Lake Ashton II Community Development District
Meeting Agenda April 16, 2021

-.   ·-	- ---=- -	-

April 9, 2021

Lake Ashton II
Community Development District
219 E. Livingston St., Orlando, Florida 32801 Phone: 407-841-5524 - Fax: 407-839-1526

Board of Supervisors Lake Ashton II
Community Development District

Dear Board Members:

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Lake Ashton II Community Development District will be held Friday, April 16, 2021 at 9:00 AM at 6052 Pebble Beach Blvd., Winter Haven, FL 33884. Masks will be required for all in attendance. For the safety of all in attendance, social distancing measures will be in place, including limiting capacity at the meeting location to 100 people, on a first come, first served basis. All others will need to participate using the remote participation options specified below, which allow for full public participation and comment.

Members of the public may attend and participate in the meeting utilizing the following options from your computer, tablet or smartphone. To participate using video, please go to the link address below. To participate by telephone, please use the call-in number below and enter the Meeting ID when prompted. Members of the public are further encouraged to submit comments or questions in advance of the meeting by email to jburns@gmscfl.com, or by telephone by calling (407) 841-5524, up until 2:00 PM on Thursday, April 15, 2021.

Zoom Video Link: https://zoom.us/j/91095803577

Zoom Call-In Information: 1-646-876-9923
Meeting ID: 910 9580 3577

Following is the advance agenda for the meeting:

Board of Supervisors Meeting

Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of Meeting Agenda
Public Comments on Specific Items on the Agenda  (the District Manager will read    any questions or comments received from members of the public in advance of the meeting;

we ask those members of the public wanting to address the Board directly, first state his or her name and his or her address.1)
Approval of Minutes of February 19, 2021 Board of Supervisors Meeting and Summary of the March 30, 2021 Budget Workshop Meeting
Golf Course Update from Indigo Golf
Engineering Staff Report
Unfinished Business
New Business
Discussion Regarding Cart Paths (Pebble Beach and Sawgrass) (requested by Supervisor Zelazny)
Discussion Regarding the Sixth Hole Restroom (requested by Supervisor Zelazny)
Discussion Regarding Maintenance of Entry Landscaping Enhancements
Surplus of Golf Course Equipment
Discussion Regarding Traffic (requested by Supervisor Zelazny)
Discussion Regarding Nature Trails (requested by Supervisor Zelazny and Supervisor Littlewood)
Discussion Regarding Maintenance of Rattlesnake Lake and Lake Hart (requested by Supervisor Littlewood)
COVID Procedure Update
Staff Reports
Attorney
Lake Ashton II Community Director
District Manager’s Report
Financial Report
Approval of Check Run Summary
Combined Balance Sheet
Supervisors Requests
Public Comments
Adjournment

1 All comments, including those read by the District Manager, will be limited to three (3) minutes

M	I NUTES

2/19/21 BOS
Meeting

MINUTES OF MEETING LAKE ASHTON II
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Lake Ashton II Community Development District was held on Friday, February 19, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. at 6052 Pebble Beach Blvd., Winter Haven, FL.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

James Mecsics	Chairman
Bob Zelazny	Vice Chairman
Duff Hill	Assistant Secretary
Colette McKie	Assistant Secretary
Angie Littlewood	Assistant Secretary Also present were:
Jill Burns	District Manager, GMS
Sarah Sandy via Zoom	District Counsel, HGS
Alan Rayl	District Engineer
Mary Bosman	Community Director
Brian Rhodes	Indigo Golf Partners
Ron Lavoie	Indigo Golf Partners

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance
Ms. Burns called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m. and five Supervisors were in attendance constituting a quorum. The Board recited the pledge of allegiance.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Meeting Agenda
Mr. Mecsics: Do we have any additions, deletions, modifications of the agenda? If not, I will call for a motion to accept the meeting agenda.
Mr. Zelazny: I would like to change the agenda. I would like to move all of the golf course presentations and discussions up so that the golf group can go back to work. I know we have some presentations on landscaping.
Mr. Mecsics: Do we have any discussion on that? Hearing none,

On MOTION by Ms. McKie, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor, the Meeting Agenda as amended to discuss all golf related items first, was approved.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comments on Specific Items
on the Agenda (the District Manager will read any questions or comments received from members of the public in advance of the meeting; we ask those members of the public wanting to address the Board directly first state his or her name and his or her address. All comments, including those read by the District Manager, will be limited to three (3) minutes)
Mr. Mecsics: At this time we have public comments.
Resident (Mr. Williams): Over the last year we have had a lot of discussion over the legal fees and the size of those fees. I don’t know if today’s legal fees are high or low, I don’t think any of us do. A couple of you know that when we first brought this legal team on, it was done without going out for bids. Due to expediency and things, it was decided to go with the first name that was given to us. That’s wrong. We need to do the right thing by the residents and go out for bids this time. That’s all I had.
Resident (Mr. Dan Murphy): I couldn’t access the agenda ahead of time but I see that this is on it. I think most of you are familiar with the situation. I am here to ask the Board for approval to hire a contractor at the homeowner’s expense to trim the weeds and invasive growth behind the five houses from 5437 through 5453 Hogan Lane. Earlier this week I sent you all some photos so you can see some before and after and current views that have been obscured by the high weeds and invasive growth. I think it’s quite obvious that our views have been severely limited by this excessive growth. I might add that we all paid a substantial premium for those lots to have that lake view. For the past several years we have been using a SWFWMD memo dated June 2014, which gave us the approval to do the necessary trimming. The owners of the affected homes have paid an individual to trim those bushes about once a year in accordance with the SWFWMD guidelines. I understand there are some questions as to whether that long standing SWFWMD approval was still valid. I contacted the current responsible SWFWMD rep,

who confirmed that the June 2014 approval was still valid. I know Colette has been working with these people too, and she has put a lot of work into this, and also into some other outside areas. In addition, this SWFWMD rep inspected about 6 to 8 months ago with Supervisor Zelazny at the property in question. I have her written response, which I believe I forwarded to you all a couple weeks ago. In it, she states that she saw no problem with the trimming that we have been doing over the past few years. Again, we took that memo as giving us the authority to do it. Now we know that we should get CDD approval before we do it. I have an estimate from the contractor to do the usual trimming for $600. The easiest thing is to allow us to deal directly with him as we have done in the past few years, or if the Board prefers the CDD can pay the contractor and we can reimburse the CDD. Just to reiterate, the SWFWMD rep inspected this individuals work and saw no problems. I’m not sure this would require a vote, but if not I would suggest giving Colette the authority to handle this issue. When I was on the Board before and we had similar things come up concerning outside work, I was always designated to work with whoever was involved. In any case, we need to get this work done ASAP because the weeds are growing taller by the day. Thank you very much.
Ms. Burns: I received a few audience comments via email that I will read now. Residents Joan Senecal and Sandy Papineau (public comment provided prior to meeting): We would like to bring the following issues to the attention of the CDD Board. We use the HFC every day except for Sunday. Maintenance issues at the HFC pool and gym; pool ladder has been unstable since mid-January, covered with yellow crime scene tape, cement beneath is cracked, one hot tub has been closed for almost two weeks, when rehab clients are using the hot tub plus residents at the same time it is difficult to maintain social distancing, pool deck floors appear to need sealing, sliders out to the hot tubs are rusty and very difficult for some residents to open and close so doors are often found left open, heavy equipment being stored at the pool deck area, the lift, 24/7 fan use needs to be properly reevaluated due to constant loud noise, evaporation of pool water, and it makes the pool area cold, some fitness equipment has been broken for a long time.
Thank you for your attention to these matters.
Resident Jan (public comment provided prior to meeting): To whom it may concern I believe it is a good idea to place signs periodically along the golf course cart trail

indicating the correct direction of travel for walkers and bikers and cruisers. On the back of the sign it could read wrong directions for walkers, bikers, and cruisers. These signs would be at tee boxes so as to not be a hinderance to golf balls along the fairways. Subject to Board approval I would be willing to chair a committee to have custom signs made and installed.
Resident David Harrison (public comment provided prior to meeting): Regarding paint striping of the parking lot, I was told that this is in the budget so I am asking if it can be scheduled within the next month. The existing lines are almost gone. Please ask the Board to consider my request.
Ms. Burns: I did follow up to his email and ask him to specify that he was talking about the HFC parking lot.
Resident Stephen and Wendy Bachleda (public comment provided prior to meeting): Steve and I have decided to withdraw from the Focus 2025 Survey. While joint cooperation was the intent from the start there was a disagreement with two opposing legal views on Board members involvement. Steve and I received conflicting direction regarding community involvement and the true objective of the focus group. The last straw was a CDD 1 Board member trying to take complete control of the focus group outside of the meeting by changing group decisions in what is supposed to be a resident led initiative.
Resident Charles Mutz (public comment provided prior to meeting): I would like to know why there is opposition to the proposal made by the Course Rating Committee. They have suggested some changes to the golf courses which would incur no costs, to get the courses in a position so they can be rated fairly. This would benefit everyone that plays at Lake Ashton and in tournaments and outings outside of Lake Ashton. Right now we are a competitive disadvantage because our courses are not rated properly.
Ms. Burns: Those are all the comments I received prior to the meeting.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Minutes of the January 15,
2021 Board of Supervisors Meeting
Mr. Mecsics: We have the approval of the minutes of the January 15, 2021 Board of Supervisors meeting. Are there any changes, deletions, or modifications?

Ms. Littlewood: I have something that is not right. On page 27 Jillian, it says I have some questions regarding the signs and it should say the “fans” instead of “signs” there. That’s all I had.
Ms. Burns: Thank you we will incorporate that change.

On MOTION by Ms. McKie, seconded by Mr. Zelazny, with all in favor, the Minutes of the January 19, 2021 Board of Supervisors Meeting, were approved as amended.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Golf Course Update from Indigo Golf
Mr. Rhodes: Good morning. As you saw from our emails last week we did have a positive COVID last week in the Pro Shop. Out of abundance of caution we did close down the Pro Shop in Eagle’s Nest for Tuesday and Wednesday. Our HR department said that close contact is anybody within 6 feet for 15 minutes or longer within a 24 hour period, even if they are wearing masks. So, we had several employees that were in that situation. There is a five day waiting period for incubation before they can take a lab test. If they test negative they can come back after 7 days. We were able to open yesterday because all of the employees we were worried about since they were in close contact, tested negative. The employee who tested positive is still out and he is in good condition. He is waiting his 14 days. Last month I gave an update on the accounting timeline. Unfortunately I did not understand it correctly, we are on the same timeline we have always been with the contract. It will be on the 20th, and the updated accelerated timeline from Troon are only for their owned or leased golf courses. All third party managements go back to the original contracts. For January financials, the team made a strong comeback the last 10 days of the month. We were trending behind when we did this meeting last month, but we came out ahead this month. In January rounds we have 5,986. The breakdown is 5,382 for member rounds and 604 for public rounds. Member rounds are still running above what we anticipated, and public rounds are running behind just like the last several months. Green fees were down almost $5,400. The same trends are following in that situation. We’re not having as much guest play with COVID and people aren’t visiting. Our associate members aren’t playing at the pace that we anticipated. For Pro Shop sales we generated just under $10,000 for the month, which was 82% of budget.

So, we did miss in Pro Shop sales in January, but we are ahead for the year. We had a big number in December so it’s equaling out. Cost of goods was very low this month, it was 50.8%, and we are anticipating that will revert back next month. We’ve either missed an invoice or had a bad count. Food and Beverage had a solid month, it did about $18,000 on a budget of about $22,000. Cost of Goods was 40.9% and our budget is 40.2% and labor was kept in line. We were positive for the months, but we did not hit our budgeted net contribution for F&B. We were positive for the month and we were positive for the year, which during a COVID year is our internal goal. Total revenues were $157,000 for the month which was below budget by about $8,500. Gross income was below budget by about $8,500. The variance there was misses in F&B and Pro Shop. Expenses were
$10,391 below budget. Admin expense was $3,700 over, we did incur a use tax that was not budgeted. Ron has worked with Jillian and Bob, we filled out the forms and have applied to get a credit back on that. Insurance is still about $3,900 under budget, that was a budgeting error on our part. Maintenance was $8,600 and $5,500 of that was in course supplies. Course supplies for us are flags, flag sticks, rakes, etc. That will be deferred for right now. We will take inventory to see if we do need to add new stuff and when we do need to buy it. The repair and maintenance was about $1,700 under and gas was about
$1,300 under. Both of those were a savings, both were timing issues more than anything else. It left us with $23,000 for the month which was $7,000 above our budget. Even though we didn’t hit revenues we were able to perform some cost savings in labor and expenses. We did incur $6,700 of below the line expenses, that was for the cart path repair job on 9. That lowered our net income to $16,275 for the month which is right on budget. I’ll jump into the deficit funding while I’m here before Ron comes in. Even though we are showing a profit and we are $34,000 ahead on net income so far this year, we anticipate some deficit funding. We will be requesting some funds, but I can’t tell you the amount right now. I know last year we borrowed just over $200,000 and we ended up with a deficit of $72,000. We bring in invoices for chemicals that may be $10,000 and we may only allocate $2,500 for the month of January and for the next four months when we actually spray it. Most of the time when we do that advanced order the bill doesn’t come due until we’ve used all the chemicals. Expenses are not always going with cash. We do have required funding in our agreement of a minimum fund balance. That’s usually 2 to 3

payrolls. We are trying to build up a Capital Reserve at some point in time if we can be positive and make gains on the budget all the time, so we have money available to fix anything that breaks. We’re going to have to fix the elevator next month in Eagle’s Nest. It’s a $9,000 cost, and if we don’t fix it we will be in code violation. We’re also trying to do a 5 year Capital Plan. We are looking at some capital lease equipment. There are some things there that are very important. We noticed a problem on 17 green east last week. We wanted to aerify it, but we don’t have an aerifier. We tried to borrow one from Willowbrook which we have been very successful at doing. Unfortunately they had a problem so we won’t get it until Tuesday. They are still allowing us to use it but it does cause a delay. The equipment we put on the greens is very old, it’s holding us back a little bit. In a normal situation we want the newest equipment on the greens and we will take the equipment that is on the greens and move them to tees and approaches. So, if we do have a hydraulic break it affects something that is minor. For the deficit funding, we paid it back August 30 of 2020 right on time.
Mr. Mecsics: The important thing to understand when he talks about cash flow is by contract we are required to have this months and next month’s expenses in the bank. That’s where we got ourselves in trouble. When we took over in the May time period from Mr. Maxwell, we didn’t have any money in the bank. They anticipate we are going to have a cash flow problem in the June/July/August time period. That’s why we draw the money, and like he said we only used $72,000 of that $200,000. You can see from the printout that it’s basically monthly expenses that we put in. That is by contract the only things we can put in. We have to make sure we have two month’s money in the bank at all times. This year it looks like we will still have to ask for the $200,000 but we might not have to use nearly the $72,000. We don’t know. When you see the request that is coming forward for the increase in the budget, which is also required by our contract for any increase in our budget over $10,000. For the equipment, we want to add the new equipment to the budget this year and start paying on it so that at the end of the 3 or 4 year period we will have new equipment especially for the area of the greens. Did that help answer your question Colette?

