A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

May 6, 2024

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in a special budget workshop on Monday, May 6, 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 Stephanie Cash, 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.

Commr. Blake 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, stated that there were no updates to the agenda.

FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET PRESENTATIONS

OFFICE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Mr. Erikk Ross, Director for the Information Technology (IT) Department, stated that the vision of the IT Department was to be a trusted partner, providing innovative and exceptional technology solutions, and that they would meet that vision by working collaboratively with all stakeholders to improve and deliver secure, flexible, and reliable technology solutions and services. He related that they provided computer services, including the following: fixing computers and laptops; maintaining networks; providing internet and e-mail services; enabling security operations, such as monitoring and reacting to security incidents and preventing cybersecurity attacks; maintaining the telephone, mobile, and cellular services for the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and other Constitutional Officers, such as the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller, the Lake County Supervisor of Elections, the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO), and the Lake County Property Appraiser’s Office; providing geographic information system (GIS) analysis, mapping, and data services; records management services; and audio-visual support in the Board Chambers. He displayed the organizational chart, and said that they had 26 full-time employees (FTEs) across five different divisions. He relayed that some of the accomplishments from the previous year included the following: they transitioned Lake County Water Authority (LCWA) users and technology into the BCC environments, which took much coordination with the LCWA and several other departments in the County; they improved their patch management, enabling them to deploy security and software updates in a much more efficient way; they improved their mobile device management systems, giving them more secure control over their smaller devices, such as tablets and iPads; they implemented new information security policies, which were approved by the BCC in December 2023; they replaced all of their County owned mobile phones with newer supported phones; and they developed a three-year strategic plan. He elaborated that the strategic plan outlined a roadmap that IT would take over the following one to three years to help the County accomplish the goals and objectives set forth by the Board, noting that their vision was to be a trusted partner providing innovative and exceptional technology solutions. He showed a graphic outlining where they currently were in the strategic plan, which was in the middle at the trusted operator level, working on the day to day operations and providing some optimization to the organization, and where they wanted to be, which was to become a business partner throughout the entire organization. He said that they envisioned offices and departments engaging them with new business projects to see how technology could be used in an effective way, and that the strategic plan they had developed would help them accomplish this goal. He mentioned that one of their efficiencies included being instrumental in helping local internet providers receive over $8.6 million in grant funds to improve residential broadband access, and that they had helped coordinate the submission of grant applications to the State of Florida, enabling local providers to expand their broadband networks and provide high-speed internet access to the citizens. He commented that this work continued with an additional $1 billion available in possible grants starting in the summer, and that currently the grants that had been awarded would provide broadband access to over 10,000 households in Lake County and included over 600 miles of fiber optic cables; furthermore, the awarded grants covered a wide variety of areas within the county. He related that other efficiencies included being awarded several cybersecurity services through a $40 million competitive grant from the State of Florida, and that they also centralized GIS support for the Office of Planning and Zoning by moving their GIS position into the IT Department. He displayed a graph showing the IT cost per capita, which was the cost of the IT Department divided by the population in each county, and said that Lake County had the smallest cost at $10.35 per capita. He showed a graph comparing the number of FTEs in Lake County to other counties in the areas, and noted that Lake County had the lowest number except for Sumter County, who outsourced their IT services. He stated that there were some additional benchmarks that compared the Lake County IT Department against 755 other government agencies throughout the United States (U.S.), and noted that this information came from multiple surveys conducted over the prior year by their leadership team that was then compared with those other 755 agencies. He related that there was a 92 percent rate for IT satisfaction and value, which was how happy users were with the services provided and how much value users gained from their IT services, and that the industry average for both of those was 75 percent, opining that they were doing very well in both.  He remarked that the IT budget as a percentage of the overall County revenue was at 1.5 percent compared to an industry average of 5.4 percent, and that their staffing levels were also efficient at 2.2 percent compared to the industry average of 4.8 percent.  He concluded that not only were they efficient with their budget and staff levels, they were also able to provide a high percentage of value while their users were highly satisfied with the services they provided.  He showed some cybersecurity related news headlines that had occurred close to Lake County within the previous few months, opining that because there were many cybersecurity attacks, it was easy to overlook them. He opined that it was important to realize that this was happening throughout the world, and pointed out that several Florida government agencies had ransomware attacks over the prior nine to 12 months. He stated that the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 proposed budget for the IT Department was $4,592,275, which was an increase of about $300,000 and included over $200,000 in personal services, such as wage adjustments and an increase to employer health insurance contributions, and about $95,000 in operating expenses, such as contract cost increases; additionally, they budgeted for one new additional ransomware protection program to initiate in FY 2025.

Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that they wanted new ransomware protection, and he inquired how much the IT Department was spending each year to keep up with cybersecurity.

Mr. Ross opined that it cost about $400,000, which included two FTEs and various security products.

Commr. Parks opined that the attacks kept changing and becoming worse.

Mr. Ross commented that they had caught up in the prior couple of years as many government agencies realized how important it was, and that the BCC had invested heavily in cybersecurity. He mentioned that some of the grants from the State of Florida program that started the previous year had helped, noting that it was a $40 million per year program for all local government agencies. He said that they had obtained a few products from those grants, and that they would apply for a few more in the current year. He explained that the grant did not require a match, and that the State of Florida just offered the services. He relayed his understanding that the grant funding was difficult to pass in the legislature; however, it did pass, and he hoped to have at least one more year of that funding, noting that there may be some decisions to make in about two years if Lake County wanted to continue using those services and budget for them.

Commr. Shields relayed his understanding that the IT Department had planned to use artificial intelligence (AI) to speed up permitting, and he asked where they were at with this process.

Mr. Ross replied that they did a security review of the company; however, he did not know where the process with the contract was at currently. He said that the County had been focusing on a couple of other products that had nothing to do with AI, and that this would probably be discussed in the budget presentations.

Commr. Smith asked what their capital outlay would be for FY 2025.

Mr. Ross answered that $50,000 was for servers, as they tried to replace one or two servers per year, and that the other $27,000 was for network equipment, such as switches, routers, and firewalls for the County Administration Building and the more than 70 other buildings they supported.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that the IT Department had been busy in the prior year because of the LCWA transition, and he expressed his appreciation for what they were doing.

