Board of County Commissioners on 2024-08-06 9:00 AM

Morning, everybody. Welcome to the August 6th board meeting. If you would, please stand for the invocation and remain standing for the pledge. Good morning. Please pray with me. Heavenly Father, in our hearts we plan our course, but we pray that you would establish our steps. As we come to you seeking your guidance, let us not lean on our own understanding, but let us act based upon your wisdom. Father, we place our hearts and our minds in your hands so that you may direct us. And I ask this prayer in Jesus' name. Amen. Okay. How are we going to work this? We'll pass until they show. Oh, they're not here. Okay. We have a presentation when a group of students get here. We'll go into the requests from the general public. I've got a bunch of people that want to talk the bulk of you want to speak regarding land use cases So you need to wait till the land use case comes up later to do that But some of them aren't clear. So I'm going to go through them We'll start with Richard nut to talk about election security Anything that's not on the agenda for me anything that's not on the agenda and anybody else that wants to talk This is your time, but if you're talking about a land use case I suggest you wait till the land use case comes up. Good morning I'm gonna briefly read some portions of the Florida statutes That deal with the county canvassing board And actually the county commissioners role in ensuring accurate and valid elections and again These are only portions of a few but at a second time. I'm gonna get right to the chase The first one is statute 102 point one for one The county canvassing board shall be composed of the supervisor of elections a county court judge who shall act as chair and The chair of the board of county commissioners as you can see there the chair of the board of county commissioners and the supervisor of elections are co-equal Because the judge is the chairman of that canvassing board Then it goes on to say if the chair of the board of county commissioners is unable to serve or is disqualified The board of county commissioners must appoint as a substitute member one of its members who is not a candidate with opposition in the election being canvassed and who is not an active participant in the campaign or Candidacy of any candidate with opposition in the election being canvassed. That's just out of that statute Statute 102 point one one two This is a very important one because this talks about certification the county canvassing board or majority thereof shall file the county returns for the election of a federal or state officer with the department of state immediately after certification of the election results The returns must contain a certification by the canvassing board that the board has compared the number of persons who voted with the number of ballots counted and that the certification includes all valid votes cast in the election As you can see, this is very important Certification to us out here means that you are signing your name that this was an accurate and valid election from only valid votes Like I said, there's several statutes. I'm just hitting the highlights. Another one of interest though is Statute 102 point 091. This is the duty of the sheriff to watch for violations The sheriff shall exercise strict vigilance in the detection of any violations of the election laws and in apprehending the violators Okay, with the last 30 seconds, I will tell you that these elections coming up are very important And when a county commissioner puts his name on the certification, that's your name telling the citizens. This was accurate and valid election Okay, thank you for your time Thank you Cassandra Richards morning I come before you as I did the last time Talking about the retention pond I have to tell you Ryan Taylor is on the ball He did have Phil call me And I've been knowing Phil for 10 years because that's how long this thing has been going on 10 years Phil talks a good game But Phil doesn't act I'm asking you kind of commissioners to get behind Ryan Taylor And have Phil come out there and do what he needs to do To make sure that the job get done Can we get your name and address for the record? Cassandra Richards 2357 Freeland on the road, Lake Wells, Florida Thank you, ma'am Good job, Ryan I believe everyone else who wants to speak is Okay, I'll get to that Is here to speak on one of the land use cases in section P of our agenda But if you're not and you have something to say, now's the time to say it Anyone? Okay, we'll stop there and we will come to the students working against tobacco in Polk County Please come forward Mr. Chairman, while these folks are coming forward Ms. Livingston Stone has been the leader of this group along with Troy and his support You may recall some time ago The students came forward with students working against tobacco Asking us to adopt an ordinance to post no smoking regulations in all of our county parks The state had already done it on state parks And simply asking that with the same thing be applied to the county parks And after the bureaucratic process we have to go through we did adopt that ordinance And the team is here this morning again to recognize that effort So Troy if you want to start it off I just wanted to say thank you for your commitment to SWAT It was a pleasure working with you We look forward to working with you in the future And this is a thank you from SWAT We have the president of the Haines City High School If you want to say something Why not I'm Nick Arthur, thank you for your support Thank you And then I'm sorry You go right ahead We have the past Haines City president Hello my name is Edwin Garcia The past president of Haines City High School And I would like to say thank you for your support Who else? Who's the little guy? Is that Dave? That'd be a no His name is David, he's my little brother Okay Okay All right So we're all politicians and we like to get our picture taken So we're going to come down there and get our picture taken You come in and we'll go down David, what's it? Yeah, yeah, yeah Do it And then we'll all pose Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah All right And Bill All right So How y'all want to do? We'll gather a little tight and y'all gather around Yeah, let's do two of the SWAT going on each side Hold up Hold up Can you come ready to see your brother? There we go Okay I don't want to call him in Thank you Thank you Need one of these All right We're back on our regular schedule. Consent agenda. Move approval. Second. Got a motion and a second for approval. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign a motion carries. Ms. Beaver. Good morning. Good morning. Thank you. We ask this morning that you approve and ratify your payroll check numbers, 02996 or 03030, in the amount of $16,281.27, 2,786 direct deposits in the amount of $3,987,713.35, dated July 17th through July 26th, 2024. Wire and electronic fund transfers in the amount of $45,248,934.02, dated July 16th through August 5th, 2024. Invoice checks numbered 463-694 through 464-960 in the amount of $25,757,658.92, dated July 16th through August 5th, 2024. Move approval. Disbursement. Second. Motion and a second for approval. All in favor say aye. Aye. Those like, sign a motion carries. Thank you. We also request approval of the minutes of your regular board meeting held on July 16th, 2024. Move for approval. Second. Got a motion and a second for approval. All in favor say aye. Opposed, like, sign. Motion carries. Anything else? Thank you. That's all I have today. Thank you. Okay. Nothing, Randy. So we'll move to Mr. Beasley. Sir. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the viewing audience. The manager's office will have five items for board consideration this morning. Item number H1 is to request the board approve a construction contract with central concrete products out of Bartow in connection with the Northwest Juanita Drainage Improvements Project. This will be a one-time capital expense not to exceed $2,322,774 with full project funding coming from the federal government's American Rescue Plan allocation assigned to Polk County. Polk County has completed the public solicitation process to solicit bids from qualified contractors who were interested in constructing drainage improvements and repairs to Richburg Road, Pine Street, Oak Street, and Maple Street, located within the Northwest Juanita community. Work primarily consists of replacing drainage culverts, driveways, ditch grading, and waterline improvements. The project will result in a reconstruction of approximately 140 driveways, and the waterline improvements will include the construction of a new six-inch water main with new service laterals. In addition to the county's drainage improvements and repairs, in July of last month, the county entered into a joint project agreement with the city of Eagle Lake to include the relocation of certain potable water distribution lines, which are located within the project limits, but also within the city of Eagle Lake's utility service area. In accordance with that agreement, the city will reimburse the county approximately $500,000 for related waterline relocation efforts. Bid number 24-425 was issued and three contractors submitted bids. The lowest responsive bid was submitted by Central Concrete Products in the amount of $2,212,166. A recommendation of award was issued and no protests were received. In accordance with Resolution 13066, $110,608 is included in the contract award total to address contingency and allowance work conditions. The contract time for this project has been set at 240 calendar days for final completion. Funding for these planned drainage improvements is available within the county's American Rescue Plan fund. So, Mr. Chair, members of the board, consistent with the board's commitment to countywide drainage improvements where feasible and in keeping with federal guidelines for timely expenditure of these American Rescue Plan funds, I would request the board approve a construction contract with Central Concrete Products Incorporated in an amount not to exceed $2,322,774 in connection with bid number 24-425 to address planned drainage improvements within the Northwest Juanita community. Questions, comments, motion? Move approval. Got a motion and a second for approval. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign a motion carries. Next item, Mr. Chair, members of the board, item number H2 is to request the board approve a construction contract with Robert Benz Roofing Incorporated out of Winter Haven for roof replacement work at the Polk County Sheriff's Animal Control Facilities, what we call the North and the South Kennels, located off to Castro Road adjacent to the county's North Central Landfill. This will be a one-time capital expense not to exceed $318,108. Polk County has completed the public procurement process to solicit bids from qualified roofing contractors who were interested in retrofitting the existing animal control North and South Kennel roofs with a new Duralast polyvinyl chloride membrane roof system. This project is part of the Facilities Management FY2324 Asset Management Program. Due to the age of these roofs and their existing conditions, the retrofit project will allow roof protection for these facilities for well over the next 20 years. Bid number 24352 was issued and three contractors submitted bids. The lowest responsive bid was submitted by Robert Benz Roofing in the amount of $302,960. A recommendation of award was issued and no protests were received. In accordance with Resolution 13066, $15,148 is included in the contract award total to address contingency and allowance work conditions. Contract time for this project has been set at 65 calendar days for final completion. The funds are available in the General Capital Improvement Fund for these identified asset management investments. So, Mr. Chair, members of the board, consistent with what I think is the board's commitment to asset management investments, I would request the board to approve a construction contract with Robert Benz Roofing in the amount not to exceed $318,108 for planned kennel roof replacements as stipulated under bid number 24352. Questions? Second. I had a motion to say for approval. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed like signed, motion carries. Mr. Chair, members of the board, item number H3 is to request the board approve two separate second amendments to the existing contracts with Tri-County Human Services for the new beginning transition centers. One of these centers is for the men's program and one of these centers is for the women's program, both of which are residential and intensive outpatient behavioral health treatment programs. The amended annual funding assignment to both programs shall not exceed $3,758,682, of which $2,505,455 will be assigned to the men's program and $1,253,227 will be assigned to the women's program. Tri-County Human Services operates a men's and women's residential treatment facility to assist individuals with behavioral health and addiction problems to transition back into independent living. The new beginning transition center programs seek to break the cycle of addiction and related judicial intervention by teaching the skills needed to successfully reenter the community and become productive citizens. The program uses a four-phase residential and intensive outpatient treatment model. Patients may enter the program as part of a plea agreement approved by the state attorney and appropriate judge or through self-referrals. For purposes of these contracts, services are for adults 18 years of age and above that are at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty-level guidelines. Services include but are not limited to substance abuse education, relapse prevention, mental health treatment, group, individual, and family therapy and counseling sessions, as well as life skills, job skills, and career training. The first initial amendments issued to these contracts increase the base funding for each of these contracts. The proposed second amendments will again increase the annual contract funding by $1,371,582 and increase the reimbursement rate by 5% from a $218 to $228.90 per client per bed day. Collectively, these amendments will increase access to serve more eligible clients throughout Polk County. The current contracts became effective October 1st, 2022 and are set to expire September 30th of 2026. These funding requests were recently presented to and approved by the Citizens' Health Care Oversight Committee. Funds for these continued community health care initiatives are available and budgeted in the Indigent Health Care Fund. So, Mr. Chair, members of the board, in keeping with the board's priority commitment to behavioral health initiatives, I would request that the board approve these two separate second amendments to the existing contracts with Tri-County Human Services in connection with the Men's New Beginning Transition Center in an annual amount not to exceed $2,505,455 and the Women's New Beginning Transition Center in an annual amount not to exceed $1,253,227. Questions? Motion. Move for approval. Second. Got a motion and a second for approval. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Those like, sign motion carries. Fourth item, Mr. Chair, item number H4 is to request the board approve amendment number one to the existing contract with the Winter Haven Hospital for continued uncompensated inpatient psychiatric services. This will revise the annual fee for services allocation to an amount not to exceed $2 million annually. Winter Haven Hospital provides inpatient psychiatric services within the Winter Haven Hospital Center for Psychiatry located on the main campus of the Winter Haven Hospital. Patients admitted to this facility for services have access to counseling, behavioral health and supervision, crisis support, and acute detox while being hospitalized. As the national, state, and local health care systems continue to struggle with health care provider shortages, recruitment and retention are ongoing challenges with an increase in demand for mental health and substance use and abuse providers. And as in Polk County, as one of the fastest-growing counties in the country as well as the fastest-growing in the state of Florida, Polk's population growth continues to exacerbate an already constrained local behavioral health system. Winter Haven Hospital is one of two Polk County Hospital systems that operates a receiving facility and provides critical services to Polk's most medically vulnerable residents. The county's indigent health care funding provides financial support to the Winter Haven Hospital for uncompensated inpatient psychiatric services. Services eligible for reimbursement under this contract are for Polk County residents whose income is at or below 200% of the federal poverty limit guidelines and who are uninsured, including Polk Health Care Plan members. A fee schedule has been established to reimburse the Winter Haven Hospital and agreed-upon rate per patient per diem. The current contract became effective October 1, 2022, expires on September 30th of 2024 and has an annual funding cap of $200,000. Having exhausted those current contracted funds within the first quarter of FY23-24, it was mutually determined that additional funding would be necessary to support these critical behavioral health services. This first amendment will be effective retroactively from October 1, 2023, will increase annual funding cap to $2 million and extend the term of the contract until September 30th of 2026. This funding request was recently presented to and is recommended for approval by the Citizens' Health Care Oversight Committee. Funds for this continuing health care initiative are available and budgeted within the indigent health care fund. So, Mr. Chair, members of the board, in keeping with the board's priority commitment to behavioral health initiatives, I would request the board approve the first amendment to the existing contract with the Winter Haven Hospital for continued inpatient psychiatric services at an annual indigent health care funding commitment not to exceed $2 million and to extend the current contract term until September 30th of 2026. Questions? Motion for it. Second. Second. Got a motion and a second for approval. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. All right. Those like sign, motion carries. Mr. Chair, members of the board, final item from the manager's office, item number H5 is to request the board approve a contract with the Central Florida Health Care Organization for related capital expenditures necessary to open a new community health center to serve the Bartow community. This will be a community health care investment not to exceed $546,203. Central Florida Health Care is a federally qualified health center providing primary and specialty care, dental, and behavioral health services throughout Polk County. Central Florida Health Care is contracted with the county to provide services to low-income Polk County residents, including Polk Health Care Plan members. The city of Bartow is an underserved area for health care services with approximately 40% of the population living in households at or below 200% of the federal poverty level. Central Florida Health Care submitted a county health care initiative request for the funding needed to lease and renovate an existing 4,400-square-foot building to be used as a new community health center within the Bartow community. The funding request also includes funding for the purchase of equipment, furniture, and supplies to establish the center. Central Florida Health Care will provide adult primary care and pharmacy services at the proposed Bartow facility. This contract will be effective retroactively March 1st of 2024 to March 31st of 2026. This funding request was recently presented to and was approved by the Citizens' Health Care Oversight Committee. Funds for this community health care initiative are budgeted and available within the Indigent Health Care Fund. So, Mr. Chair, members of the board, in keeping with the board's priority commitment to community health care, I would request the board approve a contract with the Central Florida Health Care Organization for the facility lease and partial funding for renovation costs and related equipment, furniture, and supplies to support the new community health center to be located within the city limits of Bartow. Questions? Motion for approval. Second. Motion and second for approval. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, like signed. Motion carries. That's it, Mr. Chair. No, sir. George. Nothing. Rick. Nothing. Martha. Nothing. Neil. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you all know, we're two weeks away from the primary election. A lot of folks have placed signs and have attended all kinds of little forums and events, any place they can find an audience. And a lot of them are always searching for an audience to help assist and boost their campaign. But I talked to Mr. Mink a week or so ago about giving instructions to people in this building and people in other buildings which are owned by the taxpayers. Under Florida statute 104.31, it is illegal to conduct any or all campaign activity inside the four walls of a taxpayer-funded building. It's been that way for a long, long time. I thought most people know that, but I'm not sure that enough people are aware of the law. And the reason for that is because if there are five candidates in a race and I pick out my favorite candidate and bring them in here and walk them around, introduce them to all the employees and say this is really the best person for the job, that's not fair to employees. One, it puts them in a bad spot, and that's one of the reasons it's against the law. It's not fair to the other candidates who may be equally or better qualified. They don't get that same invite and same opportunity, so that's another reason it's against the law. And it's not fair to the taxpayers who maybe care a lot or maybe they could not care less. They just want people to do the job they've been hired to do, and that doesn't involve politics in the workplace, which is a violation of the law. Recently, the legislature in the 2023 session, they adopted by assent the Hatch Act, and that was what I was talking to Randy about because it's illegal for me to bring somebody in here and put employees in a bad spot. But furthermore, the Hatch Act is a federal act, and it involves political activity during working hours. And I asked Randy what it meant, and he was looking into it, and I don't know how far he's gotten along with that. And I don't know that anybody knows when you have something that's been in law here for only a year and a half, maybe there hadn't been enough discussion about it to fully understand the impact and how it applies, but it's pretty clear you can't do it in the workplace during working hours. And I was surprised in the discussion with Randy that he told me there was a political candidate now who is a lawyer, a licensed practice and lawyer paid by the government who asked to come in the building and basically work the employees and was told no can do. That's not permitted. And the second question then was how about if I set up a table in the lobby and only talk to people that approach me? No. That's a no-no as well. You can't do that. So I'm thinking if a trained, licensed lawyer that works for the government and has worked for the government for years does not understand that that's against Florida law and maybe puts employees in a precarious situation along with the Hatch Act now that we probably needed some instruction and it probably should come from the county attorney. Now I first got elected to this office in 1988, so that was a long time ago. Back in those days, Irving Cowley was a county attorney and then Mark Carponini, and they made sure that we all understood that they wanted to keep us out of trouble, and I appreciate that. In fact, sometimes I would ask if I could do something, and they would say, no, you shouldn't do that, and it would make me mad, but I listened to them anyway. And maybe I didn't have a full understanding of the law and why it was put in place. So, you know, over the years, I don't know if we have that same – we just don't have the same contact and interaction with the county commission, that is, with the staff that we did back in those days. That was pre-charter. We were here an awful lot. We were considered full-time, and I acted like a full-time employee, so I spent a lot of time with them. But they made sure that we were aware of the law. They didn't want us to get crossways. They didn't want us to be top of the fold of the ledger, which was pretty prominent back in those days. And I do appreciate that. But I think it's probably our contact with Randy, a county attorney, which we, at least every two weeks, if not more often, we have that contact. Other candidates probably don't have that contact and don't have access to somebody as knowledgeable as Randy or somebody on his staff or Mark Carponini or Irvin Cowley over the years. Michael Craig, I'm sure if you ask them, they would tell you, no, don't do that. And so I'd ask Randy if he could come up with something where everybody would understand. Now, how we get that out to the candidates and how we get that out to the people who occupy the taxpayers' buildings, I don't know. And that's up to the board to how do we get that out there. I don't know if you all have had any instruction on what you can or can't do. And I don't know that I've had any in a long time, but nothing's really changed. It's been this way for an awful long time. And it would be my ask of the board to have Mr. Mink prepare a memo that would go out to the people in this building, the elected folks, and the people that occupy the buildings that we own or at least de facto on behalf of the taxpayers. Well, that could be a press release. Randy, what do you got? My preference, I would do a memo to the board and the employees of the county. And what occurs from that, I believe, would be up to the board at that point. But allow me to write a memo to you all. I don't advise candidates. I don't advise often other constitutionals. They have their own attorneys and so forth. But I do advise the board and the employees. So I could easily issue a memo that advises the employees and remind them of the election laws in Florida when it comes to campaigning within government buildings and so forth. I don't know exactly how the Hatch Act applies in Florida. If anybody gets any federal money, obviously we get a lot of federal money. We just spent about $10 million or agreed to federal money. And that works its way out through facilities in all sorts of ways. I don't want to see employees get in trouble. If elected people aren't smart enough to figure out how to, you know, not run afoul of law, then I guess it's on them. And Randy doesn't need to advise them. But I think we could certainly publicize, here's what the law says, and don't even ask. Right. So we'll start with a memo, Rick. Yeah, I mean, that's a lot of great information. But I reckon this is the first I've heard of this. It's, you know, pretty common sense in the past years not to do something like that. But, I mean, has somebody here in this building here done that? Did I say that? No, I'm just asking. I mean, what brought all this on? I mean, I agree with you. But I know for years we've been, you know, for as long as I've been here, I mean, that just wouldn't be the thing to do. But I'm in agreeance with you. And the information is great. But I'm wanting to know if somebody did that. I'll give you a perfect example of a candidate who is a licensed, trained, practicing lawyer, getting paid by the government that wanted to come in here. Wanted to. Yeah, asked to. Yeah, but I'm asking, has anybody done that, you know, in this election cycle or in the past that I don't know of, that in this building, Polk County? Oh, I don't know. I'm just saying it happened. The answer was no. Obviously, that candidate either didn't care about the law or didn't understand the law. So people need to understand the law, especially now that the Hatch Act is a part of state. Oh, I understand that. I understand the Hatch Act and everything. But my question is, whatever brought this up, has anybody in this building, this building here, B-O-C-C, done something like that to bring this up? That's what I'm wanting to know. He's saying is they asked to do it. I'm talking about our people. I mean, I agree. An outside lawyer brought it in. Is that what you're saying? An outside lawyer wanted to come in here? Somebody who doesn't work in this building, yeah. Okay, but I don't know if anybody. But works for government across the street. Do what now? But works for government across the street from this building? Well, I mean, Randy did his job. All right, enough of this. I mean, I agree with you, but I just want to know if somebody did something wrong up here or anywhere else. That's not what I'm saying. Yeah. Did you hear me say that? No, but that's what I wanted to know. I don't care if you said it or not. All right, we're going to move on. Your point's well taken. Randy's going to do the memo. I'll do a memo to the employees and to the Board of County Commissioners. Okay. Or copy the Board of County Commissioners, too, so you know it goes out. All right, and then, Neil, you think, is that enough, or should there be a press release? Yeah, I think so. I mean, I think candidates need to be aware. I mean, I'm not going to provide legal advice to candidates. They have their own attorneys. My job is to advise the employees. I don't think a press release, but it informs the employees if we're approached by someone inquiring about it. We know to let them know pretty quickly. I think we need to keep it internal. We'll start with a memo to the employees and move on from there. Neil, you got anything else? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. No, sir. Is that for me? No, this is for a hearing. Oh, okay. All right. And I don't have anything, so we will move on to the hearings, expedited hearings. And, Mr. Chair, before we go into the public hearings, I'll go over the public hearing general procedures at this time. We ask that you please turn off your cell phones or other devices that may distract from the public hearings. Please adjust the microphone and state your full name and address for the record before you begin speaking on the topic. Individuals speaking during the public comment section of a matter will be strictly limited to three minutes. The Board is experiencing these matters and able to discern what is legally relevant to an issue and what is not. Information that is irrelevant or repetitive only serves to frustrate and necessarily prolong the day's business. The Commission expects civility at all times during all public hearings. Speaking, I'll turn and shout out from the audience, disrespectful sounds or utterances while another is speaking are unacceptable and you will be asked to leave the chambers for the remainder of the day. If any person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board with respect to any matter considered today, you will need a record of the proceedings and that for such purposes you may need to ensure a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Which record includes a testimony, evidence upon which the appeal is to be based, which you must gather at your own expense. Anyone in the audience who wishes to speak and present testimony today must be sworn in. All testimony given during public hearings shall be deemed to be sworn. At this time, if you're going to address the Commission or speak on any case today, please stand, raise your right hand, and answer out loud to the following questions. Do you swear or affirm that testimony or evidence you provide to the Commission today is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? All right. Thank you. Mr. Chair, before we go to expedite hearings, I will go through the expedite hearing procedures. Expedite hearings are held pursuant to Resolution No. 2022-089. Expedite hearings are used when no opposition was present at the Planning Commission hearing. The applicant agrees to the expedite hearing and recommendation of the Development Review Committee is for approval. Expedite procedures are the following. After staff briefly introduces the case, the hearing will be open for public comment. If anyone speaks during public comment, the applicant will be given the opportunity to respond. At the public comment, the board will consider the land use case. At any time, a full presentation from staff can be requested from a commissioner, the applicant, or a member of the public. All documents attached to the agenda item are deemed part of the record of the land use case. Unless removed from the list of experts by a motion of the board, all individuals on the list of experts attached to the agenda item are deemed experts for the purpose of the land use case. At this time, I'll turn it over to Mr. Siskel to present the expedite hearings. Thank you, Mr. Mink. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. For the record, Ben Ziskel, Land Development Director. There are five items on the expedited public hearing portion of today's agenda. Item number 01 is an expedited public hearing for case LDCD 2024-3, New Tampa Highway Sub-District Change, to consider adoption of a sub-district change on 2.55 acres of a 5.92-acre parcel located on the north side of New Tampa Highway, also known as U.S. 92. Subject site is located west of Galloway Road, just to the north and west of the city of Lakeland. As you can see on the map here on the right-hand side of the screen, there's a light purple strip that runs on the north side of New Tampa Highway. That has a land use designation of BPC-1, and then to the north of that, there's a darker purple, and that is BPC-2. Our subject site is located in the yellow box, and you can see that the site is bifurcated by those two land use changes. So the intent of this request is to change the entire parcel to BPC-2 so that the development of this parcel has unified land use regulations. This did appear before the Planning Commission. It was unanimously recommended for approval, and following any comments or questions from the board or the public today, staff recommends adoption of this change. Questions? Seeing none, I'll open a public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak on this matter, please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close public hearing and bring it back to the board. Move adoption. Second. Got a motion and a second for approval. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign, motion carries. Item number 02 is an expedited public hearing for case LDWA 2024-21 Garden of Eden Access Waiver to consider a waiver to the Land Development Code necessary to allow the issuance of building permits for up to eight single-family homes on a property that gains access solely via easement. A subject site is located north of Gary Lane, which is east of Lakeland Highlands Road. And to the southeast of the city of Lakeland. As you can see here, the subject site is a large, undeveloped site of approximately 40 acres. And the intent is to gain access via an easement to allow this property to be divided into eight five-acre lots. Each lot will meet the minimum lot size requirements for the zoning district. And you can see here, transposing over top of the site, you can see the eight lots will access the easement, which runs along the west side of the portion. And the lots will, one, two, three, four, kind of looks like a ladder up eight lots, each accessing from the east. Staff recommends approval. At the Planning Commission, this item did receive an approval with a 4-3 vote. And following any comments or questions from the board or the public, staff recommends approval. Here's a blown-up view of that site plan. Any questions? Seeing none, I'll open a public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak on this matter, please come forward. Seeing nobody, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Move adoption. Second. Got a motion to second for approval. Will all in favor say aye? Aye. Opposed, like, sound, or motion carries. Item number 03 is an expedited public hearing for case LDC-PAS 2023-29, Grove Avenue CPA, to consider a future land use change from residential suburban to residential low. The subject site is located south of State Road 60, east of County Road 17B. It is completely surrounded by the city of Lake Wales, but it is still an unincorporated parcel and subject to our comprehensive plan and land development code. The request from residential suburban to residential low will allow the subdivision of the property into lot sizes that are similar to those surrounding it. Staff recommended approval, and the Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval. And following any questions or comments from the Board of the Public, staff also recommends adoption of this item. Questions? Yeah. Ben, how did this escape annexation? Oh, we aren't required to force them to annex, so we did encourage them. No, no, no, no. How did they escape Lake Wales annexation? Yeah, I don't know. Jack didn't, and they left them out, I guess. My understanding is Lake Wales is still under voluntary annexations, and they didn't force the property to annex, so certainly the property owner has the option to annex. At this point, they've chosen to go through our review process. If they annex after development to connect to utilities, I'm not sure, but at this point, the city has not forced them through that process. All right. Anybody else? All right. I'll open a public hearing on this matter. If you want to have any comments, please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the Board. Move adoption. Second. Got a motion and a second for approval. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign. Motion carries. Item number 04 is an expedited public hearing for case LDCPAL 2024-1, Socrime Loop Road Preservation CPA, to consider adoption of a land-use map change from residential low and office center to preservation on approximately 6.88 acres. The subject site is located on the north side of Socrime Loop Road, north of the city of Lakeland, and you can see it here at the middle picture. The subject site has multiple land-use designations on it. This site is currently owned by Polk County. It is a retention pond, and the intention is for it to remain government-owned and as a retention area. So the request is to change the site to a preservation land-use to memorialize that land-use. This will also allow development around the site to apply buffers from a preservation land-use designation, as opposed to providing required buffers from either a residential or an office center where that land-use will never be developed as such. This item did appear before the Planning Commission, received a unanimous recommendation for approval, and following any questions or comments, staff recommends approval of transmitting this item to the Department of Commerce. This is a transmittal hearing. Questions? Seeing none, I'll open public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak on this matter, please come forward. Seeing nobody, I'll close the public hearing. Bring it back to the board. Move transmittal. Second. Got a motion and a second. Is transmittal? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, like, signed. Motion carries. And item number 05 is an expedited public hearing of Case LDCPAL 2024-3, County Road 640, Industrial Park, CPA, to consider adoption of a future land-use map change from phosphate mining to industrial on approximately 380 acres. Subject site is located south of State Road 60, north of County Road 640. I can see it's located northwest of Bradley Junction near the Polk County-Hillsboro County line. The subject site was a formerly mined site that has gone through the reclamation process. Industrial land-use designations are very common with formerly mined lands, and this change will allow the property to be redeveloped with an industrial land-use. Important to note that the Mosaic New Whales facility is just to the southwest of this facility, so this recommendation would be compatible with existing uses in the area. Planning Commission recommended approval 7-0. This is another transmittal hearing, and following any questions or comments from the board or the public, staff recommends approval to transmit this item to the Florida Department of Commerce. Questions? Seeing none, I'll open a public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak on this matter, please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Move transmittal. We've got a motion and a second to transmit. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion carries. And, Mr. Chairman, that concludes the expedited portion of today's agenda. Right. Randy, you want to tee up what we're about to do? Mr. Chair, as you're aware of, y'all received an email from Mr. Siskel late yesterday regarding P4. This is the land use case that's north of Imperial Lakes Boulevard, LDPD-2024-2. The applicant in this case has requested a continuance. So before we move to regular public hearings and have the individuals here for P4 sit through all the public hearings, I will go ahead and request that the board consider that continuance. And Mr. McVeigh is here on this. If he has anything to add, my understanding is that the applicant is not available. Just remind the board that this was a de novo hearing of denial in which the applicant is actually the one that has requested a de novo hearing. So I would believe that the wait generally would allow for the board to lean towards granting the continuance since there's really no harm to the surrounding property owners for it. Unless the property owners show good cause why a continuance should not occur, I would think the board would have granted. So if you would like to open a public hearing just for the sole purpose of those who may be here for P4 to state why a continuance should not occur, I would recommend that. Mr. Chairman, I certainly don't object to and have voted for a number of continuances over the year when people had issues. I would say that if we're going to do this, we need to put it further down the road that gives everybody a chance to make sure that they can arrange their calendars to be here. You know, I don't know any of the circumstances, but I think, you know, saying, hey, we'll come back two weeks from now, and obviously we wouldn't. And if I may, Mr. McVeigh, do you have any objections to a 90-days continuance? It's 90 days. 90? Okay. George? Go ahead. Go ahead. Well, I just, I know you're going to do a hearing, but let me. On this matter, in the last 30 days, I've developed a conflict of interest with the applicant, so I'll be recusing. 72 hours. All right. Okay, so just so everybody's clear, we are now discussing item P4 on the agenda. We're going to take a vote in a minute, but right now I'm going to open a public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak on this matter, you're still welcome to speak, but there's a good possibility it's going to be postponed for 90 days. So if you want to speak on this matter, please come forward. And I would just ask to limit the comments to why the board shouldn't grant a continuance, if I may. All right, well, we'll give him three minutes. Yes, sir. We need your name and address, and we'll give you three minutes. My name's Cliff Hennessy, 5225 Imperial Lakes Boulevard, number 27, Mulberry. And last time I was here, it was regarding a LDP, or I'm sorry, LDC PAS 2022-7. That's a golf course in Imperial Lakes. You guys denied that, and I do appreciate that. It was discovered later on, actually I discovered it, that some of the numbers that were used for comparables were grossly inflated. My condominium complex was grossly inflated, the number of units that were actually there. The one behind me, next level planning, did a really good job of making it look a lot more comparable than it actually was. I did bring this to the attention of every single one of you guys up here. As far as I know, nothing was ever done about it. I brought it up to Ms. Bennett, brought it up to Ms. Case. My only concern right now is that the same thing may be going on. So I'm begging you, you hold these people accountable, because there's not proper due diligence being done, or there wasn't in this case. We need to make sure that the proper due diligence is being done, and when we do find discrepancies like this, and like I said, I called it out to you. Mr. Lindsey actually doubted me. I showed him the information, brought it to his attention, where it was, in fact, grossly inflated. We can't let this go on. I mean, seriously, there needs to be some repercussions. There needs to be some accountability, and you guys are the only ones that can do it. So I'm asking you in this case, because this is directly going to have an influence on the case of the golf course behind me, because you're setting precedents, okay? You're basically opening up a floodplain area, a sensitive environmental area to development, to high-density development, and it's going to set a precedent. The golf course, when they go to develop that and they come back to you again for that, they're going to cite that. They're going to say this is a comparable. So we need to really pay close attention to what's being presented, and I'm just begging you. You guys are the only ones. You are the first line of defense in this. I do appreciate the fact that most of you are holding developers in check. You're trying to put the brakes on a little bit. We are the fastest-growing county in the state. I don't really know that that's something to brag about. It's not as far as I'm concerned, to be honest with you. I've got plans on leaving the county. I've got to get out of here. This is becoming too much for me, and I've got a feeling that I'm not the only one. I'm seventh-generation Polk County. I come from the same roots that Neal Comby does, and it's very discouraging. It's despairing when I see that it's coming down to this, and I just ask you guys, you know, continue to monitor this and tap the brakes when we need to. Thank you. That's it. Thank you. Anyone else? Just to be clear, this is item P4. Okay. I'll close the public hearing. Chairman, I would offer you a motion to continue this for a minimum of 90 days. So, if I may, the minimum of 90 days, the next public hearing after 90 days is 11-19-2024. It's November the 19th of 2024. Second. Okay. You've got a motion and a second to continue to November 19th. Any questions? Everybody understands. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Like sign. Motion carries. Okay. P4 is continued to no sooner than November 19th. P1. Good morning, Chairman, Commissioners. For the record, my name is Shonda Bennett with the Land Development Division. This is a request for the board to consider the adoption of a large-scale comprehensive plan amendment, LDCPAL 2024-8. It's a comprehensive plan text amendment to policy 2.130 E1.1A. It's to the last sentence in that policy to add historic area reference to the policy and replace UEA, or utility enclave area, with DRI, or development of regional impact, as well to add a sentence to that policy that for the additional property, and I'll explain that in a slide or two, that a plan development will only be required if the density goes above four dwelling units to the acre and has less than 50-foot wide lots, according to Section 822 of the Land Development Code. In terms of the advertisement, 17 e-mails in support were received. One letter in support was received. Two e-mails in opposition. One letter in opposition. And a legal ad was published in the Polk Sun on July 17th. Over the last few days, we've received some additional e-mails in support, so I'll leave that here, Mr. Mink. I believe many of you have received these e-mails, but they weren't attached to the official record, so I'm submitting them right now. Just a brief reminder, certainly you remember seeing some of this at the transmittal hearing in June, but development of regional impact goes back to a state statute from the 1970s. These are developments that are defined in size in state statute in terms of number of units, square foot of commercial, and it's a certain review process that these developments have to go through. And so they have multi-jurisdictional impacts. And utility enclave area is one of six development areas that we have in the county where we base our land uses on in terms of where the water, sewer, transit, et cetera, of urban infrastructure is located. The Greenleaf was one of the original DRIs in the state of Florida, certainly the first one in Polk County in 1973. It was approved as Arrowhead. Arrowhead, development of regional impact, included dwelling units, both attached, single-family, recreation, golf course, marina. And on the map on the right, that's the original map for Arrowhead, development of regional impact. And I've thrown out these terms of UEA and DRI. So on this map, you'll see the UEA is outlined in red. The Greenleaf DRI is in turquoise. And then the additional property is called Smoky Groves. That was defined in a comprehensive plan amendment in 2009 and a Land Development Code amendment in 2009. And that's how it was defined. So as you can see, it didn't incorporate all of Greenleaf, just the major portion that was developed in an extra parcel to the south. Briefly, at that hearing, in the Trans-Mill hearing, staff discussed some of the transportation improvements that are occurring in the area, some funded, some not funded. Also, since 2009, the board's adopted a few ordinances, a text amendment to the Land Development Code for a 25-foot setback, garage setback, which will be applied to anything developed in Greenleaf, as well as open space requirements, and then a tree for every lot. Briefly, the residential low policy in the Greenleaf section of the comprehensive plan does state that any resort residential, i.e. short-term rental, has to be a conditional use level 3 per the requirements in the Land Development Code, and it maximizes the density at 5 dwelling units per acre. But this text amendment, if approved, will limit that to 4 dwelling units to acre. The only way to get to 5 is with a PD. The Planning Commission voted a split vote on this request, but staff is recommending denial, and I'll stand for any questions. Any questions? I hear from the applicant. I'm sorry. I'm recommending approval. Staff's recommending approval. He has a troubled look on his face. Well, I was going to hear that from him, but... Sorry. Applicant. Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Bart Allen. I'm a land use attorney with the Peterson & Myers Law Firm. My address is 225 East Lemon Street, Lakeland, Florida. I am here this morning on behalf of the property owner and applicant, Smoky Groves Development, LLC. With me this morning, I have Mr. Scott House, who's the manager of that LLC. I also have a number of experts who you all heard from at the transmittal hearing as well. I have Mr. Don Skelton, who is our transportation engineer from Way Engineering, who performed a transportation analysis on this site. Mr. Keith Burge, who is our utility operator from Bentech, LLC, and consultant on the utilities that are also incorporated and owned by Mr. House. And then I also have Mr. Danny Kovacs, who's been our engineer on this project. This, we spent a lot of time back in June going over the history of this site, the kind of how we are, where we are today. And I'm not going to go through all of that in the detail that I went through it in June. But just to kind of recap, and Ms. Bennett's given you a really good overview here. The Greenleaf DRI goes all the way back to 1973, and you saw from staff slides that the smoky groves or the additional property has always been included within the DRI, or was originally incorporated within the DRI, going all the way back to 1973. And as that project developed over the years and over time, this piece just never developed. But in 2008, when the UEA was created, the DRI was considered built out. And as you will recall, we talked about the built out agreement that was being negotiated at the same time that the conference of plan was going through the process to create the UEA. And then subsequently, there was a Land Development Code text amendment that came through in 2009. That built out agreement came after the conference of plan. But the built out agreement was basically a four-party agreement between Polk County, the Department of Community Affairs, which is now the Department of Commerce, the property owner, and the contract purchaser at the time, Beltram. At that time, when that UEA was created, they acknowledged the original development, the existing development, which was around 1,400 units and some other things, commercial, clubhouse, convention center, and whatnot. But then also recognized and implemented into the conference of plan and the built out agreement an additional 1,753 units. And those units were identified to go in certain places. And Smoky Groves was one of those locations where residential development up to five dwelling units in acre was identified. That was identified in the comp plan in 2008 and in that built out agreement, which came after the comp plan. In 2009, the Land Development Code provisions were implemented. And that implemented the development standards for Smoky Groves. So what we are asking for today is a text amendment to allow Smoky Groves to develop up to four units an acre at no less than a 50-foot lot width, which is consistent with the entitlements and the codes and the conference of plan that have been in place going all the way back to 2008, 2009, and quite honestly, all the way back to 1973 with some of the original entitlements in the DRI. That is what we're asking for today. It's really as cut and dry as that. We have all of our experts here. If you have any questions, we went through all the details as far as the ability to serve the site, whether it was with concurrency for schools, concurrency for transportation, concurrency for utilities. We talked through all those issues. We have all those answers again today. None of that has changed. The only thing that's changed is after your four-to-one vote in June is went to the Department of Commerce, and it is now back to you for a final vote. And, again, this text amendment applies and will only affect the additional property or Smoky Groves and would allow that project to develop. So with that, we'll stand for any questions. We have my entire team here. I know there's some people here for. I know there's some people here against and would request a few minutes at the end to answer any of their questions or provide rebuttal as well. All right. Any questions for the applicant? Neil? Obviously, and you just mentioned it, Bart, there's people here for. There's people here that are against it, and everybody's got their reasons and their good reasons because they're their reasons. But the split seems to be between east half and west half, or east and west, east of Kokomo Road. Folks seem to be really interested in seeing improvements there. The stuff that Mr. House has talked about doing there, people believe that's going to help their quality of life and probably help the value of their property. So it's kind of easy to see why they would be for that. The people on the west side of the road, not so much. And I don't know. I'm looking at it, and there's no way really to look, except the east side is a little bigger than the west side. I can tell that. But how many holes, because we're talking about basically developing holes of golf course into housing, residential units. What we're talking about today does not involve the golf course at all. Not at all. Not at all. Zero zilch on either side. Zero zilch on anything with the golf course. What we're talking about today, and if we want to look at it between east and west course, what you're talking about today on the screen above you is basically in the box, the red box. And within the red box, you're talking about the southern 144 acres. The northwestern 136 acres, because it's a 280-acre track, is wetland and will remain in preservation. So there will be no impact. I mean, there will be 100, call it 136, close to 140 acres of preserved wetland that is in preservation today in your future land use, which means it can't be developed between us and anything on the west course. And for a large majority of the east course as well. So that conservation goes almost all the way over to kind of where this cursor is. I don't know if you can see it, Commissioner Cumbie, but I'm trying to. Yeah. So that within the red box is the only thing we're talking about. So what we're doing has no effect on anything outside of the red box? That's correct. Okay. George? Mark, would you refresh my memory when we reviewed this last meeting for the transmittal, was that the property got the comp plan amendment, and typically there's a companion comp plan and land development code side-by-side that travel together as companion actions. In this case, the comp plan moved forward, but for whatever reason, the companion piece was not attached. That's correct. And had that been attached in the original hearing, we wouldn't be here today. I would expect so. I wasn't here, so I didn't provide any speculation, but that's certainly a very logical conclusion to draw. And you can see that really from the language of the comp plan. If you read the language of the comp plan, it talks about negotiating an essentially built-out agreement. Then there's a built-out agreement. And then when you look at the land development code, it says the built-out agreement's in effect. So there's very clearly a time lag between all of those approvals. And I can't say that's exactly it, but it certainly makes sense. So we can't back up time to know, but the policy and the practice is to carry these things most often in tandem. Had I been working that at the same time, I would have had all of those built in all at the same time so that the PD requirement would not have been in place, and you could have just relied on the land development code, which is what we're doing. So when this came to us last time, we knew this flaw in this property, and we knew this would be the correction. Did the Department of Commerce, did they have any comments? No objections. Okay. All right. Anybody else? Just before we move forward, I understand, Mr. Allen, that you're not presenting all your expert witnesses at this time. Not at this time. Not due to respect everyone's time, but just for the record, you are incorporating their testimony from the previous hearing into this hearing. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Meenke. Absolutely. All right. Thank you. All right. So I'm going to go ahead and open up a public hearing for item P1. I'm sorry. Yeah, P1. Anyone wishing to speak on this matter, please come forward with your name and address, and we'll give you three minutes. This is the text amendment only. Yeah. Yeah, P1. Good morning. I had a speech written. I'm going to kind of abandon it a little bit to maybe directly answer, especially Mr. Cumby's questions about kind of the demographic of Greenleaf and how it's made up. As you said, East and West, we have six HOAs within Greenleaf. The major HOA is the condo association. That makes up about 50% of the 3,000 residents of Greenleaf. Few of them are here today from the condo association. Of the remaining five HOAs, those are the smaller residential HOAs. Two of them are located on the west course. They make up about 12% of the population. The remaining three, you know, make up the other 38 or so percent. I have with me today vice president from one of those HOAs and president from another of the HOAs. So just to let you know, there is support. It is real. You were inundated with emails the last few days from people who were planning to be here today. But work schedules due to Hurricane Debbie kind of forced them to be back to work today. So I just want to let you know that the support is real. We understand what's going on. We're not going to change. We will be back. And we hope for your continued support, not only today, but at future meetings. Thank you. Thank you. Sir, before you leave, did you state your name and address for the record? Robert Lewis, 6 Greenwood Lane, Haines City, Florida. Thank you. Thanks, Randy. Next. And if there's others, if you'll just line up on the wall and kind of queue up, that'd be great. Okay. My name is William Gibson. I live at 44 Nottingham Way in Haines City. I was informed that this was supposed to be a requisition for CDD. That's the next item on our agenda. Okay. All right. You want to wait and speak on that? Yeah, I'll wait and speak on that, okay? All right. Have a seat. Anybody else wanting to talk on P1? Glenlaw, Horn 11,000, Jim Edwards Road, Haines City. You look back when the original DRI was done, this property right here was never part of it. It's like the Poinciana pre-DRI was. They went and did a giant swath of land, which included all my property over on the other side of Jim Edwards Road back then, and we were all incorporated in that DRI. And then the county commission came in and moved us out of it. Eventually. It took a long time. But the PD back, PD 0603 back in 2008 and 2009, the Smoky Groves property, they put it in there just to kind of appease David Siegel. His logger was here. I think everybody's probably seen those comments that were made. And they asked Mr. Siegel, if we approve this on this land use change, when are you going to start building it? And he said immediately. I don't know what immediately means to you, but it means to me that would have been immediately. And they still haven't done anything with it. And it's been 17 years now. So, I don't like the way this is all transpired. I think there's got to be a better way. I don't think this thing should be approved at all. That's a huge amount of density that you're going to shove into the corner of a piece of property that's far, far, far away from anybody else that has that kind of density. You've got to go all the way into Haines City, six miles away almost, to find that density. I don't think you should be doing this out there. It's time to start conserving our county. There's no water. The roads are terrible. The schools are overloaded. I just can't give you any good reason to do this. So, that's all I've got to say for now. Thanks. Thank you. Anyone else? All right. If you see anybody else, I'll close the public hearing. Bart, you want to address that? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be brief. One, appreciate Mr. Lewis and his support. What we're talking about here, even if I excluded the wetland from the 280 acres, we're looking at three dwelling units an acre. So, that's not high-intensity development in any regard. It fits within the residential low. It utilizes the entitlements that have been incorporated on this site since 2008, 2009, and as I mentioned, all the way back into 1973, when this property was included in the original Greenleaf DRI, as is shown by this exhibit, which is your staff's exhibit. And if you look underneath it, and staff kind of showed me how to do this the other day. I didn't know you could do it, but you can overlay a picture. And what you see, these little grayish outlines, that is the old map H for the DRI. That is the original development footprint of what Greenleaf DRI. The fact that it didn't ultimately develop to its full potential, the fact that it took 17 years to get here, Mr. House hasn't owned it that long. You know, though, Mr. Siegel and the things and the representations that were made in 2008 as to when development would commence, I can't control. But I can, what I am telling you is, is that what we're asking for is reasonable. You've got a staff recommendation of approval. It utilizes and follows the comprehensive plan and land development code provisions that are in place today. And we would request a favorable vote on this text amendment. Oh, and one last thing. We did, and we talked about it at length at the transmittal hearing. But we have binding letters of school capacity. We have capacity letters from our utility provider, which is the Greenleaf Utilities. We also have a transportation study in-house that's been approved that shows that we meet concurrency in none of the roads. They're operating at a level of service C today, and they will operate at a level of service C with the project traffic. So we believe that this project meets and exceeds all concurrency aspects as well. Not that that's really relevant to a text amendment, but I feel like I need to do to address it. So with that, we'll stand up. We'll, again, stand for any questions, but we would request a favorable vote of adoption on this large-scale complaint. Thank you. All right, thank you. I'll close the public hearing, bring it back to the board for discussion. Mr. Chairman. Yes. As you all know, and we stated it then, and I'll restate it now, when this was done, none of us were members of this board. And I didn't happen to watch the meeting or meetings where this was voted on and considered. I don't know how it all went down and don't know why the board did what they did, but obviously they were empowered to vote and make decisions on behalf of the public, and they did. And I think that we're obligated to recognize the decision they made, and I don't know if that was 2008. Was it 8, 9, 8, 9, 9? I mean, there's no other way to state it. I think we're obligated to recognize and accept their decision. And I voted for it last time because I couldn't really in good conscience figure out a way to vote no. So is it something that if this had an ARR land use on it, would I say this is a good idea and that it's a good matchup to the folks of the south? No, I wouldn't. But that's not what we're dealing with, and the circumstances and conditions are what they are, and that's what we have to accept. So I intend to, once again, support the – I was trying to figure out ways that I could get an acre and a half of parkland in here, and I figured Randy was going to tell me that's illegal. And so I thought, well, maybe I won't do it. But I will say that I wish that we could come up with an acre and a half of parkland in here, which would be an all-purpose field for the hundreds of children that live in the area or will live in here once this is developed. But nevertheless, I would move approval of the adoption. I think that adoption is correct, isn't it? Yeah. Okay. Second. Okay, you got a motion and a second for approval. Any further discussion? See you none. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Vows like sign. Motion carries. P2. Good morning. Eric Peterson for the Land Development Division. I bring before you a community development district. You may look familiar. You might have seen it earlier today. This is the Groves at Lake Marion Community Development District. It's for 423 single-family detached residential lots on 102.68 acres in a RL1 district that you would just approve for four units per acre, so it is consistent. This CDD was advertised by the applicant in the Lakeland Ledger on July 9th, July 16th, July 23rd, and July 30th. Included in your packet is the petition. The other items are the pre-filed testimony, which the applicant will speak of, and the proof of publication. The site is located, as you may recall, on the southwest side of Lake Marion, off of Lake Marion Road, near the Greenleaf, and the land use is RL1X, and this is the proposed, this is a plan that it is in there. It's not a binding site plan, but it shows you how the 423 units will be accommodated on the property. This is the estimated cost of the district, for which they'll be constructing infrastructure within the development. It also comes with a roundabout that will be at the entrance. The county will maintain the roadways, and the county will maintain the roundabout once it's constructed. This is the proof of wastewater and water connection, which is a requirement of the Community Development District. It will be tying into the Greenleaf system. And I'll conclude with stating that all the statements in the petition are correct. The CDD is consistent with the comprehensive plan. It's of sufficient size, compact and contiguous. We recommend it as a good alternative source of funding. It is compatible with the services and facilities and their capacity, and we have all honors authorization letters for it, and I recommend approval. I'll stand for questions. Questions. All right. Bart, do you want to talk about this? No. The other guy. Good morning, commissioners. My name is Chair Earlywine. I'm with QTAC Rock Law Firm. Just before I get started, I was going to mention to Commissioner Comey that, in fact, the project is planned for about a two-and-a-half-acre park, so it's got a dog park and a playground, and it's a really nice area that's being planned, so I wanted to make that. All in one spot? Say again? All in one location. Yes, sir. It's down in the southwest corner of the project. Yes, sir. So I did want to answer that question, but again, my name is Chair Earlywine, as you all know. I'm with the QTAC Rock Law Firm. We represent probably about 350 or so with 1,000 CDDs in Florida. I've been working on CDD projects for about 20 years, and the founding members of my office actually have worked on the very first CDDs in Florida, so we've got a lot of experience in that area. What I wanted to do today is talk a little bit about the CDDs generally and also about the groves at Lake Marion CDD, which is for the Smoky Groves project that we were just talking about there. I think the first thing that's worth saying is that under Florida law, CDDs are a state program. They're authorized by the Florida legislature under Chapter 190, and Chapter 190 sets forth the six criteria that you all are considering today, and those are the six criteria that Eric just had up on the board there. I did want to clear up a misunderstanding, or maybe it's a misunderstanding up front, which is that there's been no, as far as I'm aware, there's been no CDD where a city or county has assumed the debt of the CDD. So I don't believe anywhere in the state of Florida or Polk County has any city or county assumed the debt of a CDD. It just has never happened. In fact, Florida Statutes Chapter 190 says no debt or obligation of a CDD can become a debt or obligation of a city or county. So you don't have that risk, and I wanted to make that clear up front. As you all know, just kind of in a nutshell, a CDD is essentially a more capable version of a homeowner's association, and it's got a number of advantages over an HOA. First off, it has the ability to access the tax-exempt bond market and finance your public infrastructure for project and pay for stormwater and roads and community infrastructure. What that means is that there's more money in the project. We're able to bring forward a higher quality project and also keep the home prices competitive. HOAs simply don't have that ability. HOAs or CDs also have the ability to collect on the tax roll. And so if there's something that comes up where you need to refurbish a project infrastructure or you've got some calamity that you've got to deal with, what does an HOA do? They've got to put that one-time balloon assessment in place that I'm sure you all have all experienced from time to time if you're in an HOA community. CDs don't have to do that because they can collect on the tax roll, and so they're better able to take out loans. And so they don't have that one-time balloon assessment. They can spread the costs over time. CDs are also eligible for FEMA funding and statewide mutual aid. So if you have a hurricane go through, just like we had one yesterday, right, we had some CDs dealing with that, they can get FEMA funding. HOAs can't get that. CDs also have sovereign immunity protection, which means that they're protected. If there's a tort lawsuit or frivolous lawsuit, they're much more protected. There's a cap on their liability. Their insurance is better. HOAs don't have that. And so they've got unlimited exposure if there's a tort case. CDs are also more transparent because they're subject to sunshine laws and public records laws and public disclosures and all the reporting and public audits that CDs have to go through under state law. HOAs are less transparent. They don't have the reporting requirements and things that CDs have. So overall, a CD is a simply more efficient structure for delivering the infrastructure and also for operating and maintaining it once it's actually in the ground. Now, for all of these reasons, CDs are very popular in Florida. In fact, there's over 1,000, as I mentioned, in Florida. Polk County has over 80. I think you all actually recently approved three or four of these back in 2022, 2021. There were several that got approved during that time frame. And they include some of the best-selling communities in the nation. In fact, if you look at the top 50 master plan communities in the nation, 17 or 16, depending on the year, are actually in Florida. And all but four of those are CDD communities because they're super popular. And they include things like Nocatee and Vieira and the Villages and Lakewood Ranch. All throughout the state, there's these wonderful projects that are CDD communities. And they look and feel better because of all the reasons we talked about. Now, I mentioned some big-name communities. But two-thirds of the 1,000 or so CDs are about 300 to 500 units, which is exactly the same size as the Smoky Groves at Lake Merriam project we're talking about right now. So this is a very typical CDD. It's very similar to the ones that have already been approved in Polk County. And in fact, I think it's more warranting to have a CDD for smoking than some of the other ones that maybe you guys have already approved in the past. And there's a couple of reasons for that. One is there's a big conservation area, about 125 acres of conservation right next door to our CDD project. And CDs are a better, more capable structure for taking care of stormwater systems and taking care of conservation areas. It's one of the reasons the water management districts, I've got a written letter from the water management district that says, all things being equal, a CDD is a preferred operation maintenance entity over an HOA. So you've got that conservation area just to the west. It will be better protected because the stormwater ponds are going to be in public trust owned by the CDD. Not just that, but this is in a UEA area, or it was. And what that means is that there's less infrastructure. So to the extent you have utilities issues or stormwater issues or any issues like that, if you need a public option to step in and help out, the CDD can do that as well. So this is a really wonderful time to use a CDD on a project like this. It's very similar to the two thirds, you know, roughly 700 CDs of the thousand in Florida. It's about that same size. And it's very similar to the ones that have already been approved in the county. Now, I know that there are folks who may have come, I know, talked about this and maybe submitted comments and things like that in the past, but I want to reassure you all that none of those folks are going to be negatively affected by this CDD, right? This CDD is just for the Smoky Groves area, just for the groves at Lake Marion. And the CDD only has the power and authority to put assessments on the property within its own boundaries. So it's not going to increase anyone else's taxes. It's not going to increase anyone else's assessments. It's not going to do anything. If anything, it's going to make for a better quality community that's already going to be developed and approved, right? We just approved it. It's going to get developed. And this is going to make for a better quality community. County commissioners, the only job you guys have today is to look at the six criteria in the statute. That's what the legislature directs you to do. Look at the six criteria and decide whether they've been satisfied. If you look at the record evidence, and this is a point where I'd offer this all into the record and ask for Mr. Meek's help. We have our petition. We've got the staff report. We have the expert testimony from Rathel Hunt and Associates. And I think Bart introduced everyone except on the CD side. We've got Michael Simonowicz here from Rathel Hunt and Associates, one of our experts. We've also got the testimony from Danny Kovacs from Tracked Engineering. I've worked on him with numerous CDs. We have all of their expert testimony. That testimony, the petition, and the staff report all point to the fact that all six of these criteria are met. And I would just ask Eric to reiterate, in fact, we have met the criteria under Florida law, correct? Yeah. And so on that basis, we would respectfully request that you all approve the CD for Smoky Groves, the Groves at Lake Merriam project. I'm here and happy to answer any questions. Really appreciate your all's consideration today. Any questions? All right. Seeing none, we'll continue with the public hearing. I've got, okay, got a list of people starting with Teresa Souls, Dennis, Don. If you guys will come forward and if you're going to speak on this matter, if you'll just line up over on the wall over here so we can move right along, I would appreciate it. Ma'am, you can come right to the middle. Oh, you got some, okay, all right. Told her I'd do this for her. All right, that's fine. Okay, my name is Teresa Souls and I live at 9365 West Lake Merriam Road and have lived in the Lake Merriam area since the 1970s. My home is southeast of the Greenleaf Golf Course and immediately east of the Smoky Groves development property and east of Cuckmow. I am sincere in my concerns that I have relayed to you through emails and in prior meetings. This intense development will ruin the rural character of our area that we have enjoyed for many years. The peace and tranquility will be lost. I don't know where they're coming up with three units per acre, but the staff report says it's 4.12 on page two of the report. A particular concern to me is the creek that he's about to show you that runs in front of my house from the Smoky Groves property. Since the 280 acres of natural vegetation will be replaced with impervious surfaces, the chance of flooding will increase for those of us to the east where the creek runs through our properties and on into the lake. There's also the damage that Lake Merriam would eventually face from the runoff of motor oils, pesticides, fertilizers, and other pollution caused by the development. I've been in touch with Swift Mud as to how this will affect my property. The developer began clearing the property in the summer of 2023 with no regard to the wildlife, centuries-old trees, shrubs, and vegetation on the property. Despite my phone calls to the planning department that summer to inquire about what was going on next door, I was repeatedly told by the planning department they had no knowledge of any plans for the development. I also do not believe this developer has any concerns about the impacts this project will have on the environment. There have been several reports of them disturbing gopher tortoise burros and other wildlife, and my family witnessed buzzards circling the property for months last fall. I can also personally attest that they were operating equipment at almost 7 o'clock in the dark on January 15th of this year. I emailed the planning department that evening and received a reply the next day stating all they have heard from their attorneys as they are clearing for vegetation for pasturing in the uplands. This most certainly contradicts an earlier December 2023 email conversation I had with the planning department where it was finally confirmed that the development was most certainly in the works, and I still wonder what they were doing that night in the dark. I appreciate your time and any consideration you can get for helping to preserve our area. Thank you. Dennis. Dennis Leszinski, 18 Robin Lane, Country Homes, Florida. I met with all of you last week individually. I provided you some input relative to CDDs and what our development thinks is the problem with them. Now, they work great when they work. They don't work so well in many cases. 2013, for example, in Florida alone, 73% of CDDs were in default. Belly up. I just read something the other day, not sure where I saw it, but 83% to 85% of developments in the country are going under CDDs. That scared me. If we've got 73% in Florida in 2013, not a good year for an economy, but we're not in one now either. It's basically free money for the development of the developer. It's a good deal. I've had two businesses of my own after I left the defense and aerospace industry. I financed them. I didn't put that on anybody else. It failed miserably. I took the hit. That's how business works as far as I was concerned. I started a second one. I funded that. It was good business, and I reaped the benefit from that business. Again, that's business as we look at it. But many people have suffered for failing CDDs. In some cases, the development doesn't get completely built, leaving a short number of homes with people that obviously can't pay that. People are going to pay property taxes. Some have HOAs, and they have a CDD. It's a lot of money. And as far as being able to cover disastrous occurrences, I understand it, but the load remains on the homeowner even after the bond is paid. Some will say that the HOA gets that bill and they pay it. Who funds the HOA? The homeowners. Homeowners are on the hook for a long time, probably up to 30 years to pay off the bond. And then for everything beyond that, in some way, they're going to pay for that. And I have to wonder, is it worth having a few amenities up front to be on the hook for years and years to pay off whatever happens to your development? Pools, lighting, roads. It still comes back and hits these people. And when they can't sell their homes or they want to get out of them, what are they going to get for them? Prices drop. Prices drop. It affects the neighborhood around them. Our prices drop. These are all risks, as I showed you. Just wanted to reiterate them today so that others can hear them. I appreciate your time. Thank you. Glenn? You get to hear from me twice in one day. Isn't that special? Glenn Lawhorn, 11,000, Jim Middles Road. Sorry, that's so loud. So, CDDs are bad. I've talked to a lot of you about this already. CDDs have no business doing what they're doing. They're just a way for the developer not to have any financial skin in the game in his development. So, if a developer has that kind of money available and he goes and develops the property, so be it. So, why do we feel like the county has to come in and initiate some sort of bonding so that this developer can go in and develop on somebody else's money? Okay. That's one of my points. When they fail, it does become the responsibility of the taxpayer because, as I stated last CDD hearing, if it fails, it goes into default. Default goes in for sale by whoever issued the bond. That company sells the bond for pennies on the dollar. Somebody comes in and buys it, says, okay, I bought this for, pick a number, $400,000. And then they run in and come into the county commission chambers and say, oh, by the way, y'all approved this. So, now you're responsible for it because you have to provide the services that are listed on that CDD contract. So, it does become a ward of the county, so to speak. So, the board voted no last time on the CDD. It was three to two. I'm looking for a 5-0 vote here today. I know Mr. Lindsey is, sure enough, going to vote for it, but I hope the rest of you will not. The developer has the moxie to do this. Why doesn't he just go out and do it? He doesn't have the financial backing, apparently. He's got to go get that from somebody else. I don't think that's a very good idea. That's bad business. CDDs are bad, and I hope y'all will not approve this today. Thank you. Don. Don Fosick, 116, our head lane. Good Lord, that thing's loud. I come for you today. For me, it's been a trying few weeks. I've been sick. Right before I seen you guys on Friday, I had kidney stone. And this morning on the way, just to see y'all, yeah, I got rear-ended. So, I'm enjoying life, and I've worked just about every day at my job in the rain, just to see y'all. And I'm thrilled. You know, I love seeing y'all. What I want to talk about is the CDD. As you know, I'm against this. You know, I don't think that you ought to skirt your responsibility in business to pass it on to somebody else. And that's what we're doing here. The last meeting, yeah, I was probably a little hard on Mr. House with his business dealings. But when it comes down to it, you know, being a man, you've got to take responsibility. If you do something, you don't want somebody else to take responsibility for your actions. If you want to do this, you should go get a bank loan. I drive up and down the road. As you know, I work for McLean Company. We drive up and down the road, and I see no CD, no CD, so no CDD. One right after another. Why is this? Hopefully, people are getting smart. I don't know if you guys caught it. There was a lady from Chicago, and she was a single mom. She had worked her butt off her whole life, man. Saved up money. Saved up money. Bought a house in Davenport. Woo! But she bought a house in Davenport. And so a year goes by, and all of a sudden, her insurance went through the roof. Her taxes went through the roof. Her HOA went up. And this CDD, guess what? That house went up for sale. She sold it way under market value to just get out from under it. And that's a lot of what you're seeing now. And if you didn't notice yesterday, the economy did drop. She took a, what, 1,000-point hit right off the bat. It's coming. There's no doubt about it. I don't think that the taxpayers, I don't think that Mr. Wilson or Braswell or Ms. Santiago or Mr. Cumby, we ought to come back to this going, man, I wish we wouldn't approve that. You know, I mean, it's just being straight. You know, we're by the people. And I really appreciate you guys, you know, allowing us to come in and see y'all. Because you know what? At the end of the day, this is America. And we shouldn't, we should stand in the way from somebody just blatantly messing over somebody. You know what I was going to say. That had to stop. But, you know, let's talk about roads right quick. I have two motorcycles. I asked Mr. Peterson if any time he gets ready to talk about roads or even the guy with the beard there, we'll get on the back of that motorcycle. And I promise you, we'll go to Davenport. He'll have a white beard. Thank you. Thank you. Next. Again, my name is William Gibson. I live at 44 Nottingham Way in the Greenleaf home. The CDD tax lawyer there, he was talking about it. I prepared taxes for even large corporations for 24 years. I've had two that a tax attorney had to go to. I do about 800 tax returns a year. And now I'm starting to see people come in who've had their home repossessed because they cannot make the payment in the CDD payment. Now, if that's a $400,000 home and you owe $200,000 on it, you now owe taxes on $200,000. That's a repossessed home. And that's where I'm seeing people come in, huge tax bills they can't pay. And to me, a CDD, like the other guy said, that's passing the buck on to somebody else. If you don't have the money or you don't have the investors to build, then don't build. That's plain and simple. I, for I, me, go to work in my house, I have to pay everything. If I don't have the money to pay for it, somebody else is going to get it. So why should we put that on the backs of somebody else? Either you've got the money and the investors to build or don't build. Thank you. Next. Good morning, commissioners. Pablo Lovona, 131 Arrowhead Lane, Haynes City, Florida. Thank you guys for allowing me to speak. My name is Pablo Lovona, and I am the branch manager of Flow Mortgage and proud resident of Polk County. Over the past 15 years, I've been dedicated to helping people in Florida, particularly Polk County. Today, I want to address the critical issue of community development districts, or CDDs. Why are CDDs problematic for both residents and the community? The main issue is the CDDs transfers the cost of infrastructure, such as roads, water, sewer, parks, parking, even luxury amenities. From the builder to the homeowner, this shifts in significant additional expenses for the homeowners over time. When a new home is built, the initial tax bill is typically low because it's based on the land value. However, homeowners often do not realize that the following year, their tax bills were significantly increased to cover the cost of the land, new building, and a CDD. This increase can range from $3,000 to $4,000, which can be a substantial burden for any new homeowner. Here, I brought an example of that so that you guys can see it personally. That first page is going to show you a tax bill from 2015 for Soltero, 1504 Soltero Circle. You'll see the tax bill originally was $2,505. The next year, it jumps up to $7,760. This is what the people are dealing with on a daily basis. This is what I help put in finance. Not everybody's like me. Not everybody's going to explain to your clients, hey, your tax bill is going to go up next year. You need to save a side of some money. Doesn't happen. Also, such dramatic increases in costs are unaffordable for most people, especially in the current economic climate. Why should new homeowners be placed in this difficult position? Builders purchase land with a plan to cover infrastructure costs, either through the CDD or from their own funds. They should be responsible for these costs before selling the homes rather than passing them on to the new homeowners. Additionally, I've listed on the second page a list of homes in that same neighborhood that have been on the market for over six months, some for over a year and a half. This suggests that combination of high taxes, CDDs, and HOAs are likely due to contributing slow sales in the area. In conclusion, this issue is already affecting Polk County residents. I urge you to consider the impact on new homeowners and take steps to prevent them from continuing. Let's ensure the cost of infrastructures are fairly distributed and do not solely become the burden of the new homeowner. On top of that, earlier the gentleman was saying that the CDDs are so great because, you know, there's no need for HOA. I've been doing this for 16 years. Every one of these communities that have a CDD have an HOA. It's two separate costs. They fund different things. You guys, this is a real problem right now in Polk County that's growing. Thank you. Next. Good morning, again. Robert Lewis, 6th Greenwood Lane, Hain City, Florida. I'd first like to say that neither I nor anyone else in Greenleaf currently live in a CDD and that no existing property within Greenleaf will ever be in a CDD. I understand that the CDD proposed for smoky groves or the groves at Lake Marion won't cost any current resident a dime but will help to start improving our community immediately. I also understand through Florida statute that no debt of a CDD can be a debt of the county. As the gentleman said earlier, some of the most luxurious communities in Florida are CDDs, including the villages, Lakewood Ranch, Lake Nona, on top of the world in Ocala, just to name a few. If our new neighborhoods in Greenleaf are built to similar standards, then it will be a boom for our area. I'd like to offer an opinion on, you know, some of the opposition. I certainly understand their objections, but I'd also like to say that I believe their strategy is to just delay the project to get the CDD turned down for some alternate form of funding, which will not stop the project. We as the supporters are here to support Mr. House in any way we can and have him spend money to help our neighborhoods. That being said, I'd ask for you to vote yes on today's CDD so we can begin the rebirth of Greenleaf and move forward. Thank you. Thank you. Next. Morning. My name is Ed Thayer. I live at 511 Maple Leaf Court, Haines City. I've been at Greenleaf for over 20 years now, and I've seen nothing but a deterioration of everything. You want to ask your grandchildren or your kids to come down to do anything? What do you do at Greenleaf right now? Nothing. We don't have anything. We're talking about the CDDs. The other day, I went to Marion's Ridge. It's a new development. Just for the heck of it to find out what's going on. I went in and I asked him, I says, about the buildings and everything else. And one of the questions I had for him, I says, what are your amenities? The first thing out of his mouth was, we don't have a CDD. So CDDs help the amenities that go into a place. And that is what Greenleaf needs, is help. And if Mr. House can do it, let him do it. Because otherwise, nobody else is. It's just going to keep deteriorating. And we'll have nothing but a ghetto down there. And it's pretty sad. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Rolf Paschendag, 50 Nottingham Way, Haines City. I've been doing research on CDDs. In my opinion, though, you'd have to be nuts to get into one. Because the only one that profits here is the developer and the builder. And what people don't talk about, even if the CDD stops at 30 years, for perpetuity, you have to do maintenance fees. And they go up every year. And people lose their houses because of that. In southern Florida, in the CDD, people wanted to die in their houses. You just get a $214,000 special assessment from the CDD for maintenance costs. And the villages, everybody says how great that is. They're having a problem right now with their CDDs because they have like 25 or more there. And they have to deplete their reserves to pay for new infrastructure. And it's all underground. Any infrastructure underground, like electric, costs 10 times more than a boat ground. Takes longer to do. And somebody has to pay for it. And those are the people that live there. They just pay for everything. And then so many are going bankrupt now. It's crazy. And then if you use a cheap builder, they build cheap houses. And your property values never go up because nobody buys in the construction zone. Even if it's only for six months and it was for eight, ten years, you'd have trouble selling your house. And I know people that had that and gone through that. And I don't know about the road guy for the county, but he must have came in by helicopter because it's 544, so bumpy now. It used to be smooth. I got potholes. I think I'm back in New York State. And I actually broke a strut in my rear of my vehicle hitting one of them potholes. You go around some of the corners while the construction trucks and sand trucks go. You've got water this deep, you lose your golf cart in there. And I go through the neighborhoods, especially CDDs, and some are starting to look like slums. They have sheets on there instead of curtains up because they can't afford stuff anymore. They have blue tarps on the roofs two or three years after they build these houses. And that's insane. I don't know who inspects them, but I don't know. It just doesn't sound good for me anyway. I would never do it. Thank you. Thank you. Next. Good morning. My name is Deborah Spaulding, 1 Robin Lane, Haines City. I live in Greenleaf Country Homes, the private community that's connected to Greenleaf. I oppose this CDD for many reasons. One reason, which you've heard from other people, is that it will impose a burden to pay for these infrastructure improvements on those purchasing the homes, mainly as that the infrastructure improvements to the water and sewer plants that are private at Greenleaf. They are also servicing other areas in Greenleaf. So these people who are purchasing these homes and will be paying for these upgrades to these private services are also servicing other people who won't be paying for them. That is just an unfair, you know, this should not be happening. You should not impose fees on new homeowners that everybody in the community is going to benefit from. Also, there is a portion, Mr. Lewis stated something about the CDD wouldn't have any effect on the county, but in exhibit, I believe it's 72 or 7, exhibit 7, there is a portion of the CDD that the county is, you know, responsible for, according to what it says on there, up to $5.5 million that it costs the county to maintain the roads. I always thought if you had a CDD that it was going, you kept up the roads and everything, but it states in there on exhibit 7 that the county is going to pay for that. I feel that that's a fiscal irresponsibility at this time in our economy, and I also feel that it's irresponsible to just dole out money to people just because they ask for it. And that's, I also have one more thing. I almost purchased in a CDD community before I bought my home in country homes. I just thank God that the realtor I had, I went to church with, he was a church member of ours, and he was a realtor. I wanted to buy a home in Champions Gate. I was looking at a beautiful home there, and the price was really low. And I was like, this is a great deal. It's got a beautiful tile-roofed home. It's like $250,000. I'm like, wow, that's a great deal for that home. And I told Brad I wanted to go see it. He said, you do not want to see it. It's in a CDD community. He's like, it will cost you a lot of money to live there. He's like, you know, as a friend, he was good enough to tell me. But I would say a lot of realtors do not tell people about these fees and these costs that it's going to cost them. And like the gentleman spoke earlier, when it comes down to that, then the poor people who move into that home and uproot their lives, then they have to sell their home. So I would ask that you guys vote no on this. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, can I ask Ms. Baldwin a question? Sure. The area that you live in is private roads, gated private roads? Yes. Yes, sir. I don't know about the east side of the road. You're on the west side of the road. I'm on the west side. Is all the west side private and gated, or is just parts of it, some of it's maintained by the county, or is it all private? So, no, it's not. Arrowhead and Country Homes is kind of on that same west side. Country Homes is a separate gated community that has 96 homes in it. That is gated and owned, and the roads are owned by the residents. We maintain everything within that community. Arrowhead is county maintained. Arrowhead is county maintained. Country Homes is a private property. Yes, Country Homes is maintained by the residents. It's just a question later for the other folks. Okay, thanks. All right. Anyone else caring to speak on this matter? Bart, you want to? Oh, I'm sorry. No, it's okay. I'll look up before I speak. No worries. Thank you all so much. I should point out, too, from before, I don't know if we incorporated all the record testimony into the record. I just want to make sure that that is in the record, officially, Mr. Meeks, or if there's anything I need to do procedurally. It is, but we'll, because the record is incorporated. Thank you so much. So, just a couple things come up, and I wanted to address each of them and also any other questions you guys may have. There were questions about default. There were questions about kind of the costs associated with it. I think there's also some questions about some infrastructure. Just to start off, you know, the CDD infrastructure is going to be funded by the community, right? It doesn't matter whether you've got a CDD or no CDD. The community is going to pay for itself. It's going to pay for its own development costs. And so there's different ways to finance it. You can finance their mortgage. You can put the money in up front. But the CDD gives you an alternative way of financing it, and it allows you to spread the costs over time. I think we all know, because we live in inflationary environments right now, that inflation is going up. And so if you have a $1,500 payment today, you know, how much is that 10 years from now or 20 years from now or 30 years from now? It's obviously a lot less. So it's a really – it's an effective way to get a longer-term loan and make those infrastructure costs cost less because you're able to spread it over a longer period of time. You cannot get any kind of mortgage loan for 30 years. Only through CDD bonds can you get that kind of financing. And so it's a very powerful way to get a less expensive infrastructure and put in a better quality project. So I want to make that point up front. There were a lot of questions about defaults and, you know, some falsehoods made. You know, I think in the context of default, there's three things to keep in mind. One, again, and I don't know where these folks are getting their statements from, but there are no CDD defaults in Polk County. There are no CDD defaults in Polk County at all right now that I'm aware of. Even during the Great Recession, you know, in terms of CDDs that went through foreclosure, it was only a small percentage. It was not 73%, which I think was stated. In fact, in the materials I submitted as part of our record, I think it was a memo that I distributed as part of the comments, there's an article from an expert in the CDD field that rebuts that 73% figure. And we actually have an expert here, Michael Simonowicz, who lived through the Great Recession with CDDs. His firm, go ahead and stand up, Michael. His firm represents over 200 CDs in Florida. He does all the assessments and deals with default scenarios and things like that. And I just got to ask you off the record, I mean, what relative percentage of foreclosures were there with respect to CDDs, foreclosures? A very small percentage. I would say maybe a few dozen. And, again, that would be in CDDs that would have been in active development at the time that the Great Recession started. Please bear in mind that CDDs have been in existence as a vehicle to provide financing in perpetual maintenance for decades now. So there are CDDs now that have been matured communities also for decades. Mr. Chairman, for clarity, was that inactive or inactive development? Inactive development, essentially homes being built, because that is what you can call the danger time. As communities that are already developed will have homeowners, dozens, hundreds, thousands of homeowners living, each paying as part of their tax bill their proportionate share of repayment of the bonds or payment of maintenance. And so, I mean, thank you, Mike. I think that's what we need. Then in terms of the, you know, we're talking about default. So, you know, just a small percentage ever went through default. The other thing I would say, so the first point is a lot of those statements are simply wrong. The county has never, city or county has never taken on the debt of a CDD. Even when we were in the Great Recession, there was just a small percentage that actually went through default. And so these claims that taxpayers are going to bear this burden is simply not true at all. Even if there is a default, I want to tell you that it's only going to affect the land developer who's not paying their assessments, right? It doesn't affect the other homeowners. If they're paying their assessments, they're just fine. It just affects the project developer. And you can have any project fail. You can have projects with a CDD fail. You have projects without a CDD fail. But if you have the CDD, my second point that I want to make is you're in a better position to protect that community. And the reason is when a CDD issues bonds, the construction money for that phase is up front. You can use it for construction. It's not held in Mr. House's pocket like it would be with a mortgage loan or some other financing mechanism. It's sitting in a trustee bank like U.S. Bank or Regents Bank. You have to have a professional engineer and manager sign off on those requisitions to make those payments. So it's in a more secure location. The money's up front. Also, if you actually get a default where a developer is not paying assessments, what happens? Well, if it's an HOA community, you just end up with a mortgage foreclosure, which can sit there a long, long time. With a CDD, though, you've got reserve account money that's set aside. We can use that reserve account money to keep the amenity center open, to keep the landscaping watered, to pay for the foreclosure fees and get that foreclosure back through the process more quickly. You're also foreclosing a first-priority governmental lien as opposed to a mortgage, which is a faster lien foreclosure process because it's a first-priority lien. So, ultimately, what we saw in the Great Recession was there were a few communities that would fail, both CDD and HOA, but the CDD communities did better and got back into productive use more quickly. The third point I want to make is that the market has changed. Before the Great Recession, people used to do a bond. They would do it for the whole project, right? They'd do a $100 million bond. Nowadays, you have smaller bonds. What they'll do is they'll do 200 or 300 units at a time, and they do it through this de-levered model because that's what the bondholders require. The bondholders before the Great Recession were Goldman Sachs, Nuveen, Oppenheimer, et cetera. Who are the same bondholders after the Great Recession? It's Goldman Sachs, Nuveen, Oppenheimer, although they're under a new name. But it's the same investors before and after. So the process that the Florida legislature set up for these default scenarios worked through the CDD. I mean, the CDD structure worked, got these projects back into productive use more quickly. Okay. Mr. Chairman? Yeah. I spent, like some of the rest of you, I guess, a lot of time with residents on Friday. I spent, I think, an hour and a half or maybe even more with Mr. Earlywine. And to the extent I have the ability to cross-examine, I ask questions and I cross-examine because maybe I thought I knew more about CDDs than I really did. But the one thing, and a statement was made here, and I need clarification on it from you because obviously you're the authority on this. If I want to use CDD as a tool for development of property, can I get 100% of the development costs through the CDD bond? No. No, you can't. That was something I didn't know, but I want clarification. For one thing, you'd never be able to sell the home. For another thing, the bond market won't allow you to do it. There's kind of a two-to-one value-to-lean ratio. I won't get into it. But you can't get it. So generally speaking, the bond amount that gets passed through to a home buyer is about, it's always sort of sized to the market and your all's market. And I can't speak to what these bonds are going to be because we're not that far along. But it's around $30 a front foot. So think $1,500 for debt. And that's- Well, two-to-one, is that $1 a mine and two from the lender? Well, no. Don't let me sidetrack you with the two-to-one. So think about, in this case, you're dealing with an A bond, a pass-through A bond to a home end user. And so what you're going to generate is about $15,000 to $17,500, right around that range of principal par amount of debt. That's the amount that would be issued. And it's spread over time. So you're going to pay that $1,500 in year one. You're going to pay that in year 10, in year 20, in year 30, and obviously $1,500 today. I don't know what your all's bread costs, but it costs a lot more than it did five years ago. So it's a cheaper way to finance. If you did it through a mortgage loan, again, you're not going to get the ability to spread it out that long. And the rates are much higher. So it costs more to get that kind of financing. Did that answer your question? Okay. The other thing I would point out is that there were some statements made here by a gentleman speaking to Solterra Resort. If you look at the tax bill that I believe he submitted to you all, look at it closely. The assessments from Solterra Resort were 2015, it was $2,500, and then 2016, it wasn't $7,000. For Solterra Resort, it was $2,800, so it went up $300. Two things to say about this. Now, the overall tax bill went from $2,500 to $2,900 to $7,700, but that's because of the county and other taxes. It had nothing to do with the CDD, okay? If you look at this, it went from $2,500 to $2,814 through the CDD. Those assessments, in my view, and I don't know if that's debt plus O&M or just O&M, I don't know, but Solterra Resort is also a different type of community. It's a luxury resort. I mean, they've got a lazy river at their community, right? I mean, that is jazzed up to bring folks from overseas, from around the country, to visit Disney World, right? That's what that community is. And even with what he said, the taxes are not from the CDD at $7,000. That's ridiculous. It's $2,814, and it went up $300 over the course of a year. So I don't know where that came from. Hold on. No, no, no, no. Don't do that. Don't do that. Well, I – The way it looked to me, like it was a vacant lot that got built on and why it went up. That's exactly right. Yeah, it went to Homestead or something like that. Anyway. Yeah, I mean – But I don't think that's accurate. And it's a different type of community than what we're talking about. It is a luxury community with a lazy river, and it's got a water slide and all kinds of other stuff that – And it's geared for vacationers, right? We get that. Okay, so I want to make that point. I guess I also wanted to speak to Ms. Sowell's point. She was talking about the creeks and other things like that. You know, this project is already approved for development. It's going to move forward. I think the advantage of having the CDD is if you're worried about the creek or you're worried about the road traffic or you're worried about the utilities, the CDD can help with all of those types of things. The last thing that I would make a point is that, you know, there's – if CDs were such a bad thing, why are there, like, over 1,000 of them in Florida? Why are they the best-selling communities in the nation, like the villages and Lakewood Ranch and all these communities? Why are people buying into them? You can always tell anecdotes about why so-and-so didn't want to buy into a CDD. Well, I got some anecdotes too, right? I went down and got a CDD established in the city of Homestead, and they hadn't done a CDD in a while. The city council asked me about them. The two biggest advocates for that CDD were sitting on the board. There were two ladies that sat on that board, and they said it maintains the value of our community better long-term. That's one anecdote. The other thing is that after a CDD has paid off its debt, it can dissolve. Why don't we see more CDDs dissolving? I've only had one resident community reach out to me and ask for dissolution. That was down – it was Key Marco CDD. I went down and talked to that community. I told them what they'd have to do to dissolve. All of the residents came out, just like the folks sitting in green, and made all the arguments that I'm making in favor of the CDD. They said, we like our CDD. We like the ability to collect on the tax roll. We like sovereign immunity protection. We get better insurance. We're better able to take care of our community. We like the ability to finance and take out loans if we need to through tax-exempt mechanisms. We want our CDD. And so ultimately, the board backed off. It was a really small community of only 190 lots. And so they backed off. They left the CDD in place. The next year, a hurricane went through, tore up all their stormwater ponds. They were so glad that they had the CDD because they were able to get FEMA funding the next year. So the system really does work. All of this is disclosed in the sales literature. If people don't want to buy in the CDD, they can go across the street, right? But they don't. They buy in the CDs, and that's why they're the best-selling communities in the nation. And so I don't know if you all have any other questions for me. George, you got a question? A couple of questions from Mr. Earlywine and some other comments after you close the public hearing. All right. We've heard several comments about free money. That's certainly not the case. The money that is encumbered by the CDD, were it not for the CDD, those costs would be built into the lot. So that cost is not being forgiven, disappear. It just moves from one level to another level, and the consumer winds up paying either way. That's exactly right. Like I said at the beginning, there are several ways to finance your infrastructure. You can build it all up in the front end of the home price, you can take out a mortgage