of its conservation history, and that the purpose of the 2004 bond included the following: protecting drinking water sources; improving water quality; protecting open space from overdevelopment; providing connectivity between wildlife corridors; providing parks, sports fields, trails and recreation areas; and preserving natural areas. She opined that with the increasing population and rising temperatures, water was more important than ever. She opined that Lake County used the funding generated from the 2004 bond, along with other sources, to create great properties such as Palatlakaha Environmental and Agricultural Reserve (PEAR) Park, Ferndale Preserve, Green Mountain Scenic Overlook and Trailhead, Pasture Preserve and the Pine Meadows Conservation Area. She opined that their need for conservation lands and easements was greater at the current time than 20 years prior, and that open space was gone forever once it was lost. She hoped that the proposed referendum could include the creation of an advisory committee for the purpose of determining the types of lands to be protected, and she recommended that this committee include representatives from the conservation community.

Ms. Cindy Newton, a resident of Commission District 4, opined that the flexibility of the previous referendum proved helpful not only in getting the referendum passed, but also in providing a large group of citizens with a voice on what was going to be preserved and how the funding was used. She opined that as local governments were being controlled more by State regulations, an added incentive for this referendum to pass was the relief that the proper land choices could bring to the concerns of many citizens experiencing the effects of growth. She mentioned encroachment into rural areas and environmental concerns, and she opined that this referendum could become a great tool to help relieve these rapid growth concerns and help steer development concerns where it was more appropriate. She relayed that high recharge soil was important to her, and that it was usually unique farmland soil. She recommended that the Land Acquisition Advisory Council be a diverse council and also include a member from the conservation groups.

Mr. David Colby, representing the South Lake Chamber of Commerce, stated that the chamber thought that this was a top priority and would impact Lake County for many years to come; therefore, they would like to strongly support this referendum being on the ballot.

Ms. Tegan Bombard, a resident of the Orange Tree community speaking via Zoom, expressed concerns for the conditions of sidewalks which fell under the responsibility of Lake County within her community and some of the surrounding communities. She opined that the issue that residents were facing in South Lake was imposed by the County 20 years prior because when the developments were first passed, there was a requirement for conservation efforts to plant a minimum of three canopy trees on each property frontage between the sidewalk and the road. She indicated that these trees were maturing and that because of the water oak trees planted there, they were raising the sidewalks and creating dangerous walking situations. She indicated that they were seeing an increasing number of incidents of tripping and falling because of the upkeep of the sidewalks which had not occurred, and that they were beginning to receive concerns regarding Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance and who would be legally responsible for these issues. She expressed interest in keeping in mind the changes of the past and the maintenance that was needed to ensure that they were keeping their communities not only visually appealing and environmentally safe and contained, but also safe for taxpayers.

Ms. Deborah Shelley, a resident of the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills speaking via Zoom, expressed support for the renewal of the land acquisition referendum, opining that conservation lands, parks and preserves played an important role for residents and visitors to Lake County, and that the lands were important to the county’s economy. She commented that in the Stetson University and the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) report which was prepared for the County in the previous year, page 108 stated that just over 30 percent of Lake County was protected in conservation lands; additionally, a good portion of these lands were in the Green Swamp, the Wekiva Basin and the Ocala National Forest. She commented that much of the protected lands were wetlands or floodplains, though she hoped that they could consider acquiring and protecting uplands as well; furthermore, the report indicated that for the land cover inventory of Lake County protected areas, the percentage of floodplain ranged from 20 percent to just over 60 percent, which averaged out to 42 percent of protected lands as wetlands. She opined that balancing acquisition and protection of uplands in the future was important for aquifer recharge and other aspects. She added that the report also suggested that the County implement an agricultural protection overlay zoning which could manage or restrict other types of development, and she opined that the existing rural protection areas (RPAs) could serve that purpose. She also opined that they could augment their land acquisition and conservation easements with stronger protections in their existing RPAs, opining that they were currently providing important environmental services. She said that RPAs provided open space, wildlife habitat, recharge, carbon reduction and economic contributions by tourists, cyclists and motorcyclists who toured the rural roads. She opined that given the current development pressure and encroachment into their rural areas through annexation by the Cities, in 20 years they may not have any rural areas left in Lake County. She encouraged the Board that in addition to supporting and renewing the land acquisition referendum, to also recognize that RPAs could augment the environmental services provided by land acquisition and to make a stronger commitment to preserve the RPAs.

There being no one else who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the floor for public comment.

Ms. Pegeen Hanrahan, Southeast Conservation Finance Director for the Trust for Public Land, indicated that her organization’s work was provided at no cost to Lake County, and that they were funded through an effort to protect the Florida Wildlife Corridor from an organization called Live Wildly. She stated that the State of Florida economy was dependent on high quality water, land and the human connection between those. She explained that the Trust for Public Land was focused on connecting everyone to the outdoors, that they were a 50+ year old organization, and that they focused on items including concepts and funding, to good operations of parks, trails, lands, open space and schoolyards; additionally, they focused on the health aspects of getting people outdoors. She mentioned that the program she worked for worked primarily with City and County government, along with State government, to help them envision their program and how to fund it most significantly. She commented that there was a 2004 referendum in Lake County which the Trust for Public Land assisted with, and that over the United States (U.S.) they had 654 successful ballot measures with an 83 percent passage rate; furthermore, she commented that the southeast states leaned heavily conservative, as did Lake County, and she said that she had a 94 percent win rate over her 19-year history. She added that the Trust for Public Land drove this by following the kind of local opinion which was heard on the current day, and that this represented over 175 million “yes” votes for these efforts and over $94 billion in public funding. She stated that there had been 48 ballot measures in the State of Florida and that 41 had passed, and that the Trust for Public Land would frequently work on sales taxes which had other capital priorities. She mentioned that the Trust for Public Land followed a five-step process starting with feasibility research and following with public opinion surveying, noting that they spoke to 400 Lake County residents. She stated that they were currently working with staff to develop program recommendations, and that some of the comments or concerns raised were the types of things that the Trust for Public Land would like to see the County address proactively in their program recommendations. She stated that the ballot language was the next item, noting that it must be legal and clear. She commented that it was prohibited by law for local government to advocate or provide information using County resources, and that her organization liked to see citizens utilize their own privately funded local committee to meet with individuals; additionally, there was usually communication to voters through the same mechanisms that the Board had to use as candidates. She said that a feasibility report was completed in January 2024, and that it appeared to the Trust for Public Land that since the County had this 20 year successful program, her organization recommended to continue the same type of funding mechanism and process, along with similar ballot language. She recommended a $50 million bond with a modest continuation of the same type of cost, noting that it was a lower millage rate than the BCC had to consider 20 years prior due to their tax base growth, and that it would be about 0.12 mills. She opined that it was not an increase, and that it was just continuing the dedication that the Board had over this period of time. She said that bonds were the easiest type of funding mechanism to pass and that they only went to property owners, and she thought that bonds had an 87 percent approval rate in the State of Florida. She mentioned that the Trust for Public Land conducted a public opinion survey to test whether it was a good time to consider this, and that they looked at the different uses of funds and the accountability measures, along with if the approximate $21 per year for the typical household was a reasonable cost. She encouraged the Board to continue general obligation bonds to have a $50 million target, noting that the purposes would be similar to the language adopted by voters in 2004. She recommended full public disclosure of all of the project spending and making it accessible on their website, in addition to doing an annual public audit of how the funding was spent. She also recommended to do this in the current year, commenting that it was going to be a large turnout election; furthermore, they tended to see voter participation help parks, trails and land measures that they worked on. She said that the next steps were to continue to work with staff to ensure that the ballot language was adopted in compliance with all of the regulations, timelines, etc.; additionally, the Lake County Supervisor of Elections needed this language by the last week of July 2024 or the first week of August 2024 to be certain that everything was lined up.

