MINUTES OF MEETING ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

Transcription

1 MINUTES OF MEETING ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Enterprise Community Development District was held Wednesday,, at 4:00 p.m. at the District Office, 313 Campus Street, Celebration, Florida Present and constituting a quorum were: Russell Stokes Gregg Harkness Kimberly Locher Also present were: Gary L. Moyer Jason Walters (by phone) Ferdinand Vasquez Maria Fuentes Ben Griffin Susan McPherson Russ Simmons Alex Zlatic Members of the public Vice Chairman Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary Manager: Moyer Management Group Attorney: Hopping Green & Sams Engineer: Atkins Inframark, Management Division Inframark, Operations Division Inframark, Operations Division Inframark, Management Division Inframark, Operations Division FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Call to Order and Roll Call Mr. Stokes called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Mr. Stokes called the roll and stated a quorum was present for the meeting. SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Mr. Stokes led the Pledge of Allegiance. Pledge of Allegiance THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Public Comment Period There being none, the next order of business followed. FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Organizational Matters A. Appointment of Supervisor to Fill the Unexpired Term of Office for Seat 1 Mr. Moyer stated for a long period of time, we have been carrying this item on our agenda for the vacant seat on this Board. As you are aware, Mattamy Homes purchased Island Village in the Celebration CDD, and I believe the intent is to put one of their representatives on the Board. A representative of Mattamy Homes is here, and I do not know if he is in a position to volunteer to serve on the Board or if this item should be deferred for another month. Mr. Bennett Ruedas stated I think we would prefer to defer. Is the need immediate? Mr. Moyer stated no.

2 Mr. Ruedas stated it is a matter of whom to appoint from our organization. Mr. Moyer stated we will carry this item to the next agenda, and Mr. Ruedas and I can discuss it further. B. Oath of Office for Newly Appointed Supervisor This item not being considered, the next item followed. C. Consideration of Resolution Designating Officers This item not being considered, the next order of business followed. FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consent Agenda A. Approval of the Minutes of the December 6, 2017, Audit Selection Committee and Regular Meetings Mr. Moyer reviewed the minutes included in the agenda package which are available for public review in the District Office during normal business hours, and requested corrections, additions, or deletions. B. Check Register and Invoices Mr. Moyer reviewed the check register and invoices included in the agenda package and are available for public review in the District Office during normal business hours. On MOTION by Mr. Harkness, seconded by Ms. Locher, with all in favor, unanimous approval was given to the consent agenda, as presented. SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports A. District Manager i. Financial Statements Mr. Moyer reviewed the financial statements included in the agenda package, which are available for public review in the District Office during normal business hours. Mr. Moyer stated we have collected most all our non-ad valorem assessments on the general fund. On the water/sewer fund, we are pretty close to projection. We do not seasonalize the irrigation, so that is skewed during this time period. ii. FEMA Update Mr. Moyer reviewed the FEMA update included in the agenda package, which is available for public review in the District Office during normal business hours. Mr. Moyer stated we have met all their timing thresholds. It is not a lot of money in terms of hurricane damage, but we thought we would go through the process anyway to collect whatever we could. We made our filings timely, and it is moving along pretty well. 2