Ms. McKie: Yes, thank you very much. It’s very helpful for the supervisors to have an understanding in accounting so that we can answer questions as they come. I appreciate that.
Mr. Mecsics: There’s nothing added to the slush fund, it’s just a below the line budget item. Like the cart path, you will still see it and you will see the monthly payments. There’s nothing we move or hide, we are trying to figure out what we can legitimately put on the golf course budget so that we can claim it for the write off.
Ms. McKie: Well we have the documents that we can refer to, the residents don’t.
It can be confusing to them.
Mr. Zelazny: Just for clarification, as the guy who negotiated that overfunding, we actually have up to 300. When we all started we agreed that we would try to keep it at
200. Like
Mr. Mecsics: The reason we are staying at the 200,000 is because we anticipate major irrigation issues, we have the cart patch behind the driving range, and a couple other issues that come up that we are going to take a big chunk of money. We need to have that flexibility between the $200,000 and $300,000. We never want to get there unless we have that major expense.
Mr. Hill: I’m new to the agreement. Is it my understanding that he advances that money in June or July when we start running out of cash?
Mr. Mecsics: At whatever point in the year we feel like we have a cash flow problem, we request it and he has 10 days to give us the money. Then we have to pay it back on August 30th every year. That’s why it is so important that we have the early memberships because those pay back that $200,000.
Mr. Hill: The other thing I noticed, if I’m reading this right we made $66,000 net income year to date. If I take the expenses which are 458 and I multiple them out, expenses for the year would be $1,375,000 roughly. Does that sound like the kind of money we would be looking at? Or are there more expenses in the spring and summer than the winter?
Mr. Lavoie: Brian and I need to do a CapEx, because it has not been done here. Right now, if you go out on the third hole on the bridge and look down to your left you will see a pipe there and it is a main line pipe for the irrigation. It’s sitting in 2 ½ feet of water

and there’s a major leak in it and we can’t fix it. David has jumped in there trying to fix it and he hasn’t been able to. So, something is going to have to be done there. Again, right now you don’t know if that’s $500 or $5,000 or $20,000 to fix. There are going to be things like that, but as far as operating expenses yes you take in about $1.3 and you spend about $1.3. It will probably be higher than that because of these things that might sound like a CapEx.
Mr. Hill: My question about those issues is that, these issues are on the land that belongs to the east. Would that expense not go to the east and not the golf course?
Mr. Lavoie: Those are golf course expenses because it is golf course equipment.
They just own the land.
Mr. Hill: Have you had scuba divers look into this? Mr. Lavoie: There’s a safety issue there.
Mr. Hill: Well back to the numbers, as I look at them I think you guys have done a great job especially with the COVID situation we have. When that goes away we’ll be in good shape.
Mr. Lavoie: Thank you. We have a great team. I have a few more things to bring up. Our membership/associate fees going into two days ago were actually trending ahead by one or two points compared to prior years. That’s a good start even knowing that we are down $80,000 in seasonal memberships. The other thing that happened is last month we were averaging under a round a week for the associate members, they are not playing as much as we predicted. We predicted a round and a half, but it was about 80% with 100% being one round. It climbed up to about 96% last month. A couple things that have been brought up, we talked about this 6,000 yard golf course all the time and there’s a small group that has placed an emphasis on it. We met with the advisory board and those 4 people on that advisory board represent 80% of the golfers here. We started talking about building new tees, shrinking greens, etc., and the ladies were very vocal about it. We have approximately 14 tees on both golf courses that people use every day that need serious repair. I did a tee round comparison, and these were all USGA scores that were put in by our members. It was from 2018 through 2020 and needless to say we are getting shorter. We are creeping up on the tees as far as how many rounds are being played from what tees. If anything, people are going further forward. The other thing it shows is

women are playing many more rounds as the years go on. They’ve gone from 10% on the east course in 2018 to 14%. If you put that in combination with course rating, 6,000 yard orange tees, and we’ve got a lot going on there in the middle of the season. In order to rate the orange course it has to be 3,000 yards. It gets difficult on the east course to be able to rate 3,000 yards and not go over water. The whole idea of the tees on the east course was no water. A lot of our older ladies and gentleman just want to go out and enjoy a little golf. So now what we are thinking is we might turn the east course into a par three course for a while. Then we could do a 3,000 yard course on the west course. Again, none of this is set in stone. It would be fun to have both of those courses, and that is definitely Indigo’s recommendation on that. As far as rating the golf course, we are planning on rating the golf course this summer. We need to know where the tees we have currently need to be located, because there is controversy about that. Myself and the advisory board are going to be riding the golf courses and putting the tees where they are supposed to be and then have the golf course rated. The course gets rated every 8 to 9 years for free, and anytime inside of that it’s $2,500 and $1,500 to do the length of the golf course. As far as I know, the last time the course was rated it was on google maps. So, that tells you how accurate that is. It does need to be rated. The whole thing about a 6,000 yard golf course and the handicap penalty if you’re underneath that, well the reality in the end is if I have to give Duff 3 shots he’s going to go up 3 I’m going to go up 3, nothing is going to change. I’m not saying it goes away forever, it’s just not on Indigo’s three year plan. We have enough issues just taking care of what we have to right now. We are getting pressure on a couple greens that were on high alert. Also, we have a bunch of tees out there that weren’t tees. They were just dropped in the fairway. Our goal with all this dirt coming out of these houses that are being built, let’s go build some real tees. That white tee on the first hole on the west course, it’s just two tees dropped in the ground and it floods all the time. Let’s get some dirt and let’s extend the back tee further forward and build a real tee there. Those are the issues that we want to take care of, not putting in 7 or 8 tees that we have to irrigate and everything else. It’s just not the right time. It’s the first year, let’s just figure out who we are for the first year. The other issue that came up was the golf cart fees. Just so you know from Matt’s perspective working here, the golf carts were put in and it was kind of tied to the membership. It was a selling

proposition when you moved here, that if you and your wife play on the say day you can get a cart. So, a lot of people have that in their heads. I also believe the reason the previous Board did vote on it and said that they weren’t going to charge, the reason is it’s a COVID year. For example yesterday a cart broke down on the 12th hole and it was a threesome and they called the shop to get a cart instead of sitting in a cart with somebody else, and they know the other two people. It’s still pretty important that they ride single carts. In the future, that may be one of the ways that we do charge. We are now logging everybody that takes a cart, I have it on a spreadsheet. Maybe two months from now I’ll be able to give you that and you can look at it and say, is anybody really abusing it or is it just the same regulars? It’s a big thing to table to discuss either before you sit down to write your budget, or the end of the fiscal year.
Mr. Hill: The decision about the orange tees, extending the golf course, and the cart usage, is a decision made by Indigo. Then it would be brought before the Board if it required a vote?
Mr. Mecsics: Our contract calls for Indigo to run the golf course in it’s totality. It was specifically designed that way so we didn’t get in the situation they have on the east where they used to do their restaurant. There was too much Board involvement. When we wrote the contract, it was for Indigo to have complete control of the golf course. the only thing that comes to the Board is on the recommended fees and rates they are going to propose for next year or for any increase to their budget. Everything else is an Indigo decision.
Ms. Littlewood: My understanding is that what the resident is requesting would not cost the golf course anything. It was all going to be funded. Is there any harm in trying it?
Mr. Mecsics: Which issue are you talking about Angie? Ms. Littlewood: The orange tees.
Mr. Lavoie: The orange tees are out there and they are being done. We are going to do orange courses on both sides, but one of them will be a par 3 and the other one is going to be a 3,000 yard golf course that can be rated. It’s all being done. The money they raised was to buy new tees that can be moved but also can be mowed over.
Ms. Littlewood: This issue that the resident is raising, is that being addressed?
Mr. Lavoie: Yes, definitely as far as the orange golf courses go. Like I said, we are experimenting with the two golf courses to make sure this is how they want to play it.

Mr. Mecsics: Angie, just a little background, a group of members requested a par 3 golf course be put in place overlaying our regular golf course. We supported them in that and they put out the yardage. Once they were out for a little while we got a number of comments from the more senior golfers that said the lengths of the holes that were selected by this group of golfers were too long for them and they would like to have a shorter course. Then the same group that put out the original request for the orange tees came back and said, now I want the course changed to an executive course which has to be 3,000 yards long in order for it to be rated. So, we have to reconfigure the orange courses. It was taken to the advisory Board, talked about, and the decision that came out from Indigo is that they are going to put a par 3 golf course on the east and an executive golf course on the west. The tees are going to be put in on a temporary basis to be evaluated for 60-90 days to see what the acceptance rate is with those tees. Once the executive course is finalized that’s when we can go out and get the course rated. It has been addressed numerous times, what we get is repetitive emails if they don’t get exactly what they want. We have been responsive to every email.
Ms. Littlewood: Alright. My other question then is my understanding is that every Monday one of the courses is closed for maintenance. Is that right? If you have one that is a par 3 and one that is an executive and the par 3 is closed on Monday, that means people who want to play a par 3 can’t play that course right? So at some point we’re going to have courses that nobody can play on.
Mr. Lavoie: That’s standard. We have to have one course closed every Monday just for maintenance. Not only can’t they play a par 3, they can’t play the golf course period. It’s just an accepted thing here. You have 6 days a week here where you have the choice of either one of the golf courses. He needs at least one day, especially here, because there are so many shotgun tournaments. He’s basically kicked off the golf course 3 days a week and it makes it difficult for Dave to do his work. That’s why they have to close one day a week.
Ms. Littlewood: I understand that. The point I’m making is that anybody that wants to play a par 3 when that course is closed, they can’t play it. At the moment, anybody that wants to play golf if one course is closed they can play on the other.

Mr. Mecsics: Correct. The last email from this group states that they want us to have an executive course and a par 3 on both sides. That would entail 6 sets of tees on every golf course. If you can find any golf course in America that has an executive golf course laid over a championship golf course, let me know. You certainly wouldn’t find one that has an executive golf course and a par 3 laid over the golf course. The more tee boxes you have the more work load it is for workers. We use different mowers on the tees.
Mr. Hill: To me this is an effort to try to allow the golfers here to enjoy an amenity that we have. It’s a compromise of trying a par 3 on one side and an executive on the other. If it turns out to be extremely successful, it doesn’t mean that we can’t make par 3 and executive on both sides. To me, anything that improves the residents enjoyment of our amenities, we need to give it a shot.
Mr. Mecsics: I think we said we are putting them out for a 60-90 day period to find out how they were accepted.
Mr. Zelazny: We are doing this on those two different types of courses and we are doing this as a test to see how successful it works and at the end of that time at our next meeting I’m sure you will give us an update on that. Angie, it’s important for the greens to get rested and to get maintained. If not, we’ll have a bunch of brown grass.
Mr. McKie: I think the compromise you have set up is fine. As far as having the executive course on the west that works, we really need to know the feedback from residents. If there’s going to be a rating done and we would want to have an executive course on the east as well, we need to have that in before the rating is done. The feedback we get back from golfers and the feedback you get will be important.
Mr. Lavoie: We get feedback from all the golfers. That’s the reason for the advisory board. We don’t make any decisions in a glass bubble. Matt has been here four years, he knows every members and all their habits. He predicted everything that was going to happen yesterday. We want to do things that make sense for the majority of the people here. There’s a small minority that make things what they’re not. The course is what you bought when you got here. We’re trying to make it the best that it can be that’s the number one goal.

Ms. McKie: I’d like to switch now to the black tees and the further back tees that would lengthen the course. When I was approached by multiple members about this I was pretty neutral, and I still am neutral as a golfer because the black tees won’t really affect me as a player. Fortunately I had a friend in Maryland who was on a rating team so I knew a little bit about rating. I’ve gone out with a gentleman who is a rater, he rates some of the premier courses and he happens to live here. His team are mostly people who live here. When he took me out he showed me that those further back tees already exist for the most part on the west. They are actually being mowed. You are right, not that many people would use them, but in most courses the further back tees are used by professionals or during specified tournament. In our case, it would be to be able to have a better rating that would compare with other golf courses. The fact that most of them already exist says something about the plans that were done during the design of the golf course for them to exist. The process was started previously on hole 10. It’s our job to listen to residents and give them a voice and that’s what I’m asking for. I would like it to be taken seriously because it could be a positive thing for enticing golfers to move here that wouldn’t otherwise. When we were looking at communities we looked here, and that was an issue for us. We decided ultimately to move here, but there are other people who don’t use these golf courses. What I wrote up on behalf of the gentleman, who also have wives who understand this process, the question that really impacted me was if it can be done for little or no cost and most of the tees are already there, and the burden of raising the funds of any other cost would be done by the members and we attracted two members per year, that’s $10,000. Why would we not do that?
Mr. Mecsics: I’ll address it first. One, you said it has no impact on you because it’s just the black tees. The fact is, over 3,000 square yards of green will be eliminated in order to accomplish the 6,000 yard course. That does affect you and it affects every golfer that is out here. The advisory board said if you are shrinking greens, we don’t want to do it. We’re talking almost 3,000 square yards of green just on the west. Yes, many of the black tees are in locations but there are a number that have to be built, some of which are not being mowed and don’t have irrigation contrary to what the legacy program says. If we have black tees now that nobody plays, why are we going to invest any time and effort and maintenance costs associated with putting black tees that nobody is going to

play. The biggest impact for the golfer here is 3,000 square yards of green that will be eliminated.
Ms. McKie: There is a different opinion that most of that yardage could come from putting the furthest back tees in. I don’t see any data for that, it’s an opinion as far as I’m concerned either way.
Mr. Mecsics: If you read the documentation that Carol Seltzer and his group submitted to Billy Casper to go through, it is very clear what the reshaping of every green is. In order to accomplish 10 yards more in distance you have to take 20 yards off the front of the green. It’s not an opinion it’s in the document that you are proposing under the legacy program. It was taken seriously because we went out many times. It has been discussed at the advisory board on two occasions at least. The insinuation that we haven’t taken it seriously is wrong.
Ms. McKie: Well, everyone has a right to be heard and I am speaking on their behalf. It wasn’t 20 feet off of every green by the way. Why not do the farther back tees and get what we can for little or no cost? Down the road if we choose to shorten some of the greens, we could do that. I’m concerned about us being short sided. Once a rating is done then there is 9 or 10 years between the next rating. People who are playing now, in ten years they probably won’t be playing. I was told that Lake Ashton is a community of old people who are getting older and they don’t care. We need to entice younger old people to move here, rather than moving elsewhere. Dave Wilson went out to every one of those proposed tees and he said there is adequate irrigation for all of them. We don’t have to build a tee box on 10. We use the ones that are already there and are being mowed. The people who would use them, they don’t care if they are perfect. The women, yes we want really pretty tees. Most of the men do not care. I’m concerned about us being short sided because once we make that decision then it’s 10 years.
Mr. Mecsics: It’s not 10 years. You can get a course rated any time you want, it’s free every 8 years. It’s $2,500 under 8 years. This decision is made by Billy Casper who runs the golf course. Look at the documentation they presented. All you have to do is take the length and width of every green and that comes up to over 3,000 square yards of green that is missing. In the advisory board no one supported any change that would

reduce the size of the greens. It’s not that they are not listening and are not taking it seriously.
Ms. McKie: Then the advisory board needs to bring in some of those people who do support it and they need to be taken out onto the course to see what the options and possibilities are. It seems like it could be a real positive for the executive course, the par 3, however you set it up, with options down the road to add or delete. We can’t just look at the situation now, we have to look towards the future as well. That’s our job here.
Mr. Zelazny: We have a professional company that takes care of these things. We have an advisory board. How often do the memberships on the advisory board come? Are they yearly appointments?
Mr. Mecsics: They are the representatives of the men’s league, the women’s league, the blue men’s group, the nine holers, and the ladies. They represent 80% of the community. Every golfer has the opportunity and comes in and talks to Ron. Then it’s taken to the advisory board and they discuss it then Billy Casper makes the decision.
Mr. Zelazny: Colette, I would recommend that this group of folks that are interested in this go to their representatives on the advisory and make their position known. I don’t want to sound like an old activist but maybe they need to go over and see the representatives on the board and let them know what they feel and really push for that.
Ms. McKie: That’s perfectly fine. Rating is very complex. There’s a lot involved in it and the people on the advisory board probably don’t understand what’s involved or the benefits or negatives. I would ask that the rating not be planned until people are educated. If they don’t want it, then that’s fine and you can take your stand. I do think everything should be considered.
Mr. Rhodes: I do have a few points to make. One of my first weeks here I rode the course with a group, and we were looking at the course. Our agronomy team is against shrinking greens because they naturally shrink over time. There are some other issues that haven’t been discussed and brought up in this group. I have not brough them up so you can blame me. We can get an architect out here to look at the proposals, and that would keep us out of a lawsuit. If we move a tee back and someone’s house is now getting hit or if we create a new tee and there are homes being hit that were not in the firing zone before, there may be a lawsuit. Any time we look at changing a golf course we bring in an

architect. For the first year we’ve really made our decision to focus on maintenance, memberships, and doing the right programs for the memberships. That doesn’t mean there won’t be a 6,000 yard golf course. Personally, I probably wouldn’t play it and I’m a fairly good golfer. I wouldn’t want to be peppering anybody’s house and it’s pretty tight out there. I think there is some ulterior motive on putting tees in the ground and getting it rated so it becomes the USGA. Dave Wilson can tell you there’s irrigation there and I can tell you that once we use it and we don’t grow grass correctly we’re going to change a head, nozzles, we may moves the irrigation. There are issues that Dave does not look at. If the tee in front is above, that’s another potential safety issue.
Mr. Hill: We have an advisory board of 5 of 6 people. What I suggest we do is send out a survey to the entire golf community asking them what they think and how it would benefit them. If the majority of the people on the survey say they don’t want to have 6,000 yards then the 20 people that want it are going to have to accept that. I have a question since I have the microphone. I hit more balls out of bounds probably than anybody at this golf course. Last week I hit two balls into people’s backyards. It rolled up in their back yard about 6 inches which cost me 4 strokes. Is it possible to put red stakes and have a local rule that you cannot play out of someone’s backyard but you can move it over the fairway or out of bounds and only take 1 stroke.
Mr. Rhodes: We could do a rule like that. When you do that you do affect your handicap in a negative way. It would drop your handicap further.
Mr. Hill: This golf course is narrow. They say it’s easy but the narrow part makes it not easy. To golfers, it’s upsetting that you hit one and it barely goes out and normally it would be a 1 stroke penalty and now you have to take 2. It needs some changes I think. Ms. McKie: I appreciated Duff’s idea of having a survey, on the other hand most golfers wouldn’t even know how to answer that question. I’ve been told that the issue has been around for 4 or 5 years. It’s concerning that it was started and then never finished.
I would appreciate if you would meeting with them, and if they don’t bother to meet with you then that’s their problem.
Mr. Rhodes: We are always willing to meeting. Ron’s door is open all the time and I’m not far from here now.