OFFICE OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND RISK MANAGEMENT

Mr. Jim Kovacs, Director for the Office of Human Resources (HR) and Risk Management, explained that their mission was to assist the BCC by developing, implementing, and facilitating cost effective and efficient programs for managing employees, employee benefits, and loss control programs. He said that they had a total of nine FTEs working in the following areas: risk; HR; benefits; and a senior financial coordinator position. He stated that one of the large accomplishments they had done in the current year was a fleet video system, which was a camera and computer system that was placed in 274 of the County’s most used motor vehicles, noting that it not only captured in-cab and forward facing-video, but also recorded important vehicle data in the event of an accident. He explained that the intent of this camera system was to reduce the County’s risk and exposure to liability claims, and recalled that in the previous year, the County had gone to court twice on a couple of cases involving a five mile per hour bump, in which the County was at fault. He mentioned that the jury had awarded sizeable decisions in favor of the citizen; therefore, they would like to have this camera system, opining that it would lower risk. He elaborated that the system could identify and notify the County of potential hazards, including cell phone usage, distracted driving, rolling stops, excessive speed, seatbelt usage, and more; additionally, this gave supervisors opportunities for coaching and a means to reward employees for exemplary driving habits. He relayed that other governmental agencies used this system, including several large Counties and Cities, and opined that it was going to be the standard. He remarked that they successfully prepared and presented onsite training on several topics, including harassment, workplace violence, and “If You See Something – Say Something,” and that they had traveled to all of the work sites to conduct these trainings. He commented that one of the efficiencies they were proud of was their firefighter annual physical exam change, and explained that since the National Firefighter Protection Association (NFPA) standards called for an annual firefighter physical examination, the County had in previous years contracted this service with a third-party vendor located in the City of Sarasota, which was utilized by most Central Florida fire departments. He related that in 2023, the physical examinations were conducted in the Primary Care Connection (PCC) in a more efficient and timely manner and for a fraction of the cost, opining that it was very successful. He said that one of their benchmarks had compared the number of FTEs to the surrounding Counties, and noted that Lake County was second to the last place in the number of employees. He showed a graph comparing the number of employees participating in the medical plan to other Counties, and said that Lake County had 1,210 people participating in the medical plan, which included the BCC and the Constitutional Offices. He displayed a graph showing the annual cost for a family medical plan compared to other Counties, and pointed out that Lake County had one of the lowest insurance costs for a family medical plan. He opined that it was one of the best plans available, and that this could help with employee retention and recruitment. He relayed that the Office of HR and Risk Management FY 2025 proposed budget was $1,275,404, and that personal services would increase 8.3 percent due to wage adjustments and increases to the employee health insurance. He stated that the property and casualty FY 2025 proposed budget was $5,735,602, and that it increased every year because of rising annual insurance premiums for all insurance needs, depending on the market. He commented that they were projecting about a 9.9 percent increase in operating expenses for the following year, and noted that the reserves were increasing in this area due to some increased charges to the offices and departments. He related that the employee group benefits FY 2025 proposed budget was $22,884,148, and that their operating expenses increased 13.3 percent due to a higher cost of claims and an increased number of claims. He added that there were increased costs at the PCC, which had peak utilization, including nearly 500 appointments in December 2023 compared to 200 during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). He noted that this saved employees from going to a primary care doctor outside of the PCC, which saved the County much funding; additionally, there was some transition from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding for mental health services. He commented that their reserves were increasing, which had been an issue previously, and that they had done an increase to the employee and employer charges based on their actuary’s recommendations, which had helped their reserves.

Commr. Parks questioned if the vision for the PCC for the following five years included increased usage, another location, or partnering with Cities or others to expand it.

Mr. Kovacs replied that the PCC had doubled its space, which was a large step forward, and that they had added a mental health counselor, who was currently booked solid, opining that it was a really nice addition. He related that they had expanded the number of hours the nurse practitioner was working due to the high demand, and opined that the number of appointments in a month was as high as it could go short of adding personnel, noting that they had added the firefighter physicals. He commented that they had discussed having a second location in the Cities of Minneola or Clermont, and opined that if demand kept growing, it was an option. He recalled that a few years prior, the PCC went to the City of Clermont to do appointments onsite at the Cooper Memorial Library at certain times on certain dates, and that they had promoted it heavily. He opined that it worked well until appointments waned, and recalled that this was pre-COVID-19. He said that he did not know what that would be like post-COVID-19; however, it may be something that they could explore. He relayed that regarding partnering with others, their Everside Health third-party vendor had recently merged with Marathon Health, which had many more clinics centrally located, and noted that the PCC could borrow staff from another clinic if needed, opining that it might possibly create partnership opportunities. He related that there was a local government nearby signing on with Marathon Health, and that they had considered partnering or expanding their footprint with another clinic, opining that there would be opportunities in the following five years.

Commr. Blake inquired what the Samsara video system cost.

Mr. Kovacs answered that it was almost $500,000 paid over three years, and mentioned that the two judgements against the County were $2.4 million and $457,000. He opined that even though they had just had finalized the training on the prior Thursday, they had already saved on expenses because of these cameras, and mentioned that a resident called claiming that a County vehicle had hit her dog, noting that because he could go into the system and look at the location and the time of the incident, he found that there was not a single County vehicle that had gone down that street. He mentioned that in the past, it would have been difficult to challenge a citizen with a complaint, and that there would have been an investigation on all of their drivers. He opined that the County would benefit from this new process.

office of communications

Mr. Cooper said that the Office of Communications was responsible for enhancing, developing, and promoting the Lake County brand across multiple platforms, which included web programming, multimedia development, public relations, social media management, creative design, and print production. He commented that they had 15 FTEs in the following areas: creative services, which was responsible for all of the digital and print design as well as print production with document services; web services, which was responsible for the development and maintenance of their websites; and the public information office, which was responsible for media relations, social media content and development, photography, and video. He related that one of their accomplishments was in emergency preparedness, which included responding to hurricanes over the previous year and issuing information about the coming hurricane season. He mentioned that there would be a media event on the following day, which had sold out, and noted that it was one of the first events of its kind to come to the State of Florida; additionally, the State of Florida would be represented as well as many of their media partners and local public information officers. He remarked that they supported all first responders and public safety response, and that in partnership with WESH2, they regularly featured animals at the animal shelter, noting that each animal had been adopted following the feature; additionally, it brought attention to the Lake County Animal Shelter and the different programs, which resulted in more animals being adopted. He commented that another accomplishment was the new tourism website, which had received good data up to this point, and said that they were working closely with their marketing partners to help elevate the brand of Discover Lake County. He stated that regarding economic development, the County participated in two job fairs in the current year to help with the County staffing levels and other economic development opportunities available in the area. He relayed that they had focused on making people aware of the parks and services that the County offered through social media and by engaging the community; additionally, they had conducted a recycling survey to obtain feedback to help inform the County on how to move forward with this issue. He remarked that regarding efficiencies, they had audited, optimized, and documented internal processes and workflows and leveraged creative solutions to save on technology costs, such as changing one of their services through Google to a staff reconfigured application at no cost to the County. He related that they had expanded product offerings in document services, and that having a larger format for one of the machines with comparable cost allowed them to have less waste, noting that less waste included bringing in more services in-house. He stated that one of their benchmarks included doing more communications projects, which had significantly increased post-COVID-19. He commented that their proposed budget for FY 2025 was $1,092,510, and that there was an increase in personal services, which included a new position added in FY 2024, proposed wage adjustments, and an increase to employer health insurance contributions. He mentioned that operating expenses included a new social media platform and increased insurance costs, and that the new social media platform was adopted to be in line with best practices for security and features. He relayed that the FY 2025 proposed budget for Document Services was $387,295, and that the personal services increase included proposed wage adjustments and an increase to employer health insurance contributions.