3 iii. Consideration of Engagement Letter from McDirmit Davis & Company for Auditing Services Mr. Moyer reviewed the standard form audit engagement letter included in the agenda package, which is available for public review in the District Office during normal business hours. Mr. Moyer stated the fee in the engagement letter is what they provided in their response to the request for qualifications. Mr. Harkness asked is staff amenable to providing everything they requested under management responsibilities? Mr. Moyer stated yes. On MOTION by Ms. Locher, seconded by Mr. Harkness, with all in favor, unanimous approval was given to the engagement letter from McDirmit Davis & Company for auditing services. B. Field Operations i. Field Management Reports Mr. Simmons reviewed the field management reports included in the agenda package, which are available for public review in the District Office during normal business hours. ii. Street Trees Mr. Simmons stated the last time we spoke, we were going to cut some of the trees down on Celebration Place, which the Board approved not to exceed $30,000. It was $12,700 to take them all down last Tuesday. The Friday before at 4:00 p.m., I received an from Mr. Jim Parker. He had a landscape architect that was looking at it who said just to cut down the trees that needed to be cut down immediately. I did not want to go against that direction, so we cut down 16 trees for $7,500, which is well under the threshold. We have a price for Dix.Hite + Partners to do a design for $6,500. I do not know if we need to spend that kind of money. Mr. Tom MacCubbin can do that, and I need him to review the Celebration CDD anyway. We can hire him for 30 to 60 minutes at $75 per hour to get his suggestions on tree selections. I suggest we go that route and put the $6,500 toward new plants and trees rather than someone coming up with a design, unless the Board feels differently. Ms. Locher stated I would like to review the proposal. Mr. Harkness asked did Mr. Parker get the proposal essentially? 3

4 Mr. Simmons stated yes. I think we would be better off cutting down all the trees and replanting them. Ms. Locher stated I think the problem with replanting them is, obviously the tree type was not the right one to use, though it looked good for a period of time. Mr. Simmons stated we also need to consider the shade. Ms. Locher stated yes. Dix.Hite did the majority of the planting design in the parks and amenities. They will look at it from a consistency standpoint, but they will also look at it from an aesthetic standpoint as to what fits with the overall brand and what are good trees to use. They tend to be more conservative with their plantings because they look at it from a long-term growth, not just what looks great immediately. They consider what it will look like in 20 years, using the lessons they learned in other parks throughout here. Mr. Harkness stated that is good, but it is not worth $6,500. This is just a median. We are not looking for anything on the other side of the road, just the median. Ms. Locher stated it also includes what trees they could use in looking at the visuals of the power lines and everything that is there and coming up with two recommendations. Mr. Simmons stated what I remember about the power lines is the oak trees are the ones that block the view of the power lines. If you are looking to the right, you do not even see the trees in the median. I do not think you can really see them when driving east. Ms. Locher stated I wonder if we go back to them and explain we do not need a full analysis since we know those trees are too big and do not work, and then ask for a recommendation of two types of replacement trees that will work in that area. We do not need to spend this amount of money, but I would like their input. either. Mr. Moyer stated I am guessing you would not object to Mr. MacCubbin s input, Ms. Locher stated I do not know what he is recommending. I have not worked with him as much as I have with Dix.Hite. I do not have a proposal from him to know how much his time would cost and how he would look at it. If it is a straight replacement, we want to make sure he does not suggest some random tree. Mr. Stokes stated we could get a proposal from Mr. MacCubbin. Can this wait until the next Board meeting? Mr. Simmons stated yes, we can sod those locations now and take as long as you need, even a year. 4

5 Mr. Stokes stated this proposal is an estimate, not a not-to-exceed amount. Mr. Simmons stated that is correct. Mr. Stokes stated they will only bill us for the time spent. Mr. Simmons stated it is my opinion that unless we say otherwise, they will bill us $6,500. review. Ms. Locher stated I do not think we need them to prepare a cost estimate. Mr. Simmons stated if you are talking about blueprints, we do not need that. Mr. Harkness stated we are just looking for a recommendation. Ms. Locher stated I think we can scale back the scope, but I would appreciate their Mr. Harkness stated if the price came down to $1,500, I would be happier. Ms. Locher stated maybe we say item #2 is important, which is coming up with a recommendation. The median in some areas is tighter, so as the tree grows a canopy, big trucks will be going past it, so we need to be careful for that. A landscaper does not look at that, but a landscape architect will look at it from that bigger picture. Mr. Simmons stated there are no trees at that end, so that is not much of an issue. It just seemed like a lot of money for them to simply suggest, for example, to install a red maple and draw it up. I do not think we need technical drawings but just a couple recommendations for trees to plant. Mr. Stokes stated yes, call them and request that information. Where is Mr. Parker? Mr. Simmons stated he retired yesterday. Mr. Stokes asked do we have a replacement? Mr. Simmons stated I sent him an yesterday, and it came back with his retirement message. Mr. Moyer stated I have not heard anything from Mr. Todd Rimmer, either. Ms. Locher asked what direction are we giving to Mr. Simmons? Mr. Stokes stated he will reevaluate the proposal with Dix.Hite, get a second proposal from Mr. MacCubbin, and bring both to future meeting. iii. Sidewalk Replacements Mr. Simmons stated I discussed this with Mr. Moyer and it is something that has been in the making for some time. I apologize that it took so long but I hope it was the right thing to do. One company quoted $16.50 per square foot, another company was $14.25 per square foot, and the company we have now is $8.45 per square foot. They will do it 5

