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, May 20, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. at 6052 Pebble Beach Blvd., Winter Haven, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

James (Jim) Mecsics Bob Zelazny
Mary Clark Angie Littlewood

Chairman Vice Chairman
Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary

Also present were:

Jason Greenwood by Zoom Ooined in person late)	District Manager, GMS Sarah Sandy	District Counsel, Kutak Rock
Alan Rayl	Rayl Engineering
Brian Rhodes	Indigo Golf
Ron Lavoie	Indigo Golf
Mary Bosman	Community Director

The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the May 20, 2022 meeting.

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance
Mr. Mecsics: called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. and four Supervisors were in attendance constituting a quorum. The Board recited the pledge of allegiance.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of the Meeting Agenda
Mr. Mecsics: Do we have approval of the meeting agenda?

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor, the Meeting Agenda, 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.)
Mr. Mecsics: Alright, public comments on specific items on the agenda. Do we have anyone out in the audience that has a public comment? Jason, did you have any public comments? We have none from the floor.
Mr. Greenwood: I did not receive any public comment before the meeting.
Mr. Mecsics: Okay. Well, we have none here from the floor, so we'll move on then.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Minutes of the March 18,
2022 Board of Supervisors Meeting
Mr. Mecsics: Do I have a motion to approve the minutes of March 18, 2022 Board of Supervisors Meeting, or any amendments or changes?

On MOTION by Ms. Littlewood, seconded by Ms. Clark, with all in favor, the Minutes of the March 18, 2022 Board of Supervisors Meeting, were approved.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Golf Course Update from Indigo Golf
Mr. Mecsics: Next is the golf course update from Indigo Golf.
Mr. Rhodes: Good morning. This is Brian Rhodes with Indigo Golf. The packet included March, since we didn't have an April 15th meeting. Does anybody have any questions? I did write a short review on it. I'd be more than happy to answer questions on that. I can always answer questions via email also. Otherwise, I'll skip straight to April.
Mr. Mecsics: Okay.
Mr. Rhodes: The course hosted 5,253 rounds for the month of April. That's about 200 over budget, and it was 352 more than last April. The biggest impact on rounds was dry weather. We went through a drought, so we didn't have many rain out days like today.

April was also very good month in revenues. We generated almost $209,000 for the month. It's about $25,000 higher than our budget, and $37,000 higher than the previous year. The golf department exceeded the budget by $24,000. The greens fees and carts fees exceeded budget by about $4,500. The Pro Shop had a big month. F&B beat sales by almost $1,000. So overall, revenues went well. We had good play. Cost of goods, the Pro Shop, as I said earlier, they beat their budget by $16,000 in sales. They also had a very good month in cost of goods running at 68.3%. We budget on about 80%, a lot of it flowed straight to the bottom line. F&D department did have a rougher month in cost of goods. It was low in March, but we were 51.3% in April. We did have some repair and maintenance, so that went to waste and spoilage in there. We also had a few invoices that were missed in March that deflated March's number, and increased April's. Overall, for the year, we're running 42.8% on a budget of 39%, with the price increases constantly coming from our suppliers and vendors. We try to keep cost somewhat steady, so they don't change every day on the cost of beer, but we're doing the best we can there. The increased cost of goods did cause us to miss our net contribution goal for the month of April. We missed it by about $2,500. We were still positive in April. For the year we're about $31,000 positive net contribution, so revenue minus cost of goods minus labor minus operational expenses. Just in the F&D department, it would be an EBITDA line. Labor in April, everybody was fairly close to budget. Maintenance was slightly over, which is actually good, it's been the first time we've been fully staffed. We've ran two or three months in a row fully staffed. It's starting to show on the golf course. Our labor percentage for the month was 37%, which is about4.5% less than what we budgeted. So even though we spent more, we're running a little bit more efficiently. Departmental expenses, golf department was slightly under budget. We had scorecards budgeted. We did not need them, so we didn't buy. General admin missed budget by about $1,500, almost $1,600. We incurred a use tax that wasn't budgeted for $1,400. That's the overage there. Maintenance was over budget by $6,382 for the month, of which we were over budget on chemicals by $11,500. I'll touch on this a little bit later. We were over budget on gas and diesel by $1,500. We're fine for the year compared to budget, but we're starting to see some cost increases in a big way. Overall, we're pleased with the condition of the golf courses. Ron and David have identified a bunch of areas we're going to work on now that

we're starting to hit growing season. David and his team are out there addressing those issues. F&D department was right at budget, sales and marketing was $1,200 below. It just goes to the way we now invoice. We used to invoice quarterly and now it's monthly. So we'll go a couple of months over then a month under. So it's about normal. April EBITDA was $4,800, which is about $4,000 ahead of budget. Year-to-date EBITDA is
$152,000, which is $104,000 above budget and $33,000 ahead of last year. Now that I've told you that great story of how well we're doing, I'm going to start telling you about some of the challenges we're facing. Our business is tied heavily to petroleum. We don't mow a lot in the winter. We're starting to see a big increase in gas and diesel. So when we start mowing more in golf season, a lot of times we would try to offset that by chemicals, which went up 25-30%. Fertilizer has doubled or is up to 80%. Unfortunately, Ukraine is one of our biggest fertilizer producers. There are some challenges out there. We're not going to see them a lot this year, because we early ordered. We locked in on our pricing. It is next year that we're concerned about more than anything else, and it's hard to budget right now. With labor, we know that minimum wage is going up 10%. Almost every hourly employee is expecting a similar bump. I've given more 20% raises in the last four months than I have in the rest of my career. Most of them are going to hourly employees. I know that we're looking hard at our maintenance department trying to get them in line. Now that we have a full staff, we want to make sure we keep them. Those are some of the things that we are fighting. I know they say the CPI for inflation is 8.5%. From what we're seeing in the Southeast, it's about 14.5%. \/\/hen Ron stands up here and we'll go over the rate structures on what we're looking for and why we would like that window to expand before we make the budget to give us some room. Not that we're going to go max on everything, it is being able to create a budget that puts us in a positive cash flow in the end, so we can put some money in the bank for the future. You have a bid for a piece of equipment, it's a very multiple-use piece of equipment. It's very versatile, it will come with two mowing decks. You can also buy additional attachments that would be able to basically cut alongside the cart paths. If we buy that piece of equipment, it will save us in labor standings. It was a demo unit and it's never been purchased before and it is well under cost, so it is something that we are certainly voting for. That is all I have. Does anybody have any questions?

Mr. Mecsics: Questions? Bob, do you have anything?
Mr. Zelazny: Excuse me, the piece of equipment that Brian's talking about, I gave you the bid and everything and the description of it. Very nice piece of equipment. It works fantastic around the lakes and it'll allow us to be able to edge the sidewalks along the golf course. It is fully funded by the golf course budget so there's not an issue with that. We need to bring it to the Board today because it exceeds the $10,000 threshold to purchase without Board approval. I don't know if this is the best time to just ask the Board to approve the purchase of the Ventrac machine but that's what I would like to do.

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Ms. Clark, with all in favor, the Purchase of the Ventrac Machine, was approved.

Mr. Mecsics: How's the weather, young man?
Mr. Lavoie: Perfect. At least that's what Matt told me on the way out the door, he said he can get some work done. I will be brief because this is the final month for memberships. But just so you know, annual members make up 53%, seasonal members are 24%, super-senior is 12%, associates are 11% and there'll be probably 9 summer members. But I just want to give you a funny little thing here. If you just take the dues line for the membership and the number of rounds they played, it's basically $39.76 golf course, but that's again during the season, so that's number is going to go down. For anybody that says what the membership rates are, you know pretty good there. By the way, the bonds lead with almost 265 rounds of golf so far since October 1, that's pretty good. The guest is $55,000 in 1,436 rounds, but that's $38, that's 918 rounds. But here's the amazing one, the associate membership, which is their initial fee plus the greens fees they pay, they're paying $68 a round. VVhile it works out, they are paying the most amount of money per round. But anyway, just so you know too, it's about 70/30, annual members, is about 70% of the golf that's played here. Doesn't mean that they're paying for an annual, but they still may go away for a month or two during the summer, but they're annual members, but it's basically 70%, so it's really a year-round club. But a couple of things, one, Bob and I have been talking about it, but just so everybody else is aware, the bad debt issue that we have here, again, it's not a major problem. The one major problem that