loan, or you can use CDD money. The advantage of the CDD money is the only type of financing that you can spread over 30 years. And we know that the cost of things goes up over time. So that time value of money is super key to understanding that it's actually a way to save money. And it doesn't just save money on the front end when you put the infrastructure in, but when the residents take control of these districts and they come back and fix up their stormwater ponds or whatever they need to do in 20 years, they can again take out those loans as opposed to doing a one-time balloon assessment like an HOA would have to do. The lots that the developer holds in inventory until they're sold, they get a tax bill. They do. Yes, sir. And just like this tax bill that was represented here on a vacant lot for $26,800, that developer is going to pay that tax bill. They would, yes. So that developer is paying. All landowners pay the assessments. That's correct. So if he's got 20 lots in inventory, he gets 20 tax bills, he's going to pay not only his local taxes but his per lot assessment on the CDD bill. That's correct. And when the lot sells with an improved home with an assessed value of $321,000, then, of course, the various taxes go up based on that value. But proportionally, the CDD amount went up minuscule. Well, it did in that example, but the debt assessment portion would not increase. The difference was. It's not tied to the home value at all. Yeah. Differently O&M for that period. That's correct. And that's, again, not based on the value of the home. It's tied to how much it costs to operate the infrastructure. And the residents, when they take over that board, they can set the level of service that they want. All right. There's no free money. Any more questions? No free money. No, sir. As everyone knows, there's no free money. I'm glad you clarified that. Mark? Yeah. I have some questions. Some of it is for just additional information I need, and some of it is for clarification. So bear with me on this. This is CDD is for smoky grows only. Am I correct? That's correct. So what am I hearing from residents from the Greenleaf area about amenities being improved and things like that with this CDD? Honestly, I don't know. I think Mr. Lewis, who stood up in support of the CDD, is absolutely 100% correct. I think they're just trying to slow down another development in the future, but it has nothing to do with what we're talking about. This CDD is only going to pay for the infrastructure that's within its boundaries, and I think the roundabout out front of its boundaries, which is tied to the project. I think you misunderstood her question. Oh, sorry. She's talking about the proponents, I think, and you can answer. The proponents are talking about the things that they're going to get from this, and we're only talking smoky grows here. Oh, right, right. So this CDD is essentially going to take care of the stormwater system, conservation areas, and also the landscape, hardscape, and the roundabout out front. So the amenities are enhanced, though, indirectly because there's more money in the project. I know they're for the smoky groves. My question is, I'm hearing, I've heard that people that live in the Greenleaf area, in the existing area, that they're going to also benefit from the CDD. Let me try to answer that. Go ahead. If what is now a stagnant area becomes active, viable, and improved, and attracts buyers at higher levels, the proximity of the neighborhood will also recognize some of that appreciated value in that general area. I think that's. That's exactly right. Through no fault of their own. Through no fault of their own. They'll be the beneficiaries. Right. You just have a better quality project in the smoky groves area, and that brings everybody up. And that brings all the values of all the other houses in all the areas. That's what you're talking about. Yeah. And the point I'm making is. Not that the money is going to be used. The CDD money will be used for the Greenleaf area for roads and amenities and things like that. Used for smoky, but yeah. Smoky groves, right? Yeah. For smoky, yes. Not for the Greenleaf area. Correct. That's right. So what I'm saying. Just wanted that clarification. Yes, ma'am. Because I've heard comments about our roads will be improved. We want the amenities. We want a new pool. We want the golf courses, so forth and so forth. But that money is not going to be used for any of those things in Greenleaf area. No. Our point is simply that folks who are concerned about the CDD, they really don't have a dog in the fight. It's not going to affect them. They're not going to pay the assessments or taxes of the CDD. But if anything, they're. So they're going to benefit from it. They're benefited because. But they won't have the fees. They won't pay the taxes of the CDD. That's correct. But they'll benefit from the improvement. Exactly. Okay. What's a generally a time frame for a CDD? You mean in terms of the timing for development of it? The time frame from how long does it last? How long does it. Before it. Yeah. So a CDD is a perpetual maintenance entity. Perpetual? It's perpetual. That's correct. You know, like a homeowner's association, you have to re-institute it every once in a while. A CDD is a perpetual maintenance entity. The residents do have the option to dissolve it if they pay off their debt and things like that. The residents do get on the board potentially earlier than a homeowner's association. This one's about, you know, 400-ish units size. So my guess is you're developing in two or three years, and after the development is, you know, you go into a maintenance mode. But they have lander's elections every two years, and that you're six for sure. So it doesn't sunset. Correct. It does not need a sunset. But the residents can dissolve it if they want to. And, again, I've never had anyone reach out and ask them to dissolve it. Again, can I? Yes, please. Elaborate. There's two components to the CDD fee, the capital and the O&M. The capital number stays the same for the full 30-year period. Correct. And it expires at the 30-year period. Correct. That is correct, yeah. Any homeowner or seller or buyer can retire their remainder balance at any time that they own the property. They can. What is perpetual is only the operation and maintenance after the capital is retired. So the big number retires the smaller O&M, mowing the grass, paying the utility bill, paying the street light district, keeping the pool clean, and that sort of thing. And that O&M number goes on forever, as it would with HOA. But the capital cost that is part of the borrowing, that does have a sunset. And approximately what's the time frame for that? It's typically 30 years. 30 years, but the buyer, the owner, can retire that and pay it off early at their choice. Correct. And there's an advantage to having a CDD be a perpetual maintenance entity from an operations standpoint. I've seen HOA communities that fail to renew their documents. They have no HOA. That community is in complete chaos because they don't have anything that can maintain their infrastructure. And so everyone's yards look different. The infrastructure is not taken care of. The CDD is a perpetual maintenance entity. It doesn't have that trip hazard that's in the HOA documents. Yeah, I have a couple, so that's okay. All right. Explain to me how the CDD's fees increase on an annual basis. It's so the debt is that. George, I know you want to answer this, but. Yeah, yeah. Well, I think you would agree with me correctly because I think. Well, that's okay. Part of it. But the debt component does not increase, right? That's put in place generally in the early year or two. The O&M only changes based on what your operations costs are. So just like a homeowner's association has to set a budget every year, so does a CDD. And, you know, if you've got costs of fuel or landscaping costs go up because your landscape contractor is charging you more, then your costs go up. But it's just like an HOA. So there's no planned increase for the CDD O&M any more than there is for an HOA O&M, if that makes sense. So how does an insurance premium, how does this relate to a CDD? Is there a difference as far as getting a house with insurance for a resident? Not as far as I'm aware. There's no connection or anything like that? There's not an increase in insurance premium because of a CDD? No, not at all. The one insurance premium I can think of that's different is the CDD, you know, to the extent it's insuring its landscaping or other assets, like signs or whatnot, and its general liability insurance is better because it has sovereign immunity protection. And so it's better insured on the CDD side than if those assets were owned by the HOA. And you stated that no CDD defaults have been defaulted in Polk County? No. If I said that, it's a misstatement. But what I'm saying is that no debt of a CDD has ever become an obligation of the county, in Polk County or around the state, as best I'm aware. And it is, as Michael says, it's a statutory provision. If you look at Chapter 190, it specifically says that no debt or obligation of a CDD shall become a debt or obligation of a city or county. So what happens if a CDD goes into default? Yeah, so what happens is, part one, it's less likely to go into default because it's got the construction money up front. If it does go into default, what's in default is usually the developer has not paid their assessments on a part of the property, right? And so the CDD and its bond trustees will institute a foreclosure process. They'll foreclose a first priority lien, which is the CDD special assessment on that property. The bondholders, historically, what would happen is they would stop right at the end of the foreclosure process and park the property in a special purpose entity called an SBE. And then the property would wait until a developer comes along and picks it up and they resell it. The people who take the haircut in that transaction are the bondholders. Goldman Sachs, Nuveen, Oppenheimer, they all took haircuts on the small percentage that did default. But those are the same investors that have come in after the Great Recession and continue to buy the bonds. The one difference now is that the bonds are smaller and they're done for chunks of the project at a time as opposed to financing the entire project at once. And also we have to remember that because the default was due to non-payment of assessments by the developer, through the foreclosure the developer will lose title to the property as well. So the property is absolutely on the hook as well along with any investors. So that mechanism is completely not different than had the financing been done through non-CDD means. Yeah, the advantage that it is the ones that I'm talking about, there's, again, you're foreclosing a first priority lien, so the foreclosure is faster. The other thing is that you've got bond money setting aside to help with construction. Or if you're not doing any construction, you can at least pay to keep the amenity center open or the landscaping watered, you know, mow your stormwater banks and that kind of thing, and also pay foreclosure expenses through that reserve account money that's set aside to protect the project. So what I'm saying is you can go through a foreclosure, and I think Michael is saying the same thing. You can go through the foreclosure with or without the CDD, you're just in a better spot if you have the CDD. So for a resident in a community, or in this case, for Smoky Groves, would have the HOA and the CDD fees to pay on top of their mortgage? They would. So affordability is an issue with this? I don't know that it is, and I think the market takes care of that for you. What you do when you're buying a home is someone looks at the community, and they look at the house, and then they look at their closing statement. And everything they're going to pay is on the closing statement. If the price isn't right, they can walk across the street. But people don't do that. They buy into CDDs because the price makes sense and the communities look great. That's what happens. I wanted to elaborate on Commissioner Santiago's question regarding both a CDD obligation and an HOA obligation. The CDD is responsible for the O&M maintenance of the facilities, the roads, the pool, whatever it is. About the only role then the HOA takes over in that regard is typically architectural review. Someone doesn't move their car in time or parks wrong. That's more of a, for lack of a better word, a police action acting as the HOA. And since they don't engage in the O&M operation, those costs are minimal. That's correct. That's correct. And oftentimes, you know, you might have HOA and CDD dues, but you'll combine managers. There's really efficient ways to do it because, you know, the developer doesn't want to pay more. The homeowners don't want to pay more. So they just make it super efficient. Go ahead. Yeah, I did have one more question or a comment. Arrowhead is a public, it will be public roads. Am I correct? It's not a private. But somebody talked about. Country A roads. I'm sorry. The internal roads are not going to be owned by the county. And so those will either be CDD or HOA owned roads. I meant to say Smoky Groves. Yeah, the road that's just out front of the community, I think that's a county road is my understanding. There's a roundabout that we're putting in, I think, at the county's request. And I think we're going to have the community maintain that entry, that entry roundabout, just because we want it to look a certain way. But, no, the internal roads are not going to be the county's burden. They're not. Correct. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Back to at least the words that I would describe, at least how I'm taking it, and I think I'm taking it the correct way. The people who live in Greenleaf now, existing residents, that support you, they're looking at this as a spark or a kickstart for the rebirth that a lot of people would like to see. I mean, that's the best way to describe it. It's the only thing that makes sense because there's nothing that's taking place there outside of Smoky Grove related to this application. It's confined totally there. The thing that I had a question on, and I hate to muddy the water up, but I'm trying my best to understand, and this didn't come up in our Q&A meeting on Friday, Country Haven's private roads. Country Haven? Is that the name of it? Country? Country Homes. Country Homes. Country Homes is private currently. It's a gated community. If and when, and this is outside of Smoky Grove, but it's important, I think, that we understand this as best we can. You understand it, I'm sure. How would you, how would a CDD operate in there? Because the Smoky Grove is going to be like a conventional subdivision. When it's done, they pass inspection, then the county accepts those for perpetual maintenance. They're county's responsibility. It's been doing that forever. George, you're saying you're hitting no. Not in the CDD? No, no, no, no. I'm saying a conventional subdivision, if it's not gated, those roads are public. They're county roads, and we accept them for perpetual maintenance. And so there's nothing new there. The thing that, and that's in Smoky Grove, these will be county roads, you said. I don't know about that. I think the internal roads, yeah, they're going to be private. So they're either going to be HOA or CDD owned within the roads. But that answer, it doesn't really matter, because I'm worried about, or my concern and question is about country homes, which is private now, and it's gated. Those folks cannot be in the CDD. You can't put a CDD on the existing folks. So if you go in there to develop where there is currently private roads and gated, how does that work? I mean, it'll have to work different than Smoky Grove. Or the people, explain to me how that will work. I mean, they're covering the cost of the maintenance of the roads in country homes now. If you come in and add a lot of development to that via CDD, but these people won't be a part of the CDD, now who's going to pay for the road? Is country homes built out? I understand, but they'll access their undeveloped property through the same roads that the people in country homes do, which are currently private and gated. I don't think so. No? So they're going to be coming in with all new roads. You won't touch their roads at all. Yeah, that's right. That's why I'm asking this question, because I did not understand that. Different entrance. I do think that your point, though, I don't know if you made it well enough, but if a foreclosure occurs, if I go out and create a 100-lot subdivision, I build two spec homes on it, I'm getting started, the housing market collapses, I can't sell these two, not only can I sell these two, I'm not going to start the others, somebody can foreclose on me the people I owe money to, which would be exactly the same situation, but it would be whoever loaned me the money, rather than, you know, the bond folks. Right, it's either mortgage foreclosure or a CDD. Or a conventional bank or Uncle Tom that had plenty of money and was crazy enough to loan it to me. You know, still, it's the same situation. All right. Okay. Any other questions? All right. I will close the public hearing and bring it back to the board for a motion or a comment. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Yep. I think it's important that we stay in our lane. And when all else fails, read the instructions. You know, the Florida statute has allowed a property owner to seek a CDD. But there's six criteria that must be met in order to do that. And performance to those six criteria are assigned to the cities or the county in which the CDD would be located. So our professional staff has confirmed that those statutory requirements have been met, that these assets, this obligation, I should say, will not be the responsibility of the local government. But what this board action does by establishing a CDD, it gives public notice and authorization to the supervisor of elections is then authorized to hold elections for CDD board seats. It gives the tax collector the authorization to collect the tax that is assigned to this property. It gives the property appraiser the authority then to assess and identify the property on the tax rolls. And the clerk's office the authorization then to record the CDD obligation. So in that scenario, this ministerial act is simply to affirm that the statutory requirements have been met, which our staff tells us they are, and then authorizes the other constitutional responsibilities to be satisfied under that same Florida statute. It's no more simple than that. Regarding, you know, regarding, you know, the water and the sewer, that's a civil matter as to who owns what. As far as the plant, the water, and the sewer, there are state agencies that are responsible for that. Regarding stormwater, there are state agencies responsible for that. What we will be responsible for as those plans come forward, those improvements have to be built to our standards. And we'll go through the inspection process, and they pay a pretty healthy fee for the inspections during that process. But once that plan is recorded, that ends the operation, the county's role in that process. So, again, this is a ministerial act provided for in the statute that describes our role, and it's no more complicated than that. So, I would move that, make a motion that we approve the CDE as recommended, and recommended by the staff. Got a motion? Do I have a second? Okay, got a motion and a second. Discussion? Any further discussion? Go ahead. We've talked about this long enough. We can talk a little bit longer. I know, and I promise. You know, I just didn't get to talk very much at this hearing, so I wanted to... And you are a lawyer, so I get it. You know, I am. Just wanted to make one point of clarification. There's an exhibit in the staff report that lays out costs in operating and maintenance entity. That needs to be corrected. It may have come from us. I'm not saying where it was, but the roadways should be maintained from the O&M side by the CDD. It is currently listed on that table as county, and I think that may be where some of that last confusion may have come up. So I want to make sure that that is clear for purposes of the record and the staff report, that that should be... Mr. Chairman, that same graphic had another cost to the county, and I don't remember what it was. And that's off-site improvement. Those are off-site. The off-site's that roundabout. So, Zibit 7. 