Mr. Mecsics: Colette, you said the initiative was started. The only effort was to put two loads of dirt on the 10th hole. If you’ve been here as long as I have you’ll know that the black tees have moved up since I’ve been here. Now they are looking to move them back. The only initiative to extend the golf course was Supervisor Robertson that said this is a potential place for a tee box, I’m going to drop some dirt. Nothing else has been done.
Mr. Zelazny: For those that are interested they have the opportunity to get with the advisory board. Is there anything else to discuss on the golf course?
Mr. Mecsics: We need to get approval to increase their budget by purchasing the new equipment. The bids are in the agenda packet. There is a bid for a 3 year period and a 4 year period with a $600 payment at the end to own the equipment at the end of that period. If you’re a golfer then you’ve seen the oil spills across the greens where the hydraulics have burst. Some of our equipment is almost 10 years old and it needs to be replaced. When Billy Casper evaluated the purchase of the golf course they indicated that it would be about a $50,000 per year for cost for equipment to replace the fleet, and this would do that. It would be the start, replacing 5 pieces of equipment. It is critical for the course and the greens.
Ms. McKie: What does it mean to increase the budget for the golf course? Where would that come from?
Mr. Mecsics: It would be below the line in this year’s budget, just like the cart paths. So, when you see what the budget is right now and you see we are $60,000 or so ahead, we would just add a $5,000 per month expense through the rest of this year. In next year’s budget it will be moved up above the line as part of the operating budget.
Ms. McKie: I want to be clear that when we say increase the budget of the golf course, that does not mean that the CDD is giving them money. I know that, but I want our residents to know that.
Mr. Mecsics: Yes. The CDD’s commitment is that no CDD dollars would fund any operation or maintenance of the golf course. What we are doing is we are accepting that deal as part of the budget. When we borrow the $200,000 instead of going in at $50,000 we might go in at $75,000. We pay that back in August and by the time we get to the end of our 4 year overdraft protection the equipment will be paid for.

Mr. Zelazny: That’s why the overdraft thing was designed, so that no non golf residents would ever be paying for the operation and maintenance of the golf course itself. That’s a good point.
Mr. Mecsics: Ron and Brian both recommend going with the 3 year lease.
Mr. Lavoie: It depends on what the goal is. I think it’s $6,400 if you go 3 years and it’s a little under $5,000 if you go 4 years.
Mr. Zelazny: I’ll make a motion to increase the golf course budget and authorize the lease to purchase the 5 pieces of equipment with the 4 year lease option. I would like the professional’s opinion on the length of the lease.
Mr. Rhodes: The equipment will last 10 years for the most part. The greens mowers, we normally try to cycle them out at busy golf courses every 3 years but we can go 4.
Mr. Hill: Is there a warranty on this equipment?
Mr. Rhodes: Yes, I believe it is a one year for all of it and then certain parts for three years and four years.
Mr. Hill: It’s not bumper to bumper then. So would that make a difference on whether or not we should do a 3 year or 4 year? I think a 4 year.

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Ms. McKie, with all in favor, the Increase to Golf Budget for Lease Equipment with a 4 Year Lease Option, was approved.

Mr. Mecsics: I would also ask for approval to move forward with identifying the equipment that will be disposed of. We are going to make the green mowers and make them tee mowers, tee mowers will be rough mowers. We have a number of pieces of equipment that are no longer useful. I would ask for authorization for Ron to identify and do the paperwork to get them off our books.
Ms. Burns: It would be a motion to surplus the excess golf equipment.

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor, Surplussing the Excess Golf Equipment, was approved.

Mr. Zelazny: We’ve gone through all the golf course issues that were brought up. We can discuss the reserve study on Eagle’s Nest. We started about 3 weeks ago and unfortunately when we had to close it we had a hiccup. We have all the parts identified and now we just have to do the research to find replacement costs and life cycles. We should have that before the next meeting.
Ms. McKie: Is there anything we need to consider for the reserve study that is in the pro shop? Like computers for example.
Mr. Zelazny: Those are in the contract for Billy Casper, so no.
Mr. Mecsics: Anything else on the golf course? If not I will excuse Ron and Brian from the meeting so they can get back to work on the golf course.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Unfinished Business
A. Discussion Regarding the Maintenance of Rattlesnake Lake and Lake Hart
Ms. McKie: On the screen behind you I have a presentation. The residents have said this has been an issue off and on for years now. What we have learned over the years is that it is important to respect the wetlands, we must preserve the wetlands, and then we can enjoy the wetlands. It’s also the law. If we don’t abide by the law then we will all pay. If the CDD is ever fined for mistreating the wetlands that money will come from all residents. We need to take it very seriously. Just this last week an article was sent by a resident about The Villages. The Villages had homes or residences where they mistreated the wetlands and they are now trying to figure out who is going to pay that penalty. There is estimated damage between $40,000 and $65,000. For example, if we were given a penalty like that for $40,000 it would cost each resident $59. For $65,000 it would cost each resident $96. If you look at the screen this is an overview of almost all of the area of both Rattlesnake Lake and Hart Lake. You can see there is a wide area, and that is CDD owned land that can be used. As you can see there is mowed grass behind the property lines of all the homes that is paid for by the CDD. If you look at the retention ponds, there is a pathway that could exist between the retention ponds and the wetlands. It is a beautiful expansive space that I didn’t even realize was there until I got this job handling landscaping. It’s owned by all of us. Some of the residents have asked why the CDD isn’t helping them with the wetlands. So I asked Yellowstone for some data and it took them about a month to get this together for us, I really appreciate their efforts. There

are 24.36 acres of mowed land in Lake Ashton West and 10.89 of those acres is the land mowed behind Hogan and Green homes. 10.89 is 44.7% of all CDDII land mowed in Lake Ashton West by the CDD. The cost per year as estimated by Yellowstone is $18,996. That is paid for by all residents to have the land behind the property lines of the residents mowed. I counted by using the plat, there are 82 homes of the 680 homes that benefit from this. That is 12% of the homes in Lake Ashton West.
*The recording temporarily lost audio during Ms. McKie’s presentation.
Ms. McKie: I live two blocks away and I didn’t realize I could go through that CDDII owned land to see that beautiful area behind the homes. It made me think about how an amenity is defined. In the Joint Amenities Facility Policy, an amenity is defined as properties and areas owned by the Districts and intended for recreational use and shall include but not specifically be limited to the Lake Ashton Clubhouse, the Lake Ashton Health and Fitness Center, the golf course and pathways, bridges, together with pertinent facilities and areas. That area, the land behind the homes on Hogan and Green on Rattlesnake and Hart, are actually amenities that I think most people don’t realize is there for them. It’s interesting, as I started working on this I got an email and a call from several residents who said, could we ever have a nature walk on the wetlands? I wrote back and said interestingly enough I’m working on that idea right now. There is interest, and I would like to know if that could be a question on the Focus 2025 survey. What activities could be done if we have a walking path along the wetlands? We had a resident comment today regarding concern about golfers hitting walkers on the golf course. I can tell you golfers are also concerned about hitting walkers. We also have continued concern about walkers who are afraid of our narrow streets. I walk on a regular basis and I walk in the narrow streets, but I walk where there is not a lot of traffic. Establishing 10.98 acres as walking parks could solve problems in regards to walkers and their issues and being hit by golfers, or being hit on our narrow streets. It would also give a location that is currently not available for family and friends. People could go for walks, fly kites, have picnics, have their grandchildren a place to play which we really don’t have in Lake Ashton. We could establish a quiet enjoyment in nature to watch the sunset, read books, and bird watch. Now, the map that is here now was actually put together by a resident who was interested in this. You can see the two red lines here, this would be an entrance into Rattlesnake

Lake and into Hart Lake. The red lines you see are on the other sides of the retention ponds along the wetland. I have sent you guys some pictures. My husband and I rode all through here and he took 150 pictures of the wetlands, birds, flowers, etc. We have wonderful nature along that area. As you can see, people would enter here and they could go here and turn around and walk back. Here on Rattlesnake Lake, this is the cart path to the Pro Shop and driving range. It’s a whole new area for people to be able to explore and utilize. I know nothing is as simple as it seems when you first talk about it, so I’m not asking for an approval by the Board for something like this. If you want to start exploring this possibility I could start looking into what we would need to do to make that possible.
Ms. Littlewood: You’ve gone through what’s mowed and what’s not mowed. That’s not the issue that people have. They understand it’s CDD land and that it gets mowed. The issue is that this pond is maintained and sprayed by Yellowstone, their issue is if that’s sprayed then why are they not taking care of what’s in the water on Lake Hart. You came at a really bad time to take photos because Lake Hart has burst its banks and is now into CDD property, that can’t be mowed at the moment. Behind my house I have another pond which is Lake Hart that has overflowed. All the shrubs that are normally there have died because they’re not shrubs that live in water. The photos you’ve taken don’t give a true image of what it’s like.
Ms. McKie: The real reason for this presentation is to address what was brought up by the resident today in regards to taking care of the wetlands. I have a form, after the last meeting a put a draft form together for the residents who live along the wetlands and would like work to be done to take out exotic or nuisance plants. That way it’s done in a way that is approved and that the CDD would not have to worry about any permit or infractions by SWFWMD. Sarah went through this and it is legally correct. There were a few blanks left that I want to address. On number 3 the form says the CDD will review and approve or deny the application within blank days. I suggest 14 days, as we get used to this we could change that but I think that gives us plenty of time. As far as who would review it, I’ve started a book of all the plants that are in that area with descriptions and pictures so that I could go when someone applies, and I could see what plants are there and what could be changed or taken out. I also have Archi Campbell with Applied Aquatic and Chaz was very clear when she came out a couple of weeks ago. Alan, Archie, and

myself spend an hour and a half with her. She was very clear in saying that Applied Aquatic is their go to company because they can count on them and they know what they are doing. She said Archie is one of their best folks. There was a question about what the checks would be made out to if a resident wants to have the work done, and the checks would be made out to Lake Ashton II CDD. In number 5 it says your payment will be noted on this form and logged, if you do not accept the bid your property must remain completely untreated. I received a suggestion for an edit there that it would say if you do not accept the bid, your property must remain completely untreated unless you reapply in the future. That way it’s not just a one-time thing and if you don’t have work done that you can never do it again. I would like to get approval to move forward in putting this process in place.
Ms. Littlewood: I’ve been working and involved in this for a long time. I’ve paid to have this done. I’ve had permission from the CDD to do it and the permits to do it. Then I had a cease and desist letter even though I was compliant. I am happy to pay for it, but the residents now are really annoyed and they don’t want to pay. They believe that the CDD should have some responsibility in maintaining it. I think they have a point quite frankly even though I’m prepared to have it done. You’ve done a lot of work and you’ve done a really good job, but the idea was for it to be looked at by the CDD to maintain it. I don’t think that has been addressed.
Mr. Zelazny: Angie, I know all about the letter you got because I was on the Board. There was a lot of misinformation given out by an individual about permits and things like that. When our legal team looked at that, it did not have legal efficiency. Unfortunately for you guys you were the ones hanging out there with the liability. It’s CDD property, we are the only ones that can negotiate with SWFWMD. I’ve heard that residents feel the CDD should pick that up, and it’s up to our Board to decide if we want to add that into our budget.
Ms. Sandy: Just a point of clarification, Colette I noticed when you were reading the form and talking about number 5 saying if you do not accept the bid your property must remain completely untreated, it’s actually the CDD property that we are focused on being treated or not. So it would be the CDD property adjacent to your property, we can clarify that language. We are not saying what people can do with their own property, it’s the CDD’s property that we are concerned with.

Mr. Mecsics: A couple things, first I think the document is great. We have always allowed residents to maintain their buffer zone as long as they came through the CDD. The issue with Mr. Murphy is that he contract separately to go into CDD property and cut, that’s why he was asked to stop. I think this solidifies the program and makes it very clear. I would suggest two things. One, I don’t think we need a 14 day review from the CDD. The CDD only meets once a month, so I would suggest getting approval from you or the amenity manager Colette. I think that should be good enough. As part of that I think we should make an amendment to the Applied Aquatic contract giving us a mechanism by which you can contact them and we can do the billing back and forth. I think this is spot on and clears up all the questions. To Angie’s point, I know the residents would like to have that done and I think it’s a great topic when we get to our budget workshop in March and May. Right now, this year there is no money to move around for that project.
Ms. Littlewood: Going back to the walking and making it like a nature trail, it’s a great idea, but there will have to be some kind of signage at the end to stop people from going further on because then they will be trespassing onto someone else’s land. The other thing is we have gators that come out that go from Lake Hart into that little pond. I would hate for anyone to call wildlife and fisheries and get these gators removed. We are used to them and we like them, we don’t want them removed.
Mr. Mecsics: I appreciate what Angie says. For the signage, maybe we could just roll that into the signage committee and they can come up with a sign that says, “Nature Walk; Beware of Alligators” or something along those lines. I do think this presentation and this form is spot on.
Ms. McKie: Thank you. The signage is something we need to take into consideration. Also, we need some guidance in regards to dogs. Do we want dogs on leash only, for people to bring their own bags, take your refuse home, etc. I didn’t want to start working on those things until I met with you guys. Bob, on number 3, I think it is a good idea to change that to CDD representative or something like that because we don’t want the Board to have to meet over this.
Mr. Mecsics: You could have them submit it to the Amenity Manager, Mary can call you and you could be the approving member from the CDD. We would have no delay then.