Commr. Parks opined that there were talented people in in the Office of Communications, and expressed concerns about doing more to communicate what the BCC was doing with large policy decisions, fire services, parks and trails, conservation and water resources, the distributed wastewater treatment system (DWTS), fertilizer ordinances, and the reasons behind making policy decisions. He opined that if there was an official message that came from the Board rather than the Commissioners individually, it could reduce the negativity and relay the message that the Board was trying to make good policy decisions for the constituents. He wondered if more could be done, such as looking at the County having its own channel, and asked how the BCC could relay its messages about policy and budget decisions to the largest group possible.

Mr. Cooper replied that they were in the beginning stages of working on a strategic plan, which would involve engaging with the Board members, and that they were already in conversations with neighboring Counties to understand what they were doing and what Lake County could do on its own. He commented that they wanted to find those areas that would give the most return on investment in terms of engaging the public, and that through that process, they should be able to come up with solutions to address those concerns.

Commr. Smith expressed appreciation to the Office of Communications, opining that they did an outstanding job.

office of facilities management

Mr. Wesley Jones, Director for the Office of Facilities Management, said that they oversaw all the construction and renovation for any projects in the county, including the design through moving into the building, and that they were responsible for the maintenance and repair of over two million square feet of space within the county as well as monitoring and paying the utility bills for the BCC, noting that they did this with 29 FTEs. He stated that one of their accomplishments included removing the two underground fuel storage tanks, one for the generator for the County Administrative Building and one for the LCSO administrative building, and replaced them with above-ground storage tanks to reduce the liability. He mentioned that another accomplishment included installing and operating the new veterans sign, and noted that he had been communicating with Mr. Cooper about further upgrades on the sign. He relayed that other accomplishments included the following: modernizing the two elevators in the County Administrative Building, noting that they would be replacing the flooring, which would finish the project; modernizing one of the elevators in the Lake County Detention Center; modernizing the second elevator in the LCSO administration building; completing renovation of the Umatilla Community Center; placing a new roof on the tire cage at the Office of Fleet Management; and renovating the old Office of Parks and Water Resources building on Woodlea Road for the Office of County Probation. He remarked that the efficiencies they were able to incorporate included the following: installing two new chillers at Cagan Crossings Community Library, which were more reliable and efficient; installing a new heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system at the City of Eustis Health Department Administration; modernizing the parallel gear for the Lake County Judicial Center generators, which synchronized the output of the two generators, locked it in place, and sent it out as one source; and certifying the maintenance technicians for fire door inspections. He commented that in the previous year, they had paid a contractor $21,000 just for the inspections, and that they had come back with over $200,000 in anticipated repairs. He relayed that they were able to certify their maintenance technicians, and that they took care of the repairs in-house, saving the County over $200,000. He displayed a graph showing the facility square footage maintained per staff member, and said that Lake County had about 77,000 square feet maintained per staff member including administrative positions. He elaborated that if the administrative staff was taken out, it would be closer to 100,000 square feet per maintenance technician, and noted that some of that was offset by outsourcing some of their work to their supply contractors. He showed a graph comparing the maintenance cost per square foot with other Counties, and said that for the proposed budget, they were at $4.50 per square foot, pointing out that Lake County costs were on the lower end. He commented that there would be a slight increase in personal services, which was because of wage increases, and that operating expenses increased because of utility cost increases; additionally, they were able to cut some of their capital outlay. He related that their FY 2025 proposed budget was $10,087,061, which was 11 percent under what the FY 2024 adopted budget was, based on some efficiencies and other savings.

Commr. Parks inquired if there was an update on the Lake County Historic Courthouse and any future plans.

Mr. Jones replied that they had quotes from Ambach Masonry, Inc, which was the team that did the discovery portion of the work, and that this was on the agenda for the May 21, 2024 BCC meeting. He opined that this work should begin as soon as it was approved by the Board as the team was looking forward to starting on this project, and noted that there were some ARPA funds that would cover that cost.

Commr. Parks opined that it would be costly in coming years because it was an old building, and that the County should be preparing for that impact on the budget.

Mr. Jones commented that included in their contract was not just the repair of the columns but also repointing and sealing in between the bricks, and that they would then lay a seal on the entire exterior of the building. He said that when that was completed, the exterior of the facility would be in good shape; however, the windows would need to be replaced or repaired depending on the budget amount they would be receiving from the team that did the assessment.

Commr. Parks indicated concern about the plumbing and the electric, opining that it was part of the plan.

Mr. Jones remarked that the issues were constantly ongoing.

Commr. Shields mentioned that the County had not received much information back about the utility bill audit, and relayed his understanding that the County had issued a request for proposal (RFP) trying to lower their utility bills using technology.

Ms. Barker relayed that the County had done that several years ago; however, because of the ages of the buildings, they knew what they had to do and had the audit done. She remarked that it was a matter of prioritizing what would give the best return on investment and phasing it in as much as possible year over year.

Mr. Jones commented that Honeywell International, Inc. was currently their vendor for the HVAC controls, and that they were working with them, noting that they were going to a symposium in June 2024. He related that in the software, they had analytics that would monitor the chillers, boilers, and other equipment, and opined that it would help control the energy costs, such as peak costs; additionally, they were looking at switching light fixtures to light-emitting diode (LED) lighting, which could address some of those concerns.

Commr. Smith questioned if the maintenance contract included waterproofing the balconies as well as the columns.