6 three times faster than the other two companies. They will be done Friday. Because we have only one sidewalk along the roadway, they will need to go into the hospital. One company quoted two weeks and the other said ten days. This company got it all pulled up today, they will pour Friday, and the sidewalk will be back open Saturday. The concrete probably will not be picked up until Monday. It will cost about $16,000 for the replacement. Ms. Locher asked did they have to pull it up because of roots? Mr. Moyer stated that is the first question I asked because if it was from construction damage, we would have gone to the hospital to repair it. Mr. Simmons stated they replaced quite a bit due to damage from the last phase of the hospital. Ms. Locher stated I am guessing they trimmed the roots with this sidewalk replacement. Mr. Simmons stated yes and they are starting to form it now. Hopefully it will be a good finished job. iv. Landscaping Contractor Mr. Simmons stated we asked a vendor for a proposal since Davey is not getting it done and has not for quite some time. Mr. Moyer stated if the Board is of a mind to change contractors, I do not want to pay Davey for work they have not done. Mr. Simmons stated I am holding back at least a month right now, which is $10,000. I can hold back a second month. Mr. Moyer stated I think you need to meet with the Yellowstone representative and get his assessment of what the cost will be to bring everything back to our specifications. Mr. Simmons stated we did, and we can do this one of two ways. We can pay them up front and pay them with what we are holding back from Davey, and they will get it done in two weeks. Mr. Moyer stated that is what I would do. Mr. Simmons stated they also have a 30/60/90-day program where they will take up to 90 days to get this place back in shape, which is at no cost. Ms. Fuentes stated they will split the work among various locations. If they start in one area, they will work until they finish and then move from area to area. If it is a rush 6

7 for us to get up to standards, they can do it up to 90 days or we can do an initial cleanup for an additional cost. It is up to the Board to decide which way you want to do it. Mr. Simmons stated this is just one contractor. We can get other proposals. The reason why we chose this one is because they are working with CROA right now and Mr. Todd Haskett is very pleased with them. It has been a while since he has been pleased with any landscape company. Mr. Stokes asked have you tried Brightview? Ms. Fuentes stated they turned us down and said they are not going to provide a proposal at this time. Mr. Simmons stated they are a little more expensive, but we can look at other vendors. Mr. Stokes stated I think we need at least one more proposal. Mr. Simmons stated we can get two or three more. I wanted to give you a ballpark figure of what we might be looking at, price wise. Mr. Stokes asked how does it compare to budget and what we have been paying? Ms. Fuentes stated we are paying $113,000, and this proposal came to $149,000. Mr. Stokes stated take us through this pricing and show us what numbers you are quoting. Where is the $149,000? Ms. Fuentes stated he split it between Celebration Place and S.R Celebration Place is $104,000, and S.R. 417 is $45,000, which totals $149,000. Davey was charging us $113,000. Mr. Simmons stated we could change the scope on some things for S.R. 417, such as fertilization, weed control, pest control, and others to get this price down even further. S.R. 417 does not need to be maintained every week. Mr. Stokes asked did we do a formal RFP where we described the scope of work and what we expected weekly, monthly, and quarterly? Mr. Simmons stated we updated the previous scope of services, which this proposal is based on. Ms. Locher stated to repair and get the areas of greatest concern back into good order, if they take the long term, they will nurture everything back to health over time in the price that is included. If we want it to look good faster, they will do it in two weeks at an additional fee. Would you normally take that fee out of what is being retained? 7