we have has gone away. It's been paid. But basically, what we do, we are lenient because of the seasonality and people traveling. We basically send out letters after 60 days. Again, it's rare. I think the biggest month I ever had I sent out 12 and most of them paid immediately. We suspend people after 90 days just to get them to wake up. But overall, it's not an issue for golfers. What we're running into though, is I've written off close to
$2,000 worth of bad debt for people who have moved. I don't know if everybody knows this, but again, it started with the developer, but his job was to sell houses and mine is to make sure people pay. We have a lot of residents that are non-golf members that have charge accounts and that was a standard fare. You could go get a charge account at the club for upstairs just by being a resident. The problem with that is while we have a lot that we know and support the club and they are great and everything else, there's a lot of people that will come in and we really don't know them, their habits and stuff, so we don't know when they leave. We don't have a real personal relationship downstairs with a lot of the people upstairs and that's the reason. Again, it's not a ton of money that we wrote off, but it is a couple of grand. I just want you to be aware, so it doesn't get worse or somebody charges a set of golf clubs the week before they move or something like that. One of the things Brian talked about, I thought was a pretty good idea is that we might initiate a social membership for those people that are not golfers that want to charge upstairs to the point, I don't even look at it as a moneymaker, maybe we charge them $50 and we put their credit card on file. At least then they're signing a piece of paper because I found out that we really, as a CDD, don't have a real good recourse to be able to get this money back. So at least if we have a signed document, at least that's better than just go ahead upstairs and charge. Other than that, with the events, I just want everybody to be aware that I told Vicky no more events whatsoever; Tuesday, Wednesdays, and Thursdays. I even explained to her because she's been here for so long, seven years and I'm trying to tell Vicky, "When you were here, there were 300 members. There's 660 people now. Golfers pay the tab to run this club. We need to have it available to them." Eventually, we'll cut back on even more events because again, the season was very busy, about as busy of a private club I have ever been a part of. The other thing that we are having a hard time with, again, is labor. But Vicky has really said no to people that are doing smaller events down here. Again, we have to carry two crews. It's losing money

when we do it, so we limit it. We'll still be able to do stuff Friday through Monday, that's plenty of time to do it. I just want anybody to be aware of that, and I'll give you a little scenario of what we're dealing with here, which Brian touched on it. Pizza dough is up 39%, the sauce is up 10%. The good thing is that mozzarella still costs the same. But here's a good one for you. Pizza boxes are up 42% over prior year. Turkey is up 42%. Trash bags are up 135% because they're an oil-based product. But the good news is gloves are down 22%. But the reason I bring all that up is just be aware there are some major price increases coming to upstairs at eagle's nest. We've tried to hold it as long as we can knowing that it's an amenity that we're breaking even making a couple of bucks, but now it's gotten a little bit ridiculous. But that's about it as far as the monthly report, the only other thing is the fee increases and what the Board would like to do.
Mr. Mecsics: We have a question from Angie.
Ms. Littlewood: I don't understand why. I get that you want golfers to be able to have an account, I get that. But non-golfers, why don't you make them pay upfront? That's a novel idea, I know. But when you go to a bar or to a restaurant, or to even just to a cafe, Starbucks, you have to pay as you get your products. VVhy not just make people pay?
Mr. Lavoie: I think it's one of those things. We've got some people I will tell you this much, I would never want to shut off because of what they bring to that club every month and they're loyal supporters. We've got people that eat here four or five days a week and they're not golfers, and they pay their bill on time and everything else. I think if we just organize it to where it's a social membership and you're allowed to charge. If you don't want a social membership, then it will be cash-only. It's just I really would like to have someone on paper in case a scenario where it comes down to how do we get stiffed for
$3,000 by one person. If we ever did go to small claims, you can say you wrote it right here and you signed it and the whole bit so at least we have that. That's the reason. I would shut off anybody who doesn't want to be a social member.
Mr. Mecsics: VVhat I'd like for you and Bob as the oversight to do is to come up and take a review of that whole thing and come back to us. I'm sure you guys are the experts, come back to us with some type of recommendation.
Mr. Lavoie: That's why I brought it up for this one. So going forward for the next meeting and we can have a legal document as far as social membership.

Mr. Mecsics: Yeah. Good.
Mr. Zelazny: While we are on these, just to confirm my numbers. We've talked about 660 golfers, 432 memberships, 660 golfers. That does not include the free golf that we still give for homes that are closing. We give one-year free golf. I think we have 20 some from this year and we have, I think 20 houses to close, and that'll then be the last free memberships.
Mr. Lavoie: Because actually there's 42 freebies going on right now and as Bob said, 22 more houses. So what I looked at it as if you use this same stat, which is 28% of the rooftops from golf members, we probably will top off somewhere around the 675 to 680 as far as golfers. That will probably be the community. Again, 2024 will be the year of all dues paying people, and the only prorated would be selling of houses in turnover. That's a good story to tell at a club like this now that we have that many members. Because usually, I'll tell you what, the average is between 4-8% of most communities. The larger the community, the lower the percentage. But to say you got 28%, you're a real golf community.
Ms. Littlewood: Do you know what the conversion rate is from the people that get a year's free to them actually taking out full membership after that year is up?
Mr. Lavoie: That was that 28% number. Mr. Mecsics: Anything else?
Ms. Clark: I don't want to ask a question, I just want to make a comment to both of you with a thank you. My husband and I had an occasion and recently went to play on the golf courses or courses outside of Lake Ashton. When we were finished, I told my husband I would rather play at home. So I think that that's a testament to the work that you and your crew are doing in trying to make sure that we have an established course that is well-manicured, well taken care of, and fun to play. So thank you.
Mr. Lavoie: Well, thank you. It's good to hear. Like I said, when you come onboard, you try and extend that honeymoon as long as you can. But it's funny you say that because somebody else said one of the men's groups came to the office and they're talking about that we haven't really gone anywhere to play. I was talking about how you go someplace else, you're going to have to ride 2 to a cart. They said, "We haven't gone anywhere to play." I said, "How come?" and they said that it was because conditions are

good, and you want to stay here whereas before they wanted to get away. So I really appreciate that and they do hard work and I'd be remised not saying officially here at the Board meeting that we are really going to miss Trent, his last day is tomorrow, and he is off to a new career. I think he's going to be very excited with it. We look forward to hiring new personnel.
Mr. Mecsics: Great. Well, I think on behalf of the Board, we wish Trent only Godspeed in this new endeavors and all that stuff. Any other questions? Comments?
Mr. Zelazny: Just one. I did put in your packet a copy of the community blast that the golf course sent out in reference to two people per cart just so you're aware of it, in case you get any questions. It's an attempt to try to reduce the traffic on the golf course. We have 60,000 rounds a year that are played on the golf course and if everybody drives a cart and they drive down the fairway, the grass gets beat up pretty bad. So that was the intent. We really are just trying to get back to pre-COVID standards, which is two per, we're not demanding it if there are people with health conditions, people that smoke cigars and can't ride with somebody. There are accommodations for that, but that's the intention. Just tried to reduce traffic on the golf course.
Mr. Mecsics: Great. Anything else? Go ahead, Sarah.
Ms. Sandy: We have on the agenda underneath the golf course report, the discussion regarding golf rates. If we want to go ahead. I didn't know if we needed to go to that.
Mr. Mecsics: Let's go do that then.

A. Discussion regarding Golf User Fees & Rates for 2022-2023
Ms. Sandy: So included in your agenda package is a resolution to potentially set a public hearing on the golf user rates. Bob has been working with the golf course staff on what they're proposing those rates to be for this upcoming membership year 2022-2023. I think we'd like to have this in place by July 1st, is that what you are saying?
Mr. Zelazny: Correct. The membership drive kicks off the first part of July. So we have to have the new rates in place so we can start to advertise. The rates requested by the golf course is for a 5% increase. As you know, the first year we had no increase, last year was 2.5%, this year we're requesting a 5% increase. Brian talked to a little bit about

it, labor cost is up 8% on the green staff, 14% upstairs. Food costs 20 to 40%. Our electric bill just at the two pumps, the pumps stations that were at the golf course are up over
$1,000 a month and then gas has doubled. So as our commitment to the residents is that the CDD would not fund any part of the golf course operations, we feel that the appropriate raise this year would be 5%. So that's what we're requesting. If you look at the chart, 5% and I think for the categories exceeds what we're allowed to increase by the Board. In those cases, we are requesting that we reduce it less than 5% so we can stay within the window that we can change the rates without having a public hearing. So I think this is a two-part thing. One is to approve the rates for next year, which if we do, requires no Board action other than approval of the new rates. The second part would be to have the resolution to change the window and move everything up 5% so that we can change the rates in the next couple of years without coming back to the Board for a public hearing if necessary. So it's two issues. One is set the rates for this year and then secondly, if Sarah thinks we should do it now or later, but to give us a new window so that we can change the rates if necessary. Because ifwe put it right up against the wall, we have no flexibility.
Mr. Mecsics: Right. Sarah?
Ms. Sandy: The one thing I was going to mention, the idea of the social membership, we would need to include it as a new category of rate on here. So we could do that simultaneously, add that in.
Mr. Zelazny: You mean the social membership?
Ms. Sandy: That Brian was just talking about. It was having the social memberships so that we are charging a fee so that they could have non-golfers that have a charge accounts. So we can add that as a category as well. Would you want to increase the window just by the 5% or make it a bigger window?
Mr. Zelazny: Well, I was thinking that once we establish the new rates, the window would be 5% above that, 5% below that.
Ms. Sandy: Got it.
Mr. Zelazny: So that we have, again, flexibility going forward. Not that we're going to increase it, but I think just for the sake of having the flexibility and not having to go back to the Board every time we have a rate increase and do it by resolution. Still has to come to the Board, but doesn't have to go through the resolution process.