Commr. Smith asked if the ballot language would come back to the Board.

Ms. Barker confirmed that the Board would have to have a public hearing for this.

Commr. Shields inquired about the maintenance issue, relaying his understanding that the County had a new funding mechanism that they did not have 20 years prior.

Ms. Hanrahan replied that there was a new provision in Florida law which allowed an amount to go into maintenance if the Board chose this, and that it could be voter authorized in the same question for the bonds and additional millage to cover maintenance; furthermore, the other option was for the Board to do an annual budget appropriation on the basis of what they thought the need was.

Commr. Parks expressed support for moving forward, and he thanked Ms. Hanrahan and residents for their comments about balance. He opined that this issue with growth management and what the county could potentially be losing was unifying across party lines, along with how they balanced it out. He stated that he was interested in getting the public involved as much as possible, and he opined that the County needed to get each question answered when moving forward. He opined that it would be fully vetted and that it would pass with a similar margin. He mentioned that he also liked the idea of the advisory committee and management.

Commr. Campione thanked everyone who came to speak and who sent emails, and she agreed with Commissioner Parks that this was a critical time in Lake County’s history. She opined that they were experiencing unprecedented growth pressures, and she recalled that Ms. Hanrahan had mentioned that in State law the BCC could not advocate if they put this forward to the public; therefore, she asked if the County could have information on their website about the referendum, the ballot language and the purpose.

Ms. Hanrahan replied that there had been some recent changes to Florida law in this regard, and that before 2008 or 2009 it was not unusual for local governments to take positions on ballot issues. She elaborated that this had changed and moved more into a neutral space, and she relayed her understanding that the most recent changes to Florida law was that they could not spend public funding even to provide educational information.

Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, clarified that if the Board approved moving forward with this, staff would ensure that they had all the information about what they could and could not do as far as publicizing this measure.

Ms. Hanrahan indicated that she preferred that local government remain out of it because it could irritate some people; however, each of the Commissioners had First Amendment rights and could speak to anyone they wanted to, in addition to sharing their opinions, though it became more questionable if they were using County resources.

Commr. Campione opined that much of the growth pressures were largely in and around the municipalities, and that to address something like this as a community, there needed to be a multifaceted approach. She mentioned finding the properties in the right locations which had the largest impact, and said that many properties in the last bond issue were in rural areas which did not have growth pressures. She questioned if this was the most impactful way to use the funds, though she noted that they had some great passive recreation areas as a result of it. She questioned how the County could make this more impactful on lands that created open space and places where they were having the most growth pressures, whether it was small pocket areas or looking at how they could connect corridors. She added that development regulations could possibly play into this so that each project approved in a city had a component including some type of a wildlife corridor, noting that they could connect some of these larger tracts. She opined that these were the kind of discussions that they needed to be having if the public was in support, and she opined that the language was not just words and that it was how they could make this work in the most impactful way. She opined that it was critical for the Board to let the public decide, and that if the decision was to go forward, then she opined that they needed to look at the larger picture and how they could make this work in a way that created these spaces for generations to come.

Commr. Blake said that he would support the motion because it was a direct democracy issue and he was in favor of letting the voters decide; however, he expressed concerns for the government acquiring more land at the current time when the country was $34 trillion in debt. He added that the updated statistics of the Florida Natural Area Inventory was that 34 percent of Lake County was already in permanent conservation, and that land could already be acquired and dedicated to conservation privately without going through this process. He commented that it would result in the removal of land from the tax roll, and he mentioned that almost 30 percent of individuals did not consent to pay for this item previously. He opined that if it could be done privately, then it was better to do it privately.

Commr. Smith indicated that he liked letting the voters make the decision.

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to direct staff to work with the Trust for Public Land to craft some draft language for the ballot, and to advertise it.

proclamation 2024-23 firefighter appreciation day

Commr. Smith asked to address Tab 2 at the current time.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Proclamation 2024-23 designating May 4, 2024 as Firefighter Appreciation Day in Lake County to coincide with the worldwide International Firefighters' Day.

Commr. Smith read and presented Proclamation 2024-23 to Fire Chiefs from the Cities and Lake County.

CLERK OF the Circuit COURT and comptroller’s CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller’s Consent Agenda, Items 1 and 2, as follows:

List of Warrants

Notice is hereby provided of warrants paid prior to this meeting, pursuant to Chapter 136.06 (1) of the Florida Statutes, which shall be incorporated into the Minutes as attached Exhibit A and filed in the Board Support Division of the Clerk's Office.

City of Mount Dora Ordinance 2023-17

Notice is hereby provided of having received Annexation Ordinance 2023-17 from the City of Mount Dora.

electronic game room faciliites

Ms. Stern said that in February 2020, at the request of law enforcement and based on complaints received from residents, an ordinance was presented to the Board that would have prohibited electronic game room facilities from locating in unincorporated Lake County. She elaborated that at that time, industry representatives requested that the ordinance be tabled so that more discussion could take place regarding a regulatory ordinance, rather than a prohibition of those types of facilities. She relayed that on February 3, 2021, the Board approved Ordinance 2021-4 which created Article X, Chapter 3 of the Lake County Code entitled Electronic Game Room Facilities. She elaborated that on August 21, 2021, there was a minor amendment which updated some permitting and fees as part of that code. She commented that staff was now seeking discussion and direction regarding electronic game room facilities and amendments to the Lake County Code.