8 Mr. Moyer stated yes. Ms. Locher stated then Yellowstone needs to review all the areas of concern for the cleanup, break it down, and get to the total of what needs immediate attention, and that is the amount we need to withhold from Davey. Mr. Simmons stated we can provide that pretty quickly because they have already done that. Ms. Locher stated it might be $20,000 worth of work and we may only be holding back $10,000. We need to look at that. Ms. Fuentes stated we have that information. Mr. Simmons stated the first couple pages of the proposal are pictures of areas they noted needing attention. Mr. Moyer stated I did not see any dollars related to that work. Mr. Simmons stated that is correct, but we can get numbers from them pretty quickly. Ms. Locher stated we need to know that so we can answer why we are holding money back from Davey or why they still owe us, which is because deficient areas need to be fixed because they are not providing service. Mr. Stokes stated this period says March 1 to December 31, so it is not a full year. That makes the annual comparison even higher, which is a problem. What are we doing in the interim? Is Davey still working for us? Ms. Fuentes stated yes, until the Board decides what direction to take. We will need enough time to send a 30-day notice of termination to Davey. If you want us to get another proposal, we are waiting for one from Blade Runners. If we receive it this week, I can it to the Board for your review. Mr. Stokes stated the concern is the budget. When was the last time we looked at this budget? Mr. Moyer stated that was low to begin with. We always knew it was low. Ms. Locher stated we had that discussion at the last meeting. Mr. Stokes stated we need a true budget that is representative of the current market with approximate conditions. We need more proposals. Go back to Yellowstone and request a full-year proposal. Then we will have an apples-to-apples comparison. Can we tolerate Davey for another month? Mr. Moyer stated yes. 8

9 Mr. Harkness stated we definitely need more proposals, just to make sure. This may be the cost of doing business these days for the quality we want. Mr. Stokes stated it could be. Mr. Harkness stated we just need to verify that. Mr. Walters stated one thing we need to be cognizant of is the threshold to go out to bid, which is $195,000. To the extent we think we may break that cap, we may need to take a formal approach. But I do not know what those numbers will look like for a 12- month contract. Mr. Harkness stated if they are at $150,000 for 10 months, it would be about $180,000 for a full year. Mr. Walters stated it sounds like we will be under the threshold. Ms. Locher stated we will be close, but we should be under. Mr. Stokes stated thanks for the reminder. Mr. Moyer stated it is certainly in their interest not to break that cap as part of the pricing. C. Utility Operations i. Utility Report Mr. Griffin reviewed the utility report included in the agenda package, which is available for public review in the District Office during normal business hours. ii. Toho Water Authority Ordinance and FOG Program, and Discussion of Rule Adoption for Same Mr. Moyer stated we need to discuss the FOG (fats, oils, grease) program and where we go from here in terms of Mr. Walters developing a resolution since we do not adopt ordinances. We still need some additional input from Inframark in terms of things they saw in the Toho Water Authority ( Toho ) FOG program that may not be applicable to us. My desire is that we adopt whatever we are going to adopt before we start spending money on anything related to FOG. Mr. Harkness stated I would do it even before that. I read what Toho provided in their FOG program. The problem is, which customers would fall under their program? Do they already have grease traps? If they do not, then forcing them to put in a grease trap is an extremely expensive endeavor. If they are some of the guilty participants we are having issues with, then we need to figure out what we are going to do before we ever adopt a resolution. 9