Mr. Mecsics: Correct. So do I have a proposal or a recommendation?
Ms. Sandy: Yes. I think we have two motions that the Board should consider. The first would be to approve the 2022-2023 golf user fee rates at the amounts shown in your agenda package, except for the ones that are at the max part would be maxed out. I guess I would say at the amounts shown.
Mr. Zelazny: Not to exceed the approved limit.
Ms. Sandy: Yes. Thank you, Bob. So that would be the first.
Mr. Mecsics: Let's tackle that first. Do I have a motion to approve the 2023 golf to their max or within their limits for that?
Mr. Zelazny: It's 5% increase not to exceed the max.
Ms. Clark: I have a question. Have we reached out to the golf membership? Do we know what impact in an increase of 5% would have on the actual membership? Have we made it a public situation where we're saying to them, "Here's why we're increasing the rates because of these costs." And so on and so forth, or are we just being asked to raise the rates without giving the golfers and any notice? Sorry.
Ms. Sandy: Procedurally I just want to mention that technically, we have provided notice in the sense that we set this range previously in years past. We said that we could go up to this maximum amount. So just legally and procedurally, we have provided some notice. But I think your statement is different.
Ms. Clark: Just the heads up might be nice.
Mr. Zelazny: Yeah, Mary. Clearly, we have to do the marketing to explain why. I think in talking with the golfers, they pretty much understand because of the cost of everything going up, but yes, we can do that.
Ms. Littlewood: I think where Mary is coming from, correct me if I'm wrong, I'm sure you will, but I think where she's coming from is if you increase it by 5% if you haven't actually done that survey kind of thing, will it dramatically affect the membership? Will people say, I know I'm not paying that, and then the membership will go down and then you'll lose money. I think that's where you are coming from, right?
Ms. Clark: My concern is that without giving the folks notice in advance of any rate, so that they have an opportunity to go back and look at their own personal budgets because prices aren't just going up for the golf course, they're going up for everybody.

Then being able to say, well, yes, I can afford a 5% increase or I cannot afford a 5% increase. Are we going to increase ourselves to the point where we were going to lose a significant number of memberships, in which case then was 5% too much? Would there have been a better intermediate or give folks the opportunity to say, we totally get it, but if 5% is too much, maybe a 3%, or just a little bit more of a discussion with the golfers to ensure that the increase isn't going to increase ourselves out of business.
Mr. Zelazny: Well, that is a possibility, but what we've looked at is the budget. What is a fixed amount of the budget? Then what can be modified? The plan is that based on the membership, Indigo will come up with their final annual budget for approval based on what it looks like the membership is going to support. The problem is in order to sustain the golf course at its current level, this is the revenue we have to generate. If we don't do that, we miss the mark automatically. If we miss the mark, then we will have to adjust the budget down. I understand explaining, but I don't know how you capture the feel for how many are going to join or rejoin or change their program. If you said, I won't join if it's more than 3%, well, I would never say okay, I'll pay 5% if I know I can argue down 3%. I know how much is fixed cost in operating the golf course, but again, I don't know what the answer is.
Mr. Rhodes: Obviously, we're always worried about attrition. We try to follow our membership by playing habits. Here's a little bit different because when the shop closes, I know I play golf here at four or five o'clock and I don't always get checked in. Obviously, in playing habits we monitor that. We're seeing the membership increase over the last year, even with the 2.5% increase last year. We're seeing the numbers go up at every club that pretty much we're managing. We're getting 5-10% increases in membership. It's just unfortunately, it's a cost of doing business. Even though we're moving up 5%, I'm going to say it's going to be mid-range, not the high end. Obviously, if it was a for-profit club that we were really looking to drive numbers, we'd be standing here asking for 1O or 12% to offset current inflation, but I think just by the pure numbers, we're looking at maintaining where we are, both bottom line and being able to maintain the golf course.
Mr. Mecsics: Any other discussion? I understand exactly what you're saying, but I also agree that we need to let the membership know what they're getting and why is it

going up? It's like on TV, gas prices are going up, minute-wise it's going up, but I think we owe it to them to let them know.
Ms. Clark: That's would be my request. We need to make it available and easily explained to the membership that this is the projected increase in the cost and this is why there's projected increase in costs. I think that that's just the prudent thing to do. Then it gives the individuals the opportunity to make a decision as to whether they want to continue with their membership or not.
Mr. Mecsics: Do you have any further discussion on the motion, or second? If not, I'll call for a vote.

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor, the 2022-2023 Golf User Fees and Rates at 5% Not-To-Exceed the Previously Established Max Rate, was approved.

I. Consideration of Resolution 2022-14, Setting a Public Hearing on the Golf User Rates
Ms. Sandy: The second motion would be to approve Resolution 2022-14, setting the public hearing on the golf user rates. I would suggest for the August meeting since there's not a time crunch. That would be the motion.

On MOTION by Ms. Littlewood, seconded by Mr. Zelazny, with all in favor, Resolution 2022-14 Setting a Public Hearing on the Golf User Fees & Rates for 2022-2023 for the regular August Board meeting, was approved.

Mr. Mecsics: Thank you. Anything else regarding that? Ms. Sandy: No, that's it.
Mr. Mecsics: Well, thank you gentlemen. Keep up the good work. I echo with everyone up here, I have more people come and just say how great this golf course is looking. Thank you so much.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS
Mr. Mecsics: Engineering?

Engineering Staff Report

Mr. Rayl: I handed out some bullet points and some backup information for the Board this morning, but first, I wanted to check in with Sarah on the repair work on the cart path behind the driving range. We completed our discussions with the contractor.
Ms. Sandy: I sent back responses to their comments, and accepted most of them except for a handful. I think they wanted to remove the public records language, which we're required by statute to have. There were a handful of other smaller items and I believe Amanda had sent it back and I haven't heard a response.
Mr. Rayl: I'll check in with them. I'd really like to see us get that work done before we go through another rainy season with it. Thank you. On the hole six bathroom building adventure, we're looking for solar power to provide the power to run that building. The developer did not leave a route for electric to be run back to that building and the route that we would have available to us would have to come from 653, which it would be cheaper to build a new building over at 653. We have been talking with Kincaid Electric who does a lot of work in the community, we were trying to figure out what our best options were. We weren't really getting a lot of productive assistance from TECO so we thought we're going to try to look in to see if we can equip some solar facilities out there that can run the lighting in the bathroom building and then run that small pump station. We'll continue to look into how to solve that problem.
Mr. Mecsics: I know in our discussions Alan, and I'm not going to say anything about previous owners or anything like that but when you looked at the electrical set up over there, one scared me and secondly, I think was always said, if the water cooler was used, the pump would shut off and other things. It needs to be addressed.
Mr. Rayl: As soon as the electrician saw it, he disabled it. It wasn't very good. We're still working on that state-mandated stormwater needs analysis. It's ongoing. We're working with GMS to compile the data and we will submit it to them. They're doing it for a lot of Districts and it will need to be to the state by the end of June. So that's on track.
Mr. Mecsics: Good.
Mr. Rayl: Now, some of the attachments that I gave you, I think, the last one in your package was something we'd brought up. It was asked about, we've looked into, we got a few bids to do thermoplastic stop bars at the intersections. They're more durable, longer-lasting, and the striping is what you see on highways, that DOT puts down. Before