7, that's correct. Thank you. We'll send you an updated petition, but that would be the check. Line item 2, roadways 3.574. The O&M. That O&M entity should say CDD. Okay. And then when the final, if this is approved, final staff report, we would like it to reflect, so. Yes. All right. Corrections made. Any other comments? Yeah. I, as I said, I spent an hour and a half, and I didn't know what I didn't know about CDDs. Mr. Earlywine was kind enough to endure the questions and the questions, which created more questions at times. And as you can tell, I still didn't get it all because I'm still trying to figure out and make sure that I understand it. But I want the public to understand it, so that's part of the reason I've asked questions and made the comments I've made because, you know, going into that meeting on Friday, I didn't know what I didn't know. And the reality of it is there were things that I learned that made me take a little different view. I think it's interesting when you look at, and he's pointed it out a couple of times, that really the premier developments that I think of when I think of development in Florida is the villages, is Lakewood Ranch. Here at home, it's Lake Ashton, although I was somewhat involved with Lake Ashton, and I really wasn't at least peripherally involved, and it was a CDD. I didn't understand the quality of that and general contentment of the folks who reside there. And I understand, and Ms. Spaulding said this, and it really kind of, everybody probably picked up on it. I couldn't be the only one that picked up on it when she was talking about Champion's Gate, really nice price for a really nice place, but you got the CDD. Well, that's the situation. Those prices are set on what those costs are that go in, the input costs. And the input costs are going to be paid by the community, the buyers, regardless of whether it's through a conventional lender or whether it's through a CDD. The benefit to the CDD, and I guess when listening to it, there's multiple benefits, but one of the real benefits when you're talking about trying to maintain affordability is the tax-exempt money that's available, not to mention the sovereign immunity, which really conducts the business as if it was a little city or a county. Same limits apply to the CDD that applies to the cities and counties. Is that correct? That's a head nod. So there's real benefits to that. So I'm going to support this. I voted for some in the past reluctantly because George said it was ministerial, and he's probably right about that. But I wondered if it was a ministerial mistake on my part not to say, you know, is this what we really want to be doing? But I think after all the information that I've gotten on Friday and then again here today that I think it's ministerial and probably, you know, something we should do. You know, I'm going to have to echo what Neil's saying on some of the things. I agree with him. Sometimes I normally don't, but I'm going to agree with him on this. What? But, you know, I've learned a lot, too, here in the, you know, last couple of weeks. And a lot of, you know, listen to what went on here and what's been going on here today. You know, when you go look at one of these properties and it's got all this stuff tied down to it, it's just like Mr. Earlywine said, you can go across the street because you can't afford it. Because this is what is involved in it. I've heard of this for years. You know, people that don't know this is happening at a place that they're willing to buy, you know, they're not paying much attention. Now, a lot of people have come here today that don't, you know, what we voted on before this one here was their main concern. We approved it. It got approved. The CDD, to me, in my mind, is two different things. So we had got people that are still getting up and talking about a CDD that they don't even live there and they don't have no dog in that pipe. You know, so I've learned a lot. You know, and, you know, a lot of people, you know, on the builder here saying, well, you know, if you had the, you know, you're just going out trying to get somebody else to pay for this or try to make, you know, not have to pay it. Well, that's how business is done. But, you know, it doesn't really, it depends on, if you've got a lot of money in your pocket and you just want to spend it where you've got a very good avenue to get it done and not have to spend your money, that's a smart way to go, too. So, making a long story short, yeah, Neil, I'm going to agree with you. I'm going to go along with this. All right, anybody else? All right, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign. Motion carries, 4 to 1. For the record, the Exhibit 7 was amended as part of that motion. All right. All right. Let's take a five-minute break in between 2 and 3. Ms. Bennett. Good morning. For the record, Shonda Bennett with the Land Development Division. This is a request for the board to consider the adoption of a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment, LDCPAS 2020-4-4, from residential low to residential high on 7.18 acres. In terms of the advertisement, 65 mailers were sent to area property owners on July 12th, and a legal ad was published in the Polk Sun on July 17th. 20 emails in opposition, one phone call in opposition, and two boards posted on June 12th. Property is in the greater Winter Haven area between Winter Haven and Eagle Lake. It's on the south side of State Road 540. The road on the west is Bradbury Road. It's a local residential road. Winter Lake Road is a state road. On this aerial, you can see the intersection of Spirit Lake Road and Winter Lake Road to the west. It's got Publix Plaza located at that intersection. And you can see all the different subdivisions on the north side of State Road 540, and on the south side, there are a majority of residential units, but there are also some religious institutions due west of the subject site, as well as an assisted living facility. Currently on the property is a home built for a single-family residence, but looks like it does have some non-residential activity on the property. There is a building built several decades ago that was built for residential purposes, but it has had some non-residential uses over the last several decades. To the north are a few subdivisions that have been built since 2017. The lot sizes are closer to four dwelling units to the acre in density, and then the larger lot sizes to the west and south. I'm sorry, east and south. This is a current future land use map. You can see the residential low in the yellow on the screen. The district is 2. You can see that in northeast, there is a residential low 3 district. You can see the city limits of Winter Haven on the far up right. The other color on the map that you see to the left is convenience center and institutional. There are several religious institutions in this particular part of the county. This is what the land use map would look like if the request is approved. This map shows the nearness of the utility lines. There are some water lines adjacent to the property. There are sewer lines, but they're on the north side of the roadway. So to bring sewer lines, we'd have to go under the roadway to bring them to the site. This is standing on the property, looking to the east. Next, there's a nursery facility and a tutoring facility using some of the existing buildings. This is Bradbury Road, looking south. This is looking at the home that's on the property that was on the southwest corner. I'm sorry, southwest corner. The pavement width is about 13 feet, but here the right-of-way width is about 40 feet wide. So certainly any driveways that access Bradbury Road from that standpoint all the way to 548 would have to be improved according to county standards for a local road. This is still looking south, further to the east on the subject site. You can see the other houses that are south of the subject site. This is looking northeast. The existing uses on the site, the tutoring, the nursery facility, and the other residential subdivisions to the north. In terms of school capacity, school concurrency, the elementary school is over capacity at this time, but the middle school and high school are under capacity. There are parks in the area, like Ship Park, Fire EMS, and Sheriff response times are pretty decent since they're two to three miles away from the property. The site is served by Polk County Water and Wastewater Utilities. There is capacity in the system as well as capacity on the roadway systems available trips. And there are no wetlands or floodplains on the property. Staff recommends approval. The planning commission had a four-to-one denial with one that abstained from voting, but the recommendation from staff comes from the fact that it is on a state road. It's in an area where there's not a lot of diversity of housing. It's all single-family detached. There are some non-residential uses adjacent to the property. It's got some history of non-residential use, i.e. intensity of use on the subject site. There is a transit route existing on State Road 540, but not a stop at the facility itself. But staff does find it consistent with the location criteria for residential high in the urban growth area and compatible with the surrounding uses. And I'll stand for any questions. Any questions? You just mentioned the transit route. Does the bus stop along Winter Lake Road? Not in this particular, not next to the site, but on the road itself. I don't have the exact location of the stop. I don't know. I just heard that, and it just made me wonder, because I've never noticed, but I don't travel that much if there's bus stops along the way or stops at all. Yes, stops at the stop signs. The closest, Summer Glen Drive, .07 miles away to the east of the subject site. Say it again. It's Summer Glen Drive, .07 miles to the east. Any other questions? Yeah. And Bradbury, is the name of the road Bradbury? Yeah. Yeah, the road's named Bradbury. Access. Access. There's a potential they could access the state road, but that's not up to the county. It's up to the state. But they do have the ability to access Bradbury. And again, any access point in Bradbury, they're going to have to bring that pavement with up to current standards for a local residential road. Yes, sir. Any other questions? All right. Seeing none, I'll open in public here and ask the applicant to come forward. Good morning. For the record, Sarah Case, Next Level Planning and Permitting. My address is 3825 South Florida Avenue, and that is in Lakeland. I want to thank staff for the presentation. In the interest of time, I am in receipt of the opposition letters, the communication that you all received as well. I would ask the board if we could go ahead and hear from the opposition. And in the interest of time, if you'll allow me the opportunity to respond. That works. For the presentation. Thank you. Okay. Chair. All right. So I have a list of people. I'm going to start reading out names, if you'll line up on the wall, starting with Jody Jackson. Please come forward. Followed by Pamela Jackson. Jody, you can come forward. Chase Varn, maybe? I don't know. 1927 Bradbury. Stubbs, McCartney, Kent, McCartney, Gutierrez. All right. Go ahead. Name and address, please. My name is Jody Jackson. I live at 1917 Bradbury Court, Winter Haven, Florida. And the reason why I'm totally against this, because one thing, we've got to remember, traffic from 540 speed limit in front of our community is 60 miles an hour. There's no deceleration lane. We have a very narrow road to get in. So when you're coming in, you've got to be very careful because there's assisted living there. And all these comments, you've got to remember, no deceleration lane. And sometimes there's ambulances and fire trucks there. And you've got to be careful not to hit them. And you have to actually get off the pavement because the picture she showed you is a hair a bit wider than our actual road. But it's very short, very short. And it's only a little bit wider. It's not very much wider. It's still one lane. So you've got to remember, when you pull off there, you hit that. You know, you hit very quickly. We have kids. I have grandkids that play on that road in the back. You know, so if you build a 70-unit complex right there, where's their kids going to play? It's going to be on that street, right? So you're coming in. No deceleration lane. They're playing on that street. It's going to be extremely dangerous. It's already extremely dangerous when the ambulances are there. And they're there to save lives. And you've got to be very, very careful. I totally approve of the ambulance being there doing that save lives. So our neighborhood is the smallest lot in our neighborhood is about a half acre, a little bit more than a half acre. And there's many multi-acre lots. So this 70-unit complex definitely does not fit into our neighborhood. And you've got to think of that also. Also, there's trucks. Whenever delivery to the assisted living, there's trucks there. They have no place to go to. And so we've got to think of the building. Building that big complex, that's not right because we've got to draw a line somewhere. 70 units, we're going to turn into New York City with 70 stories high building. So it definitely does not fit into our neighborhood. You know, it's dangerous. You know, kids have got to go play somewhere. Where are they going to play? They're not going to play on 540. And then so we've got to draw the line somewhere. And also she admitted that the schools are to capacity. You're talking about 70 families that are moving in there. There's going to be at least 70 kids going to the schools. So the schools are already completely full. So we have to think about that also too. So when we moved here many years ago, 540 was just a small two-lane road. I moved there because I wanted to live in the county. I didn't want to live in the city. I agree, you know, development, yes, we can. But we have to draw a line somewhere. And where are we going to draw the line? 70 units, 80 units, 90 units, 100 units, 120 units. So we have to draw the line. 70 is way too many for our neighborhood. So that's pretty much what I've got to say. Thank you. Next. Hi, my name is Pamela Jackson. I am the wife of Jody Jackson. We have lived there for over 30 years. We have seen a lot of beautiful families move in, and then they stayed. And when they stayed, the kids, sorry, I broke my necklace, the kids, as they grew up, they didn't want to leave. They stayed in this community. Now we have their children that we're watching grow, and it's really nice to see. So here they are, they're out there playing with their bikes, and these young men built houses across from their parents so that they can establish a community that they're safe. We all know each other. We care about each other. At night, you see them on their golf carts or in their bicycles, and we're playing, and we're enjoying ourselves. Now, we don't need 70 apartment buildings. Come in and spoil that beautiful little spot that we have. We're on a dead end. If they ever miss their exit, they're coming down our street. Please do not allow this to happen. Thank you. Next. Hello, my name is Chase Varner, 1927 Bradbury Court. So my concerns with this is, for one, is if you look at the site map, there's high density across the street, but it doesn't match anywhere in the surrounding area if you look at the map there. All of these lots, like they said, I think the smallest lot in our neighborhood is a half acre. It's just, it's not a good place for this. There's plenty of other places that, you know, that could be built. And, in fact, just down the street, there's a major subdivision going in down there at King's Road. So the problem with that is, is that when we moved there, I'm one of the kids that she's referring to that also moved on the road down the street from my parents, and now I'm raising my kids there. The problem is, is we, before, we were able to go out of the street and go to Lakeland. You know, things were much easier. The high density they put in has been put in since we've actually moved there. So they had to create a turn lane. They actually concreted across, and now it defers us down to the next intersection, which is King's Road, which was a terrible choice because now it's even more overloaded. We're trying to do U-turns, which I'm not a fan of to start with. Now you're putting a huge apartment complex in there that's going to also overload that, and then you want to put another 70 at the end of our street. I think it's just a terrible idea. Again, this road, from my understanding, at one point was an orange grove. They didn't do very much other than pave it, so it is a very narrow kind of a dirt road appearance if you're on the road. And like they were saying, I think we're going to have a lot of overflow with traffic. I mean, we've had semis come down there. They can't turn around. It's just not the right place for this project. Another thing, this is just something that I kind of, they use the amenities as the religious organizations. But these, you know, the Greek Orthodox and the Jewish synagogue, you know, that only pertains to the people that follow that religion. That doesn't benefit anybody else other than, you know, the people that actually go to those places. And that's a small percentage of the population overall. So, all in all, I hope you guys go and vote against and go with the planning committee because obviously they didn't feel this was appropriate either. Thank you. Thank you. Next. My name is Rod Stubbs. I live at 1819 Bradbury Circle. It's a one-way in, one-way out street we'll start with. We already have up to five-minute waits to get out on this highway that traffic's running 60 miles an hour at peak hour. Adding 70 units in, you're adding, they say 70 cars. That's, I know no family of Harley that's got one car per family. So, you're talking 140 cars maybe plus going in on that one little road we're trying to get out of. You got a rest, a situated living home that sits right across the road where they want to put their driveways. And we have emergency vehicles coming in there at all times. Two and three times a week. We have to drive out in the field now just to get around them plus trying to get through the traffic. And then with the building of the homes across the road that they built on 9,000 to 11,000 square feet or whatever they got, 4,000 to 11,000, that they basing the units they built in here on, is took the driveway, I mean our medium away from us, sending us down to Thornhill Road to make a U-turn. It's got a short, actually got a short runway off-ramp in order to make a U-turn to start with. Then you got traffic coming off of Thornhill making a left and a right. Nobody's even mentioned the housing development that's already under construction on the corner of King's Road there. And all of this, kids out of the unit and this housing development, impacting schools that's already overloaded. So, no, we don't need this sore thumb stuck up in a residential R2 neighborhood. We'd appreciate y'all's vote along with what your planning board's seen and deny this request. Mr. Chairman? Yes. I don't know if it matters, but on your sign-up card, Mr. Stubbs, it says you support the application. Sure. On your sign-up card here, it says you support. You don't want that to. No. You want me to. I don't support it. You mean change it for you? I change that. I don't support them building in there. I'll change it for you. Thank you. I didn't understand all those questions anyway. There you go. Thank you. Next. Good afternoon. Paul Kent, 1998 Bradbury Road. They've already gone over the safety on the kids. What they haven't gone over is the amount of accidents that have occurred from Crystal Beach to Wrecker Highway, which is just under one mile. DOT records we were able to get. There's been 62 accidents in that one-mile stretch over the last seven years, and that's just too many. And if you want to add another 70 housing units and possibly 140 more vehicles, I think there's going to be a lot more accidents. So if you could find it in your hearts to deny this request, we sure would appreciate it. Thank you. Next. My name is David McCartney, 4262 Shadowwood Lane, Winter Haven. I live about a mile from this location, and from what all they're saying is the traffic, they are correct. The traffic on 540 is a major artery between Lakeland, L, and Winter Haven, so there's a lot of pass-through traffic during the rush hours of the day. I've seen traffic back up for two miles at the stoplight, which prevents the side streets from entering the roadway. Another thing I want to point out is on the presentation, both last meeting and this meeting, they've said there's two businesses. They only pointed out two businesses. There's actually four. There's four businesses on this location. There's a satellite service company, or a cell phone tower service company, I'm sorry, that employs six to eight persons. The tutoring company, which I'm the owner of, employs 12 to 15 at that location. The Morgan Sod company is behind us. They employ five to eight. And the Tree Lady company, they employ probably another five to eight. So we're talking collectively probably 20 to 30 jobs that will be affected by this. Now, some of the things I've heard in the previous cases that were placed before you were compatibility. And to say that this isn't a good project, I wouldn't agree that it's not a good project. It's just this location isn't the compatible location for it. Can they move it to another location in the county where it would be a better fit? I believe they could. To remove business owners and employees, I don't think, is in the best interest of Polk County. I mean, here we have people moving into our area. We are a growing area. Housing developments are going in everywhere. But what's the impact of those? Yes, they're clearing the land and building houses. But are we bulldozing jobs out? Are we taking jobs away to bring people in? And how counterproductive is that? I don't think this is a good location for this project to be in because I don't believe, you know, small business owners employ half the employees. So we're losing, I mean, if small businesses are the heartbeat of our county's economics. So to move these businesses out, can they relocate? We've been looking for months knowing that this could go through. And they're just not appropriate locations for businesses to move to because they're all being developed for houses. So if we get moved, there's high chances that they won't be reestablished. So that's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Next. Good morning. Thank you for listening to us. My name is Linda McCartney, and I live at 4262 Shadowwood Lane. We're very concerned about this development, as my husband just stated, the number of jobs that will be lost. And not only that, but the amount of services that it provides to our community, this community, the community that surrounds Lake Ship, the elementary schools, Eagle Lake, Pinewood Elementary, the middle schools in the area. We provide essential tutoring services to those parents and also to the Bartow area, Auburndale area, and even Frostproof. They come to our tutoring center for their services. Something was mentioned about the bus stop. There is a bus stop. I know because I pull out onto 540 every day from my work. And the bus stop is a bus stops on the other side of 540, dropping kids off at Coventry Cove and Pinnacle Point, which are the two major subdivisions that are directly across from this building. And when they drop children off, there are lots of children. I usually see them dropping off around 4 o'clock, 4.15, so they're middle school students. And those students are walking to their homes, which are across the street or down the road to Pinnacle Point. The transportation is an issue. I know that the form that they put up there that said it meets all of the transportation requirements, as they are now, although I'm not sure that anybody really takes into consideration the amount of development that's going to be taking place. When we went to the planning committee meeting back in July, there were two other very large subdivisions that were approved on Spirit Lake Road, one by the Dollar General, and another one right near there as well, about 150, 160 more homes that would be built. And the increase in traffic that the document stated, I don't think takes into consideration that those vehicles are not there yet, but they will be very quickly in this general community. The emergency vehicles are definitely a consideration, as someone else stated, so I won't go into that again. But I just really implore you to please vote no on this. Again, what my husband said is that the development is not right for this particular area. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next. Yes, my name is Leland Coble, and I am 1019 Bradbury Road, so I am directly across from where they're planning on having this project. And I can tell you I have a wall around my property, so I have complete privacy, but when they widen this road, it's going to come right up next to my wall, which is going to be a problem because I already can't get out of my property as it is because of the increased traffic on Bradbury Road. The two churches add a great deal of traffic during any times that they're having activities or facilities there. I'm not going to harbor on the same things over and over. It is a family neighborhood. I've lived there for three decades now, and I worked my entire life in the medical profession in Polk County so that I could retire in this neighborhood where it's a family environment. We know everybody on the streets, and it's just this isn't compatible to have. If you were talking about single-family homes, I don't think you'd be getting the resistance because if they put some single-family homes in that property, it wouldn't increase the car, the vehicles. It wouldn't increase the traffic. One of the big selling points you know is going to be you've got a dead-end street with a lake down here for your kids to go to. If you have 70 townhomes and each home only has one child even coming down our streets and going down to the lake and everything, it's going to be a disaster. It's just going to disrupt our entire calmness and peace. And, yes, there's the bus when you have to go down. When you go out on 540, you have to go down and make a U-turn, and then there's the bus stops right there. So that's increased the traffic. Being able to get in and out takes five minutes. I live right next to the assisted living facility. A lot of times I'll have to drive out onto the property because they have ambulances and food delivery trucks, and it's an assisted living facility, so the ambulance is there quite often. It's not like it's once a month. It's more like two to three times a week. So that adds a lot to the traffic. So I think the biggest thing for me is that I worked my whole life to retire in the peace and quiet of a neighborhood that had larger lots. And now we're talking about, like I said, single-family homes is one thing, but 70 townhomes is just really, it's not compatible. It's not acceptable. And we're just asking that you stand by the decision that was made previous to deny the request. Thank you. Thank you. Next. No, you don't have to. Come on up. My name is Diana Wilhite. I live at 901 Avenue X Northwest in Winter Haven. I am against the building of this, the development of this property. This is a letter that I sent to all of you. I just want to make sure y'all got it. I'm against the rezoning of this property because it would displace the current businesses on the property that provide important services to our community. Specifically, ABC Tutoring is providing an indispensable resource to students from preschool through adults who need one-on-one instruction to meet their goals. Those goals could be anywhere from learning to read, passing to the next grade, or passing a high-stakes exam that would open the door to college or military. My son is one student who benefited from their services. As a struggling reader over 16 years ago, he is now a successful adult who is training as a pilot in the United States Air Force, which was his lifelong dream. This business is making a positive difference in the life of hundreds of students. Their services are like no other tutoring business in our area, and our community needs them. The current site of ABC Tutoring service is at 2084 State Road 540. It's a prime location to service clients from Bartow, Lakeland, Auburndale, and the west side of Winter Haven. Again, if they are forced to move in any direction, it could potentially impact their current and future clientele, not to mention the great tutors that work at this location. Some of them already drive a great distance to service the students at this particular venue. The second facility of ABC Tutoring service located on the east side of Winter Haven is also too far for the tutors and clients who are currently accessing the State Road 540 facility. That location services the other location, services clients from Dundee, Davenport, Haynes City, and the east side of Winter Haven, and it is nearly filled to capacity already, so it is not even feasible to combine the two locations. Therefore, losing the building at State Road 540 would greatly impact our community in a negative way. Everybody already stated about the traffic and everything, but I request that you deny this building, this development. Thank you. Thank you. Tamara Gutierrez, did you want to speak? Are you here? She had to leave. Okay. Anyone else? Yes, ma'am. Come forward. Give us your name and address. Well, I wasn't going to speak until you hear all this. My name is Teresa Varner, 1920 Bradbury Court. There is no public access for people in our neighborhood to go to the lake. And the closest playground that they're talking about, the children would have to cross 540 to get to the playground. And everybody has spoke about the traffic on 540. And I don't know if this facility is going to have a playground for these kids. You know, you have to think about that. They have to have something to do outside. And that's one thing you all need to be thinking about. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Ms. Case? Good afternoon. For the record, again, Sarah Case. And I am representing the Wilson Trust and the Taylor Trust as applicant for the topic in front of you today for consideration. As you know, and it was reported in a ledger article in March of this year, that according to the 2023 census, Polk County was the fastest growing county in the nation. And that's according to the 2023 census. So where are these folks going to go? So it is the mission of the county growth management department to map out, and they did 20, 30 years ago, where this growth is going to go. So I think I did make a list of some of the points that all neighbors made, and I will get to that. But I wanted to go through a couple slides that I put together. So I think it is very important to kind of redirect what staff indicated in their staff report, that we are in the urban growth area. And this is directly copied from the comprehensive plan that was adopted by the county. And it says for the objectives and policies, the Polk County comprehensive plan shall provide areas for the future development of urban intensity growth through the designation and mapping of urban growth area, which is what we are, and the establishment of policies to govern the development of land within those UGAs. So the first one is to complement the TSDA in guiding growth while promoting orderly and compact development. Be located contiguous to the TSDAs or a municipality as they represent the expansion areas. Be supported by existing or planned urban-type services that are programmed for the 20-year planning horizon. And be those areas where the availability of infrastructure and other community facilities and services, including but not limited to mass transit, other transportation alternatives, utilities, public safety. The rest of those items are also addressed in the staff report, but I have some backup slides. So this slide is the development area overlay that the county has adopted. The brown is TSDA, the pink is UGA. Our site is the two parcels that are shown combined from what we're looking at. And as you saw in the slide previously, in order for development, ideally within the UGA, it needs to be adjacent to the TSDA. And then I know this was in Ms. Bennett's slides, but here we do have Polk County Utilities. We have sewer right here, which is an 8-inch, and the developer is aware that we have to go and get that sewer at the developer's cost to bring it to the site. So surrounding development, this was touched on by some of our neighbors as well as staff. But, you know, it was mentioned that north of State Road 540, the residential development, but I wanted to bring to your attention in this blue outline here, this property is owned by Faith Baptist Church. So that is not developable property, if you will, unless it's something that they do, and I know that's overflow parking on Sundays. This is a St. Mary's Anglican, I think. This is our subject site, and here is Islamic Central Florida. So, again, here's our site and the New Horizons Assisted Living Facility. So all of these have an underlying land use of residential. However, some of the uses are not used as residential, and I know that that was a concern of the neighbors. So this slide will show for a couple different points that I wanted to make. When this development came north of 540A, as our neighbors said, improvements were made to this FDOT roadway, and that is in response to the request for the development and for the unit count, and it also takes into consideration the rate of speed of this arterial road. On this site, you will see they've said that there's four. My owners have like a month-to-month lease agreement with three of the businesses, and it is, you know, the owner's opportunity to present this application to you for consideration as the property owner. We do know that Bradbury Road is substandard, and it will be the requirement of the developer to improve it to county standards for a safe and in compliance ingress-egress for the site. We do have to go to DOT for permitting because of its location, the likelihood of us getting a driveway on to DOT. They consider, again, the speed factor of the posted mile-per-hour limit. They also determine safety as far as driveway separation and any kind of safety upgrades, which I'm imagining is what happened when the other developments occurred. So one of the other points that was made had to do with Bradbury Road, and one of the emails, I believe, said there were 24 custom homes built. Bradbury Road leading to Bradbury Court, it is a dead-end road. Over the years, I believe, people have approached the county to try to come in for commercial uses to make this site potentially a land-use amendment to commercial. However, that was not successful because Bradbury is a local road. And for purposes discussed in the comp plan, in order to have a commercial center of any type, rural cluster, convenience, neighborhood activity center, and so on, they shall be located at the intersection of arterial and or collector roads. So we have an arterial, but commercial would not be supported here at the intersection of Bradbury, which is a local road. The likelihood of this being upgraded to any kind of different standard, it's not a thoroughfare, it's not a cut-through, and it will remain as a local road. I've listed some of the comprehensive plan policies, but you can find them in the staff report, pages 15 to 19. So I've already gone over the objectives and policies, but also mentioned in the staff report are how this application met Section 2.119, which is the residential policy and the location criteria, as well as the characteristics designation and mapping, the location and development criteria for residential high, specifically that category, in the comprehensive plan. So we were found to be consistent with the comprehensive plan per the staff report, which is considered competent and substantial evidence. So I'm asking you to lean on that. I understand the neighbors' concerns about change occurring, but the location of where we are on a state road, a minor arterial, it is my understanding with commercial uses along the frontage of that that are non-conforming today, that I do understand that any change, any kind of development, a lot of people are not comfortable with, but this is the vision of the county. The county laid it out in the comprehensive plan with their policies, their objectives, and I really encourage you to, you know, ask me questions about this, ask staff questions about it, but anything that you find that is not consistent, I would like an opportunity to respond, but I would here request a recommendation of approval from this board for this application, and I'll stand for any questions. What kind of, for the residents in this development, what kind of recreational facilities would you have? We would be required, according to Chapter 3 in the Land Development Code, we would be required to have some sort of recreational. Like a park or something in there? Something like that. I believe it's based on per, yeah, it would be a passive recreation. Okay. Well, no. What? You're just pointing at me? Okay. Martha, you got anything? I travel this road every day, two or three times a day, and a couple of things that I have observed is people that are having to make a U-turn on that Keene's Road. It's very scary. I mean, cars go 60, 70 miles per hour, and these residents are trying to make a U-turn, and with all the other subdivisions that are coming aboard about, I'm kind of scared about that. Another thing is the traffic that is accumulating on 540 used to be that you could just get, and I'm not even talking about the construction of the parkway. I'm just talking about 540 to the light. Now we're in Spirer Lake Road at 540. It backs up. Somebody mentioned that earlier today. It backs way, excuse me, way back, and it's amazing how that strip of road has become so congested with it. But anyway, yeah, the road bothers me, worries me. George, any comments? Yes, sir. Just want to ask staff, Ms. Bennett, if you heard anything in the testimony today that would change your staff conclusion that the project meets the criteria? Anything that would change your staff opinion? Nothing I've heard will change my staff's opinion. In the quasi-judicial arena, again, we know we're sitting as judges, if some might, to apply the law, to apply the existing adopted regulations, policies, and requirements associated with it, not whether we like it or not, but does it meet the standards? And so your staff conclusion is that this application does meet the standards adopted by the board? Correct, yes. This may be outside your expertise. This is a state road, and as development has occurred along there, what is the criteria that would lower the speed limit in that area? Correct. That's outside my expertise. A rhetorical question. Yes. But I would offer that we've had discussions with DOT about changing open medians to these directional median openings. I attended a meeting last year for an intersection on State Road 60 east of Lake Wales at Boy Scout. Why? Why are you doing that? And their response to me, and I haven't reviewed the data, is that they have noticed that when they do this kind of turning scenario or intersection, directional intersection, it decreases the accidents or decreases the deaths of the accidents. So I thought that was astounding, but I have not researched that. I don't know if it comes up in the TPO board meetings, but I haven't researched that specifically. Well, there is a regular review by DOT to revisit ingress, egress, speed limits, and those kind of things. But again, outside of our purview, but within their purview. When there was a denial at the Planning Commission, did any of those who voted in opposition cite specifically any deficiency in the application as to why it didn't meet the criteria adopted by the board? No, sir. The concurrency question regarding traffic and schools. Currently, if the applicant meets their obligation as to the load that they apply to the schools and the roads, then that proportionate share obligations mitigates any shortfall in the schools and or transportation. For transportation, certainly. The mitigation for school concurrency is a little bit more flexible, but that's debated at the time of the application because that could be made two years or five years from now, and the school concurrency could fluctuate between now and then. There's a path to accommodate that. Yes, sir. That's all I have for now. Ms. Bennett, just to clarify, this is a level four, correct, CPA? Correct. So there wasn't, it was a recommendation of denial, not denial? Correct. Motion, Mr. Chairman? Yeah, I just want to take some of the mic on. There you go. That's better. You know, I'm looking at this, the bigger map, and, you know, you get all the development, which is high density across the street. And, you know, just by my, you know, my little calculation there and kind of using my finger as a measurement deal, I really didn't get serious on it. This place, this portion right here, if you, you probably could put 30 homes in there, as they are probably on 40-foot lots right across the street, which we don't do that anymore. But, you know, when you look at that and putting 70 units right there on that corner, like I said, if it was built out for homes, you might could get 30. And so, I mean, you're looking at a lot more people coming in. I don't think Bradbury can handle that. And I don't think that, you know, the, like I asked earlier, the road, the developer will improve the road from their entrance, not on down to where everybody else lives. So, I mean, I can look at this at the map and see that, you know, this is not compatible to me, so I won't be supporting this. Okay. Neil? Mr. Chairman, first let me make a motion because we've got a question period, then we've got debate, and there's usually a motion in between. So, I would move to support the Planning Commission's decision and accept their recommendation of denial. You're moving to accept denial. Okay. To accept the Planning Commission's decision. Is there a second? Second. Okay, discussion. Mrs. Case, who is a friend of mine, Sarah, but I'll call her Mrs. Case for the purpose of this meeting. Thank you. I think made the best case for denial. And the best case for denial is what you said about FDOT and the probably near impossibility getting permission to come off of that road because of speed, because of the volume of traffic. Whether you come off of, directly off of Winter Lake Road or whether you come off of Bradbury, the traffic remains the same. It's still too many people from, you know, too small of an area in a bad location. And while we're talking about bad location, let me just say that I think this is a bad application. It's not compatible with the existing area at all, and it never will be. And years ago, my wife and I were driving around the Virginia, D.C. area, and it was the oddest thing. You would see, like, residential property, single family, one story, and then just a building, just like four or five, six stories, and go drive around, and there would be another one in the middle of it. Why, I don't know. I mean, it looked odd to me at that time. And to me, this would look like the same situation. You've got people with single-family homes, mostly probably single story as well, and then you've got a four-story, 70 units on six acres. So I think it's out of place. I think that the traffic is just unacceptable to try to put those kind of volumes or that volume into this area based on it. Let me say this about U-turns. We all would love to just pull over a driveway, cross two lanes, and then get in the other two and go in the other direction. DOT does that because it is a safety issue, because it is 60 miles per hour there, because there is, at times, a lot of traffic on Winter Lake Road, and they don't want people trying to cross four lanes to get to where they want to go. So you go two at a time, you go do a U-turn. I don't like it any better than anybody else in the room does, but they do that because they're trying to improve safety, and they typically only do it when they deem a situation, you know, less than optimal safety. So that's why we have them. We're going to have to put up with it because they're trying to save lives. I get it. I don't think this will do anything to improve safety out there. In fact, I think this will make matters considerably worse and, again, is just a bad application, and we should approve the Planning Commission or accept the Planning Commission's recommendation. I just want to say as far as the U-turns are concerned, I understand, and I agree with what you just said. However, in this case, because I've seen it all the time, three and four and five cars are one behind the other ready to make a U-turn, which then becomes a safety issue. Commissioner Chair, may I make a comment? Sure. So while I do understand the comments that you are making, I do not believe anyone in this room is qualified as a transportation engineer that can weigh in on the design of that road for what it is. Mr. Chairman, you don't have to be an engineer to take your own words and say that DOT won't approve this application here because of volume and because of speed, because of the safety concerns. It's no different. In fact, it's only worse because if you could get DOT to give you one, they would most likely require a D-cell lane, which might improve the safety. Now, we can condition this and maybe consider approving it if only access can come off of Winter Lake Road. I mean, obviously, that's going to be a very expensive, if you can get it, and I suppose you could eventually if you say the county won't let this come off, we have a right to access this. And they'd say, well, sure, we'll give you a permit, but you've got to start back down at Spirit Lake Road with a D-cell lane to get that kind of traffic into this facility or property safely. So I don't have to be a traffic engineer to say if DOT thinks it's unsafe, they don't issue a permit, it's not going to be any safer if we say, okay, come off of Bradbury. All right. Any other comments? Okay. Let me make sure I understand we have a motion to accept the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial. All in favor of that, say aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Aye. Three, two, to deny. That's right. Yeah. Randy, can we leave it like that? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. All right. It is. What are the reasons for denial? Board's already stated their reasons. Well, traffic. Incompatibility. Not compatible. Incompatibility. Okay. But your comprehensive plan in a staff report indicated that it was compatible. I think the staff is wrong. All right. We're, we're, we have. I have a right to think they're wrong. We have, we have dispensed with this case. We'll move on. And we have no more. That's it. Ajourn. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.