On MOTION by Mr. Mecsics, seconded by Mr. Zelazny, with all in favor, Appointing Colette McKie as the Representative to Approve the Requests and Finalize Form and Process with Community Director, was approved.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	New Business
Discussion Regarding Guard House Utilities
Ms. Sandy: I will address this and Alan may have some additional input. As the Board may remember I think we have mentioned this issue a couple times over the past few months, there were some issues with the sewer at the guard house. Alan and Eric Olsen from our office, who has been working with us on the water drainage issue, have been looking into it trying to determine who is the owner of the utilities and what steps would need to be taken from there. At this point in time I think Eric and Alan have come to the determination that while these utilities were built they did not ever appear to be accepted by the city. It also does not appear that there is a specific permit for them. There might be a general permit that they fall under, however. Based on that, we believe that they are owned by the District and need to be addressed by the District at this point in time. I think the plan from here is for Alan to work on getting an estimate for some septic companies to provide an assessment of what the utilities that are there look like and how they compare to the building standards. From that assessment point the idea is if they meet code then move forward with getting them approved permitting after the fact. If they are substandard then we will have to address bringing them up to code and then getting them permitted by the city. Based on Alan’s conversations with the city, they are not interested in taking ownership of these utilities. They view them like they would for a resident or a residential lot, up to point of connection. We did have FDEP reach out to us regarding the initial overflow issue that we had. That is still yet to be resolved. We are going to wait to talk to FDEP until after we have a permitted project. There is likely to be some negotiations regarding penalties because the utilities were potentially not up to code at the time that there was an issue. That is to be determined and would be dealt with after we get the utilities themselves addressed.
Mr. Rayl: I concur with how Sarah explained that. We looked into the issue of the connection. There is an 8 inch force main that leaves Ashton Boulevard and goes out to

653. That 8 inch force main is a City of Winter Haven utility. If anything ever happens with that they are the ones we call, they are the ones that fix it. The connection of the guard house bathrooms to that force main is ours. That is private. I’ve never seen any public utility municipality ever maintain any infrastructure like that. Those types of connections are always privately owned and maintained. So I am satisfied that is what occurred from the very beginning of construction of this. From everything we have seen the utilities were always a part of the guard house construction from day one. The guard house was constructed with the road way infrastructure. This should have been an element contemplated and approved under the building permit that went with the guard house. The City of Winter Haven doesn’t have any records of the building permit of the guard house, it’s a dead end there. I can assure you that in all the subdivisions I’ve built, you don’t get to connect to public utilities without it passing through some level of review. It would be unheard of for that guard house to have been constructed with bathroom facilities and a connection to a public utility line that would not have had somebody at Winter Haven check the box. Beyond that, we have not been able to find evidence that it was included in the FDEP permit that was used to construct all the infrastructure, or that it had its own separate general authorization to construct. The issue that occurred out here that caused us to look into the wet well and the mechanics of things going on, was a valve that wasn’t there, which would lead us to believe that this was maybe not a permitted system or that valve would have been there. The valve is there now. There are companies that operate and maintain private lift stations in developments. We are going to get with one of those companies to put that station in a condition that it can be inspected with some as constructed information. We can compare to an original permit if found or apply for a new permit if that’s the road we have to go down. Either scenario will get us to the point of being able to solve this issue and it won’t come back.
Ms. Sandy: So the Board is aware of HGS’s role in this, Alan is going to be working to get the estimates. We will be involved to the extent needed in any kind of discussions with the city in terms of getting permits and any discussions with FDEP. I don’t believe we have an estimate in terms of the overall project cost, but depending on the state of the utilities there could be some costs here that the District is looking at.

Mr. Mecsics: Alan, I will ask that you work with Duff, the infrastructure Supervisor.
Please bring him up to speed on that. Thank you Sarah and Alan.
Mr. Zelazny: Alan, we still have a connection problem at the guard shack?
Mr. Rayl: No, there was a repair made and the missing part was installed. It was a check valve that prevents flow from returning back to that station. The lack of the piece made us think that is was something that had not been permitted or not been constructed as permitted.

Consideration of Fee Increase Letter for District Counsel Services from Hopping, Green & Sams
Ms. Sandy: I will address this as well. Part of the agreement that the District has with our firm is that there is an annual rate increase to the extent that the hourly rates were not increased above $15 an hour for attorneys or paralegals. Due to the large extent of the costs and the sensitivity to how much work into the golf course acquisition we did not implement and annual increase last year. We are proposing an annual increase but we think that we can delay it until the start of the District’s next fiscal year. It would not go into effect until October 1, 2021. As we have always done we try to keep our rates down by using either paralegal services or the lower associate rates in order to do most of the work and keep it on the lower end. Certainly we strive to do our bust to not have any kind of budgetary for the District. Our annual rate increase is due to our firm reviewing costs and looking at the market and trying to keep up with that. That’s when we implement those rate increases. The District does receive a discounted rate from our new client rates, the existing client rate that the District receives is at a discount and it is lower than what our existing clients have because we have not implemented the annual increases in the past. I am happy to answer any questions that the Board has regarding these rate increases. I am not looking for any Board action at this time, we just wanted to provide notice of what is to be expected come the next fiscal year.
Mr. Zelazny: I have in my notes that it will be part of what we look at during our next budget workshop and Board meeting as well, whether we want to go out for a competitive bid or to continue on.
Mr. Hill: The problem I have with this is it looks like there is gender inequity here.
Jill corrected me and said there is a partner that gets more than Sarah does.

Ms. Sandy: I recently did become a partner at our firm, but Mike and Wes have been partners in our firm longer than I have. It’s usually more associated with the tenure at the firm, but I appreciate your concern Duff.
Mr. Hill: The other thing that disturbed me is that your law firm has increased the revenue from the CDD II $18,000 this year. I feel that the timing of this request for a rate increase does not sit very well with me, especially when we are trying to keep our expenses down. I’m sure the Board will review this, but it bothers me some.
Mr. Mecsics: Are there any other comments? Hearing none, we will move on.
Thank you Sarah.

Discussion  Regarding  Landscape  Improvements  to  Ashton  Boulevard
(requested by Supervisor McKie)
Ms. McKie: Ashton Boulevard is like the front door of all of our houses. If you think about the front door of your home, you want it to look the very best it can. You might not care so much about the back door. We have to consider that Ashton Boulevard is the first and last view that people have of Lake Ashton West. That’s for all of us who currently live here, perspective buyers, real estate agents, and everyone else who goes in and out. Ashton Boulevard is one of the few amenities we have where everybody uses it whether they are a golfer, mostly homebound, whichever. Unless people on the West always go toward the Clubhouse entrance they are using that boulevard. It’s been an issue that I heard of for several years, about the plants that are there. I was asked to look at us restoring it. One of the issues is we used to have some of the annuals and we decided to save money, and I think it was the right thing to do but people miss the color. They miss the variety. I contacted companies and I sent you the bids and I purposefully had no comments on those bids because I wanted you to see what I was given. As we go through this then I do have comments that I can share. I was given a request for a low cost solution. The low cost solution is to;
Remove/relocate all trees and shrubs on Boulevard
Replace the trees with 2 or 4 arm light poles
Replace the magnolias with shaped bushes or colored bushes
Install new grass where trees and shrubs were removed

Install Royal Palms with small bed of colored bushes around them
Main objective of this suggestion is to stop yearly expense of $4,000 for mulch
I am not going to go through all of the information I shared with you, but as I talked to each professional landscaper who came to see the area I asked them if we should consider this option over the description that was read to the Board last month. It was mostly putting in Florida friendly plants in the right places. All three of the professionals had the opinion that taking out trees is very expensive and removing trees that are healthy is not environmentally advised. Then adding more grass versus mulch, I did some research online in addition to the opinions that the landscapers gave me. Buying and installing grass is more expensive that buying and installing mulch. With the grass you have all the maintenance involved. Environmentally, especially here in Florida, the mulch is more environmentally friendly because as it breaks down it becomes part of the soil. The cost would be more to us overall to do grass, so I did not ask that the landscapers give a bid on this suggested option. I gave you three bids but I also contacted another company that had been recommended. They didn’t call back. I also contacted Lukas in Orlando, which is a very popular landscaping company, and they were very nice. However, for them to give us a bid they would want $250 in advance and then they would put together a plan. In our concern about funds I felt that if we could get some bids where we didn’t have to pay, that would be preferred. One of the companies was Unlimited Properties Solutions, we see their trucks all the time. They actually enlarged my driveway and they did a great job and the price was very reasonable. None of the companies were given a budget. I wanted to see what they came up with, because usually when you give a budget they will meet that budget or exceed it. Their rep had very creative ideas and was very interesting to talk to. The bid does include removal of existing plants. The problem I had with them was he said, ‘I’ll have blueprints to you next week’ and I didn’t hear from him. On Monday I called and he said there was a mix up, and they had bigger jobs, and he would get it to me the next week. He also did not give the plan he promised, he gave me what is in front of you. There was no blueprint, no specification of plants, and basically they wanted us to accept the bid knowing nothing. In the bid there is 740 total plants and their cost estimate was $22,000. Every contractor said that as we are pulling out those dead shrubs there is very likely going to be damage done to the current irrigation

system. The irrigation may need some adjustment because the of the plants that will be put in. Because of the shrubs location, none of the contractors could really see where the current irrigation is. We would have to plan on some amount for irrigation changes and fixing any damage. In my perspective, this is not something I would consider. We don’t need to beg and remind people to do their jobs. The next bid is Yellowstone. Again, they were not given a budget to work with. Dana is very good to work with, when I have given him a deadline or asked him to observe a deadline he has followed through. He had great ideas and a lot of interest. As you saw in what was sent to you there were pictures of some of the plants so you can get an idea of what they were. The removal of existing plants is included. For the 7 islands, his price was $20,206.61. That included 1,448 plants. That is over the yearly budget for landscaping. Again, we would have to plan on irrigation changes and fixing damages. I was talking to Mary about these bids and I said I didn’t understand how we would work the irrigation if we chose a company other than Yellowstone. I was informed that Yellowstone maintains our irrigation. When we have new irrigation to be added we hire another company because Yellowstone’s pricing is too high. I also learned that there has been some concern about the level of maintenance on the island plants. $20,000 is better than $22,000 but it is over our budget. Fox Hollow is a company that I found online and was highly rated. In talking with the owner she has owned Fox Hollow for 40 years. She was not given a budget, she had creative ideas and interest and she was the only one that delivered the estimate before the deadline. The hauling and removal of plants is included as you probably saw in the bid that I sent you. What I didn’t understand was that she sent her bid in two pages and the second page didn’t completely transfer over. Her bid is $12,473. I didn’t realize we didn’t pay tax, so that’s a goodness on our part. This bid is under the $15,000 landscape budget for 2021. Since we don’t know them like we know the other two companies, I asked her some questions that I anticipated the Board asking. I asked her about commercial landscaping they have done, and she sent me a list. They’ve done landscaping for Lake Gwyn Park in Wahneta, Jarrett-Gordon Ford Dealership in Lake Alfred, Vertical Blinds, Cypress Gardens, McDonald’s in Winter Haven, Auburndale, Dundee, Cypress Gardens, and Lake Ruby. So, they certainly have done commercial contracts before. She also said they do installation and maintenance for those people. I asked, since irrigation could be an issue,

that they could do the irrigation changes and fix any damage. They would handle mulch for the islands. Since there was concerns of maintenance they would be open to giving us a bid for maintenance just for the islands. That’s all the information I have, and if you have any questions I can take those. If you want me to get more information let me know.
Mr. Hill: The first two bids there were 1,400 plants on one and 700 on the other. I did a quick count on the Fox Hollow bid, if she’s going to do three islands there are only approximately 400 plants involved. Is that going to be enough to make it look right, or will it look sparse? Have you done an analysis of that?
Ms. McKie: In the count I have there are 1,018 plants total for the Fox Hollow proposal.
Ms. Littlewood: Is she leaving in all the palm trees and magnolias? Are they taking out all the Hawthorns? I don’t see the point in taking out plants that are not dead to be honest.
Ms. McKie: The Hawthorns would be removed and some of the hedges would be trimmed back so they are not close to the palms trees because we don’t want plants near the palm trees in case we have to put them back in or take them out. The Magnolias would remain. I didn’t deal at all with palm trees because they are so expensive. We can certainly look at them down the road.
Ms. Littlewood: I was concerned about the palm trees being taken out because I think it needs the height of them to make a statement.
Mr. Mecsics: I have a few questions Colette. 18 months ago when we embarked on the issue based on some resident comments, the issue was the 6 missing palm trees and the appearance of having a palm tree in this island and two in the next and then an island with none. My question going forward would be how do we address the palm tree issue or are we just not going to address it and leave them until such time as they go. The next issue was the dead Hawthorns which makes a lot of gaping holes. I think we were in the vicinity of 150 mixing Hawthorns. I want to make sure that our solutions address those concerns when we go forward. My other question is what is the way ahead? We have presentations on a couple vendors, but what is the way ahead?
Mr. Zelazny: We have a budget workshop coming up on March 30th, and I think we should discuss and look at the options Colette has brought up for us.

Ms. McKie: In regards to the palm trees, I emphasized last month that we need to do this in stages. The plan is for the missing palms trees, when we can afford it we will put in Royal Palms in their place. It depends on money. If we have more money we can do more things. I also asked Fox Hollow what kind of time frame they had. They will plant all year round. I asked if we could do it in stages. If we do it in stages, then we have to pay for the excavator every time they bring it out. If we do all 7 islands, she said they can do it in 2 days. She asked that Ashton Boulevard be closed from 9-4. She would be willing to give us a bid for irrigation and whatever else we might want. That’s the plan ahead. The palms trees are going to have to wait.
Mr. Mecsics: I heard you say that we would put a Royal Palm where there was a hole. Then we would have 2 Medjools, a Royal Palm, a Royal Palm, a Medjool. Sequencing is very important to me. If it’s in the plan to replace the palm trees, then to invest $20,000 in the shrubs that would be torn up when you put in palm trees or street lights would seem counterproductive. I agree the Royal Palms going down the Boulevard would be the ideal solution. If we are going to be doing something with the palm trees, shouldn’t sequencing be more important than putting in the hedges that we are going to potentially tear out within a year or two? I wonder if there is a low, mid, or high cost alternative like maybe removing the outer tier of Hawthorns because the interior bushes look very healthy and clean. So you would have a mulch are. I don’t know the answer. When I looked at the documents I was kind of hoping we would have a landscaping workshop where we could engage in conversation about these things. If it’s in the workshop environment then residents can have input during the discussion phase. If this is just for information this is a great job and we have three great approaches, but if we’re looking at taking action now or in the near future I would have to have a lot more detail and options before I could support it.
Ms. Littlewood: I agree with Bob about having a workshop, and I agree with Colette that this is like our front door. But the front door is actually before you get into the gate, when you come in from the east and then come from the west there’s no comparison.
Mr. Mecsics: Yesterday Brenda told me if it was her choice she would invest the initial amount of money to get the entry way looking very nice. The east changed from their perennials to flowers in the front which gave them a big splash of color. You talked

about us going away from those. The ones that were in the middle of the islands were very small but there were 200 or 300 plants per small section that lasted 2 months and then we took them out. If it was isolated to the entry we could have color all the time. My wife and I agree that coming in the gate is the first visual you see.
Ms. McKie: In regards to the palms, sequencing is fine and you know how much it costs to take a Medjool out. The objective was to put the row of palms in where there are holes then as we have the money or as the Medjools die, then we replace them with Royal Palms. In regards to the entry way, I agree that the entry is very important but that was not what the Board asked me to work with. I watched the CDD I Board meeting and they got estimates for their entry way which were about $17,000. We can’t do both. I did what the Board asked me to do, I did what has been under consideration for at least a year and that was the 7 islands. We don’t want to drive the landscapers crazy because we can’t make our mind up. I don’t know how to move forward. I would be happy to have resident input, I’m the one that got owners input about the lamp posts. But we don’t have a lot of leverage with time or money. If we don’t use the $15,000 that is budgeted I don’t get another $15,000 when the years ends. I still only have $15,000 to work with. I don’t want to waste anyone’s time including mine if we don’t know what we are going to do.
Mr. Mecsics: It’s not true that your money goes away. It does roll over. It can build up. We haven’t done that in the past because we haven’t had any projects by which to do that. The money doesn’t go away it just goes down below the line. At the budget meeting we need to have a sense of what all this is going to cost and plan for a way forward.
Mr. Zelazny: We have a budget workshop. Colette could also chair a workshop with residents discussing all this. That way residents could get their input. Jillian is that correct?
Ms. Burns: If you’re going to have more than one Board member present then we would want to do an advertised workshop. If she’s just going to get with a group of residents and ask questions about landscaping she could do that at any time.
Ms. McKie: This is what I was asked to do and my thinking was, if we do these 7 islands and see how that fits we could then use the budget for next year to do the entry. We could do it the opposite as well, but we’ve got to be clear.