Mr. Lou Trombetta, Executive Director for the Florida Gaming Control Commission, stated that his organization was on a mission to help commissions deal with this issue. He displayed a slide with the general legal framework for gambling in the State of Florida, and said that gambling was generally prohibited by the Constitution except for specific exceptions created in either a constitutional amendment or statute. He pointed out the list of the main forms of legal regulated gambling, remarking that the State of Florida had a history of licensing certain types of gambling, traditionally at pari-mutuel facilities. He said that for almost 100 years the State issued a series of licenses to businesses to operate pari-mutuel wagering, which was essentially betting on horses and dog racing, along with jai alai, and that other activities were added as time progressed. He explained that pari-mutuel facilities were currently authorized to conduct poker rooms, and that eight of them were authorized to conduct slot machine gaming. He elaborated that slot machine gaming was also authorized through a compact with the Seminole Tribe of Florida at tribal properties located throughout the state; however, slot machines were illegal everywhere else. He commented that if slot machines or similar looking devices were seen in Lake County, they were likely illegal. He mentioned that the other listed forms of legal regulated gambling essentially existed through statutory exception. He specified that there was a specific statutory exception to the general prohibition on slot machines and gambling for amusement machines, noting that the Family Amusement Games Act legalized three types of devices that met specific requirements and that if not for this statutory exception, these devices would be considered slot machines and would only be able to be offered legally in a place with a slot machine license. He explained that type A devices were traditional arcade games, that type B devices were things that redeemed tickets, and that type C devices were claw machines. He displayed the State of Florida definition of an illegal slot machine which was created in 2013 following some issues with illegal adult arcades, and said that the Florida Legislature broadened the definition of a slot machine to specifically capture some of the schemes and procedures being used by some of the criminal actors in the Allied Veterans of the World case to make it clear that this was illegal. He then read the following definition: any machine or device, that upon activation is directly or indirectly caused to operate, and by application of skill or reason of any element of chance the user may receive or become entitled to receive a thing of value or the user may secure additional chances or rights to use such machine. He added that if a device looked like a slot machine and involved the payment of money, then it was presumed to be a slot machine. He showed a map of where slot machines were lawful in the State of Florida, noting that there were limited exceptions to the general prohibition against slot machine gaming. He displayed images of what many electronic game rooms looked like, noting that the images looked similar to a Las Vegas, Nevada casino focusing on slot machines. He then showed images of fish tables, which were another type of device which was commonly used by people in this space to try to sell the idea that what they were doing was legal; however, a fish table was a slot machine that multiple players could play at the same time. He also displayed images taken from skill-based slot machines which were sold and distributed in the state to people in the electronic game room business; however, this had no impact on the State of Florida because skill was specifically included in the definition of a slot machine as one of the elements. He stated that as was identified by staff in the memo, these types of games were harmful to the local community. He commented that many of these businesses were associated with other criminal activity, and that there was no consumer protection or recourse for people who were cheated or taken advantage of. He added that were audits done in a licensed regulated environment, and that they ensured that the machines in the casino floor were fair, that payment was correct and that tax revenue for the State was correct; additionally, if people had issues, they could come to his organization to help resolve them in a legal environment. He said that for the impact on State revenue, the pari-mutuel facilities with slot machine gaming paid a 35 percent tax on their gross revenue, and that the people engaged in illegal slot machine businesses were not paying this tax; therefore, the State was losing funding. He mentioned that the Florida Legislature authorized slot machine gaming in the state for the benefit of education, and that none of the money made with illegal slot machine facilities made it to the education trust fund. He displayed contact information and said that the Town of White Springs had an ordinance allowing gaming; however, two weeks prior the Florida Gaming Control Commission, with support from local law enforcement agencies, raided two of the facilities, seized much of the machines and the money, and made several arrests. He commented that the ordinance did not change that the activity was illegal, and that his organization had met with other Counties in a similar position. He relayed that an ordinance was not going to solve the issue in terms of the illegality presented by these places, and that it would not solve many of the issues and the harms that were mentioned. He stated that his organization continued to work with law enforcement, the State Attorney and the Office of the Statewide Prosecutor, and that they were taking it seriously. He opined that the staff memo was correct in that resources was one of the issues, noting the scope of the issue was large.

Ms. Stern recalled that in February 2021 with Ordinance 2021-4, there were some established parameters that required an application review submittal process; furthermore, one of the requirements was that for any electronic game room in operation at the time that the ordinance was passed, they were required to submit an application within 30 days of the passing of that ordinance. She said that they initially had 32 applications, that 32 were approved, that nine had been revoked since that time, and that they currently had 23 electronic game rooms within unincorporated Lake County. She listed the following proposed amendments to the code: Section 3-68 would clearly provide that all approved electronic game room facilities shall comply with State laws and emphasize that failure to do so would result in immediate revocation; Section 3-70 would clarify that nothing in the ordinance authorized illegal gambling; Section 3-72 would remove the current cap of 25 facilities and prohibit any new electronic game room facilities in unincorporated Lake County, along with prohibiting an approved electronic game room from expanding larger than the space they were already occupying; enhance some of the requirements for a sworn affidavit and require that every principal officer and director of the business provide an affidavit that each piece of electronic equipment in use at the facility was not a slot machine as defined by Florida Law; require a certification from the manufacturer that each piece of electronic equipment was not a slot machine as defined by Florida Law; clarify reasons for denial or revocation, such as an illegal gambling operation, failure to timely submit for renewal, any change in ownership from the original applicant, permit holder or operator, and any expansion, other than what they already occupied; clarify that any order of enforcement by the Special Master would result in immediate revocation; require that payments would be due at the time the application was submitted for the electronic game room fee and the annual fee per piece of electronic equipment; all approvals shall be effective on June 1, beginning with 2025; and for the renewal application to be submitted by April 1 of each year, which would set the dates the same for staff review and the owners of the electronic game rooms. She commented that proposed amendments also included establishing annual requirements for life safety inspections including a deadline of December 1 for life safety inspections, and March 1 for receipt of passing a life safety inspection; additionally, it would clarify that life safety inspections did not limit the powers of the Florida Gaming Control Commission. She relayed that illegal gaming would remain prohibited, and that it would clarify the ordinance shall not be construed to authorize slot machine gaming in Lake County, nor would it shield anyone from civil and criminal prosecution from State or Federal law. She relayed that the next revision increased the fine for a first violation from up to $100 to up to $1,000, and increased the fine for any repeat violations from up to $2,000 to up to $5,000. She added that it would also clarify that any criminal violations or any Lake County Code violations may result in immediate revocation and ineligibility for reinstatement.

The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.

Mr. Kelly Mathis, an attorney who represented a number of these game rooms, recalled that several years prior the BCC passed the ordinance which was now before them. He opined that the ordinance did not change State criminal law, and that since the ordinance was passed, there had been no violations of State criminal law. He opined that the primary issue that the Board addressed with this ordinance was not alleged criminal activity taking place inside the game room, but rather the criminal element that it seemed to generate. He indicated his understanding that calls for service, crime complaints and criminal activity around these game rooms had decreased; therefore, he opined that the ordinance was sound. He relayed that the Florida Gaming Control Commission and the Lake County Sheriff could enforce if there were game rooms which were acting illegally, and he said that one of the operations of these game rooms was sweepstakes, which he opined that the Florida Gaming Control Commission admitted was an exception to the gambling law. He opined that their requirements for sweepstakes were addressed in the ordinance and Florida Statutes, and that in 1971 the Florida Legislature permitted sweepstakes in the State of Florida, which were now done electronically by computers. He opined that the State ordinance and criminal law worked in harmony, and that for the most part the game rooms did not have any issue with the staff recommendations.