this thing got any older, I just wanted to make last call on this bid, I guess. If we wanted to have the contractor go forward with it or if we decided we didn't want to move forward with it, I just wanted to finalize that discussion.
Ms. Littlewood: I'm just going to ask you, are these the bars that go across the road, do you mean where we just repainted them? That's what you mean, right?
Mr. Mecsics: Yeah.
Mr. Zelazny: So, the thermoplastic stop bars, how long do they last? Mr. Rayl: Years under normal conditions.
Mr. Mecsics: James, how much did it cost just to paint them the first time? Economically, doing the thermoplastics stop bars, better public safety, better visibility. We've painted them twice in the last three years because they fade out. I think it's a good idea to move forward. Before we vote on this, we're going to have to look at the budget and their impact on the budget right away. It is part of the issue because in your packet, Alan, there's about $56,000 worth of projects so we need to look at it. I do think that the cart path behind the HFC needs to be resolved, it's getting progressively worse and it's become a safety factor so I think that needs to be prioritized to move that forward.
Mr. Rayl: Sorry to interrupt but the pond repair bids, I really put that in there for informational purposes. I'm not asking the Board to approve that today, I wanted to let you know we're going back to the contractor. We're going to try to work out some more cost-efficient ways to get us to where we're trying to go than that 40 some odd thousand­ dollar bid. The HFC repair though we need to take action on that.
Mr. Zelazny: I was going to ask you because I saw S&S out looking at the ponds. Was that at your request or was it a result of a SWFWMD review that they were coming out and looking at all the concrete in the ponds and everything, the gravel?
Mr. Rayl: It was.
Mr. Zelazny: Let me ask one question, on the driving range cart path. Have we signed the contract or are we still negotiating the contract on that?
Ms. Sandy: I guess we're still negotiating. We provided our standard form of contract. They had comments many of which we accepted and sent back. They've had two rounds of comments. I've accepted what I think we can and provided updated

contracts. I was just looking I think the last response I sent was on May 5th, and I was sending over a new draft of the contract and I haven't heard anything back yet.
Mr. Zelazny: Alan, do you have an estimate as to what the solar solution at the bathroom on six will be?
Mr. Rayl: No. Not at this time. Not yet.
Mr. Mecsics: I think reading what I am reading is the thermoplastic is about $8,500 for that?
Mr. Zelazny: It's actually quite affordable.
Mr. Rayl: The SNS quote was half of one or the other quotes, and then I think Thurman came in at $4,000 something.
Mr. Mecsics: Do we still have money in our roads?
Mr. Zelazny: No. We have extended our money that's in the capital budget. We still have sufficient money for end of year funding, I believe. That'll be addressed when we look at the budget itself, but there is sufficient money I believe to address the two safety issues. One is the cart path and behind the HFC, which is I think a safety factor now and I think would agree with me and then the thermoplastic things. Again, a safety factor and beneficial use of our money. I think that $10,000 is doable under this budget, but we can wait till we looked at the budget numbers if we want.
Ms. Littlewood: If the roads get resurfaced, which we will do eventually, will that thermoplastic bar thing still be visible or will we have to have it redone? Is it petroleum­ based? Is it going to go up if we don't accept this?
Mr. Rayl: It won't be a very significant cost in a resurfacing of the road project. The striping is really always a pretty minor cost compared to overall.
Mr. Mecsics: I think it goes back to a public safety aspect. I worry about not having those lines there. God forbid, somebody continues on and you can save them for it. But more importantly, we have an accident and then it goes back to liabilities. There was no directive thing in order to stop.
Mr. Zelazny: What I handed out today, there's one sheet that talks about the approved capital projects that haven't had paid invoices. I think it comes to about $56,000, something like that. That shows the projects that have been approved and are in some form of work, but we have an obligation to pay those bills. If you look at the budget for

this year in the April financials, at the end of the year, in the capital budget, we will have an end-of-year fund balance of $371,000. From that you have to subtract the $56,000. You have to subtract that. That would reduce that down to $320,000 end of year fund balance carrying over to next year. If we add another $10,000 to that, it'll bring it down to a carryover of $300,000 going into next year's budget. I think that accounts for all of our money if we stopped spending.
Mr. Mecsics: So do you make that as motion, Bob?
Mr. Zelazny: I'd like to move forward and make a motion that we repair the cart path behind the HFC and that we go ahead with the thermoplastic stops.

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor, Repairing the Cart Path Behind the HFC, and the Addition of Thermoplastic Stops, were approved.

A. Proposal from S&S Contracting to Repair Erosion Behind the HFC
Mr. Rayl: Actually, there's only one item I had a bullet point for there that I wanted to go over and it's for informational purposes. The water use permit that we have for watering the golf course, we've been working really pretty cooperatively with SWFWMD back-and-forth, negotiating. We've also been working with the golf course. Now in their new rules, they want the information out there to the users and residents about water conservation measures. Some of those things are part of this water use permit renewal package. Just wanted to let the Board know, as with every other government held water permit that's out there in this southern water use caution area, pumping rates are being reduced. It's across the Board. They're similarly reducing hours. I just brought this from the office today. This is our current permit pumping rate. We've never touched it. It's up at this line right here. We're going to be brought down to the rates were actually using. It's in line with our historical pumping. You're allowed to exceed your permitted rate in a couple of scenarios. If you had a drought month or something and you shot way over as long as your annual average does not exceed the permitted amount. We have exceeded, well, in data reporting before we took over the data reporting, it looked like we were exceeding it. Even then it wasn't a deal breaker. We were able to get it resolved and worked through with the District. So I just want to let you know that that's being wrapped

up and finalized and we're asking for a 20-year renewal of that permit. The last permit was a 10 year, but we're allowed to ask for up to 20. We're going to try to see if they'll do that. We can lock it in for a longer time frame. We're also getting some quotes for some miscellaneous repairs in the community, very small stuff, but I'll bring those back in future meetings. We're assisting James with some building permit submittals for the structure here at the HFC. I think that's all I have for the Board this morning.
Mr. Zelazny: The only thing I'd ask is, I know we approved it at either one or two meetings ago but the flares on those two cart paths.
Mr. Rayl: I sent you an email about that with some photos. It looks like the work has already started because some of the sod has been removed out of the CDD tract.
Mr. Zelazny: I noticed that there was a sod missing there. Somebody asked me, I said I had no idea. Can we reiterate it and then close that gap on that please?
Mr. Mecsics: Anything else for Alan? Okay. Great update.
Mr. Zelazny: Alan, did you do have a chance to look at those two homes that I sent you the pictures of.
Mr. Rayl: Yes.
Mr. Greenwood: The two items that we have is unfinished business because these came in after the hour when the agenda was circulated. It's just two updates here. It's the update on the memorial project, and that was obviously put together by Angie, and then she's also going to be updating us on the entrance lighting project, correct?
Ms. Littlewood: Yes.
Mr. Mecsics: Okay, Angie?
Ms. Littlewood: Am I doing the memorial project first? So the last meeting I was asked to send out the survey thing and we did that. An email was sent to every resident with a survey attached that was registered in the resident's directory. On it was a brief explanation of what the survey was about. The residents were asked just three questions. Those three questions were, are you in favor of a memorial area in Lake Ashton? Would you be willing to purchase a paver, cost to be determined? Would you be willing to donate other appropriate items? From that, we had 191 online responses and they break down as the follows. Read the area, would you be in favor of the area? 49% said yes, 51% said no. Purchasing a paver? Only 39% said yes, they would purchase, 61% said no. Donating

appropriate items such as a bench? 27% said yes and 73% no. We had eight manually completed responses and they break down as follows. Regarding the area, 25% said yes, 75% said no. Purchasing a paver, it was the same, 25% yes, 75% no. Donating appropriate items such as the bench? 1% said yes, and 99% said no. Although we only had 191 responses, to me that says that the rest of the residents are either not interested or don't want it. As far as I can see, the residents are not in favor of this memorial project. The recognition program that we all spoke about, and I suggested that we did it in the form of an album type thing. I spoke with Mary on that and asked how many residents that had donated items for the enjoyment of everybody wanted some recognition other than a thank you. She said in her opinion, it was very few. It's up to the Board whether a public thank you, at a meeting is enough recognition or if they want to continue with the plaque program, I'll leave it open up for discussion so that you can see what you wanted to do.
Mr. Mecsics: Okay. Discussion?
Mr. Mecsics: Thanks for doing the survey, good job. It looks like that we have very little interest in the memorial garden. You did what you were asked to do, you did a survey and did check the interests, unless we have something more from the Board here, I'm not sure whether we want you to do any more work on that. Any comments about that?
Ms. Littlewood: The golf course recognition memorial program thing wasn't included in that survey because we decided that was going to be down to the golf course. Mr. Zelazny: First, let me thank you for taking the initiative and going through it all.
I do think that we should move forward with the recognition of tree planting etc., on the golf course, and really all we would need from the COD is authorization to plant trees on COD property. I think either Angie can do that stuff or I can write it up for the golf course under another thing, but it probably better under landscaping and whatever.
Ms. Littlewood: I think the last meeting we agreed that we wanted to keep COD and landscaping stuff separate and that you and the golf course or the golf course on that the golf course people could discuss that and decide.
Mr. Zelazny: Correct. We just need the COD to authorize the purchase and placement of memorial trees, etc., on the golf course and then we can run the individuals a through with the golf club.