Mr. Mecsics: I agree with you. A decision has to be made on how we move forward. Once a decision has been made we will support that decision. The task was to look at Ashton Club Boulevard. 18 months ago it started as an issue with the trees then we went to the Hawthorns. Yellowstone provided an alternative which was the crotons and then they negotiated with an oyster plant bid. Today I’m presented 3 options that don’t have any of those on them. I’m asking questions and you for some reason feel like I am aggressively against these. I’m not, I’m just asking how are we addressing the palm trees which was the issue 18 months ago. How are we addressing the sequencing? And how are we addressing the funding? Every one of these deals with irrigation, I have no idea what the unanticipated costs of irrigation are. I just hope you are not looking for a decision today. I think there needs to be more information.
Mr. Zelazny: The task we gave her was to do the islands and she has done that. As I said, this is something we are going to have to bring up at our budget workshop to work into the budget. We can roll over the $15,000 so she has more to work with for the 2021 budget. She has accomplished what her mission was, however, our next phase is going into our budget workshop and make a plan.
Ms. Littlewood: Colette, I don’t want you to think I was being disrespectful. You’ve done a great job but I was using your analogy to say the front door of the community is the entry way. It’s not that I don’t appreciate what you’ve done, I’m just using the analogy you gave us. I do think this needs more discussion quite frankly.
Mr. Mecsics: Be prepared for our budget workshop.
Mr. Hill: We’ve gone two years without doing anything to this front entrance to this community. She spent the time to get this survey done and it’s under budget. The only thing I see we need to do is decide about the palm trees. If the palm tree work won’t destroy the other landscaping I would like to move forward with this as quickly as we can.
Ms. Littlewood: I think you already said that the plantings would be put in such a way that if we had to remove any palms or put in palms, it wouldn’t disrupt the plantings.
Ms. McKie: Right.
Mr. Mecsics: From the Board perspective, do we want to put this on the Board workshop and then at the next meeting make a decision to go forward?
Mr. Hill: Yes.

Mr. Mecsics: We can take a vote at the next meeting.
Ms. McKie: Would you like me to get a quote for the entry way from Fox Hollow? Mr. Mecsics: Yes.
Ms. Burns: Normally when we are doing landscape improvements we use the entity that is going to end up maintaining it, which will be Yellowstone. So, I would ask for warranty information on the installs if somebody else is maintaining this. We’ve had issues before with vendors not warrantying the plants they put in and things like that. It’s an important thing to consider.
Ms. McKie: I did consider that and I asked Fox Hollow about that. She said they stand by their plants and generally new plants die from lack of water. She said if there were any issues she would evaluate and make a decision based on whether it was their issue or lack of water.
Mr. Mecsics: Colette, in their proposal she indicated that she could maintain the islands?
Ms. McKie: Yes.
Mr. Mecsics: Do we have the cost for that? Ms. McKie: No. She was hesitant to send that.
Mr. Mecsics: Okay. Jillian is exactly right. In our current contract with Yellowstone they have to replace any plant that dies.
Ms. McKie: In the Yellowstone contract it says they will replace plants that die because of them, not because they’re old or poor irrigation. It is not a blanket issue that all plants are replaced if they die.
Mr. Mecsics: They are required to replace plants that die from irrigation because under their contract they are responsible for the irrigation in the community.
Ms. Littlewood: It shouldn’t make a difference then. If they have to replace plants that die because of poor irrigation it shouldn’t matter who plants them.
Ms. Burns: What ends up happening in this situation is that there ends up being a lot of finger pointing. They’ll say it wasn’t the irrigation it was the plants and then we’ve got two people saying it was somebody else’s fault. Whereas if the entity who has the maintenance contract is the one doing the installation, it falls on them. I just want you to

know if you go with somebody who is not Yellowstone to install these plants that we need to have warranty stuff figured out.
Mr. Mecsics: Clarify with both companies so we know where we stand with the warranties. Just because Yellowstone does it and they’re already hired, it doesn’t give them the edge in my book.

Discussion Regarding Exterior Fence Proposals (requested by Supervisor Zelazny)
Mr. Zelazny: In your packet you have two bids to work on the exterior fence line. One is a $1,200 bid to paint the tops of the walled fence. That would be done by in house staff so we would primarily be paying for the paint. It saves us a little over $2,000. The bids for that were around $3,000. The other is for $998 to replace 11 fence posts along the 11th and 12th hole which have been bent and pulled out of the ground and disconnected to the top of the fence. The fence is starting to stretch and if we don’t get it fixed now we are going to have to spend a lot more money fixing the cyclone fencing.

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Mr. Hill, with all in favor, the Fence Proposal for $998, was approved.

Discussion Regarding Increase in Golf Course Budget (requested by Supervisor Zelazny)
This item was discussed during the fifth order of business, under the golf course update.

Update Regarding Memorial Program (requested by Supervisor Zelazny; item back-up provided by Supervisor McKie)
Mr. Zelazny: I provided you a copy of that. We discussed the program where you could sponsor a hole for a departed loved one. We agreed that it was $10,000 for 10 years. That expanded the idea to other memorializations like tree plantings and other things. I did a fact sheet for your review and we can discuss it at the next meeting because it’s not time sensitive. I looked to expand it beyond sponsoring a hole or putting in a palm tree. We had a lady who put on a function and donated half the money for all of the

plantation shutters. She should be recognized as a friend of Lake Ashton. Establishing tiers of donations and contributions to the CDD costs us nothing other than a frame and a plaque that says you are a platinum contributor. For example the pickle ballers got us a lot of money for the pickleball courts. We should recognize them as patrons to Lake Ashton at a platinum level because their contribution was significant. It was $25,000 or more. It’s just an expansion of sponsoring a hole for $10,000. I would like you to review and provide comments. We can talk about it at a Board meeting when we aren’t so time crunched.
Mr. Mecsics: We can task Bob with continuing to work on that program.

Update Regarding Focus 2025 (requested by Supervisor Zelazny)
Mr. Zelazny: As you know Steve and Wendy sent a comment in. They were designated to chair the effort for our side. They have withdrawn from the chairmanship. The committee did kick off on time and they meet every Tuesday afternoon. There were 12 representatives from the West and 12 representatives from the East. There was a difference of opinion on the direction and the scope of the effort between our chairman and the representatives from the East. Having said that, we really miss Steve and Wendy’s participation and leadership. We have asked them to come back, if they don’t want to be leaders, they can participate. They bring so much to the table. In the meantime, the representatives that represent us and the East are fully committed to the project and getting the survey out, returned, evaluated, and in the hands of the Board members before the May budget meeting. The differences in direction and scope, it was nuances primarily. We were very focused on amenities like we were in 2020. The group voted collectively that they wanted to expand it a little bit and look at other areas so the survey has grown. We will get the information we need out of it. Our representatives will do the evaluations and recommendations for our Board. I appreciate everybody on our side and the East. It is a joint effort because we are looking at all the amenities, not just the East or West.
Mr. Hill: I understand working together with both sides is important, but what concerns me is you have 1,200 residents on that side and 700 on this side and you are doing a survey to find out what they would like to do. It can’t help but be weighted more

in the eastern projects. I wonder if we couldn’t have our own 700 residents decide what they think is the best thing to do with our 2025 survey.
Mr. Mecsics: In my opinion it would be counterproductive to put two surveys out covering the same things. The survey, as designed, captures your address, age, gender, length of time lived here, etc. The responses that come back all show if you are from the East or West.
Mr. Hill: Should legal comment on whether or not a Board member could participate and be on this committee?
Ms. Sandy: I’m happy to weigh in. We discussed this before the last focus group. If there are one or more Board members participating, then certainly we have to notice that. The discussion last time was that if there is a single Board member participating in their role as a resident, not as a representative of the Board, that was okay. The committees themselves are not appointed by the CDD’s. They are resident initiated. If we have multiple Board members getting involved then it becomes more of a CDD committee and we would have to comply with Sunshine Laws, Public Records Laws, etc.
Mr. Zelazny: Our group is led by residents with no CDD participation.

Discussion Regarding Easements (requested by Supervisor Mecsics)
Mr. Mecsics: As discussed at the last meeting, there are some areas where golf cart paths encroach on the resident properties that are being built. The lots identified are on the newest Pebble Beach area. Alan looked into the issues regarding those lots. The comfort station near hole 6, there are some issues that need to be resolved. Specifically it is the lack of potable water and sanitary connections to city lines. Again, I’d like to ask Alan to work with Bob, since public utilities and golf course is your area, to explore the costs associated. Finally, Colette will work with Alan on the easement between the two homes at the end of the cul de sac to facilitate the connections to the comfort station. There are some discussion about other entrances in the golf cart path, and I saw what Sarah sent out as far as the CC&Rs. I want to make sure going forward as other houses are built that there are no issues for the CDD or the golf course where we are required to do something.

Mr. Hill: I’ve look at that area and my recommendation is that we need to do something before they finish building the two houses. Once they build the houses and put grass in, we’ll have to cut down through there and the cost to put the cart path in will be more than if we put it in while there’s dirt on the ground. I’d like to put the cart path in and postpone putting out connections for sewage and water to the bathroom area. The other reason we need to do it fairly quickly is because that way the golf cart traffic will continue to go against the golfers direction. If we don’t do anything then the only solution would be for the golfers and social drivers to go the same direction which is against what we’ve set up as a policy.
Mr. Mecsics: Alan I’m going to turn it over to you. If we put the concrete pad on top of that easement, that’s where the pipes go.
Mr. Rayl: I wouldn’t recommend putting the cart path improvement down until the utility lines go down. To clarify, in that area it’s not an easement, it’s actually a tract. It’s in-between the two lots, an easement would be the two lot lines coming together and we’d have the right of access over other properties. This is actually our CDD District property. It’s a 10 foot wide tract that connects the golf course lands behind. In the original design of the community, it was provided for a water service connection and a 2 inch force main connection. Those 2 elements were stubbed out to the beginning of that tract just outside the right of way line. The force main connects to an existing man hole that is in the cul de sac. The service water line connects to the potable water line that runs around the cul de sac. We have already submitted to the City of Winter Haven a plan showing connected to and extending those services line down the tract, down the golf course property to the comfort station building on hole 6. That plan is being reviewed by Winter Haven utilities right now. It would involve cutting out a section of that interconnecting cart path where that storm man hole is back there, to bring the lines through that area and then that cart path would be replaced. Then I would recommend if the District wants to make that paved connection between the cul de sac and the longitudinal cart path, then make that improvement. The lines are to be installed, the have to have at least 6 feet of separation. They will run about where the edge of the concrete above will be. You couldn’t install them in the extra green space outside an existing cart path. It wouldn’t work well. We can get pricing from contractors now to do that installation of the utilities so the Board can

have a budget number to look at. I would not advise continuing to use that as a bathroom building without these permitted hookups.
Mr. Hill: What sort of time frame are you looking at?
Mr. Rayl: We should have a permit from Winter Haven in the next couple of weeks. We’ll have contractor pricing in that time too. At our next meeting I can have everything that the Board would need to consider.
Mr. Hill: At the rate they’re going I don’t think those houses will be finished anywhere near two weeks.
Mr. Zelazny: Alan, how big of pipes are we talking about running down from the cul de sac? Big pipes or little pipes?
Mr. Rayl: 2 inch force main and I think a 1 ¼ inch water line service.
Mr. Mecsics: Do you recommend that we hold off on the cart path until such time that the pipes are put in?
Mr. Rayl: I would, it could be done quickly.
Mr. Mecsics: If we could install the cart path now while it’s leveled and it’s not grass then it’s a little bit cheaper. You’re going to have to dig it up to put the pipes in anyways.
Mr. Rayl: And you run the risk that the utility contractor doesn’t care about the concrete guys work.
Mr. Mecsics: I got a preliminary bid to have for talking purposes today. It was
$35,000 if you had to use the machine and $31,000 if he could do it without bringing the big crane in. That’s a ball park figure. Duff, I was concerned too that we need to strike while the iron is hot before they’ve got all the grass in. Another question, the easement on 10 that we identified, some golfers had requested access so they didn’t have to go on the cart path so far. The problem is the houses are going up now, if we’re going to put in that cart path there that’s time sensitive but it’s $3,500. My personal opinion is that it’s not necessary.
Mr. Rayl: I agree, just because we have tract or access does not mean we have to do anything about it.

Discussion Regarding Reserve Study for Golf Course and Eagle’s Nest
(requested by Supervisor McKie) – ADDED

This item was discussed during the fifth order of business, under the golf course update.

Discussion of Golf Course Expenses Earmarked for Inclusion in Operating Deficit Funding Agreement (requested by Supervisor McKie) – ADDED
This item was discussed during the fifth order of business, under the golf course update.

Discussion Regarding Policy for Approval of Tree Installation on CDD Property (requested by Supervisor McKie) – ADDED
Ms. McKie: I received a request from a resident on Pebble Beach asking about installing a tree on the CDD property. She said that she wanted to be sure it was done correctly and she’d been given a verbal approval. That’s fine, but I started thinking about residents planting trees on CDD property. What if it dies? Who is responsible for that? What if the tree is picked up by a hurricane and slams into their or someone else’s house? What if a future owners says they don’t like the tree it’s on your property and you have to take it out? I didn’t know how to address that. I know trees are good for the environment, but I asked Sarah if there’s something that already exists that says if a resident plants a tree on CDD property, who is liable for what if anything. She said nothing currently exists. I wonder if we should initiate something like that so that the residents are protected and we are protected.
Ms. Sandy: Colette, what I was addressing was that I was not aware of any kind of process where a homeowner would approach the District and get approval to put a tree on District property. I would assume that once the tree is placed on District property that it becomes property of the District and we are owners and maintainers of that tree and subject to any kind of liability as such. In terms of the initial program to have homeowners planting trees on District property, I’m not aware this District has any kind of policy in place in regards to that.
Mr. Mecsics: Way back when a person came and we said they could put it on the property as long as it doesn’t interfere and once you put it on that property it is ours. If it dies we will remove it. Maybe we need to appoint a Supervisor to approve those kinds of

things when they come up. Both of the people requesting the planting are on Pebble Beach, both in areas where there are lots next to them.
Ms. Littlewood: Why would they want to plant trees on property that isn’t theirs? Ms. McKie: This particular person just wants the side of her house to have a tree.
My concern is there is nothing in writing. If I’m going to be the landscaping person that deals with that, I want to know if there’s any kind of guidance.
Mr. Mecsics: Jillian, I believe you could write up something with Colette for that. I think we need to have a point of contact which should be you, Colette, and we should have a form.
Ms. Burns: My suggestion would be to handle it similar to the request for the wetland buffer.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	COVID Procedure Update
Mr. Mecsics: Essentially we are just continuing to watch the numbers. I’ve talked to Mary and we are looking at possibly sending out a survey of how many people have been inoculated. Once we get to that 70th percentile, then we can start looking at modifying things.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Attorney
Ms. Sandy: I don’t have anything additional to report at this time unless the Board has any questions for me.
Mr. Mecsics: One thing I would like you to do for me, we have the areas of annexation of the 3 holes. I’d like you to take a look at that and I want to tie that up before long. If you could give me an updated report on that at the next meeting please.
Ms. Sandy: Alright. I did speak to Jan on the Lake Ashton side. The agreement as part of the acquisition was that they would cooperate with us. There would be two boundary amendments, one to take it out of Lake Ashton 1 and one to put it into Lake Ashton 2. We would be running both of those.
Mr. Hill: I want to thank you for coming in under budget this month, which is unusual for you guys. It’s not your fault, it’s our fault.

Ms. Sandy: We do strive to keep costs low and respond to the requests made by the Board. I’ll also give an update on our neighboring property owner Mr. Venrick. As the Board knows we continued to push to try to get a settlement agreement and water flowage easement signed. However, there has been no direct response to the agreement or easement. I believe at this time that the Board is not wanting to move forward with additional efforts on our side to try to get a settlement agreement signed at this time. I think we have accomplished what, at minimum, we needed to do. That was to have the culvert removed, so we will continue to monitor to see if anything changes in the future.