There being no one else who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the floor for public comment.

Commr. Campione asked if game rooms currently operating in Lake County were considered legal, or if the Florida Gaming Control Commission was not taking any action to enforce that law.

Mr. Mathis opined that there were games which were legal, and that those were the games that were currently being operated in Lake County.

Commr. Campione inquired if any of the illegal games would be in violation of State law and therefore a violation of Lake County’s ordinance, which could result in that operation being closed.

Mr. Mathis confirmed this. He added that he had some disagreement on some of the games that the Florida Gaming Control Commission were pointing out as illegal because there was no court opinion or decision on this, and he opined that those were not the issue before the Board; rather, the issue was that if there was legal activity and the Florida Gaming Control Commission recognized this, then could the County regulate that activity. He opined that the County could do this, and that the Board could not make something legal which was illegal under State law; however, this was not what the Board had to decide. He opined that the issue was if the County would continue to regulate the legal activity, noting that if the Lake County Sheriff deemed it to be illegal at any time, they could do a criminal raid, a prosecution, and receive a search warrant; furthermore, if the Florida Gaming Control Commission believed that it was illegal, they had certified law enforcement officers which could and had gone into establishments and determined that it was legal, including raids and prosecutions. He commented that this had not occurred in Lake County, opining that Lake County had control of this issue by this ordinance.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that Mr. Mathis was in favor of this ordinance.

Mr. Mathis confirmed this, noting that he had worked with the County when the first ordinance was proposed. He added that he had spoken to Ms. Marsh about the modifications, opining that there was not any major issue with them.

Commr. Parks asked if the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) wanted to add anything.

Captain Shawn Vance, with the LCSO, agreed with the Florida Gaming Control Commission and said that simply because there had not been arrests or search warrants executed did not mean that the activities occurring were legal or lawful. He commented that they had not been made aware of a single example of one of these game rooms that would be lawful, opining that some of the pictures depicted were the ones in their casinos. He mentioned the Florida Gaming Control Commission’s definition of something of value going in with a chance of something of value coming out, opining that this was why individuals were visiting these facilities. He opined that there was a heightened risk of criminal activity, indicating that he was not aware of any recent reduction in statistics. He commented that drugs were sold there, and that they had complaints of human trafficking. He said that the LCSO’s approach would be to work with the Florida Gaming Control Commission to develop strategies for enforcement, noting that there was a recent law change which made the slot machines a misdemeanor and created challenges in getting a search warrant. He relayed that the LSCO hoped to be on the same page as the Florida Gaming Control Commission in terms of not having an ordinance which clouded whether it was lawful, opining that it was unlawful.

Commr. Campione said that she had wanted to abolish this altogether, relaying her understanding that the County could not regulate what the Cities were doing. She stated that she considered herself to be pro-business and pro-free market, though she opined that this was an issue of illegal activity. She opined that the LCSO’s resources were spread thin with their growing population and ongoing concerns with other issues that they needed law enforcement available to address, expressing concerns for the idea of spreading them thinner to facilitate activity that was illegal according to the State. She added that many issues were occurring as a result of these establishments being able to operate, and that she did not want to be part of it. She relayed that as an elected official, her position was that the people in Lake County did not want these establishments in the county; therefore, she supported prohibiting them. She opined that if the State of Florida said that it was illegal activity, then she did not see how the County could lose a lawsuit, noting that the County would just be saying that one could not continue an activity that was considered illegal by the State. She expressed support for abolishing them in Lake County.

Commr. Smith commented that if the LCSO was saying that they had not seen a game room which was legal, then this ordinance would address 100 percent of them.

Ms. Marsh confirmed this, stating that when the Florida Gaming Control Commission originally sent a letter to the LCSO in the previous year, which was forwarded to the County and started these conversations, there was nothing about the County’s ordinance that was ever intended to make an illegal activity legal in Lake County. She elaborated that if there was a criminal prosecution violation or a violation of Lake County code for any reason, the County would immediately revoke that license. She said that staff was asking to move forward with an ordinance to make these changes, or that staff could bring back an ordinance which would prohibit electronic game rooms outright like they had originally brought in 2021. She added that staff was also asking the Board to adopt a resolution to implement the Pending Legislation Doctrine, explaining that currently, the County had an up to 25 license cap in their ordinance, noting that they were down to 23 with nine of them having been revoked; however, they did not want two more facilities to rush in with their application fee and ask Lake County to allow them to operate. She asked the Board to adopt this resolution regardless if they wanted to repeal or make modifications to the ordinance so that staff could stop the issuance or application of any further gaming facilities.

Commr. Campione opined that the County should not be allowing any more facilities, and she asked if this language would address what the LCSO needed to enforce the State law if there were violations occurring within these establishments.

Captain Vance replied that the position they were discussing at the LCSO was that if there was no example of the game rooms being lawful, then why would there be any ordinance, noting that many items were covered under Florida Statutes that they did not have ordinances for. He opined that it was easier from their standpoint if there was not an ordinance.

Commr. Parks questioned that if the Board did this on the current day, then would this effectively end it, or would it be easier for the LCSO if there was no ordinance.

Captain Vance opined that the Florida Statute spoke for itself and gave the LCSO the tools they needed to investigate and make arrests; therefore, he was unsure what additional value an ordinance gave them.

Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that if the Board did this on the current day, then over the next month most or all of them would be shut down because they were illegal anyway.

Captain Vance relayed that in the past when the LCSO executed a search warrant and seized equipment, in many cases they would reopen. He said that if they were attempting to operate within the ordinance, whether the LCSO executed a search warrant did not make them close their doors and stop trying to operate game rooms.

Commr. Blake asked that if it was unlawful today and the only argument for not enforcing the law was that they would continue to do it, then would this not continue regardless of what the Board did.

Captain Vance clarified that the LCSO was not making the argument that they were not enforcing the law or stipulating that it was lawful behavior because there had not been a search warrant or an arrest, and he opined that they continued to operate whether there was an ordinance or not. He questioned that if the Florida Statutes already covered it and if the LCSO could not come up with a lawful example, then why not defer to the statutes.

Commr. Campione stated that practically, the County collected fees and had to prosecute their ordinance through a special master. She added that if the Board eliminated it, they would not collect any fees and the LCSO could use Florida Statutes to enforce what the law already said. She elaborated that if the County had an ordinance in place and attempted to regulate this, they would collect regulatory fees which paid for the services to regulate and attempt to keep the facilities as safe as possible; however, she opined that it felt that doing this was condoning something that the State law said should not be happening. She opined that they should eliminate the ordinance.