Mr. Jones indicated that this was correct, and stated that it would be for the entire building.

office of fleet management

Mr. Joseph Blackwell, Director for the Office of Fleet Management, said that they provided support services to its users, ensuring that there was safe, sound, and economical transportation and equipment available. He related that they monitored, repaired, and maintained four County fuel sites in full compliance with Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations in order to support fuel needs for County vehicles and equipment, and that they administered the State of Florida contract for fuel cards. He remarked that they had 12 FTEs, and that their accomplishments included installing 274 cameras into the County’s most used vehicles. He explained that the cameras could capture in-cab and forward facing video in addition to important vehicle data, such as a check engine code, which could be checked from the computer at the office; additionally, the system could send accident notifications, global positioning system (GPS) location, and speed of the vehicle, noting that they could use GPS to send a tow truck or a mechanic to its location more quickly. He relayed that they were recognized by Government Fleet Magazine and the Florida Association of Governmental Fleet Administrators (FLAGFA) as a notable leading fleet because of its operational efficiencies, leadership, competitiveness, and responsiveness to challenges, and noted that out of the top 100 fleets, they were number 77 in the U.S. He stated that they had serviced 2,755 vehicles and equipment, which was an average of 229 per month. He related that instead of outside vendors, they partnered with Lake Technical College (Lake Tech) for light vehicle repairs, saving approximately 60 percent on vehicle body repairs. He mentioned that recently the County sign shop purchased a couple of vehicles, and that they fabricated the bodies in-house, which saved over $20,000 on installation costs. He showed a graph comparing the cost of outside vendors for light vehicles, and said that Lake County was currently at $88 per hour, noting that in the coming year, they would be going to $98 per hour, which would still keep them under outside vendor costs. He commented that on heavy equipment, their costs were still under the outside vendor costs at $115 per hour, and that this cost would increase to $128 per hour. He relayed that their proposed FY 2025 budget of $4,106,879 reflected a decrease in personal services because of the reduction of two mechanic positions, and that there was an increase in operational expenses due to parts and repair costs.

Commr. Shields inquired about a pilot project to see if electric vehicles would make sense for anywhere in the fleet.

Mr. Blackwell replied that they were working on that, and that they were trying to obtain some grant funding for electric vans and solar charging stations.

Commr. Parks asked if they would be looking at the compressed natural gas hybrid vehicles and regular fuel hybrid vehicles.

Mr. Blackwell answered that they were currently only looking at electric vehicles (EVs).

Commr. Parks opined that if the County had the charging infrastructure in place, they could also charge a hybrid vehicle.

Mr. Blackwell commented that they would not have to install infrastructure for portable solar charging stations, but it would take grant funding.

Commr. Smith said that he was glad that they were partnering with Lake Tech, noting that it taught the students and helped the County.

office of transit services

Ms. Jill Brown, Director for the Office of Transit Services, stated that the LakeXpress service currently offered eight routes operated by 12 buses, Monday through Friday, from about 5:30 a.m. to almost 10:00 p.m., and that fares were $1 each way and half fare for seniors, veterans, and customers with disabilities. She related that students rode for free with a student identification (ID) card, and that they offered free transfers between the LakeXpress and LYNX buses when they connected. She displayed a graph of their ridership that showed a decrease in 2020 due to COVID, and said that the ridership increased by about eight percent in FY 2022 and nine percent in FY 2023. She relayed that they were still experiencing an increase and expected to increase by a similar percentage annually in the future, and that other transit agencies with the same size and type of area were experiencing the same gradual increase in fixed route ridership. She remarked that the Lake County Connection was a paratransit service for people with disabilities that had no other transportation and met one of four conditions: physically or cognitively disabled; low income; a senior citizen; or a child who was high risk or at risk. She mentioned that the fare ranged from $2 each way for in-County trips, and that they took people to the Cities of Orlando and Wildwood for $5 each way; additionally, they went to the City of Gainesville for $10 each way. She elaborated that the Lake County Connection provided limited services on Saturdays for dialysis patients only; otherwise, they provided services Monday through Friday, similar to their fixed route service. She commented that their Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) service had to be comparable with their fixed route services, ensuring that those on the ADA service could ride as late as the fixed route buses. She displayed a graph showing the paratransit ridership, and pointed out that even though ridership decreased in 2020 and 2021, it increased by four percent in 2022 and 14 percent in 2023, noting that they were anticipating another six percent in the current year. She stated that ridership was increasing as people were going work, to the store, and to school, and that their meal sites had added more services. She related that they had six FTEs that did the following: applying for grants; overseeing operations for safety; providing customer service; overseeing bus builds and bus stop construction; writing safety plans; billing grants; financial management; and ensuring they were in compliance with the many federal and state regulations they had to follow as a transit agency. She relayed that one of their accomplishments was their annual Stuff the Bus event, which was held in October 2023, and said that they had been sponsoring these events since 2006. She elaborated that they had collected over 980 pounds of nonperishable food items and $587 in funds, and that Lake Cares and Sun Harvest Food Bank purchased another 3,092 pounds of food with the donated funds, making a total of 4,072 pounds of food; furthermore, Lake Cares distributed the nonperishable food items to other food banks and to those in need. She mentioned that the bus was weighed before they went to the food drive and then after, and recalled that staff used to use a scale to weigh the food, opining that the process had improved. She stated that the LakeXpress bus stop improvement project was an annual priority, and that their schedule was underway with 35 improvements in the current year, including a new shelter at the City of Clermont park-and-ride and two new shelters in the City of Groveland, one of which the City of Groveland was paying for. She commented that they had 496 bus stops, and that their bus stop improvements were 100 percent grant funded through federal capital grants, which they sought annually to improve access to bus stops and amenities to the high ridership locations. She mentioned that when the current year’s improvements were completed, they would have 37 percent of their bus stops ADA accessible, and that the plan was to be at 100 percent. She relayed that another accomplishment was the new 27 Express route, which was to connect the north and south transit routes due to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Service Development Grant, and that this service would begin on October 21, 2024. She displayed a map of the LakeXpress system showing the north and south systems and the 27 Express, which would allow travel from the Four Corners area in the south of Lake County to the Altoona area in the north for $1. She remarked that the grant award was for three years and required a 50/50 match, and that services would run Monday through Friday during peak commuting hours, which meant that there would be no midday service. She mentioned that they had two new 35 foot buses on order to run the services, which were 100 percent funded through Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grants, and that they were expected to be delivered in July 2024. She showed a map of the new route and a draft of the new schedule, and said that the northbound and southbound routes included going into the Christopher C. Ford Commerce Park. She listed the roads the route would take, and explained that they had to coordinate the connections both in the north and the south as well as the Route 50 and the Four Corners route. She relayed that one of their efficiencies was the fixed route bus replacement program, and said that the majority of their fixed route buses had a useful lifespan of 12 years and 500,000 miles. She commented that their oldest buses, which were being replaced in the current year, were 10 year buses with 350,000 miles because they were only mid-duty buses instead of heavy-duty buses, and that once those were replaced, the whole fleet would have an inventory consistent with heavy-duty buses. She stated that they had a capital improvement plan for their fleet to determine when a vehicle would be meeting the end of its lifespan, which helped them determine what grants needed to be applied for and how often they would apply, and that in most cases the grants were 100 percent covered, such as the FTA grants, noting that some grants were through the State of Florida, which required a 10 percent match. She mentioned that the grant process could sometimes take a year to be awarded, and that it sometimes took almost as long to build the bus. She relayed that they had six new buses for the coming year, and that one of those was ordered in the prior year and was just delivered in the previous month. She remarked that the buses they ordered in January 2024 would be delivered in July 2024, and opined that it depended on when the chassis were available and when the order went in. She pointed out the pictures from a bus inspection, and relayed that they hired an outside consultant to go to the State of California to inspect the buses before they came to Florida. She displayed a chart showing the 2022 fixed route trips per capita, and said that the ridership information came from the most recent National Transit Database (NTD) data, noting that based on the population of the neighboring transit agencies, Lake County was a close match to Marion County, which had a similar size transit and population. She showed a chart of their fixed route expenses per capita, and pointed out that Lake County was in between Polk and Marion Counties, noting that since they were very similar to Marion County, the expenses were comparable. She displayed a chart showing the paratransit trips per capita, and said that in FY 2022, ridership increased throughout the industry. She relayed that because Sumter County did not have a regular fixed route system, they provided more paratransit services, and noted that even though Lake County provided more trips than Sumter County, due to population, they showed a slightly higher percentage per capita; additionally, Marion County’s paratransit, SunTran, only operated ADA trips. She pointed out that a chart for paratransit expenses per capita showed a slightly higher expense per capita than Sumter County, and said that this was due to Lake County providing more trips than Sumter County; furthermore, they paid their service provider per trip, which was most of their expense. She related that their fixed route costs per hour increased by 14 percent in FY 2023 due to going out for bid for contractors in 2022, and that the increase was expected due to hiring and retaining drivers, maintenance, and other costs that increased that year, such as parts and fuel; additionally, their fixed route costs per hour were projected to slightly increase in FY 2024. She relayed that the Lake County paratransit costs per trip were based on the total expenses divided by the total number of trips, and that they expected an increase from 2022 to 2023 due to the new contract, noting that the paratransit costs were projected to increase because of the increase in fuel costs and maintenance on the vehicles. She stated that there was only a 2.4 percent change from the FY 2024 adopted budget to the FY 2025 proposed budget of $13,347,120, and that their operating expenses were increasing due to the 27 Express services. She remarked that there was a significant decrease in the capital outlay because they had a few capital grants for replacement paratransit vans that were expected to be awarded, and that this would be added to their budget at that time. She commented that they had applied for capital grants for paratransit every year and had never been awarded one since 2020 due to a shortage in chassis; however, she opined that since they were starting to award them, the Board would be seeing this on a future agenda.