Engineer (This item follows the Golf Course Updates)
Mr. Rayl: We’ve already talked about some of the things I had. I want to let the Board and the residents know that the hole 9 repair work is completed. Also, the work that was done on the east side is complete as well. All the holes are back open and everything is running smooth. The inlet top at Ashton Boulevard in Pebble Beach has been repaired. I know the contract has been paid and I believe we were prepaid by the offending vendor, it did not cost the District anything. We have a quote from Suarez Grading to make a repair to the pond 22 control structure. Pond 22 is on the north side of Hogan. We have to repair that structure in order to make a SWFWMD certification. I am asking the Board for authorization to have Suarez Grading repair that control structure for
$2,097.
Mr. Mecsics: And we need this to be done to get the SWFWMD certification? Mr. Rayl: Yes. We talked about it at the previous Board meeting.

On MOTION by Mr. Hill, seconded by Ms. McKie, with all in favor, the Suarez Grading quote for Repair to Pond 22 Control Structure for $2,097, was approved.

Mr. Rayl: Thank you. I will let Suarez know to get to work on that immediately. Regarding the cart paths, we have looked into the platted easements and unplatted easements and the cart paths in the communities. We also looked into the CC&Rs and I asked Sarah to give an opinion of those locations where cart paths are obviously on the platted lots but there are no easements on those platts. I wanted to know if the language

in the Covenants cover and address that. I will defer some of my time to Sarah if you will relay to the Board what you told me.
Ms. Sandy: As part of the acquisition, this was something that we had looked at. We looked at whether there were actual cart path easements, and in a lot of places there aren’t. However, under the declarations on both the east and west the provisions provide that there are easements over private lots for cart paths essentially. That right under the declarations was assigned to the CDDs as part of the acquisition of the golf course. Even though there are not platted tracts or easements, there is an easement that exists under the declaration that allows us to have those cart paths traverse across private lots.
Mr. Rayl: Right. It basically means that they are allowed to be where they are. We also looked at the stop bar locations at some of the intersections in the community. There were only a handful here in CDD II where they are currently located and the sight distance at the intersection is not as good as it should be. This relates to a safety issue. Our recommendation was that the Board consider moving the stop bars forward in 9 intersections to increase the sight distance. We provided our report to Colette and she was working with staff to see if that could be done in house.
Ms. McKie: Yes, it was suggested that I talk to James about that possibility. I showed him the report from Alan and he estimates that for taping, black paint to go over the old line, white paint to be put down, etc. would be at the most $400. He said it would likely be less. James said he could do it during their regular hours because they are not as busy due to COVID. Alan offered to get estimates but I assumed they would be more.

On MOTION by Mr. Hill, seconded by Mr. Zelazny, with all in favor, Approving $400 to Move the Stop Bars on Road forward to Improve line of sight, was approved.

Mr. Rayl: A few more things. It was mentioned in the last meeting, a resident requested that the Board look into making a connection to the cart path between 6096 and 6104 Pebble Beach. It’s west of the pickleball courts where the cart path comes down Pebble Beach, it’s just a dirt area right now. It would take about 25 feet of concrete to make that connection between the street and the existing cart path. We could get a contractor to give us a number on that if the Board would like.

Mr. Mecsics: I thought the issue was they wanted grass.
Mr. Hill: That’s a highly trafficked common entrance and exit to either the golf course or coming from Hogan over to the HFC. If there’s a reasonable amount of expense to make that look better than it looks now I think we should proceed. We should get a quote anyways.
Mr. Mecsics: Alan, you have staff’s direction to obtain prices for that work.
Mr. Rayl: I will get a quote and bring that back to the Board. We also have another SWFWMD inspection coming due for the other ponds and permits. It’s due April 30th, we will be out here doing that review and getting that information together. That’s all I had for the Board today.
Mr. Mecsics: Did anybody have any questions for Alan?
Mr. Hill: I wish I could compliment you on being under budget. It’s not your fault, things come up that are unforeseen.
Mr. Rayl: Things we are fixing shouldn’t have to be fixed again.
Mr. Mecsics: Duff, I have to remind you that you are going to be working with him on a lot of sewage lines so be nice to him.
Mr. Zelazny: I have a question. A couple Board meetings ago you gave us a list of potential projects. Do we have quotes against those?
Mr. Rayl: I think I got one and I was trying to get more than one. I don’t have anything final to bring to the Board.
Mr. Zelazny: I want to make sure we are prioritizing the top things. The last two years the only things we’ve done to the roads are curbing and in some cases we’ve extending out into the road which is good. Half the ones you’ve identified are curbing and half are roads. There’s obviously structural damage to the road. I want to make sure we are capturing the most critical spots.

Lake Ashton II Community Director
Ms. Bosman: Good afternoon. Our two temporary positions have been filled. The pool attendant position was filled by Evelyn Lopez and she is working on Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and Monday through Friday from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Our office position was filled by a resident Marina White who will work from 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.

Krystle Funk, our office manager, has taken the course for Notary Public and she passed so she is now a Notary. We got a sign for her so the residents know that. On the weekend of February 6, lightning hit the Health and Fitness Center again with damaging power surges that knocked out another wireless internet box, and on the same weekend, one of our spa heaters. James has researched and gotten pricing on surge protection which will be discussed at the upcoming budget meeting. The new piece of equipment for the Fitness Center has been delivered and the old piece was taken out.
Ms. Burns: We will need a motion to surplus whatever piece of equipment was taken out.

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Mr. Mecsics, with all in favor, Surplussing the old crank cycle that was broken, was approved.

Ms. Bosman: Next Friday we are going to be moving the activity desk functions to the Community Center because the following Monday will be when the work will commence on the portico shea. I’ll close on a good note. Daily I review the billings and put the account numbers on the billings. Just last week I found one that we were being charged 10 times the amount on every copy that we are over 5,000 with DEX Imaging. Because I found that mistake we are now having a $1,400+ credit with that account.
Ms. Littlewood: I have a couple questions on the email Joan sent in. I take it that the spa that is not working is because of the lightning strike?
Ms. Bosman: Yes.
Mr. Mecsics: Angie, I’ll cover that email.
Mr. Hill: You brought up the lightning strike. I understand that to get a surge protector it will be about $23,000. We may have had as much as $40,000 of repairs, I have not seen proof of that number though. I’d like the Board to do some homework for the next meeting on this because the rainy season is coming and we’ll get more lightning.

District Manager’s Report
Ms. Burns: I do have a question. We have our budget workshop scheduled for March 30th. Traditionally we have held that in place of the regular March meeting. I don’t

have much for the March meeting at this point, does the Board want to cancel the March meeting on the 16th and just have the budget workshop? I think a lot of the deferred items were put on the April meeting after that budget workshop. It’s up to the Board if you want to hold that regular March meeting.
Mr. Mecsics: Any comments from the Board?
Mr. Zelazny: Is there a problem with having a workshop immediately followed by a Board meeting if there are any decisions that need to be made? We might want to vote on the landscaping items since it is getting into Spring in March.
Mr. Mecsics: We have our workshop at 1:00 p.m. on the 30th. Ms. Burns: Yes.
Mr. Mecsics: And then we will do the Board meeting right after that in case we need to vote.
Ms. Littlewood: I’m okay with that as long as I can be home for dinner.
Ms. Burns: Alright, we’ll cancel the regular meeting and schedule the Board meeting for after the workshop in the event it is needed on March 30th.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Financial Report
Approval of Check Run Summary
Ms. Burns: The check run summary is included in your package. The total amount for the general fund is $90,103.82. The Capital Reserve was $6,513.36. This from January 14th through February 10th, 2021.

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor the Check Run Summary for January 14th through February 10th for $90,103.82, was approved.

Combined Balance Sheet
Ms. Burns: These are the financial statements through January 31st. If you look at the general fund we are getting closer to 100% collected. We still have about $80,000 to be collected for our O&M budget on roll. Those are due by March and you will generally see that come through in the next couple of months. Again, the same items are tracking over budget that we discussed last month. The Capital Reserve Transfer, you can see

that was made in January and that $192,000 was transferred from the General Fund to the Capital Reserve. Looking at the Capital Projects Fund, the golf course note payment was made in January and that is reflected in these financials. We received the $115,000 from Lake Ashton in January as well.
Mr. Hill: I’ve taken the expenses and extrapolated them out for year. We will be
$51,000 over budget if we keep spending like we have been. $20,000 was for insurance but last month it was a lot more than that. It looks like we are starting to get the budget under control which is what I would like to see continue. The amount of money I see that we are going to have to spend is not as much as I think we need for the years’ worth of projects unless we going into Capital Reserve and I am not a proponent of doing that.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor Requests
Mr. Mecsics: Angie had a question on the response to Joan and Sandy on the issues she brought up on HFC maintenance. Any time a resident has an issue I think it is important that we track it, follow up, and get back to them. I would only ask the residents to instead of waiting and sending it to a Board meeting please take the opportunity to discuss it with either the facilities manager, the maintenance manager, or the front desk so we can get to the problem right away. It doesn’t do us any good to wait 2 or 3 weeks before the problem is addressed. The issues that Joan and Sandy brought up, one was the ladder at the end of the pool. That was identified by staff on January 13, they tried to repair that in house but they couldn’t and the coping has been ordered. The spa went down as a result of a broken heater, that was on February 4th. All the parts have been on order and are slow due to COVID. They were ordered on the 5th and staff is tracking those to see when they will get here. The other spa remains fully functional. The pool pavers, they were sealed two years ago. Unfortunately when we resurfaced the pool this year the guy steam cleaned all around it to clean it up and a lot of that sealant went away. It costs us about $5,000 to seal the pavers in there. It is not in the budget this year so we would not anticipate any change in that until at least next year. They talked about the doors going out to the spa being difficult to slide back in forth. The doors weigh 300 pounds, they are difficult to move at their best. All the rollers were replaced last year and the tracks are cleaned and serviced every week. There’s nothing else we can do about that. She

mentioned the lift that is out in the pool, it was there because we were having inspections and work done by the Fire Marshall. It is no longer stored there. She mentioned the fans and how annoying they are. They have to be on. We’ve covered this numerous times. They have to run 24/7 as long as the doors are not all open. That’s to keep from having issues with the fire alarm system in the ceiling.
Ms. Littlewood: It’s an issue that has been discussed several times but it keeps coming up with the residents. It is very noisy, I’ve been there and checked it. What are we doing to fix that on a permanent basis so that will not always be running?
Mr. Zelazny: The issue is the condensation that builds up on the fire alarms. We are working on being able to isolate the fire alarms. Those folks have been talked to by Mary and myself and apparently don’t care for the answer. When it comes time to open the doors up a little bit more, then James will work on having the fans off.
Ms. Littlewood: Where are we with the fire alarms? Mr. Zelazny: Staff is working on that.
Ms. Littlewood: If we had something concrete where we could go to them and say this is where we are, we are working on the fire alarms, we’re at this stage now and it should be two or three months before it’s complete. Just to keep saying we’re working on it is not answering questions.
Mr. Zelazny: Well then I’d like those two folks who have a problem with it to come and talk with Mary and I and we will give them the times.
Ms. Littlewood: It’s not just two folks. Mr. Zelazny: Okay.
Mr. Mecsics: I don’t believe I said we are working on it is the answer. The answer is, in the current state of the building the fans have run until we come up with a solution. I don’t know what the solution is and what the dollar amount will be to fix it. We do know that when the weather improves and when the doors are open the fans can be off. Other than that they have to be run so that we don’t have condensation in the alarm system. The people that complained because they couldn’t hear during their exercise classes, we went out and purchased a new PA set so that problem would be alleviated. Unfortunately it is the way it is. It’s the way the building is designed. We have to come up with a solution, but in the meantime you’re just going to have to put up with the fans.

Ms. Littlewood: Then the question is what is the solution?
Mr. Mecsics: We don’t have a time or dollar. We just say we are trying to find a solution. It’s not a perfect world and we don’t have the solution. If we knew the solution was to replace something we would. We don’t have a workable solution right now. Regarding the down time on equipment in the Fitness Center, looking back at the records we had 2 pieces of equipment down in the last 6 months. One was the step machine which was down for one day and we had the hydraulic system that was down for almost 6 months. That’s the one Mary talked to that has been replaced. The issue was we tried to fix what we had and it was so old they had a difficult time getting parts and then it was deemed to be economically unrepairable. That’s when a new one was ordered. It’s unfortunate but it’s one machine.
Mr. Zelazny: Any other comments?
Mr. Mecsics: I want to make sure we covered everybody’s issues. Stan wanted the District Legal fees to be addressed for competitive bid this year. I think we are going to do that in the next meeting. Dan Murphy’s issue with the buffer zone was addressed by Colette. Jan had the volunteer group, we agreed that was a good idea. I’ll tell you that when we first purchased the golf course, we first went to Billy Casper Management. They have a whole series of signs that we can purchase to put out there. Just to show you the magnitude of whatever you say is an easy issue. How many entry points do you have on our golf course? Twenty two. That would be 22 signs. And we have one mile of open access where there is no cart path, you can just walk on. It’s just not a simple thing of putting up a sign telling you you’re going the wrong way. We’ll give that to Jan’s committee. Dave Harrison brought up striping in the parking lot. It’s not in our budget but we can talk about it at the workshop in March. Tom Williams has been addressing the issue of speeding inside the community. A lot of people talk speed bumps and having law enforcement presence or something to try to curtail these people’s speeding and driving through stop signs. I’m not an advocate of speed bumps or of speed tables. I do think if there’s a way we can get law enforcement presence here periodically on Pebble Beach or some other bigger roads, or get the machine that tells you how fast you’re going we need to do that.

Mr. Zelazny: In my experience in training, enforcement and tickets are the only real way you can get compliance unfortunately.
Mr. Mecsics: You talked about a cost associated with bringing law enforcement out
here.
Mr. Zelazny: I wanted to talk to Sarah about that. The CDD doesn’t have law
enforcement powers. I was told at one point that if the officers are using enforceable action, that can be construed that the District is doing. I will chat with Sarah on that.
Mr. Mecsics: I think that the Board authorized expending some money to try to get this speeding under control.
Ms. Littlewood: Can we also check for people that are not doing the speed limit? The number of times I got out there following someone doing 15 mph, that’s as frustrating as following someone at 22 mph.
Mr. Mecsics: There’s no law unless you’re obstructing traffic.
Mr. Hill: We could put blasts out saying if you don’t slow down then we will have to hire officers to come and patrol. Perhaps the threat would be better than bringing officers in and giving tickets. I’d rather try something like that first and then go to drastic measures second.
Mr. Zelazny: Mary and I will work on that with the public safety blasts.

TWELTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comments
Mr. Zelazny: Are there any public comments at this time?
Resident (Stan): At Pebble Beach by the driving range, people run that stop sign going straight across. If you have police officers here let them know that. The other comment I had was when you talked about the residents putting in a tree on CDD property. I think you need to specify what trees.
Mr. Zelazny: Okay thank you.
Resident (Steve Realmuto): I’m still here after 4 ½ hours to speak to you because I think it’s important for the Board to have as broad of perspective on things happening in the community as possible. I’m speaking about the Focus 2025 because you’ve had a few other perspectives. On a positive note, I want you to understand there has been tremendous interest in this from the community from both sides. In fact at our first meeting

I believe we had a total of 15 people that signed up to participate. I am a supervisor from Lake Ashton East and I have been participating. I am the only supervisor from Lake Ashton East participating. Supervisors Zelazny has attended all or a portion of two meetings and was at least in attendance and observing from the back of the room at the other. It’s not correct to say that no supervisor from your Board has participated. Hopefully your attorney addressed that and cleared that up. That is not an issue as long as it is only one supervisor from each Board. Moving on, I want to address the concern with a Lake Ashton I supervisor having some undue influence. They are referring to me and I’ll address that. I want to assure each of you that I have had no influence other than to voice my opinion as a resident and my perspective at a meeting. I am not dictating anything, I cannot dictate anything. In fact, the view I have expressed to the group is that this is an independent group and each of us has a voice, but the group is the one that needs to make decisions. Since there was a rather strong letter about the resignations, I want you to understand what I believe that stems from, and that is me expressing my opinions not even in the meeting, but in a phone call between Iris and I, and Steve and Wendy. If there is an issue with influence, it’s certainly not by me or our side. Thank you for listening.

THIRTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment
There not being any further business to discuss, who will ask for adjournment.

On MOTION by Ms. McKie, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor, the meeting was adjourned.