10 Mr. Moyer stated to the extent some of these establishments do not have grease traps, we may go full circle and do it through the rate schedule. We know what we are paying and what we are going to have to pay to Toho for violating their policy. Perhaps we just build that into the rate schedule. Mr. Harkness stated we can use it to say we would rather not pay the money to Toho but take that money and retrofit them. It is very expensive. If they do not have one, the sewer coming out of the building needs to be split from what came out of the kitchen and what came from the restrooms. You cannot run restroom waste into a grease trap. Retrofitting is a massive plumbing issue, possibly millions of dollars. I would like to see particularly from all the restaurants, because they are the key contributors, who has a grease trap now and who does not. The other issue is to look at the building permit that was issued by Osceola County. We need to see what their plumbing code says about grease traps. Toho s rules have this and they have the design standards for grease traps if you are going to be a Toho customer, but I do not know what the plumbing code says about that. Mr. Stokes stated our engineer from Atkins should know. Mr. Vasquez stated we will find out. Mr. Harkness stated it is just a matter of looking, and it is probably the Florida Plumbing Code more than anything else. I am not sure if it includes grease traps. RCID added that in a few years ago. You will need to refer them to the County for any new customers coming onto the system. I am scared of the costs we could be incurring to retrofit. I am not saying we do not need a program because we do. The cost of retrofitting is more than you think. Mr. Moyer stated I do not think we are looking at a lot of time or effort in terms of Mr. Walters reviewing the resolution. We can proceed with that. Mr. Harkness stated yes, we can do them on parallel paths. He can work on that, but at the same time, let us get the other information we can review. Mr. Moyer stated it has been a long time since I have done anything with a FOG program, but it used to be under the health department at one time. Mr. Harkness stated it was a long time ago. DEP almost requires it. Toho needs to have it because they have a reuse system, so they need an industrial waste program which 10

11 includes FOG. We are weird in that we have a reuse system, but we are not the one generating the reuse. I do not know how that fits in the DEP issue. Mr. Griffin stated we pulled Toho s ordinance and FOG program for the agenda package. It is not as easy as copy and paste like we hoped it would be at the last meeting where we could remove references to Toho and insert Enterprise CDD. One of our recommendations is if you go with a FOG program, we need to hire a third party to do that. The base of the steps required is, we need to figure out which facilities are discharging and if they have grease traps under the sinks. Then the question is if the Board wants to make them be installed as Toho requires because they said grease traps have to be installed if they are not already. They did give some waivers and clauses if someone was in a reconstruction period, but they made people have grease traps. They also extended it to multi-family housing, such as apartments. I think they even looked at duplexes if they were a high-strength contributor because lift stations 9 and 11 were two of the ones we identified. Some of that may be going on because of the developments around there. Mr. Harkness stated take a development like that. Everyone has sewer coming out. Should it not go together in one big sewer before it comes out of the apartments? Mr. Griffin stated it all gathers. The next group of apartments is beside the medical center and is under construction, and a big lift station is there. Another lift station is at the end of Resolute Street that flows into that one with all that waste, plus waste from the school that dumps into it. We also need to figure out if the school has any type of grease trap because I am sure they are adding to the issue. Then it goes to anyone who uses petroleum oil that goes into the system, to see if they have an oil/water separator, as well as anyone who does industrial laundry which is a contributor to the issue. A lot needs to be done if we want to adopt a FOG program. We need to identify the contributors and figure out if we are going to require them to install oil/water separators or grease traps. That may be cost prohibitive. Or, as Mr. Moyer said, we may pass on the surcharge to the people we identify as the contributors. You can identify that category to include the larger restaurants having a bigger surcharge, for example. that. Mr. Harkness stated we would need to come up with some way to appropriately do 11