Commr. Parks inquired that if the County eliminated the ordinance, did this mean that the LCSO could shut them down.

Major Todd English, with the LCSO, said that the Lake County Sheriff’s position on this had not changed and that he opposed electronic game rooms. He opined that these were establishments which were lining their front doors with armed security guards to prevent armed robberies from occurring, and that this was the largest point of concern to him. He relayed that the LCSO had sent members into some of the electronic game rooms and that there was yet to be one that was operating without the LCSO’s believed violations, and that if the LCSO attempted to apply charges, this could become an issue when they were balancing the justifiable arguments to the law that the defense would make about an ordinance being in play.

Commr. Blake recalled that when this item came up the first time, he took a position that would rather not regulate them, or ban them all. He opined that if this was something that the County did not need to be involved with, then they likely should not be involved. He expressed concerns for the hypocrisy of the State turning many convenience stores into casinos in a way and receiving $2 billion in revenue, and for the State picking the winners and losers in this category. He opined that it was essentially discretionary funding that someone had made and was deciding what to do with, and he agreed that the County should stay out of it. He also opined that the number of law enforcement interactions was not a reason to regulate something or shut it down; however, he did not disagree with Commissioner Campione or Commissioner Parks because it was a State issue.

Commr. Smith asked that if there was a motion to abolish electronic game rooms, was there a period of time where it had to come back to the Board.

Ms. Marsh replied that staff would have to bring back an ordinance to repeal the current code provisions.

Commr. Smith stated that he had been a proponent for electronic game rooms when they first came out with these regulations, and he opined that the game rooms had drastically changed over the three years; additionally, he did not realize that having an ordinance would affect the ability of the LCSO to do their sworn duty. He indicated that he was in favor of abolishing them.
Commr. Parks inquired if there would be a timeframe after which there would be no more of these establishments in Lake County.

Commr. Campione said that if they repealed the ordinance, then they would eliminate any regulatory involvement.

Commr. Parks asked that when someone went to the Office of Planning and Zoning to receive permits, could permits be issued.

Commr. Campione stated that staff could cite the State law.

Ms. Marsh clarified that as part of the ordinance repealing this, staff could clarify that these facilities were prohibited under State law and that staff would be unable to issue zoning clearances. She also indicated that staff could make it clear in the Land Development Regulations (LDR) that they did not issue zoning clearances or permits for things that were prohibited under State law; therefore, it would not be specific to gaming.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to bring back an ordinance to repeal the existing ordinance.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Resolution 2024-55 implementing the "Pending Legislation Doctrine" while amendments to Article X, Chapter 3, Lake County Code, entitled Electronic Game Room Facilities are considered.

citizen question and comment period

Mr. Samuel Mehalick, a resident of Lake County, expressed concerns about zoning, planning, and ditches. He displayed images of where drainage ditches were over six feet in height, and he opined that drainage ditches in many areas were not being maintained. He relayed that Astor was in a flood zone and that most of the area was wetlands; additionally, he questioned how it was possible for developments to receive approval to build on wetlands. He indicated that he could not build a house on his property because setbacks required it to be 50 feet away from wetlands, and that he could not build without paying a $5,000 variance fee. He opined that the County had zoned land that was originally campsites as mixed residential, and that they were placing a limitation on what he could do with his property. He asked if the zoning could be changed, and he opined that most of the campsites had campers and people occupying them; however, the Office of Code Enforcement said that they could not do this because of the zoning. He indicated interest in addressing this.

Minutes approval

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the minutes for the BCC meeting of February 26, 2024 (Special Meeting) as presented.

COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA

Commr. Smith said that he had a comment card for Tab 14; therefore, it would be pulled to the regular agenda.

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Consent Agenda, Tabs 4 through 13, with the addition of Tab 22, and pulling Tab 14 to the regular agenda, as follows:

COUNTY ATTORNEY

Recommend approval of Second Amendment to Lease Agreement between Lake County and NWS Holdings, LLC, for Commercial Office Space. The fiscal impact for the addition of leased space is $191,778 (expenditure) in Fiscal Year 2024.

PUBLIC SAFETY

Fire Rescue

Recommend approval to advertise a public hearing for the renewal of the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Lake County Board of County Commissioners, Office of Fire Rescue. There is no fiscal impact.

Recommend approval:

1. To utilize Q2024-00067 to purchase a modular/manufactured structure to be used as a temporary fire station from Baird Homes of Leesburg, Inc. (Leesburg, FL); and

2. To authorize the Office of Procurement Services to execute all supporting documentation.

The estimated fiscal impact is $170,200 and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2024 Budget. Commission District 5.

community services

Housing and Community Services

Recommend approval for the Chairman to execute the Housing and Urban Development Annual Civil Rights Certification (HUD-50077-CR) certifying conformity with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. There is no fiscal impact.

Recommend approval:

1. Of the First Submission of the 2024-2027 Local Housing Assistance Plan (LHAP); and

2. To authorize the Office of Housing & Community Services Director to execute any necessary documents required by the Florida Housing Finance Corporation and corresponding authorization Resolution 2024-54.

There is no fiscal impact.

Library Services

Recommend approval to enter into an Interlocal Agreement for Data Sharing for Virtual Library Card Services with Montverde Academy. There is no fiscal impact.

infrastructure and transportation services

Facilities Management

Recommend approval:

1. To purchase a Building Automation System and related software for additional County buildings, Phase II; and

2. To authorize the Office of Procurement Services to execute all supporting documentation.

The estimated fiscal impact is $829,363 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2024 Budget.

Recommend approval:

1. Of the Electric Vehicle DC Fast Charging Site Host Agreement with Duke Energy; and

2. To authorize the Office of Procurement Services to execute all supporting documents.

There is no fiscal impact.

Public Works

Recommend adoption of Resolution 2024-51 to install stop signs and all-way plaques on Dorchester Boulevard at Westminster Trail/Shoal Court in the Clermont area.

The estimated fiscal impact is $100 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2024 Budget. Commission District 1.

Recommend adoption of Resolution 2024-52 to advertise a public hearing to vacate platted right of way located east of CR 48 and north of Bella Vista Drive. The closest municipality is Howey in the Hills.

The fiscal impact is $2,295 (revenue-vacation application fee) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2024 Budget. Commission District 3.

Recommend adoption of Resolution 2024-53 to advertise a public hearing to vacate the remaining portions of an unnamed platted right of way and tract located west of Good Hearth Blvd and south of SR 50. The closest municipality is Clermont.

The fiscal impact is $2,295 (revenue-vacation application fee) and is within the Fiscal Year 2024 Budget. Commission District 2.

tab 14: interlocal agreement regarding vista ridge drive

The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.