Commr. Campione inquired about placing a bus stop shelter at a certain location in the City of Eustis on State Road (SR) 19, and said that she had seen elderly people at the bus stop there standing on the concrete pad. She wondered if that was one of the locations slated to be improved, and that if it was not, she wanted to know if they could explore the possibility of reaching out to the City of Eustis to see if the City might be willing to either share the cost with the County or take it on, since this bus stop was in the City of Eustis and was used by many people.

Ms. Brown replied that she did not know if this location was on the list, but she would check and run that data again, noting that each year’s projects were based on the ridership of the location for shelters. She stated that it could make the following year’s list, and said that they could approach the City of Eustis and go outside the regular criteria that they needed to qualify for a shelter, as they had done in the City of Groveland, who had agreed to pay for the shelter.

Commr. Campione asked if Ms. Brown would keep her apprised of the situation, and opined that if it was something that the County would have to reach out to them about, then this could be coordinated; furthermore, she opined that the City of Eustis would be supportive of making that shelter happen. She mentioned that on the Transportation for Disadvantaged Coordinating Board, there was a discussion about the Mary Bennett Rule, which provided trips to people that had long term conditions that required them to travel on a regular basis, such as dialysis, cancer treatments, and diabetes. She explained that Ms. Mary Bennett had served for many years on the Transportation for Disadvantaged Coordinating Board, had worked in the healthcare industry, and had been there at the inception of providing paratransit services to people in Lake County. She related that the Mary Bennett Rule allowed someone who had up to $5,000 over 200 percent of the poverty level to qualify, and opined that there were many people who were over that amount who would benefit from this. She said that she was not sure if this was something they had run the numbers on, and she wondered if it could be brought back to the BCC to make a formal request to provide some flexibility there. She opined that the cost of these services was such a large percentage of these residents’ living expenses that it had a disproportionate effect on them and their ability to take care of their other needs, such as food and housing; therefore, she hoped that this could be broadened. She opined that these services were there to help people who were in situations that required this type of transportation, such as someone who was in a wheel chair and could not afford a vehicle that could accommodate them or did not have anyone to drive them, causing them to be homebound. She wondered if Ms. Brown could work on this and bring it back to the Board, and said that even though it was the desire of the Transportation for Disadvantaged Coordinating Board, the BCC would have to put that in place.

Ms. Brown remarked that she could have the numbers run and would bring it back to the Board, and said that Ms. Amy Bradford, Paratransit Coordinator for the Office of Transit Services, may have already been working on it.

Commr. Parks expressed appreciation for the continued improvement in the system, and questioned what the latest information was with the first-mile/last-mile study for Wellness Way.

Ms. Brown answered that there was nothing new with the Wellness Way first-mile/last-mile plan, and that they had received grant funds for a first-mile/last-mile option through the Transportation Disadvantaged (TD) program. She commented that that they were working on obtaining a contract with UZURV, or something similar, to provide that service as they could not use Uber or Lyft because a transportation disadvantaged population may or may not use mobility devices that would not fit in a regular vehicle.

Commr. Parks opined that they should keep looking because the first part of the first-mile/last-mile for Wellness Way was to have the study and then the plan, and that it would be a few years in the future.

Ms. Brown commented that they were looking to partner with the City of Clermont on the study, and said that she would reach out to them again.

Commr. Shields opined that the north/south route was amazing, and noted that he had a meeting with someone who wanted to build workforce housing in the Green Swamp, which made him wonder how they would get to work without spending all the money they had saved from living there. He opined that having this bus line going to the Christopher C. Ford Commerce Park meant that workforce housing could be built anywhere along that route, and that it would be great.

Commr. Smith relayed his understanding that ridership was trending in the right direction, and he asked if they had the number of nonpaying student riders compared to the amount of paying non-student riders.

Ms. Brown replied that they were currently completing a fare analysis of the fares received that they would be bringing to the Board, and that she would give the data then.

Commr. Smith inquired if there was an update on how sponsorships were going for bus wraps to help reduce the cost of operations.

Ms. Brown indicated that she did not have that information, but that she could bring it back to the Board.