Mr. Mecsics: Do we have a consensus for the Board to authorize? Do we need it?
I don't think we need a motion for that for the golf course to plant trees.
Ms. Sandy: To work with the Indigo golf and to plant trees, I think as long as they're working with Indigo golf and they're directing that, then you can leave that to discussion. Mr. Mecsics: Bob would you then take it to anything other than more fleshing out?
Mr. Zelazny: Yes.
Mr. Mecsics: Good. Entrance lights kiddo.
Ms. Littlewood: I'm sorry, I forgot to get some stuff printed out for you, but I'll just run through it. I looked at two areas for the lighting. The first area was a way to light up some of the pillars that we're on. When I was given this brief to do, I wasn't really sure on the whereabouts I was supposed to be going with it. I went and had a look at the east entrance and I see that they've got some lighting on so many pillars visible from the road which then takes you into the entrance. I thought that might be the way that the Board wanted to go. So I had Andre out from TECO and there's no electricity out there. We couldn't actually have lights on the walls that would be electric, so we would have to go solo. There's limited space to put it because of the public footpath that goes down there, and the first concern was if we put solar in there, they would get stolen because people walk past there, but there's also a very narrow area that's full of soil. I spoke with James and we looked at solar lights. She can actually get solar like carriage like type things that can go on the pillars, and he said it's not going to be a problem to do that. We looked at some options and there were two, James pulled at one that actually looks like carriage lights that are on there, they were pack of six for $33 on Amazon. You could light up three pillars down coming this way and three pillars coming that way, so that you've got guides right to the entrance. Then I looked at some and they were a pack of about eight I think for $80 which were slightly different. They had a cap on them so the light would shine down. I will send them out if that's okay. Sarah I'll send these photos out because I forgot to send them then the Board can look at them.
Ms. Sandy: Yeah.
Ms. Littlewood: Okay. So that you can take a look at them, but I think that would be the option and the way to go, I think we'd probably have to cut away some of the vine that's on that to get them on. The other thing is the solar panel cannot be, there is a cap,

little edge that goes around the cap, it has to be protruding from that because otherwise the sun will block. That was one way to go with that. I've had people say to me that the Boulevard is actually very dark. Again, I spoke with Andre that day when we're looking at it all and there is no electricity that runs down the center of the Boulevard. He looked at boring and I said, if we just had one street light in the center, we've got the light from the guard house, then we've got the light from the HFC and the light that's at the end there. If we just had one in the center of the curve, how much would it be? It will be just over
$10,000 to actually bore to get electricity to that light. Then it is, I can tell you what it is. It will be $10,500 to bore and then it will be a monthly rental of $78 a month. But again, because I was looking into solar lights for the wall, I looked into solar street lighting, and you can actually get solar street lighting as well, but I didn't pursue that because I didn't know if that's an area that the Board wanted to go in.
Mr. Mecsics: Okay.
Ms. Littlewood: That's where I am. Mr. Mecsics: Thank you.
Ms. Littlewood: It's up to the Board to decide what they want to do. Mr. Mecsics: Discussion?
Ms. Littlewood: I gave you this little map that shows you where the one street light would be and how it would shine if we went that way.
Mr. Zelazny: Well, I think the solar solution for the pillars is good now so you can see the road coming in. We'd had previous discussions on how we could light the entryway itself. James and I had bought a solar light and you could see them out front right now but then we couldn't figure out how to make the thing work. I do think that there are available solar street lights that we can put into the bed so that it provides a little more light and I would ask that we research them. I think with the pole and the light, they're about $600.
Ms. Littlewood: I actually spoke with the guy from TECO that I was with. We discussed about putting a street line in those beds and he said he wouldn't do that. We were talking about a TECO light obviously but he said he wouldn't do it because eventually that whole area across from Lake Ashton is going to be developed and street

lights will be put in down the road and he said that would then make our lights in that bed just void really.
Mr. Zelazny: Yeah, I don't know how long it's going to take to get the street lights and the developments across the street but at five or $600 per light, I think we should look to put them in and take them out when the area is developed. We've had a number of residents that talked about trying to figure out how we light the entryway. I think Angie has done a great job in finding solutions to do the fence line. Others have still mentioned how we can get the entryway itself lit up a little bit.
Mr. Greenwood: Just to chime in here. GMS has a maintenance division. We've done this in several communities where we've installed these solar lights. I'm going to pass around a picture of what we've done at other Districts to the Board members where it's a solar light, stands roughly about 12 feet tall. It can be motion or it can stay on or not but we can put a proposal together and work with Angie to provide that. We've used it for security reasons and we've actually installed 300 watt lights where it sits pretty bright. Very cost-effective like what Bob said it's right around that price too and we can actually do that. I can bring that back hopefully to the next meeting, obviously if approved, I have to get the scheduling from our maintenance division.
Mr. Mecsics: Would you work with Angie on that and then come back so we have a package deal? I agree with the pillar lights. I think that's a good set. Why don't we come back with a solution that addresses one, the pillar lights and then the street light itself? Can you do that for us, Angie?
Ms. Littlewood: Yeah, I can do that. The other thing that I was very conscious of was I don't find anything in there that's going to be too bright and shine into the houses that are now built around the golf course. You don't want anything that's going to affect them out there so that was another issue that I was concerned about.
Mr. Mecsics: Keep the lumens down enough so it doesn't impact upon the back. I've been working with TECO to put a block on a street light that what residents had asked for and it was going well until they put it on the wrong light, so you've got to keep on. But I would recommend to the Board that we ask Angie and Jason to come back and give us a solution package on that, so that we can address that and vote on.

Mr. Zelazny: Angie if you think putting in that light there is expensive, you should look at the bill they sent when we asked to put the streetlights between the fourth hole and the model homes. It would blow your mind.
Ms. Littlewood: They came back with a thing for, I think it was four lights or five lights, the first sketch he did and I think it was nearly $19,000 just to get it bored. Then it was about 300 bucks a month for rent and I'm like, "No."
Mr. Mecsics: Thank you. Good job on that. Go ahead, Jason.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	New Business
Acceptance of Resignation Letter from Supervisor McKie
Mr. Greenwood: With our next item that we have, we're moving into new business. Item A, we have the acceptance of the resignation letter from Supervisor McKie. At this point it was a termination effective immediately. If there's no discussion, we'll be looking for a motion to accept the resignation letter from Supervisor McKie.
Mr. Mecsics: Well, before we take the motion, in her resignation letter obviously, she had her own personal reasons for that. But there were some words in there about leadership and ethics and let me just make it clear to everyone on this Board, you are all ethical people and I don't want anybody ever to think that we do anything or pressure anybody to do anything unethical. I just wanted to clarify that for the register. With that, I'll make a motion to accept her resignation.

On MOTION by Mr. Mecsics, seconded by Mr. Zelazny, with all in favor, the Resignation Letter from Supervisor McKie, was approved.

Discussion of Appointing a New Supervisor to Fill the Vacant Seat
Mr. Greenwood: Next we have the discussion of the appointment of a new Supervisor to fill the vacant seat. Obviously that appointment would actually be into 2024. At that point, I know that you've got two Supervisors right now that are running for, I believe, re-election and hope so you guys are great servants to this District. Those seats are up in 2022. At any point, you have the opportunity to appoint someone to Ms. McKie's previous seat and that also goes for other Board members too. Options are if a Board

member was to step down and then get appointed to the other seats. That's another option if the Board wanted to. It's an option and I just wanted to declare that publicly.
Mr. Mecsics: Mr. Zelazny and myself are coming up for re-election. We do have that option that if one of us were to do that then the Board would have to accept our resignation and reappoint us immediately back into Collette's seat which will then give a little more continuity for the Board and their future. I'll open that up for discussion.
Ms. Littlewood: Are we discussing whether we should hold it open or until November or?
Mr. Mecsics: Well the discussion will be do we want to afford the opportunity, for one of the two Board members to move over to that seat. Essentially, it's a resignation then a reappointment by the Board. This will then give us another two years for a little more continuity within the Board.
Ms. Clark: I would move to do that.
Mr. Mecsics: Do we have any other further discussion? Do we have anybody who would nominate a person for that? I would do it and I'm sure Bob would do it. But I think for that I would volunteer to do that and that will give me two more years. Then we would have to discuss someone to fill my seat in November because then they would have to run.
Ms. Littlewood: Help me understand. So, you overtake Collette's seat. Mr. Mecsics: Correct.
Ms. Littlewood: That gives you then until 2024? Mr. Mecsics: Right.
Ms. Littlewood: That then only still leaves four members on the Board. Are we
looking for someone else? Mr. Mecsics: Yes.
Ms. Littlewood: Oh, okay.
Mr. Mecsics: Once we establish the move over to that, then we still have to say we could appoint someone for the last five months of the seat.
Ms. Littlewood: Right.
Mr. Zelazny: I can tender my resignation. That is fine.