Ms. Newton asked for caution moving forward and if they could possibly do a larger study on what was occurring under the surface of this area. She displayed a map from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and pointed out where the proposed road was going to be, noting that the Wolf Branch Sink was nearby with much drainage; furthermore, they were cutting off a wetland when they did not know if there was something going on underground to connect those. She relayed that the Wekiva Study Area was high recharge type A soil, and that some of the areas had a confining layer which development would sometimes say stopped the recharge; however, she opined that with the high pressure, much of it still pushed the water through the confining layers. She relayed her understanding that there was much karst and other breakage in that clay area which, if the pressure was high enough and it could not get through the confining layer, tended to move horizontally and still allowed recharge. She added that if this was not available, then they saw it move in further and usually ended up in the lakes, opining that this was one of the reasons why the lakes were becoming high during the dry seasons. She also indicated that they were receiving reports in the area about roads flooding during dry times with no rain, and she opined that they needed to look at this understructure to see what was occurring. She mentioned that the expansion to Sorrento Pines was 200 acres and that when they did the hydrology study, they found four karst features. She reiterated her request to review this more closely and see what kind of impact it would have on the Wolf Branch Sink and drainage around State Road (SR) 46.

There being no one else who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the floor for public comment.

Commr. Parks said that staff could possibly include an aquifer vulnerability test in the preliminary engineering to go beyond the typical hydrological engineering.

Mr. Jeff Earhart, Engineering Director for the Public Works Department, indicated that this could be included and that the road had not been designed yet. He mentioned that this item was just saying that the County would allow them to use impact fees on it and defining what the cross section of the road would look like.

Commr. Campione opined that this road was important from a transportation network standpoint because it would create an east-west connection which would eventually go to Round Lake Road and to the east. She commented that it could be conditioned on those types of engineering studies to ensure that they were not impacting any subsurface water movement.

Mr. Earhart added that staff was also trying to get the school and the church off septic tanks, and to incorporate some positive environmental impacts.

Commr. Campione opined that the key was for the City of Mount Dora and the County utilizing information to ensure that this was not going to impact anything from the subsurface level, or the outflow from what looked like a wetland or lake area.

Mr. Earhart said that the wetland and lakes were likely fairly isolated, and that they would want to see how it moved underground and what connected to the Wolf Branch Sink, etc.

Commr. Campione opined that this should be part of the overall review that the County gave the Wolf Branch Creek and the area surrounding Britt Road. She relayed that along any subdivisions adjacent to the Wolf Branch Creek, the City of Mount Dora reserved or had the developers reserve conservation easements; additionally, the City designated a potential trail system in that area. She opined that there were many positive things that could come from the City and the County working closely on this area and being sensitive to the environmental concerns.

Mr. Earhart remarked that the trail would likely connect to the City of Mount Dora.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Mount Dora and Lake County regarding Vista Ridge Drive.

lake technical college update

Ms. DeAnna Thomas, Executive Director for Lake Technical College (Lake Tech), recalled that the County had granted Lake Tech some American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding for the following three projects: the Transportation Training and Innovation Center, which was their partnership with the City of Tavares to provide diesel system technician training and automotive service technology training on Captain Haynes Road; workforce training in the south end of the county, particularly earmarked for something with the Lincoln Park Education Center; and workforce training and scholarships for students across Lake County for some of the critical sectors. She displayed an image of the Transportation Training and Innovation Center from March 2024, and she said that things were moving along with that building; additionally, she pointed out the City of Tavares public administration building, the City’s public works operations center and the building for Lake Tech. She elaborated that they were on schedule to be completed by the end of May 2024, and that they would have a grand opening; additionally, they had classes scheduled to begin in August 2024, and they had partnership from business and industry that would be providing scholarships for 100 percent of the first students who went through those programs in the August 2024 class. She relayed that many partners had been drawn to this and that they had received many donations. She added that this would free up space on their main campus, and that they would be bringing industrial maintenance machinery technician training programs to their City of Eustis campus at the request from the commerce park and some of the larger companies coming in, as well as aviation airframe and power plant training programs as they were working on their advanced manufacturing expansion in aerospace, etc. She commented that for workforce training at the Lincoln Park Education Center, they could not do any capital projects with the funding that they earmarked for this; therefore, they had to look for resources to do some work on the former Clermont Elementary School building and provide space. She related that they were successful in writing a capitalization grant with the State and were awarded $4 million toward the property in which they would be redoing the gymnasium; additionally, they would be offering an electrician program and a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) program. She said that the Lake County School District was doing a flexible high school there, and that Lake-Sumter State College (LSSC) was coming in to partner in that gym area where they would be doing a mechatronics program and their construction management associate of science (AS). She mentioned that Lake Tech was continuing to seek funding for that area, and that the idea was that it would become Lake Tech South with an abundance of other programs including healthcare, public safety and hospitality; furthermore, they had been in conversations with CareerSource Central Florida, who would like to have a South Lake office at that location, as well as Lake Economic Area Development (LEAD) and the Office of Elevate Lake regarding what they could do there for makerspace or entrepreneurship for South Lake. She explained that their Pathways to Prosperity program was offered to Lake County residents and that they chose the following nine programs in critical need sectors: public safety, which included correctional officer, fire/emergency medical technician (EMT), 911 dispatcher and crossover to law, noting that it did not include law enforcement officer because Florida Governor Ron DeSantis had set aside funding specifically for this and that not included in these numbers was another 50 law enforcement students that they were able to scholarship through additional funding; healthcare, which included nursing, patient care technician and pharmacy technician; hospitality, which included culinary arts; and architecture and construction, where they provided scholarships to HVAC students in their integrated program where students were working on gaining their high school diploma at the same time as their credential as an HVAC technician. She commented that they had 203 applicants awarded and that 195 were eligible for completion for a 96 percent retention rate; additionally, 96 students were graduates and 99 were still enrolled and due to complete their training in the current year. She displayed a graph for the 96 graduates and commented that about 56.7 percent were provided scholarships in the public safety programs, that 34.6 were in healthcare, and the next highest were hospitality and architecture/construction. She relayed that 100 percent of the recipients lived in Lake County, and that this was a qualifying factor. She added that 96 percent of them were employed, noting that their mentor was working with the other four percent, and that of the 96 percent, seven percent of them were employed in Lake County businesses. She commented that Lake Tech still had about $165,000 left in the Pathways to Prosperity funding, and that they were continuing to identify students; additionally, at the request of the Office of Fire Rescue they ran an evening fire program to help with the County’s shortage of firefighters and EMT paramedics. She also indicated that Lake Tech reserved some of this funding to award those students for the class that started on May 6, 2024. She related that for the other 99 students still enrolled in training, Lake Tech would be working on job placement with them. She thanked Ms. Barker and Mr. Sean Beaudet, Parks and Trails Program Manager for the Office of Water Resources, for helping with these funds and making a significant impact to help those in Lake County. She expressed appreciation for the County’s investment in Lake Tech and the workforce in general, and she hoped that they saw that the return on investment would pay off in the county long term.