Commr. Smith expressed appreciation for making the connection between the Cities of Leesburg and Clermont, noting that it had been a two year process. He asked if the Office of Communications could disseminate the information to the 55 and over communities, such as the Plantations of Leesburg and the Legacy of Leesburg, and noted that they had been asking about how to get from the City of Leesburg to the City of Clermont via the transit system.

Ms. Brown related that they would be reaching out with the Office of Communications to provide this information to everyone for their grand opening.

department of public works

Mr. Fred Schneider, Assistant County Manager, said that he would be presenting the opening for the Public Works Department budget presentation, and that Mr. Jeff Earhart, Engineering Manager for the Public Works Department, and Ms. Jordan Salinger, Road Operations Director for the Public Works Department, would be covering the engineering and operations divisions. He showed the organizational chart and stated that there were two divisions, including the Operations Division, which covered all of their road maintenance and stormwater programs, and the Engineering Division, which was involved in development review, permitting, road design, and construction, noting that there were 113 FTEs split between the divisions.

Mr. Earhart related that there were about 50 employees in the Engineering Division, and that within that division they did the following: engineering, which designed different systems; construction inspection, which ensured that what was built was efficient and would last; right of way, which helped with road maintenance, right of way vacations, and acquiring right of way to build facilities; surveys, which helped all the divisions across the county and saved the County funding; traffic engineering and traffic operations, which kept signal lights operational; and development engineering, which had done about 905 permits and 1,100 right of way use permits for utilities and other things. He stated that one of their accomplishments was the completion of Schofield Road, and that as soon as it opened, about 8,000 people found it and were using it. He relayed that they were in the process of designing a signal light at Wellness Way and U.S. Highway 27, which had involved all of their different groups to coordinate traffic signals, right of way, and engineering design. He remarked that a great safety project they worked on was County Road (CR) 48 near Mission Inn where a guardrail was falling apart, and that they had done the following: obtained the funding; did the design; did the construction, engineering, and inspection (CEI) in-house; and then contracted it out. He mentioned that their survey group did work for different areas, including a survey they did for the Altoona Fire Station, and that they had done about 30 surveys throughout the county on different projects, saving the County more than $250,000. He commented that on different projects, there were some things that communities appreciated, including the following: the Lake Minneola Shores right turn lane design and construction; the Britt Road right turn lane design and construction; and the CR 437 full depth reclamation and shoulder paving, which added some shoulders there. He related that they worked with developers often to achieve project goals, such as the following: adding dual left turn lanes to Hammock Ridge at U.S. Highway 27, which was a developer’s agreement with the owners of the property; constructing traffic signals, such as the one at Old Highway 50 and Blackstill Lake Road; and permitting and planning flood reviews, including a flood study in the Altoona area, in which they were able to obtain the correct flood elevation in-house, saving consultant fees and helping residents who wanted to develop in that area. He showed a before and after video of CR 437, and said that it was a full depth reclamation, shoulder addition, and road resurfacing, noting that they would likely be doing this on the next section of CR 437 at some point. He said that they integrated and upgraded 110 traffic signals to intelligent transportation system controllers, which allowed them to communicate back and forth without having to go to the location. He commented that they had upgraded 18 school zones to remote monitoring functionality, which allowed them to update them, see where they were operating, and change the times of operation from the office without having to go to the location of each individual one. He displayed a graph comparing the total signals, beacons, and flashers per technician to other counties, and pointed out that in Lake County, each technician maintained about 88 signals, which was more than the surrounding counties.

Ms. Salinger commented that their operations included everything that did not fall under the umbrella of engineering, including the following; maintenance of roads, bridges, and right of ways, the roadway resurfacing program; the Adopt-A-Roadway program administration; the inspection and maintenance of the stormwater infrastructure, which included inlets, outlets, pipes, and swales; lot grading permit review and inspection, which included pre-grade, final grade, and sidewalks; Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit administration, which included investigations and inspections of complaints; basin management action plan (BMAP) compliance; floodplain administration, mapping, and permit review; and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) community rating system (CRS) program administration. She related that some of their accomplishments in road operations included the following: fielding over 2,800 requests resulting in over 2,200 work orders; maintaining 1,403 miles of County roadway network; grading and maintaining 110 miles of clay roads; completing small in-house projects, such as resurfacing, pothole repairs, and enhanced patching; completing 95 miles of right of way tree trimming in FY 2023, which was an increase from 32 miles completed in FY 2022; contracting the resurfacing of nearly 16 miles in FY 2024, which was an increase from nearly 7 miles resurfaced in FY 2023; and contracting the removal of 215 tons of litter from County right of way. She mentioned that as the county continued to grow, so did the number of permits they reviewed in the stormwater division, and that their accomplishments included the following: completing over 1,500 lot grading reviews in FY 2023 with a projected increase of 60 percent in FY 2024 based on the current data so far; completing over 6,400 permit inspections in FY 2023 with a projected increase of 20 percent in FY 2024; and completing the MS4/NPDES five year permit renewal for 2024 and annual audit of the County’s Stormwater Management Plan, which was a federal requirement regulating point source discharges from the County’s stormwater sewer system for all conveyances and permitted construction activities related. She elaborated that the Public Works Department was responsible for the auditing, administration, and renewal of this required permit, and she showed photos of an NPDES inspection of a subdivision. She commented that some accomplishments for the flood plain administration included the following: performing over 2,200 flood reviews with a projected increase of 40 percent in FY 2024; issuing 69 flood plain development permits with a projected increase of 150 percent in FY 2024 as less desirable lots were becoming more popular because of continued growth; and submitting the 2024 annual CRS verification, which was a voluntary incentive program rewarding the County’s flood plain regulations that exceeded the minimum national flood program standards, allowing the County to maintain a Class 7 status and a 15 percent insurance premium discount to individuals who resided within the special flood hazard area, which was a large benefit to residents. She said that maintenance projects were evaluated for peak efficiency based on project scope, such as routine in-house projects, and included the following: minor drainage improvements; right-of-way maintenance, which included potholes, roadside drop-offs, and tree-trimming; grading and repair of clay roads; and minor sidewalk repair and grinding. She remarked that they also had non-routine projects that either exceeded their in-house capabilities or would consume a large amount of time that would take away from their daily work orders, and that these included the following: stormwater pipe replacement; pipe lining installation; road base repair; large scale right of way tree trimming; and large scale roadway resurfacing. She displayed a photo of a contracted resurfacing project at Hancock Road and Hooks Street in the City of Clermont, and said that in another project, 1,769 linear feet of pipe lining was installed instead of replacing the pipe, saving $300,000. She related that another efficiency included the Entry Level Driver Training (ELDT) Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) program, which provided in-house training to certify operators. She stated that this saved much funding as it could cost $5,000 to $10,000 for operators to obtain a CDL license depending on the provider used, and that this could help attract and retain employees, noting that they had issued 10 CDL licenses since the program’s inception in June 2023. She relayed that their Adopt-A-Roadway program contributed to litter removal efforts with volunteers donating 960 volunteer hours to collect 69 tons of litter, and opined that this was impressive when compared to the 215 tons collected by the contracted litter removal company. She remarked that some of the efficiencies they were working on in the stormwater division included process improvement efforts to more effectively administer their MS4 permit and partnering with GIS to develop an in-house solution for violation tracking and infrastructure inspections, and that they were piggybacking off of that effort to improve their flood mapping capabilities, which improved the efficiency and expediency of flood reviews. She mentioned that by leveraging these in-house resources, they were able to save some costs by avoiding utilizing outside vendors to develop the software, and she showed a photo of their GIS tracking map, which was currently in development. She displayed a graph comparing County-maintained road miles of several counties, and said that Lake County numbers were in the middle, noting that the County had 1,293 paved miles and 110 unpaved miles.