Mr. Mecsics: Well, I would do it too so depends on which one of us you guys want to take.
Ms. Littlewood: You have to resign first?
Mr. Mecsics: To take Colette's seat, you'd had to resign and then you guys would reappoint right away.
Ms. Littlewood: If you resign, does that mean we go out for a new Chairman? Ms. Sandy: Not necessarily if he's reappointed.
Mr. Mecsics: Well, I would like to offer my name for that and I would do that and stay on as the Chairman if you all love me that much.
Ms. Sandy: We would do it in two motions if the Board is amenable to that. Mr. Mecsics: I will make a motion for myself to resign from this.
Ms. Clark: I moved to accept Jim's resignation from the Board.

On MOTION by Ms. Clark, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor, the Resignation Letter from Supervisor Mecsics, was approved.

On MOTION by Ms. Clark, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor, Appointing Supervisor Mecsics to Seat #5 on the Board of Supervisors, was approved.

Mr. Mecsics: Thank you, everybody. Now, do we have to do anything as far as the Chairman or can I continue on?
Ms. Sandy: You can continue. It's not by seat number, it's by name so you can continue on.
Mr. Zelazny: What that means is we're going to leave the seat open now until the election in November?
Mr. Mecsics: Well, that's what we need to discuss. Do we or do we want to call for someone to apply and fill out that seat until the next election?
Ms. Littlewood: I would prefer to fill the seat. Not as a Board member now as a resident, but I would like to full Board. November is a fair way away. It only needs one of us to be sick or two of us to be sick together. I would vote for filling the seat.

Mr. Mecsics: Do I have a motion for that? Angie is that your motion?
Mr. Zelazny: I motion that we move forward to find a replacement to fill the vacant position.

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor, Authorizing the Search for a Replacement for the Vacant Seat on the Board, was approved.

Mr. Mecsics: I would like us to set for June because we're probably going to have to have a June meeting if we have any of that to ask for volunteers and folks like we did the last time. The only thing I think would be fair as we vote for this next time, rather than just the first with the most, that everybody gets a chance to vote for whatever how many people we have, then we would have a voting on that, whoever gets the most votes. I think that would be the fairest.
Mr. Greenwood: With that, just on GMS side we will advertise this on the website
and post that there. We'll correspond with Mary to make sure that we get an email blast regarding the vacant seat. Maybe someone that's in this room right now wants the seat because they actually attend our meetings.
Mr. Mecsics: I think we want it. Is it a consensus of the Board? Please do so. Thank

you.

Mr. Zelazny: Are we are we looking to fill the position at the June meeting? Mr. Mecsics: Yes.
Mr. Zelazny: If we're looking to fill a position in June meeting, then we need to have

a date by which the residents submit their applications well beforehand so we can review them.
Mr. Mecsics: Do you have one date in mind?
Mr. Zelazny: No, I don't even know what day we're meeting in June. Ms. Sandy: I think you can probably leave that to GMS.
Mr. Mecsics: Let's give it at least a week to week and a half so that we have a chance to look at the resumes and not something we just walk in on.
Mr. Greenwood: What we'll do, typically we advertise it, we'll put it on the website, we'll get the correspondence out to the community, and then we will set a deadline.

Obviously, we won't stop applicants if they come, if anyone else came to the public meeting and said that I would like to be considered. But if we set a deadline, then obviously we'll get those resumes. That's what we want, resume or letter from the resident.
Mr. Mecsics: Yes. Go ahead, Angie.
Ms. Littlewood: The seat we were filling now will become available again in November, right?
Mr. Mecsics: Yes. Ms. Littlewood: Okay.

Consideration of Resolution 2022-16 Announcing the Seats Up for the November General Election
*This item was taken out of order
Mr. Mecsics: That'll lead us into our next I think along the way there. VVhy don't we move that one up where we talk about seats that are open in this November's election?
Mr. Greenwood: You will see that there's the consideration of Resolution 2022-16 announcing the seats that are up for general election. You do have Mr. Zelazny's seat up for election. Jim, your prior seat number was?
Mr. Mecsics: One.
Mr. Greenwood: One. seat one is still up for election. Obviously, you just have to make sure that you get down to the supervisor of elections. There's a window from June 13th until June 17th. Then it's open just for the four days. Opens at noon shuts down at noon on the fourth day. There's a $25 application fee at that point. That's where that is publicly notifying everyone in the community that your seat, Bob, is you've got Seat 1 and seat number?
Mr. Zelazny: I'm in Seat 3, even though the document says Seat 4. Mr. Mecsics: I'll ask the question. Bob, are you going to run again? Mr. Zelazny: That's my intention.
Mr. Mecsics: Good.
Ms. Clark: Good. Jason, in addition to the public notification now at this meeting, could we send an email blast out that lets the community know that there are two seats

that are open and what the process is for if they wanted to run. If they had an intent to run so that we are doing our due diligence to make that known to these residents.
Mr. Zelazny: That's fine.
Mr. Greenwood: We can put it on the CDD website or we can communicate with Mary to have an email blast for that. That's not a problem if you'd like us to do that.
Mr. Mecsici;;: Yes, please.
Mr. Greenwood: Other than that, we will be looking for a motion to approve Resolution 2022-16.
Ms. Sandy: Subject to updating Seat 4 to Seat 3.

On MOTION by Ms. Clark, seconded by Ms. Littlewood, with all in favor, Resolution 2022-16 Announcing the Seats Up for the November General Election, Subject to Updating Seat 4 to Seat 3, was approved.

Consideration of Resolution 2022-15 Approving the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2023 & Setting a Public Hearing Date for Adoption (budget to be provided under separate cover)
Mr. Greenwood: As you see, we do have a proposed budget per Florida statue. We need to make sure that we approve a proposed budget. Proposed budget at this point is essentially setting the high-water mark. Once we approve a proposed budget, we cannot go higher. If there was going to be an assessment increase, we would have to do it at this meeting, we can look and adopt either in our July or August meeting, we can't increase our fees after. Whatever we set today, that's what we will be adopting. Just some key points here obviously, Ms. Mary Clark was working on the budget. Bob Zelazny came in, provided some great inputs with the budget also. Sharyn has also with our office, I know that between Mary and Bob, there's a lot of correspondence with Sharyn. She works diligently with this District. With the golf course, it's time-consuming and cumbersome but Sharyn's on it. Obviously with the proposed budgets, one thing I would like to ask the Board members. I do see that there was a 2.5% increase for management fees. GMS is asking for the 5% rather than the 2.5%. If that's doable, if not, not a problem, continue business practice as normal.
Mr. Mecsics: Mary, did you want to lead?

Mr. Zelazny: I'm going to take lead on that.
Mr. Mecsics: Bob, would you take the lead in the discussion?
Mr. Zelazny: Yeah. If you look at the proposed budget that was submitted for your
.review, you'll notice a couple things that are different from previous budgets. We've identified a new line under maintenance for building grounds, golf course, and building. You have two lines for the golf course, you also have an additional line for pickleball courts because we've found that maintaining the pickleball courts with the screening and things is getting cost-prohibitive for us so we put a line in the budget for that. Even though engineering exceeded their budget the last two years, we did not recommend an increase in the engineering budget. You'll notice a significant increase in personnel costs and security costs, those are based on the rate increases that we approved in February. You'll notice a large increase as well in electrical, gas, and propane. VVhen we get down to the monthly budget, you'll see that we've already exceeded our gas and electric bill for the year because the prices had just jumped astronomically, so there's a big increase on that. We did increase the first-quarter reserve and we also increased the transfer to the capital fund and it all balances in the general fund area. I think that Sharyn did a good job of increasing everything by 2.5% based on the total projected cost of the year, if it was something that wasn't a fixed cost. I think we're pretty close on that. VVhen you look at the capital budget, you'll see that at the end of the year, we break even on that, but we're transferring $367 to the capital budget to go with our carryover of approximately $300,000 which gets us to about 600 plus thousand in the capital budget. You can see that the items listed there, I got to find my document if you don't mind, the capital projects have our standard annual bills, which is roads and bridges, landscaping and other projects. Then the rest of this stuff is pretty much centered around the reserve study stuff as the items reach their planned obsolescence state. I think we've captured all of the comments that the Board brought up at the last meeting. If you look at the list of projects, there are some new ones that have come up since the meeting and that is there has been a discussion on increasing the golf cart from $10,000 to $15,000 so that we would be able to get a good cart with a good warranty. VVhen you look at the warranty program that's associated with the new golf cart, it seems like a very doable thing because the cost of replacement of the golf cart, when you eliminate the $3,000 a year we pay in maintenance