Secretary / Assistant Secretary	Chairman / Vice Chairman

3/30/21 BOS
Meeting (Budget Workshop)

MINUTES OF MEETING LAKE ASHTON II
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Lake Ashton II Community Development District was held on Tuesday, March 30, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. at 6052 Pebble Beach Blvd., Winter Haven, FL.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

James Mecsics	Chairman
Bob Zelazny	Vice Chairman
Duff Hill	Assistant Secretary
Colette McKie	Assistant Secretary
Angie Littlewood	Assistant Secretary Also present were:
Jill Burns	District Manager, GMS
Alan Rayl via Zoom	District Engineer
Mary Bosman	Community Director
Brian Rhodes	Indigo Golf Partners
Ron Lavoie	Indigo Golf Partners

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance
Ms. Burns called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. and five Supervisors were in attendance. The Board recited the pledge of allegiance.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comments on Specific Items
on the Agenda (the District Manager will read any questions or comments received from members of the public in advance of the meeting)
Several comments received prior to the meeting were read.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion Regarding the Fiscal Year
2022 Budget and Analysis of Current Year Budget Status

March 30, 2021	Lake Ashton II CDD

The Board and Staff discussed the current year budget and the upcoming fiscal year budget that will be presented at the May meeting. The Board gave direction to staff on changes in budget line items. At this time an increase in assessments is not contemplated for the upcoming year.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment
There not being any further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned.

Secretary / Assistant Secretary	Chairman / Vice Chairman

2

SECTION VIII

SECTION C

FOX HOLLOW ENTERPRISES, INC
25 JIMMY LEE RD WINTER HAVEN, FL 33880

Lake Ashton (Entrance) Att: Colette McKie

	Date	Estimate #	
	3/23/2021	1371A	
Description	Qty	Rate	Total	
MONTHLY MAINTENANCE: WEST ENTRANCE & HFC (2 small beds on sidewalk)

Services to Include:
all shrub care
weeding & weed control (round up) pruning
raking blowing

Fertilization: March, June & September

NOTE:
Weekly Service: March - November
Bi-Weekly Service: December - February		

348.00	

348.00	
GENERAL CONDITIONS/TERMS:
This estimate includes only the work specified herein. Any alterations/deviations requested or required above the quantities and/or scope of work and total price included in this estimate, will be completed at an additional cost. Fox Hollow Enterprises, Inc., shall not be responsible for any damages to existing irrigation and/or utilities, due to this work. Fox Hollow Enterprises, Inc., shall complete a clean up and disposal of excess materials and debris directly related to our work. Customer shall be responsible to seal/secure doors, windows, etc. (if needed), to prevent dust from entering interior of home/building.	Subtotal	$348.00	
	Tax (7.0%)	$0.00	
	Total	$348.00	
The customer agrees, that by signing this quote, it shall become a legal and binding contract and shall supersede any previous agreements, discussed or implied. The customer further agrees to all terms and conditions set forth within and shall be responsible for any/all court and/or attorney fees incurred by Fox Hollow, required to obtain collection for any portion of money owed for material and/or work performed by Fox Hollow Enterprises, Inc.	

653 Entrance

Phone: (863) 967- 5095
foxhollow608@aol.com www.foxhollownurseryandlandscaping.com

ESTIMATE

Customer Signature:	 		Date:    	

SECTION D

Triplex Mowers

We Have six triplex mowers in operation currently. Four are used to mow the greens daily. Two are used to mow the tees, collars and approaches. The mowers where purchased at two different times. Some in 2013 and some in 2015. The mowers have in the range of 3,500 to 5,000 hours on them. If in the instance that we are able to obtain the four new triplexes, we would dedicate one of the old ones to a full time verticutter. This would give us a lot more flexibility to do the preventive maintenance to the greens than we do now. As of now when we verticutte we must change reels around which is a timely process. It also leaves us a mower short while we are doing our cultural practices. one the other mowers would be turned into a tee mower and two would be set up as backups for tees and greens.
This sounds like a lot of back ups but keep in mind these mowers are in poor shape and are not very reliable backups. Below is a list of the mowers.

Greens Mower

Serial#	
Year:	
hours	
6220602655	2015	N/A	
6230602329	2013	3,125	
6230601760	2013	3,385	
6230602667	2015	N/A	

Tee Mower			
6230601747	2013	3,000	
6230602323	2013	4,500	

Junk Equipment

Jacobsen Greens king	Serial # 6230602328	hydro and engine	
Jacobsen ArS rough mower	6808002279	Electrical and Hydro Lot of wore out bushings	
EZgo Cart	2776205	Engine and Transaxle	
EZgo cart	2772094	Engine and Transaxle	
John Deere Gator	1m00cxrajem120816	Engine and Rear end	

These pieces of equipment will cost more to repair than they are wort. We have used parts off them to repair other equipment. But they have no monetary value.

SECTION X

SECTION B

LA II COMMUNITY DIRECTOR
REPORT
Meeting date:  April 16, 2021

Mary Bosman
mbosman@lakeashton2cdd.com

Projects/Summaries
The following is a listing of updates around the HFC and projects that are being worked on or have been completed since the last LA II Board of Supervisors’ Meeting, on February 19, 2021 (Not necessarily in order).
The Porte-cochere project is complete and came in on budget and ahead of time.
The finials on the fencing on HWY. 653 are painted and ½ of the black posts are painted. We have a staffer out on vacation this week, so it will be completed next week.
The pool coping has been replaced due to cracking from excess weight demands. The ladder was moved also and signs put up for weight limits to prevent further cracking.
A spa heater was replaced in February from a lightning hit. Two access points were replaced from the same lightning hit as the spa heater.
A security camera was added to the Rose Garden.
Phase IV COVID procedure is out and effective April 15, 2021. The two temporary positions will end on April 14th. Both ladies have been a great asset to Lake Ashton II CDD.
Two certified letters went out to two residents for Joint Amenities Policy infractions.
Two separate emails went out to residents regarding two different Joint Amenities Policy infractions.
We’re looking forward to expanding open hours and activities with the Phase IV procedure in place April 15, 2021. Respectfully,
Mary Bosman
LA II CDD Community Director

SECTION XI

SECTION A

	LAKE ASHTON II
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT		
	Check Run Summary GF		

Date	03/24/21 - 04/08/21

Check Numbers	

Amount	
3/24/21	3391-3402	$18,825.94	
4/7/21	3403-3406	$1,765.00	
4/8/21	3407-3421	$39,445.38	

Total	 	$60,036.32 

Lake Ashton II CDD
Special Assessment Receipts
Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2021

						$1,544,991.24		$399,247.04	$330,000.00	$729,247.04	
	O&M	Debt				.36300.10000		.36300.10000	.36300.10200		
Date	Collection	O&M	Debt Svc	Debt Svc	Discounts/	Discounts/	Commissions	Net Amount		General Fund		05A Debt Svc Fund	06A Debt Svc Fund	Debt Total	
Received	Period	Receipts	Receipts	Interest	Penalties	Penalties	Paid	Received		100.00%		54.748%	45.252%	100%	

11/16/20	
10/01/20-10/31/20	
$	2,285.49	
$	-	
$	-	
$	91.42	
$	-	
$	43.88	
$	2,150.19		
$	2,150.19		
$	-	
$	-	
$	-	
11/19/20	06/01/20-10/15/20	$	15,959.44	$ 6,476.38	$	-	$	837.87	$	340.01	$	425.16	$	20,832.78	$	14,832.74	$	3,284.89	$	2,715.15	$	6,000.04	
11/23/20	11/01/20-11/08/20	$ 153,127.83	$ 59,153.20	$	-	$ 6,125.14	$ 2,366.20	$ 4,075.79	$ 199,713.90	$	144,233.82	$	30,374.15	$	25,105.93	$ 55,480.07	
12/1/20	11/09/20-11/15/20	$ 146,271.36	$ 70,510.72	$	-	$ 5,850.88	$ 2,820.52	$ 4,162.21	$ 203,948.47	$	137,592.90	$	36,328.24	$	30,027.32	$ 66,355.56	
12/11/20	11/16/20-11/25/20	$ 638,868.18	$ 304,355.20	$	-	$ 25,524.43	$ 12,157.61	$ 18,110.83	$ 887,430.51	$	601,040.26	$	156,792.49	$	129,597.76	$ 286,390.25	
12/18/20	11/26/20-11/30/20	$ 443,385.06	$ 216,666.56	$	-	$ 17,735.48	$ 8,666.96	$ 12,672.98	$ 620,976.20	$	417,040.26	$	111,650.53	$	92,285.41	$ 203,935.94	
1/15/21	12/01/20-12/31/20	$	50,834.85	$ 24,080.13	$	-	$ 1,525.11	$	722.37	$ 1,453.35	$	71,214.15	$	48,322.41	$	12,532.73	$	10,359.00	$ 22,891.74	
1/29/21	INTEREST	$	-	$	-	$ 44.46	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	138.59		$	94.13		$	24.34	$	20.12	$	44.46	
2/16/21	01/01/21-01/31/21	$	47,995.29	$ 26,397.84	$	-	$	937.05	$	540.47	$ 1,458.31	$	71,457.30	$	46,067.54	$	13,900.34	$	11,489.41	$ 25,389.75	
3/15/21	02/01/21-02/28/21	$	15,544.75	$ 7,302.97	$	-	$	137.12	$	62.90	$	452.95	$	22,194.75	$	15,099.92	$	3,884.27	$	3,210.56	$	7,094.83	
$ 1,514,272.25	$ 714,943.00	$ 44.46	$ 58,764.50	$ 27,677.04	$ 42,855.47	$ 2,100,056.83	$	1,426,474.18	$	368,771.98	$	304,810.66	$ 673,582.65	
BALANCE REMAINING	$30,718.99	$14,304.04										

98.02%
$45,023.03

Gross Percent Collected Balance Due

SECTION B

LAKE ASHTON II
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT BALANCE SHEET
March 31, 2021

ASSETS:	 	MAJOR FUNDS	
DEBT	CAPITAL
 	GENERAL	 	SERVICE	 	PROJECTS		TOTAL GOVERNMENTAL
 	FUNDS		
CASH	$110,221	---	$13,261	$123,483	
PETTY CASH	$656	---	---	$656	
DUE FROM GENERAL FUND	---	$32,529	---	$32,529	
DUE FROM CAPITAL RESERVE	$101	---	---	$101	
INVESTMENT - STATE BOARD - SURPLUS FUNDS	$656,568	---	$490,590	$1,147,159	
SERIES 2005A			
RESERVE A	---	$264,271	---	$264,271	
PREPAYMENT A	---	$11,952	---	$11,952	
REVENUE A	---	$345,721	---	$345,721	
DEFERRED COST A/B	---	$33,509	---	$33,509	

SERIES 2006A			
RESERVE A	---	$76,713	---	$76,713	
REVENUE A	---	$290,064	---	$290,064	
PREPAYMENT A	---	$28,797	---	$28,797	
DEFERRED COST A/B	---	$3,447	---	$3,447	
COST OF ISSUANCE	---	---	$29	$29	
DEPOSITS	$23,307	---	---	$23,307	
PREPAID EXPENDITURES	$4,939	---	---	$4,939	
TOTAL ASSETS	 	$795,792	$1,087,002	$503,881	$2,386,675

LIABILITIES:		
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE	$36,811	---	---	$36,811	
ROOM RENTAL DEPOSITS	$500	---	---	$500	
DUE TO GENERAL FUND	---	---	$101	$101	
DUE TO DEBT SERVICE - SERIES 2005A	$17,809	---	---	$17,809	
DUE TO DEBT SERVICE - SERIES 2006	$14,720	---	---	$14,720	

TOTAL LIABILITIES	 	$69,840 	$0 	$101 	$69,940 

FUND BALANCES:

PREPAID EXPENSES	$4,939	---	---	$4,939	
DEPOSITS - TECO	$23,307	---	---	$23,307	
DS-SERIES 2005A	---	$673,262	---	$673,262	
DS-SERIES 2006A	---	$413,740	---	$413,740	
CAPITAL PROJECTS	---	---	$503,780	$503,780	
ASSIGNED FOR GENERAL FUND	$170,344			$170,344	
UNASSIGNED FOR GENERAL FUND	$527,363	---	---	$527,363	

NONSPENDABLES:

RESTRICTED FOR:

TOTAL FUND BALANCES	 	$725,953 	$1,087,002 	$503,780 	$2,316,735 
TOTAL LIABILITIES & FUND BALANCES	 	$795,792	$1,087,002	$503,881	$2,386,675

 DESCRIPTION	

REVENUES:	ADOPTED
    BUDGET 		PRORATED BUDGET
     THRU 03/31/21			ACTUAL
 THRU 03/31/21 		  VARIANCE 	
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS - TAX COLLECTOR	$1,445,344		$1,426,474		$1,426,474		$0	
INTEREST EARNED	$1,500		$750		$316		($434)	
RENTAL FEES	$5,200		$2,600		$200		($2,400)	
MISCELLANEOUS INCOME	$0		$0		$238		$238	
TOTAL REVENUES	  $1,452,044 		 	$1,429,824 		 	$1,427,228 		 	($2,596) 	
EXPENDITURES:								
ADMINISTRATIVE:								
ARBITRAGE	$1,200		$600		$600		$0	
ANNUAL AUDIT	$4,900		$2,450		$0		$2,450	
COMPUTER TIME	$1,000		$500		$500		$0	
DISSEMINATION	$6,500		$3,250		$3,600		($350)	
DUES, LICENSES, SUBSCRIPTIONS	$175		$88		$175		($88)	
INSURANCE	$11,182		$11,182		$12,730		($1,548)	
LEGAL ADVERTISING	$1,500		$750		$560		$190	
MANAGEMENT	$60,000		$30,000		$30,000		$0	
OFFICE SUPPLIES	$250		$125		$101		$24	
OTHER CURRENT CHARGES	$2,700		$1,350		$1,321		$29	
GOLF COURSE STUDY	$0		$0		$0		$0	
POSTAGE	$2,000		$1,000		$823		$177	
PRINTING & BINDING	$1,000		$500		$354		$146	
TELEPHONE	$50		$25		$0		$25	
TRUSTEE FEES	$13,963		$6,982		$6,573		$409	
TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE	     $106,420 		 	$58,801 		 	$57,337 		 	$1,464 	

 DESCRIPTION	

FIELD:	ADOPTED
    BUDGET 		PRORATED BUDGET
     THRU 03/31/21			ACTUAL
 THRU 03/31/21 		  VARIANCE 	
ATTORNEY	$40,000		$20,000		$31,267		($11,267)	
BUILDING CONTRACT SERVICES	$43,920		$21,960		$19,908		$2,052	
BUILDING GROUNDS MAINTENANCE & SUPPLIES	$40,000		$20,000		$14,428		$5,572	
CONTINGENCY	$0		$0		$729		($729)	
ENGINEERRING	$15,000		$7,500		$47,206		($39,706)	
HFC SPECIAL EVENTS	$5,000		$2,500		$1,216		$1,284	
LANDSCAPE CONTRACT SERVICES	$179,604		$89,802		$88,379		$1,423	
IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE	$2,000		$1,000		$0		$1,000	
LAKE MAINTENANCE	$35,560		$17,780		$17,080		$700	
OFFICE SUPPLIES/PRINTING/BINDING	$13,000		$6,500		$8,393		($1,893)	
PERMITS/INSPECTIONS	$1,500		$750		$275		$475	
PERSONNEL EXPENSES	$245,950		$122,975		$124,831		($1,856)	
PROPERTY INSURANCE	$21,854		$21,854		$24,443		($2,589)	
SECURITY CONTRACT SERVICES	$200,170		$100,085		$100,837		($752)	
UTILITIES	$215,000		$107,500		$97,361		$10,139	
TOTAL FIELD	  $1,058,558 		 	$540,206 		 	$576,354 		    ($36,148) 	
TOTAL PROJECT:								
FIRST QUARTER OPERATING RESERVES	$265,271		$132,635		$0		$132,635	
TOTAL PROJECT	 $265,271 		 	$132,635 		 	$0 		   $132,635 	
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	 $1,430,249 		 	$731,642 		 	$633,691 		     $97,952 	
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES
OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES	 	$21,795 		
 	$698,182 		
 	$793,538 		
     $95,356 	
OTHER FINANCIANG SOURCES/(USES):								
INTERFUND TRANSFER IN/(OUT)-CAPITAL RESERVE	($192,139)		($192,139)		($192,139)		$0	
TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCES/(USES)	   ($192,139) 		 	($192,139) 		 	($192,139) 		 	$0 	
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE	($170,344)		$506,043		$601,399		$95,356	
FUND BALANCE - Beginning	$170,344				$124,554			
FUND BALANCE - Ending	 	$0 				$725,953			