Mr. Schneider showed that the gas tax proposed budget for FY 2025 was $21,443,981, and noted that there was a slight reduction in personal services even though there were general increases, such as wage adjustments and an increase to employer health insurance contributions. He explained that the County had done some restructuring, which had brought down their budget overall; additionally, there was not a significant change to their operating expenses. He commented that their capital outlay had decreased from about $5 million in FY 2024 to about $2.8 million in FY 2025, and that $1.3 million of that amount was from The Villages’ widening of CR 466A, which was still in that account. He remarked that the grants and aids category reflected how much of the nine cent gas tax was transferred to the Cities from the County, and that the other uses category was primarily administration fees paid to support internal services. He stated that reserves included $3.1 million in carryforward from FY 2024 and $650,000 in the proposed budget for FY 2025, and said that he would like it to be higher because he did not know what could happen in the future economy. He recalled that gas tax purchases had decreased significantly for about two or three months when COVID hit, and that in one year alone, there was a reduction in gas tax revenue of $1 million; therefore, he opined that the County needed to be prepared and have some reserves available. He related that the stormwater municipal service taxing unit (MSTU) fund proposed budget for FY 2025 was $3,862,170, and that it reflected wage adjustments as well as some position restructuring, noting that it showed a higher percentage because this budget was much lower. He mentioned that there was not a significant change in the operating expenses, and that the capital outlay reflected the completion of projects in 2024 and the remaining balance slated for water quality improvement projects. He relayed that other uses included administration costs, and that reserves included $260,000 carryforward for the FY 2025 budget. He remarked that in the coming year, they were planning on taking a fresh look at the County’s stormwater improvement program, and that Ms. Salinger would be doing that, opining that she had made a positive difference. He commented that they had an annual audit for NPDES, which was a federally mandated requirement that came through FDEP, and noted that if the County did not have that, developers would have an issue with FDEP and would need permitting. He related that it was important for them to manage the floodplain CRA system, which gave residents a 15 percent reduction in flood insurance, because there was a west coast county that FEMA had just removed for being a Class 5 rating, and that their citizens would have to pay thousands of dollars more a year in flood insurance. He remarked that staff was going to be looking at how to improve in those areas, and noted that they had all new staff in that section; additionally, they were going to be looking at the stormwater program, the five year capital improvement program, obtaining grants for it, and working with the basic management action plan. He stated that the engineering staff was continuing with the OnSyte DWTS, which would help them meet the goals of the BMAP, opining that there was much to do.

Commr. Parks expressed appreciation for the emphasis on FEMA and flooding issues, and opined that FEMA was becoming stricter about CRS, mapping, and predevelopment issues. He opined that Hurricane Ian proved that there was much flooding in areas that were not supposed to flood because of data that may not have been correct and other reasons, and that it was good that Lake County was focusing on that. He questioned how much the asphalt cost increased from pre-COVID to the current day.

Mr. Schneider opined that the cost of resurfacing had nearly doubled, noting that it had not come down since COVID-19. He commented that in the current year’s resurfacing program, the next phase would give them about $2.8 million, and that $2.5 million of that was to resurface Citrus Tower Boulevard from U.S. Highway 27 to SR 50, noting that a few years prior it may have been $1.5 million or less.

Commr. Parks opined that the issue with the roads was that the cost was not going to go down and the gas revenues were declining.

Mr. Schneider commented that the gas tax revenue was stable; however, cars had become more efficient over the years, and there were electric cars on the road.

Commr. Parks opined that even though it was stable it could not keep up with the increased costs.

Mr. Schneider indicated that this was correct, and opined that they had struggled to manage the gas tax program in the current year. He stated that they had worked hard to protect it and ensure that they were not overspending, opining that they had a very efficient gas tax program. He relayed that they had a large number of vacancies in the Road Operations Division, which had prompted them to defund some of those positions and make those funds available for reserves, noting that this was where their reserves were coming from.

Commr. Parks inquired if they needed those positions.

Mr. Schneider answered that they would need them in the long run, and that there were many things they could be doing, such as shoulder work because of drop-offs and high shoulders, which should be regularly maintained, and tree trimming.

Commr. Parks opined that contracting this work out could be more expensive than having your own program, and that some Counties had their own sidewalk crew who did nothing but sidewalks continuously.

Mr. Schneider commented that they contracted 50 percent of the work, and that the rest was internal; however, the more they contracted, the more expensive it was. He hoped that this would change and that they could fill those positions, opining that this would help them with the road maintenance. He opined that this would not be evident in the short term, but if it went on for a while, they would fall behind.

Ms. Barker remarked that something they had realized in the public works area, as in other industries, was that it was difficult to obtain skilled workers, and that some of these positions had been vacant for more than a year. She opined that the workforce was shifting, and mentioned that they had difficulties recruiting employees despite having job fairs and increasing the minimum pay for road operations crews. She also opined that nobody wanted to work outside in the heat; however, she said that they were actively working on it.

Mr. Schneider opined that they had very good employees who worked well together, worked hard, and accomplished much.

Commr. Parks opined that they had a great crew, noting that he saw them working very hard, such as the striping crews who had gone around recently. He also opined that this brought up an issue that there were not any answers for currently, even though many were working hard to find the answers.

Mr. Schneider stated that because of some of the solutions Ms. Barker had mentioned, they had seen some hires come back and some new hiring again, and he hoped that this would continue. He relayed that the answer to the question of needing those positions was “yes,” and that when those positions were all filled 20 years ago, they were able to provide better maintenance.

Commr. Smith opined that they had accomplished much in the prior year, and he asked if in a future presentation, Mr. Schneider would highlight some of the large projects, such as the guardrail near Mission Inn and the resurfacing of some of the major roadways, along with what was planned for the coming year.