Commr. Smith encouraged her to keep doing excellent work.

public hearing: ordinance 2024-9 conditions of employment

Ms. Marsh placed the proposed ordinance on the floor for reading by title only as follows:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA; AMENDING SECTION 2-57, LAKE COUNTY CODE, ENTITLED CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT, REGARDING THE POSITION OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

Commr. Parks expressed appreciation for Ms. Marsh and the work that she did.

On a motion by Commr. Shields, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Ordinance 2024-9 amending Section 2-57, Lake County Code, entitled Conditions of Employment regarding the position of county attorney, and the fourth amendment to the employment agreement between the Lake County Board of County Commissioners and Ms. Melanie Marsh.

Commr. Campione was absent for the vote.

public hearing: ordinance 2024-10 arts and cultural alliance

Ms. Marsh placed the proposed ordinance on the floor for reading by title only as follows:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA; REPEALING AND REPLACING DIVISION 4, ARTICLE IV, CHAPTER 2, LAKE COUNTY CODE, ENTITLED LAKE COUNTY ARTS AND CULTURAL ALLIANCE; AMENDING ADVISORY BOARD DUTIES, MEMBERSHIP, AND NAME; CREATING SECTION 13-2, LAKE COUNTY CODE, TO BE ENTITLED FLORIDA ARTS LICENSE PLATE FEES; DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY MANAGER; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Ordinance 2024-10 repealing and replacing Division 4, Article IV, Chapter 2, Lake County Code, entitled Lake County Arts and Cultural Alliance, and creating Section 13-2, Lake County Code, to be entitled Florida Arts License Plate Fees.

Commr. Shields was absent for the vote.

public hearing: amended and supplemental budgets

Ms. Allison Teslia, Director for the Office of Management and Budget, said that the purpose of the mid-year budget amendment was to make adjustments to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 budget to add previously unanticipated revenues and expenditures, and to include any necessary changes that had been identified. She stated that the current countywide budget, which included previously approved unanticipated revenue resolutions, was $873.1 million, and that the proposed changes were about $9.9 million, which would bring the supplemental budget to around $883 million. She remarked that the total mid-year adjustments for the General Fund revenues were about $7.26 million and included the following: an adjustment for changes in the beginning fund balances of $5.4 million, which was attributable to the audit adjustments; a $2 million legislative appropriation for the fairgrounds; adjustments made for the LCSO service agreements; and other revenue adjustments that totaled approximately $15,000. She explained that adjustments for the General Fund expenditures included the following: $2 million for the legislative appropriation for the fairgrounds; around $35,000 in adjustments to accommodate leases for the Lake County Tax Collector; around $183,000 for the LCSO, which included grant reconciliations, leases and service agreements; a $1 million transfer to the Office of Solid Waste for the purchase of bear proof trash cans and other non-assessment services; roughly $3.3 million which was an increase to reserves; and $696,000 for miscellaneous adjustments including about $275,000 for increased utility costs based on current trends, about $60,000 for wage adjustments, $24,000 for Office of Planning and Zoning permitting software, and $63,000 for costs related to the second floor renovations at the Lake County Tax Collector building. She commented that the current adopted General Fund operating reserves were about $41.2 million, which was around 19.5 percent of the annual operating budget, and that after approval of the mid-year adjustment, the total General Fund reserves would be roughly $44.5 million, which was a $3.3 million increase representing approximately 21.1 percent of the operating budget. She relayed that they had one department position request for the Office of Public Safety Support, which was converting a part time position to a full-time position; additionally, it was funded out of the E911 Fund. She said that the total adjustments to the other funds was approximately $2.6 million and included the following: $863,000 in grant reconciliations; $30,000 in beginning fund balance adjustments; the $1 million Office of Solid Waste transfer for bear proof trash cans and non-assessment services; and $446,000 in other adjustments that were primarily related to recognizing unexpected revenues that had been received in the current year.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

Commr. Parks asked if the discussion regarding areas of need to provide the level of service, particularly in the Office of Planning and Zoning, would continue later in the current year with the budget.

Ms. Barker commented that this would be discussed further during the budget process, recalling that the Board had approved granting her the authority to approve new positions as needed for the Office of Planning and Zoning; furthermore, she had approved six new positions since that time which were currently filled.

Ms. Teslia added that this was included in the General Fund adjustment.

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved an amended budget for FY 2024 to include a reconciliation of beginning fund balance and other adjustments, and Resolution 2024-56 adopting a supplemental budget of $882,998,668 for FY 2024.

Ms. Teslia then presented the mid-year budget amendment for the Lake County Water Authority (LCWA), which was about $4.9 million. She said that this was primarily related to the beginning fund balance adjustment of around $1.4 million, and adjustments for the purchase order (PO) carryforward from FY 2023.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved an amended budget for FY 2024 for the Lake County Water Authority to include a reconciliation of beginning fund balance and other adjustments, and Resolution 2024-57 adopting a supplemental budget of $31,314,685 for FY 2024.

other business

appointments to the elder affairs coordinating council

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the following appointments to the Elder Affairs Coordinating Council: Mr. Fred Costello, to be reappointed as a District 1 member and serve a term ending January 31, 2026; Ms. Latoya Sankey, as a District 1 member to fill a vacant seat with a term ending January 31, 2026; Ms. Pamela Orr, as a District 2 member to fill a vacant seat with a term ending January 31, 2025; Ms. Amanda Waterstradt, to be reappointed as a District 3 member and serve a term ending January 31, 2026; Ms. Janelle Carbone-Rodriguez, to be reappointed as a District 3 member and serve a term ending January 31, 2026; Ms. Cheryl Rumbley, as a District 4 member to fill a vacant seat with a term ending January 31, 2025; Ms. Kathy Haviland, to be reappointed as a District 5 member and serve a term ending January 31, 2026; Ms. Carolyn Peoples, as an At-Large member to fill a vacant seat with a term ending January 31, 2025; Ms. Debbie Brazill, as an At-Large member to fill a vacant seat with a term ending January 31, 2025; and Ms. Erika Buigas, with conflict waiver, as an At-Large member to fill a vacant seat with a term ending January 31, 2026. The Board also approved to adjust the term of District 4 member Ms. Barbara Wallace to show the current term ending January 31, 2025.

appointment to the homeless mitigation advisory committee

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to appoint Corporal Philip Pollen to the Homeless Mitigation Advisory Council as a designee representing an At-Large individual with experience in providing assistance to the homeless population, with a term expiring September 30, 2025, and applicable waiver.

commissioners reports

commissioner shields – vice chairman and district 1

four corners study

Commr. Shields mentioned that he was working with the ECFRPC to get some grant funding to study Four Corners.