12 Mr. Griffin stated yes, because a one-person donut shop may not put out as much as Applebee s. Mr. Harkness stated it is load based, so we will need to have an idea of their load. It is also an administrative issue. Once a policy is established, the grease traps have to be inspected. Mr. Griffin stated yes. Mr. Harkness stated the policy indicates how often they are pumped, so they need to be checked. We cannot just say they need to have a grease trap. Mr. Griffin stated that would be an additional cost because we will need to add a person to the utility staff. Mr. Harkness stated you might need an industrial waste specialist to administer the FOG program. Mr. Griffin stated someone will need to monitor it because inspections have to be done quarterly and testing has to be done. If they provide a grease trap, we need to remember they need to have a sampling port that is accessible so we can do our sampling. Mr. Harkness stated that is correct. Mr. Griffin stated quite a bit is involved in this. Mr. Harkness stated it would be interesting to see. If I remember correctly, the design standards for this utility do not have grease traps. Mr. Moyer stated I think you are right. Mr. Harkness stated now we need to add it. Toho has it in their design standards, so now we need to add it. We have to do it, but we also need to understand it is a long road and could be very expensive. Mr. Stokes asked what is the timeline on this? Mr. Moyer stated the timeline is primarily driven by the fines and penalties we are assessed from Toho. When you look at our financials, we are in a great position of making a fair amount of money on the utility, so it is not something I am concerned will make us go bankrupt, but we want to address it because the numbers are pretty significant. Again, addressing it as we discussed could be actual installation of physical equipment or just offloading those costs to the people we know are contributing. 12

13 Mr. Harkness stated I am surprised Toho did not say in the beginning that we need to have an industrial waste program. Every other utility around here, if a feeder comes to them, their wastewater has to meet the utility s standards. Mr. Moyer stated that is correct. Ms. McPherson stated it is in the large-user agreement, which was initially with the City of Kissimmee and is now Toho. Mr. Griffin stated one of the things we discussed at the last meeting is, they are using the City of Kissimmee s calculations to assess the surcharges as opposed to the calculations they use elsewhere. Ms. McPherson stated but it is in there. Mr. Harkness stated we just never did it. Mr. Stokes asked what is the next step? Does the Board need to approve a motion, or will someone continue to work on this? Mr. Moyer stated we will do a couple things. I would like Mr. Walters to give some thought to a resolution. We will start looking at the number part of it, if we want to pass these costs on as a base rate type of charge to these customers. Then we will start looking at what Mr. Harkness mentioned, what type of number we are looking at if we have to retrofit the system. Mr. Harkness stated a small restaurant can get away with a kitchen one that is mechanical and small. The bigger ones are gravity, and most people use those. But some of the mechanical ones are not very good, either. They have to find a place in the kitchen to put it. If they have to go to a gravity one, the minimum size is 750 gallons. It is essentially a septic tank, so you are digging that big of a hole probably in the back of the restaurant, and then you also need a sampling manhole. Ms. McPherson stated they also stink. Mr. Harkness stated that is correct. Ninety days is too long to have them pumped out. They should be monthly. Mr. Griffin stated that is the minimum with Toho. You can change it, which would be the responsibility of the person who is administering the program to check how often they are being pumped out and keeping records of the program. Mr. Stokes stated Mr. Griffin will continue his evaluation. Mr. Griffin stated I am not sure what more we need to do. 13