Commr. Campione relayed her understanding that Mr. Schneider would go over the work plan and show what was in the impact fee funds, and she inquired when the Board would be seeing that.

Mr. Schneider replied that the five year work program would typically be presented in September 2024.

Ms. Barker added that it could be in late August or early September 2024 depending on the timing.

Mr. Schneider commented that it would cover impact fees, grants, sales tax, and the funds they used for road and sidewalk improvements as well as trails.

Commr. Campione wondered if the Public Works Department could look at what other Counties and Cities were doing regarding rural roads being annexed, and opined that there must be a different paradigm the County could use that could help in these situations where portions of rural roads were annexed while the County continued to be responsible for the maintenance and there was not sufficient right of way. She wondered if there could be a way to invite more City participation at the time they decided to extend their boundaries into a rural area by tying it to the density and driveway permits. She opined that a driveway permit could be issued if it stayed at current densities or if it did not go over 10 or 20 percent, and that if it went beyond that, the City would be responsible for the right of way acquisition along the entire roadway and would be required to improve it to a more urban or suburban cross section.

Commr. Parks opined that if there was a plan for a road that development could occur on and the City could annex, it could be planned to be improved with funding beyond impact fees.

Commr. Campione opined that there was a deficiency which occurred when those expansions happened and the roads were not built at that time to accommodate that growth as well as future growth that could occur as a result of an annexation.

office of solid waste

Mr. David Salinas, Director for the Office of Solid Waste, explained that his office encompassed the following items: managing and operating of the Solid Waste Management System landfills; coordinating residential curbside collection; operating residential convenience centers; collection of household hazardous waste; yard waste disposal; overseeing landfill construction; providing customer service; conducting solid waste assessments; providing administration; making scale services available; and supporting the efforts of the Keep Lake Beautiful (KLB) program. He displayed the office’s organizational chart, and said that they currently had 31 FTEs. He relayed the following accomplishments: provided collection and disposal services to 76,403 unincorporated residents; disposed of 77,535 tons of trash, which was an increase of 22 percent from the previous year, noting that recycling decreased about 7,000 tons; provided assistance with the Coastal Conservation Association (CCA) Oyster Shell recycling program relocation; acquired 2 PUP garbage trucks to aid in residential collection; re-homed 121 bikes through the RE-Cycle program; purchased 1,400 additional bear proof trash cans for disbursement; completed the Phase III Ash/MSW landfill closure; and saw an increase of 1.5 percent at the convenience center for a total of 102,671 participants. He stated that their efficiencies included the following: creating a concrete recycling stream program; replacing a grapple truck with increased capacity from 30 cubic yards to 50 cubic yards, which allowed them to service more containers at the drop-offs and reduce their landfill trips; and restructuring the Office of Solid Waste to focus on customer service. He relayed the following KLB accomplishments: achieved 4,312 volunteer hours; removed over eight tons of litter; collected around 16 tons of tires; received about six tons of household hazardous waste; and received the President’s Circle Award from Keep America Beautiful. He displayed a benchmark and said that the solid waste assessment showed Lake County being the second highest in the area for 1-1-1 service; additionally, all of the surrounding Counties had indicated that they anticipated increases to their solid waste assessment in the coming years. He showed the Office of Solid Waste FY 2025 proposed budget of $36,446,663 and remarked that personal services reflected staffing restructuring, proposed wage adjustments, and increased employer health insurance contributions. He stated that the operating expenses reflected increases for contract costs, the bear proof trash cans program, fleet repairs, and fuel costs; furthermore, capital outlay reflected the purchase of a roll-off truck, semi and agricultural tractors, and fence replacement. He concluded that the overall budget increased slightly over four percent.

Commr. Parks recalled the complaints that the County had received regarding the hauler in South Lake, opining that the office had addressed this quickly. He suggested working with the Office of Communications on promoting education and awareness about recycling and calling in for a special pickup.

Mr. Salinas confirmed that they were working on an education program with the Office of Communications, and he reported that they had received the first batch of their new magnets that they would be handing out. He also indicated that their waste and recycling composition study had been moved to July 2024.

Commr. Smith opined that the office did a great job addressing the hauler for the north side of the county, and that they needed a four wheel drive garbage truck to reach some of the locations. He expressed appreciation for everything Mr. Salinas and his team did.

Commr. Campione asked about the bear proof trash can waiting list.

Mr. Salinas replied that there were about 1,350 individuals on the list, and that they ordered 1,400 bear proof trash cans; therefore, those would likely be distributed by June 2024. He mentioned that they were working with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) for their new list going forward to focus on bear hotspots.

Commr. Campione inquired if the magnets had information about where to call, etc.

Mr. Salinas explained that they used the magnet as a way to refer people to the website, which was recently upgraded, and he showed the magnets that they purchased.

Commr. Campione asked how the hauler was being held accountable to recycle, recalling that it was costing the hauler more to take it to a recycling facility versus taking it to the landfill.

Mr. Salinas replied that there was a challenge with contamination, and mentioned that currently the two haulers were using the same facility off SR 46 and were claiming between 30 and 40 percent contamination. He said that that this was something that they wanted to address, but that they were going to wait until the County did its education campaign.

Commr. Campione inquired where the County was on the education campaign and what timeframe was being considered.

Mr. Salinas responded that they needed to incorporate the waste and recycling composition studies, and that once this was done they could have the final touches in August or September 2024.

Ms. Barker added that the composition study should be occurring in July 2024, and that this data was needed so that the County knew what the contamination issues were to fine tune the education program; additionally, they could update their website accordingly.

Commr. Campione asked if they had the ability at the drop-off centers for people to segregate the recyclables.

Mr. Salinas clarified that they did not specifically segregate certain household recyclables, and that cardboard and plastic containers went into the same place; however, it limited the amount of contamination and was minimal in comparison to the curbside program.

Commr. Campione wondered if the County could use the convenience drop-off centers for people who were committed to recycling, so that residents would know that the items would be recycled when taken to those locations. She also expressed support for this.

Commr. Parks commented that the County had a great price for their disposal and the landfill, and that the less that went into the landfill, the more cost effective it was. He opined that this was why recycling was part of the overall system, and that most Counties had it for these reasons. He also opined that making it more efficient and effective was the key for Lake County.

Commr. Shields asked if there were any future plans for a drop-off center in the Four Corners and Wellness Way areas, as they continued to grow.

Mr. Salinas indicated that there was nothing currently, but that staff had started researching the cost of building a new convenience center.

The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.

There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding the budget workshops, the Chairman closed the floor for public comment.

Commr. Smith thanked staff for preparing for this presentation.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:01 a.m.

_________________________________

kirby smith, chairman

ATTEST:

________________________________

GARY J COONEY, CLERK