	ADOPTED BUDGET	OCT	NOV	DEC	JAN	FEB	MAR	APR		MAY		JUN		JUL		AUG		SEPT		TOTAL	
REVENUES:																						
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS	.300.363.10000	$1,445,344	$0	$161,217	$1,155,673	$48,322	$46,162	$15,100		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$1,426,474	
INTEREST EARNED	.300.361.10000	$1,500	$11	$0	$11	$123	$90	$81		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$316	
RENTAL FEES	.300.362.10000	$5,200	$200	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$200	
MISCELLANEOUS INCOME	.300.369.10000	$0	$7	$149	$0	($40)	$101	$22		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$238	
CARRY FORWARD SURPLUS	.300.271.10000	$170,344	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$0	
TOTAL REVENUES		$1,622,388	$218	$161,366	$1,155,684	$48,406	$46,352	$15,202		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$1,427,228	

EXPENDITURES:																						
ADMINISTRATIVE
ARBITRAGE	
310.513.31200	

$1,200	
$0	
$0	
$0	
$600	
$0	
$0		
$0		
$0		
$0		
$0		
$0		
$0	
$600	
ANNUAL AUDIT	310.513.32200	$4,900	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$0	
COMPUTER TIME	310.513.31500	$1,000	$83	$83	$83	$83	$83	$83		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$500	
DISSEMINATION	310.513.31300	$6,500	$500	$600	$1,000	$500	$500	$500		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$3,600	
DUES, LICENSES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS	310.513.54000	$175	$175	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$175	
INSURANCE	310.513.45000	$11,182	$12,730	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$12,730	
LEGAL ADVERTISING	310.513.48000	$1,500	$0	$140	$140	$140	$140	$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$560	
MANAGEMENT FEES	310.513.34000	$60,000	$5,000	$5,000	$5,000	$5,000	$5,000	$5,000		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$30,000	
OFFICE SUPPLIES	310.513.51000	$250	$0	$21	$20	$20	$20	$20		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$101	
OTHER CURRENT CHARGES	310.513.49000	$2,700	$233	$211	$247	$166	$238	$227		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$1,321	
POSTAGE	310.513.42000	$2,000	$468	$73	$127	$57	$45	$54		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$823	
PRINTING AND BINDING	310.513.42500	$1,000	$269	$3	$55	$14	$7	$7		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$354	
TELEPHONE	310.513.41000	$50	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$0	
TRUSTEE FEES	310.513.32300	$13,963	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$6,573		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$6,573	
TOTAL ADM. EXPENDITURES		$106,420	$19,458	$6,130	$6,673	$6,580	$6,033	$12,463		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0	$57,337	

FIELD:																						

ATTORNEY	310.513.31500	$40,000	$8,881	$6,651	$4,938	$5,232	$5,409	$157	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$31,267	
BUILDING CONTRACT SERVICES	$43,920
SECURITY SERVICES	320.572.34510				$364		$0		$465		$635		$0		$130	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0 CLEANING SERVICES	320.572.46010			$2,360	$2,360	$2,053	$2,360	$2,360	$2,360	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0 POOL MAINTENANCE	320.572.46400	 				$0	$1,497		$661                         $567                      $1,167                         $567                             $0                             $0                             $0                             $0                             $0                             $0
TOTAL BUILDING CONTRACT SERVICES	$43,920	$2,724	$3,857	$3,179	$3,562	$3,527	$3,057	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	
$1,594
$13,853
$4,461	
	$19,908	
BUILDING /GROUNDS MAINTENANCE & SUPPLIES
BUILDING MAINTENANCE/SUPPLIES	320.572.46020
GROUNDS MAINTENANCE/SUPPLIES	320.572.46030
PEST CONTROL	320.572.34800
TOTAL BUILDING /GROUNDS MAINTENANCE & SUPPLIES	$40,000
$1,055	$2,578	$925	$4,015	$267	$1,673	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$10,513
$1,496	$73	$255	$193	$750	$734	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$3,501
$207	$128	$0	$79	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$414	
	$40,000	$2,758	$2,779	$1,180	$4,287	$1,017	$2,407	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$14,428	
CONTINGENCY	320.572.49000	$0	$395	$108	$45	$181	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$729	
ENGINEERING	310.513.31100	$15,000	$9,840	$5,839	$8,243	$6,604	$9,842	$6,838	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$47,206	
HFC SPECIAL EVENTS	320.572.49400	$5,000	$776	$227	$107	$0	$101	$6	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$1,216	

ADOPTED BUDGET	OCT	NOV	DEC	JAN	FEB	MAR	APR		MAY		JUN		JUL		AUG		SEPT		TOTAL	
LANDSCAPE CONTRACT SERVICES	320.572.46200	$179,604	$14,968	$21,247	$8,745	$15,318	$14,051	$14,051	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$88,379	
IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE	320.572.46210	$2,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	
LAKE MAINTENANCE	320.572.46500	$35,560	$2,730	$2,730	$3,430	$2,730	$2,730	$2,730	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$17,080	
OFFICE SUPPLIES/PRINTING/BINDING	320.572.51000	$13,000	$1,375	$632	$1,554	$1,824	$2,407	$600	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$8,393	
PERMITS/INSPECTIONS	320.572.49300	$1,500	$0	$275	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$275	
PERSONNEL EXPENSES
EXERCISE INSTRUCTORS FICA EXPENSE
HEALTH INSURANCE SALARIES
PERSONNEL EXPENSES	
320.572.34100
320.572.21000
320.572.23000
320.572.12000	$245,950

$245,950	
$3,948
$1,132
$471
$14,793
$20,343	
$2,992
$1,122
$500
$14,670
$19,284	
$2,045
$1,727
$500
$22,579
$26,850	
$1,375
$1,154
$673
$15,085
$18,287	
$1,549
$1,253
$673
$16,373
$19,847	
$1,835
$1,259
$673
$16,454
$20,221	
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0	
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0	
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0	
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0	
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0	
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0	
$13,743
$7,646
$3,490
$99,953
$124,831	
PROPERTY INSURANCE	320.572.45000	$21,854	$24,443	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$24,443	
SECURITY CONTRACT SERVICES		$200,170														
GATE ATTENDANTS	320.572.34500		$15,106	$19,151	$15,831	$15,427	$15,099	$18,844	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$99,457	
OFF DUTY SECURITY-EVENTS	320.572.34501		$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	
VIDEO SECURITY-ADT	320.572.34520		$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	
SECURITY EXTRAS	320.572.34530		$290	$183	$183	$183	$183	$358	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$1,380	
TOTAL SECURITY CONTRACT SERVICES	$200,170	$15,396	$19,334	$16,014	$15,610	$15,282	$19,202	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$100,837	
UTILITIES		$215,000														
ELECTRIC	320.572.43000		$10,441	$10,395	$10,417	$10,335	$10,666	$10,436	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$62,690.06	
REFUSE	320.572.34900		$195	$195	$195	$196	$0	$401	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$1,182.03	
WATER	320.572.43200		$1,786	$1,600	$1,534	$2,215	$0	$1,787	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$8,921.00	
TELEPHONE	320.572.41000		$277	$1,679	$960	$962	$1,122	$956	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$5,956.02	
GAS/PROPANE	320.572.43100		$3,565	$2,135	$1,949	$3,808	$3,725	$3,430	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$18,612.00	
MAINTENANCE	320.572.46000		$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0.00	
TOTAL UTILITIES		$215,000	$16,264	$16,003	$15,055	$17,517	$15,513	$17,009	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$97,361	

TOTAL FIELD EXPENDITURES		$878,954	$120,893	$98,966	$89,339	$91,151	$89,726	$86,278	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$576,354	

FIRST QUARTER OPERATING RESERVES

OTHER SOURCES/(USES)

INTERFUND TRANSFER IN/(OUT)	

300.581.10000	
$265,271

($192,139)	
$0

$0	
$0

$0	
$0

$0	
$0

($192,139)	
$0

$0	
$0

$0	
$0

$0	
$0

$0	
$0

$0	
$0

$0	
$0

$0	
$0

$0	
$0

($192,139)	
TOTAL OTHER SOURCES/(USES)		($192,139)	$0	$0	$0	($192,139)	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	($192,139)	

TOTAL EXPENDITURES		
$1,442,784	
$140,351	
$105,096	
$96,011	
$289,871	
$95,759	
$98,741	
$0	
$0	
$0	
$0	
$0	
$0	
$825,830	
EXCESS/REVENUES(EXPENDITURES		$179,604	($140,133)	$56,269	$1,059,673	($241,465)	($49,407)	($83,539)	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$601,399	

LAKE ASHTON II
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
CAPITAL PROJECTS
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2021

 DESCRIPTION	

REVENUES:		ADOPTED
 	BUDGET			PRORATED BUDGET
 	THRU 03/31/21			ACTUAL
 	THRU 03/31/21			 	VARIANCE		
CAPITAL RESERVE - TRANSFER IN		$192,139		$192,139		$192,139		$0	
MISCELLANEOUS INCOME		$0		$0		$2,000		$2,000	
INTEREST EARNED		$1,000		$500		$342		($158)	
TOTAL REVENUES		 	$193,139 		 	$192,639 		 	$194,481 		 	$1,842 	
EXPENDITURES:									
BANK CHARGES	$600	$300	$270	$30	

CAPITAL PROJECTS - FY19
ANNUAL EXPENSES:									
PUBLIC WORKS-BRIDGES/PATHWAYS (ROADWAYS) (1)	$32,000	$16,000	$3,314	$12,686	
EQUIPMENT-ATHLETIC	$18,500	$9,250	$3,832	$5,418	
LANDSCAPE REPLACEMENT	$15,000	$7,500	$0	$7,500	
OTHER CAPITAL PROJECT EXPENSES	$30,000	$15,000	$921	$14,079	
SPECIFIC PROJECTS:					
FITNESS FLOOR	$15,000	$7,500	$0	$7,500	
ICE MACHINE	$10,000	$5,000	$0	$5,000	
POOL/SPA REPAIRS	$5,000	$5,000	$2,649	$2,351	
RACQUETBALL FLOOR	$14,500	$7,250	$0	$7,250	
SPLIT SYSTEM (AIR HANDLER)	$120,000	$60,000	$0	$60,000	
SPORTS FLOOR	$14,500	$7,250	$0	$7,250	
WATER HEATER	$2,000	$1,000	$0	$1,000	
PROMISSORY NOTE PAYMENT	$147,877	$147,877	$147,877	$0	
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	 	$424,977 		 	$288,927 		 	$158,862 		 	$130,065 	
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES
OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES	 	($231,838) 		
 	($96,288) 		
 	$35,619 		
 	$131,907 	
OTHER FINANCIANG SOURCES/(USES):								
INTERGOVERNMENTAL TRANSFER FROM LA1	$115,000		$115,000		$115,000		$0	
TOTAL OTHER FINANCIANG SOURCES/(USES)	 	$115,000 		 	$115,000 		 	$115,000 		 	$0 	
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE	($116,838)		$18,712		$150,619		$131,907	
FUND BALANCE - Beginning	$350,165				$353,132			
FUND BALANCE - Ending	 	$233,327 				$503,751			

(1) Road repairs not used during the current fiscal year will be set aside in an investment account to use for future road repairs.

Page 6

 DESCRIPTION	

REVENUES:	ADOPTED
   BUDGET 		PRORATED BUDGET
 	THRU 03/31/21			ACTUAL
 THRU 03/31/21 		  VARIANCE 	
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS - ON ROLL	$394,800		$368,772		$368,772		$0	
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS - OFF ROLL	$0		$0		$0		$0	
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS - PREPAYMENTS	$0		$0		$11,950		$11,950	
INTEREST EARNED	$6,000		$3,000		$25		($2,975)	
TOTAL REVENUES	  $400,800 		 	$371,772 		 	$380,747 		 	$8,976 	
EXPENDITURES:								
SERIES 2005A:
INTEREST - 11/1	
$109,381		
$109,381		
$109,381		
$0	
INTEREST - 5/1	$109,381		$0		$0		$0	
PRINCIPAL - 5/1	$165,000		$0		$0		$0	
SPECIAL CALL - 11/1	$35,000		$35,000		$155,000		($120,000)	
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	 $418,763 		 	$144,381 		 	$264,381 		  ($120,000) 	
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES
OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES	 ($17,963) 		
 	$227,391 		
 	$116,366 		
  ($111,024) 	
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE	($17,963)		$227,391		$116,366		($111,024)	
								
FUND BALANCE - Beginning	$159,026				$556,895			
FUND BALANCE - Ending	  $141,064 				 	$673,262 			

DEBT SERVICE FUND - SERIES 2006A
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2021

 DESCRIPTION	

REVENUES:		ADOPTED
   BUDGET 		PRORATED BUDGET
 	THRU 03/31/21			ACTUAL
 THRU 03/31/21 		 VARIANCE 	
ASSESSMENTS - ON ROLL		$310,388		$304,811		$304,811		$0	
ASSESSMENTS - PPMTS		$0		$0		$25,800		$25,800	
INTEREST INCOME		$0		$0		$6		$6	
TOTAL REVENUES		  $310,388 		 	$304,811 		 	$330,617 		    $25,806 	
EXPENDITURES:									
SERIES 2006A:
INTEREST - 11/1		
$94,208		
$94,208		
$94,208		
$0	
INTEREST - 5/1		$94,208		$0		$0		$0	
PRINCIPAL - 5/1		$120,000		$0		$0		$0	
SPECIAL CALL - 11/1		$0		$0		$25,000		($25,000)	
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	 $308,415 		 	$94,208 		 	$119,208 		   ($25,000) 	
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES
OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES	 	$1,973 		
 	$210,603 		
 	$211,409 		
 	$806 	
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE	$1,973		$210,603		$211,409		$806	
								
FUND BALANCE - Beginning	$104,687				$202,331			
FUND BALANCE - Ending	  $106,659 				 	$413,740 			
Maximum Annual Debt Service								

Long Term Debt Report FY 2021

Series 2005A, Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds	
Interest Rate:	5.375%		
Maturity Date:	5/1/36	$4,070,000.00	
Bonds outstanding - 9/30/2020		$4,070,000.00	
	November 1, 2020 (Special Call)	($155,000.00)	
	May 1, 2021 (Mandatory)	$0.00	
Current Bonds Outstanding		$3,915,000.00	

Series 2006A, Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds	

Interest Rate:	
5.300%		
Maturity Date:	5/1/38	$3,555,000.00	
Bonds outstanding - 9/30/2020		$3,555,000.00	
	November 1, 2020 (Special Call)	($25,000.00)	
	May 1, 2021 (Mandatory)	$0.00	
Current Bonds Outstanding		$3,530,000.00	

Total Current Bonds Outstanding	$7,445,000.00	

CAPITAL PROJECTS - SERIES 2006
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2021

 DESCRIPTION	

REVENUES:

INTEREST EARNED		ADOPTED
  BUDGET 

$0		PRORATED BUDGET
 	THRU 03/31/21	

$0		ACTUAL
 THRU 03/31/21 

$0		 VARIANCE 

$0	
TOTAL REVENUES		 	$0 		 	$0 		 	$0 		 	$0 	
EXPENDITURES:									
CAPITAL OUTLAY		$0		$0		$0		$0	
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	 	$0 		 	$0 		 	$0 		 	$0 	
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES
OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES	 	$0 		
 	$0 		
 	$0 		
 	$0 	
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE	$0		$0		$0		$0	
								
FUND BALANCE - Beginning	$0				$29			
FUND BALANCE - Ending	 	$0 				 	$29