14 Mr. Moyer stated we need to complete the study that you started and provided an interim report on. We have a basic idea of where the violations are coming from. I think now we need to piece together the users that are contributing to those lift stations that are violating the policy. Once we know who those users are, then it is a pretty simple mathematical calculation to take the penalty and divide it by the flow from each of those users and come up with a number. That is where I would like to see Mr. Griffin spend his time, in identifying the users and the lift stations. Mr. Harkness stated once those users are identified, you need to figure out if they have grease traps or not. That will be a real help to understand the magnitude, as well as what we are looking at if we need to retrofit. Mr. Griffin stated I am hearing that we want to focus on the restaurants and not worry about the multi-family developments right now. How do we want to go about that? Mr. Harkness stated if the multi-family developments are a big ticket, you should look at them, too. You need to look at everyone who is contributing to the problem. Mr. Zlatic asked will you authorize sampling at the specific sources that are envisioned to be the problem? Mr. Moyer stated we did some of that already. Mr. Zlatic stated we sampled the lift stations. Ms. McPherson stated the problem is sampling at the individual places because we may not have the ability to take a sample. Mr. Harkness stated there may not be a place to take a sample. They may all be discharging into their own sewers which are all combined. To a small degree, we can identify where the offenders are. Mr. Moyer stated yes, I think that is a pretty good approach. Mr. Griffin asked when do we want to send that additional report? Do you want it at the next meeting or in two meetings? Mr. Moyer stated let us keep it moving. Ms. Locher stated the next Board meeting is March 7. Mr. Walters stated from a rate schedule standpoint, we will need to have a hearing to make any changes. We certainly will not be able to do that in March. Ms. Locher stated he meant for his next report. Mr. Walters stated thank you; I wanted to make sure. 14

15 Mr. Griffin introduced Mr. Zlatic, who is the new project manager and will be onsite on a daily basis. He has experience with water and wastewater system design. He is an engineer by trade, and we look forward to what he can do. He has many ideas, and I think you will see the service do nothing but improve. Mr. Zlatic has a project management background and understands budgets, schedules, and so forth, and is looking forward to contributing to the team and the community. D. Attorney There being nothing to report, the next item followed. E. Engineer Mr. Vasquez stated we are continuing with some development reviews, especially the Mattamy Homes project in Island Village for their 60% design, which Mr. Parker requested we review just prior to his retirement. Mr. Ruedas asked the engineer is reviewing the designs on behalf of the CDD? Mr. Vasquez stated yes. Mr. Ruedas asked was there any movement from the Board due to the fact that Atkins is also the engineer of record, in looking at an alternative engineer? Ms. Lcoher stated I think that is in reference to Ms. Kathy Leo. Mr. Ruedas stated it does not matter to me, but I am more concerned about the process and the timing of that process. I do not care who reviews it, as long as it is approved to the satisfaction of all parties. Mr. Moyer stated we have a proposal from Ms. Leo who used to be with Atkins, and we will put that on the March agenda for consideration. Mr. Harkness stated we do not want to create any conflicts. Mr. Vasquez stated Atkins is the engineer for Enterprise CDD and has reviewed the plans, so I do not think there is a conflict of interest but it is the Board s decision if you want to have two separate engineers. Mr. Simmons asked do we know who may be doing the bond issue? Mr. Moyer stated it will most likely be MBS Capital. Mr. Simmons stated that will be for Celebration CDD. Will we have some input on what is installed in Island Village versus keeping things the way they are, such as light poles? 15

16 Mr. Moyer stated the underwriter is not going to get involved in that. You need to get with the engineers. What they put on a piece of paper is what is going in the ground. If you have any comments, make them at the engineering stage. Mr. Ruedas stated we do not want to create any problems. We hear some of the issues, but we do not know all the issues. We definitely want to make sure we are not installing light poles, for example, that will go out ten at a time. Having said that, we are trying to keep to our schedule so we can move it forward. It is a very convoluted process to get before Enterprise CDD, Celebration CDD, CROA, Osceola County, and others. We have been talking with Mr. Moyer offline and will talk more on how we do all this with the two CDDs and CROA. We are trying to make sure we can navigate through the system here without causing too much heartburn. F. District Representative There being nothing to report, the next order of business followed. SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Other Business and Supervisor Requests There being none, the next order of business followed. EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, March 7, 2018, at 4:00 p.m. On MOTION by Ms. Locher, seconded by Mr. Harkness, with all in favor, the meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m. Gary L. Moyer, Secretary Russell Stokes, Vice Chairman 16