of our two golf carts, it pays for itself in the warranty period, so there's a small increase in that. Then there is a new project that Alan has to evaluate and that is the one for taking care of the north parking lot which needs to be resurfaced, but other than that, I think that they are all other projects that we had discussed or captured. You'll notice that when you look at the handout that I gave you, you can see that we're doing well. We will have an end of year fund balance in the capital budget of $219,000 at the end of the year, after having funded everything that we've looked at. Now that does not include though the
$57,000 of invoices that we haven't paid, so that would be further reduced. It also then talks about we try to build the budget around the reserve study. There are some things like athletic equipment. If you remember, two years ago, we decided that we had like
$60,000 worth of outdated athletic equipment, that it reached its obsolescence. Rather than try to replace everything in one year, we put in $10,000 a year and programmed it over a four-year period. We've done the same thing with the kitchen, now we've done the same thing with HVACs and things like that. There is an amount of money that is in the reserve study that has not been worked, it has not been performed so it requires money associated with it. You'll see that on the last sheet which says reserve study open expenses, those are the expenses that should have been incurred if we took corrective action when it had planned obsolescence. That amounts to about $184,000. As you remember, when we looked to increase the assessments last year, we looked to try to set it high enough that we could get through the low points and the high points and make it 3-5 years without having an assessment. But I believe that because of the items that you'll see in the open expenses, we don't expect them all to be hit at one time. But so over the next two years, those will all be paid down and we will still have enough revenue in the below the line budget in the capital. We also realized that we're bringing in $330,000 into the thing. We also have the $300,000 that sits in the first-quarter reserve, which can be called upon if we needed the money for that. I think that the budget is pretty sound unless we want to make some changes, I would not recommend an assessment increased this year. I have done, I guess it's the third to the last page, if you will, is a chart which project, and Jason, this is for you and for Sharon, below the line on the budget because that hasn't changed this part down here, the five-year budget. These are the numbers on the five-year budget, which is based on strictly annual costs and what is

currently in the reserve study. You'll see what our costs are for the next years going out. We shouldn't have a surprise. As you know, we went to a ten-year budget cycle a couple of years ago trying to look out ten years to see where we are. You can see that the transfer from general fund goes down every year based on the 2.5% in the general fund, which then keeps that budget in balance. My recommendation to the Board is to look at it, see if we have to make changes. I don't believe at this time this year, an additional assessment is required. Then if you have any questions on my charts or whatever.
Mr. Mecsics We will require a motion to accept this budget per se and no assessments and then we'll finalize everything in August, correct?
Ms. Sandy: Yeah. It would be a motion to approve Resolution 2022-15. Mr. Mecsics: Okay.
Mr. Greenwood: The motion for the public hearing date will be August 19. Mr. Mecsics: Correct.
Mr. Greenwood: That's on that Friday. Again, Bob, tremendous work.
Mr. Mecsics: Yes.
Mr. Greenwood: Putting that together. Obviously, I know I briefly mentioned it right now, there's a 2.5%, obviously, we'd be looking to, if applicable, change to the 5% for GMS. I don't know where the numbers are, everything fits perfectly. I just wanted Bob's input on that, if that's applicable.
Mr. Zelazny: What is the 5% or how much additional is that?
Mr. Greenwood: I believe it was just the 2% that was in there. The additional more is just shy of the $3,000 if I'm not mistaken.
Ms. Clark: Did you just say we got an additional $3,000?
Mr. Greenwood: Well, it's not to increase the budget, but to find it within the numbers. We have a budget where Bob's built a very good forecast. You spend less in one column means that there's more money in the bottom line.
Ms. Clark: We would adjust $3,000 on the bottom line. Mr. Mecsics: That's correct.
Mr. Greenwood: With that, as I said, Bob's done a tremendous job, so we'll be looking for a motion to approve Resolution 2022-15, approving the proposed budget for

fiscal year 2023, and setting the public hearing for August 19, 2022. Do we have a motion?
Mr. Mecsics: Well, what you're saying though is, regarding your change from 2.5% to 5%, that we do not have to act upon that at this time, that would be part of our August discussion of finalizing of the budget?
Mr. Greenwood: Correct.
Mr. Zelazny: I will say that I think that we'll certainly be able to find the additional revenue to support that. If you look at the monthlies, the staff has done a tremendous job in keeping us under budget across the Board, and so I think we can continue to do that next year, and we'll be fine.
Ms. Littlewood: Motion to approve Resolution 2022-15.

On MOTION by Ms. Littlewood, seconded by Ms. Clark, with all in favor, Resolution 2022-15 Approving the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2023 & Setting a Public Hearing Date for Adoption for August 19, 2022, was approved.

Mr. Zelazny: Before we leave the budget, Jim, also in your packet is a sheet on IT, should be, that's probably your last sheet. That was omitted previously in the reserve study, and we found that it's crept up on us that our equipment is aging. There's a recycling program that we have, and a retrofitting program. What we're going to do is Ryan is going to upgrade all of the computers in the lab, which will give us a couple more years and increase the speed, and stuff like that. This was added to the reserve study. None of you have seen this before.

Discussion of Amenity Policies & Procedures in Regard to Resident Sponsored Events
Mr. Mecsics: Now we move into, I believe, Jason, the E discussion of amenity policies, and procedures in regard to resident sponsored events. Angie, is that your area?
Ms. Littlewood: Yes. Are we talking about the joint amenities here?
Mr. Mecsics: Well, did somebody submit this for inclusion, or is this something we just had on there?

Mr. Greenwood: I think this was more of a continued item that needed to be discussed. I know that we had our joint meeting Monday. Do we need any further discussion at this meeting, because I know that in the joint meeting, it was a case that Lake Ashton had not come together yet to discuss furthermore of the many policies? We can also put this onto the next meeting if we want to do that, but it was also just placed on the agenda for our discussion.
Mr. Mecsics: I think in all fairness to Angie.
Ms. Littlewood: I will just let you know that the four of us have arranged to have another joint meeting on Tuesday, and I know that some of this was brought up at the meetings, so we will be discussing all that on Tuesday. I should have something to bring back to you for the next meeting, but at the moment, there's nothing changed.
Mr. Mecsics: I would recommend then to the Board that we defer that to June.
Ms. Clark: I have a question. I wanted to bring something up for guarding the use of the equipment in the gym here at the HFC by the person who has an occupational therapy business that he runs here, would this be that appropriate time to discuss that since it deals with the amenities or at the end?
Mr. Mecsics: At the end.

Consideration of Proposal from GMS to Prepare the Audit for the Golf Course Fund
Mr. Mecsics: Let's see, proposal from GMS to prepare the audit for the Golf Course
fund.
Mr. Greenwood: This is for Lake Ashton II and the purchase of the Golf Course. In
order for us to submit financials to even start the audit, GMS works very closely with the Golf Course to supply numbers to start an audit, that's just simply on the accounting side. At the moment we are looking to start the audit, however, we were looking back to the Golf Course, and we're not pointing fingers, it's just a case of in order for us to submit an audit, we need to submit this in a format that the audit can actually read, and it's acceptable. As it stands right now, we don't have that. We don't want to be late on the audit. However, in conversations, I know we briefly spoke with Bob, we've also provided a backup to the chairman separately of the amount of work that is almost seen as out of our scope of services. That's fine, we will always go above and beyond for all of our

Districts, especially with Lake Ashton II. However, the amount of work that you see for fiscal year 2022, this is more of work that we've already done. But now we're looking at fiscal year 2021, that we need to act on almost immediately because we've been told by the Golf Course that's not in their scope, so someone needs to do the work, and we're more than happy to do it. I think it's more of GMS would like to be compensated for their efforts for it because the amount of work that goes into it, and it's been supported tremendously by amount of work that we actually have to do on the accounting side. That's part of your agenda packet, and we just wanted to open that to Board discussion, if this is applicable, we would like to introduce that to Lake Ashton II.
Mr. Zelazny: Can I ask you a question, Jason? Is this time-sensitive to today? Can be resolved on June 20th? Because I've talked with the Golf Course a number of times, I haven't spoken with you at length. I would like to know what the problem is between their system and your system, and what the issues are, and the magnitude of work that's associated with it, and if we could have the month to discuss that, and figure it out, then I'd be able to be more supportive than sitting here right now and saying yes or no. That so, if you and I can work this month then in June, we should be able to bring it to the Board to make a decision.
Ms. Sandy: Which audit is this for? Is it for last year's audit that is due June 30th? Mr. Greenwood: Correct.
Ms. Sandy: It's due June 30th to the state, so the auditors need to finalize the audit right now. I can't speak to specific issues, but this was the issue with the bonds last year, and we had a great delay on our audit. We got it significantly late from the auditors. It was an issue with the Golf Course accounting and being able to, I'm not an auditor, so I can't speak specifically about that, but just there was history there. I do know that piece.
Mr. Zelazny: Well, if it's a statutory requirement, we don't have much choice to do it. I think we should go ahead, and proceed, and then I'll work with the Golf Course to see if there can be a cost-sharing of the audit bill.
Mr. Mecsics: Do I have a motion to accept that?