keep lake beautiful meeting

Commr. Shields relayed that he had a Keep Lake Beautiful (KLB) meeting.

central florida mpo alliance meeting

Commr. Shields said that he had a Central Florida Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Alliance meeting.

east central florida regional planning council retreat

Commr. Shields stated that the ECFRPC had a retreat where they discussed regional issues to work on in the following year.

sidewalks in orange tree community

Commr. Shields commented that an issue in the Orange Tree community came up, indicating that they had issues with individuals tripping and falling on sidewalks. He explained that they had sidewalks which the County owned the right of way for, and that they had trees planted next to the sidewalks; therefore, he opined that it was a matter of time before the County would have to replace the sidewalk and remove trees. He added that the County had already spent about $500,000 so far, and that there were another 1,000 trees that could be breaking up the sidewalk there. He added that he was trying to work on a solution.

commissioner parks – district 2

DEDICATION FOR STATE ROAD 50 BYPASS

Commr. Parks expressed appreciation for the dedication for the SR 50 bypass around the City of Groveland. He opined that Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Shields and other speakers did a great job, and that the event was well done.

WATER MEETINGS

Commr. Parks reported that he had some critical water meetings that Ms. Stern, along with the Mayors of the City of Orlando and Orange County, were part of. He added that the City of Orlando and Orange County used and treated much water, and that they had regional plans in place for their future water resource needs; however, Lake County was not part of those plans, noting that the City of Orlando and Orange County had Conserv II lands in Lake County. He commented that as Lake County had growth occurring and was trying to meet population needs and current entitlements, there would be a challenge to meet those water resource needs. He opined that it would become a large issue, and he thanked Ms. Stern for the meetings and trying to work with some regional partners. He mentioned that Ms. Stern met with Dr. Richard Levey, who was also part of the meeting, to work with Orange County and City of Orlando staff, as well as the Cities in Lake County to come up with a strategy.

LIBERTY TREE PRESENTATIONS

Commr. Parks thanked staff for working on the Liberty Tree presentations, and said that they would be at Umatilla High School on the following Friday, and at East Ridge High School on the following Monday. He hoped to have Liberty Trees at each high school in Lake County in the future, and he also thanked the Lake County Historical Society. He encouraged everyone to attend at 10:00 a.m. at East Ridge High School.

commissioner campione – district 4

REGIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

Commr. Campione stated that she had a regional Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) meeting, noting that if the County did not participate, then they would be deprived of their State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) funding. She added that they were able to hear about the affordable housing programs in the State of Florida, along with their annual allocation and what other Counties were doing.

VISIT TO OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

Commr. Campione commented that she visited the Office of Housing and Community services, and she encouraged the Board to see how they had everything organized and how they kept up with the different things that they had to administer. She commented that many good things would be coming before the Board in the future for potential projects that they could be involved in as a result of some of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and State funding that had been made available. She also indicated that they would have another issue coming up in the future regarding the tax exemption under the Live Local Act that they would have to address, noting that it put a large burden on the County to keep up with the requirements, in addition to removing this funding from the General Fund.

MEETING WITH CHILDREN’S SERVICES COUNCIL

Commr. Campione said that she had a meeting with the Children’s Services Council, and she mentioned the groups that were working directly with the needs of young people in Lake County. She also relayed that when there were large events in Lake County which filled up the hotels, many families that relied on living in those hotels for housing were displaced. She elaborated that this was an issue where they were looking to see to what extent they could help, and that staff was going to see if they could connect with those families and offer locations in another part of the county where they could possibly stay at hotels. She explained that these individuals did not technically fall into the HUD homelessness programs, but they were not otherwise able to have permanent housing if not for the hotels.

CITY OF MOUNT DORA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA

Commr. Campione recalled that when the Board was having discussions about the Mount Dora Groves Property, there was some discussion about the City of Mount Dora considering doing a community redevelopment area (CRA) on that property. She said that the property had now been annexed into the city, and that they were having discussions about going forward with the CRA. She stated that the property was adjacent to Limit Avenue, which the County continued to maintain and have jurisdiction over; additionally, there were many deficiencies and needs on Limit Avenue. She commented that the County had tried to have the City take over Limit Avenue, but that the City did not want to do this unless all the sidewalk work and stormwater improvements were done. She opined that this affected city residents who were also county residents, as well as county residents who used this network of roads. She added that when property was put into a CRA, that revenue was frozen where it currently was and flowed straight into the CRA. She said that this was a large property located between U.S. Highway 441 and Limit Avenue, and that there were county services which still needed to be provided for residents and businesses in that area. She asked if the Board would support staff reaching out to the City about the possibility of entering into an interlocal agreement so that a certain amount of funding could be available for county services if they went forward with their CRA. She opined that there were benefits of the CRA expanding, and that this could be done in a way through an interlocal agreement so that the County could still fund services and ensure that enough funding had been allocated to address Limit Avenue projects and improvements; furthermore, the agreement could also assure that the City would then take over all maintenance of Limit Avenue. She requested consensus to direct staff to work on something to ensure that these needs were addressed.

Commr. Parks expressed support for coming to an agreement on the sharing of funding for this.

commissioner smith – chairman and district 3

STAFF MEETINGS

Commr. Smith related that he had attended many staff meetings in the previous week.

STATE ROAD 50 REALIGNMENT

Commr. Smith said that the SR 50 realignment would transform the way the City of Groveland looked, adding that trails would be added and that it was a needed bypass. He indicated that was an honor to speak there, and he recalled that he had visited the City of Tallahassee with Ms. Jennifer Barker, County Manager, to support the realignment.

BASSMASTER ELITE TROPHY

Commr. Smith stated that he had the opportunity to give out the trophy for the 2024 Lowrance Bassmaster Elite at Harris Chain tournament.

LAKE-SUMTER STATE COLLEGE FUNDRAISING GALA

Commr. Smith remarked that he attended the LSSC fundraising gala.

ANIMAL SERVICES VOLLEYBALL TOURNAMENT

Commr. Smith thanked Ms. Whitney Boylston, Director for the Office of Animal Services, and staff, recalling that two weeks prior they had a volleyball tournament to bring awareness to sheltered animals and to see if they could have them adopted. He added that it was a great turnout and a great event.

LIBERTY TREE CELEBRATIONS

Commr. Smith said that the Liberty Tree celebration was coming up at Umatilla High School on the following Friday at 9:30 a.m., noting that he would be in attendance, and that the one at East Ridge High School would be on the following Monday at 10:00 a.m.; furthermore, Commissioner Parks would be in attendance. He thanked the Lake County Historical Society, the Sons of the American Revolution, the Daughters of the American Revolution, and the Lake County School Board for their support.

take a chance day

Commr. Smith said that it was Take a Chance Day.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 12:15 p.m.

_________________________________

kirby smith, chairman

ATTEST:

________________________________

GARY J COONEY, CLERK