On MOTION by Mr. Zelazny, seconded by Ms. Clark, with all in favor, the Proposal from GMS to Prepare the Audit for the Golf Course Fund, was approved.

Consideration of Proposal from Fox Hollow Enterprise to Provide 1 Gallon of Blue Daze Plants
Mr. Mecsics: Great job. I think this is yours Angie, consideration of proposal from Fox Hollow for the infamous missing plants.
Ms. Littlewood: Well I spoke with Kathy from Fox Hollow, she went straight into fight mode.
Mr. Mecsics: Who won?
Ms. Littlewood: Oh, well, I'm not sure I did and I think Jason also spoke with her. She is still insisting that these plants have been stolen. All I know is that the days that they were planting them, myself and my husband went out through the back gate, and when we came back, Ryan said to me, "Why are there no plants?" and I said, well, they will be coming back and I never continue to look and then when this all came through, I mentioned it to a neighbor who said there's never been any plants in that bed. I don't know. I mean, going from the information that Collette had, she said that she went with Kathy and Kathy showed her there are all the little holes where they would all be. The upshot of it is when I kept saying to Kathy, "Is it not mistaken for this?" and she said, "No, definitely not." I did suggest because she's got a lot of these blue daze in the big bed down at the bottom so I did make a suggestion that maybe we took those blue daze out of there and put them in the other bed and she said, absolutely not, we won't do that. I don't know where the Board wants to go. The estimate for 79 of these blue daze is $635. She's not prepared to compromise on it. She's not prepared to just replace them, so it's up to the Board.
Mr. Mecsics: Alright. I can tell you, based upon my experience in law enforcement security, when that was first brought up to me, one I did a couple and this is going to sound silly to do for plants, but I did some stakeouts just to see what was going on out there at three o'clock in the morning. In fact, a Winter Haven police officer came by because somebody called me in. There's a lot of little animals out there. There are some beautiful deer, armadillos, even a wild pig and in furtherance, I checked and there were

no other reports of thefts of any plants like that in Winter Haven. I know there was a reference to Orlando, I called the Orlando Police, no thefts. Now, as crazy as it sounds, I went into the FBI database nationwide. There's no residential plant that's like that. Again, I'm not saying yes or no or maybe, but from a professional I cannot say that and something other than maybe an animal or whatever or if they were ever put in in the first place. I don't think we have any evidence either way more than but I doubt it was stolen. I really do.
Ms. Littlewood: We did discuss animals, but the thing is that everything's missing. If it was an animal, the root would still be there. There's nothing, absolutely nothing and everything's been smoothed. It was all smoothed over. You could see where the plants have been taken. The upshot of it is the plants that she said were in there are not in there and it's $600 and something to replace them. I don't know how the residents feel, I'm happy just to leave it as it is for a while, but if the residents feel that that needs some plants in them or the Board feels then we going to have to pay to them replaced.
Mr. Mecsics: Discussion?
Mr. Zelazny: I agree with Angie. I think I would leave it for the time being until we get the final invoices and we're going to have to wait for an invoice from Angie on the solar lighting on the sconces then we're going to have the solar lighting poles that Jason was talking about. Then we've got the solar solution at the sixth hole, which we don't know yet what that's going to cost so I think everything can be like on hold until June 15th until we stop the bleeding. I mean, that's what we're doing right now. We just have to stop that.
Mr. Mecsics: All right. Any further discussion between the Board? No? That'll stay as is. Good job, Angie.
Mr. Zelazny: So for the sheet that has approved 22 projects, not yet, make sure that you add tape for $3,275, and the cart path on four, for $6,885. Those are now committed projects to do so that would increase that $55,710 to somewhere around
$65,000. Then of course we've got three other projects that are pending we're waiting on funding for.
Mr. Mecsics: Thank you Bob.

Discussion of Letter from Polk County Board of County Commissioners related to Thompson Nursery Road Extension
Mr. Mecsics: Discussion of the letter from Polk County Board of County Commissioners related to Thompson Nursery Road Extension.
Ms. Sandy: I think this was just including the letter from the County in the agenda package. I wasn't sure if it was circulated to all the Board members, but also for the Board's knowledge as well as the public's knowledge that we did receive a response from Polk County in regards to the joint letter that was sent by both Districts regarding the Thompson Nursery Road Extension construction. No update.
Mr. Mecsics: That was brought up at a county Board meeting earlier this week that I attended and Tip Franklin, who's one of our residents, gave a really good presentation on the scope and requests for their consideration as far as traffic and there's no doubt about it, we're going to have a lot of infrastructure and a lot of challenges within this community, surrounding us as I call it a doughnut hole. But the good job and we will continue to watch that.

Discussion of Landscaping Scope of Services
Mr. Mecsics: Discussion of landscaping, scope of services.
Mr. Greenwood: I'll let Angie lead with the scope of services, but I also communicated with Angie about the scope and I'll fill in any gaps that I think that you missed.
Ms. Littlewood: Well, first of all, one of the reasons that Kathy went straight into fight mode was that both companies have heard rumors that the Golf Course landscapers will be taking over, I don't know. That rumor has got back to me actually as well. There's been no discussion with this Board on that and so I try to alleviate it, but I think she brought that up with you as well, Jason, right? When you spoke with her, so she's in the opinion that don't matter anyway because I'm not going to get my contract renewed the Golf Course to taking over and I said that's never been brought up with me and it's not been voted on.
Mr. Mecsics: Right

Ms. Littlewood: First of all, there's some issues with the current Fox Hollow contract that needs addressing. Sarah. Your name is still our legal representative with the company, but the name and address has changed?
Ms. Sandy: Yes.
Ms. Littlewood: Yes, so that would need addressing and also in the contract, it says that the contract states that the District designates the District Manager to be its representative. Should that not be me?
Ms. Sandy: I will have to look at the exact language usually it says District manager or their designee. It's just a way of allowing us to direct them to who they should be working with. If it ends up changing from you, then they can always refer back to the District Manager but I'll confirm.
Mr. Mecsics: But you are designee?
Ms. Littlewood: I will say this. It says that a one paragraph then when you turn over the next page, it says the District delegates the District Manager, instead of saying a supervisor, I mean, no names but just a supervisor. That was that. The other thing I really would like to know from the Board is why they were unhappy with the previous contractors that we had. What were the issues with them? Can anybody tell me that?
Mr. Mecsics: Well, let me address two things and then I'll let Bob chime in and as far as the Golf Course taking over, that is nothing new. That goes back to the days of Doug Robertson and when I was the Vice Chairman way back when and that was always a concept that we thought that if we could save money because at one time the Golf Course actually did do all the landscaping. That's always been out there and that's always a concept that we've kept in the back of our mind because again, as far as cost-benefit analysis, that ifwe can save money that way and efficiency, then that's fine. We'll explore that. But to get back to your point, you're exactly right. There's nothing that has been officially said, but that's true. That's been out there, but again, nothing further. What was the other thing? I'm sorry.
Ms. Littlewood: The other thing was, we changed the landscaping companies to
these two and I just wondered, well I can't remember what the issues were.
Mr. Mecsics: From my perspective, and Bob, did you want to say it? Either but from my perspective, when we looked at the former one there was some concern about quality

control, responsiveness. This was what we were given by Collette and just overall dissatisfaction with what they were doing. As a result, that was discussed at length. We at that time decided that now as with anything, we'll always reserve the right that if we find something further in the future then again, that will always be addressed.
Ms. Littlewood: Sorry, the reason that I'm asking is because when all the proposals were put in, now look at the different contracts, it wasn't a level playing field. I don't know whether the companies were given a brief of what we required or not, but there are gaps and then was certainly more in the previous contractors contracted what they did than the two that we've got now. So it just wasn't a level playing field that we had.
Mr. Zelazny: Well, Jim is right in the fact that there was a discrepancy in some of the things they did. The mowing they did they did very well, some of the trimming they didn't do well, some of the mulching they didn't do well. I would say if you looked at them as a company, they were probably a 6 to an 8 out of 10. They required constant supervision from staff and from the supervisor that was overseeing the contract. When the previous supervisor took over landscaping, she wanted to break it out into two contracts, one for the landscaping, the bushes, the flower beds, etc., and then one for just general cutting. She thought it would be better to have two contracts, better oversight, better focus. When they went out for bids, as I remember her presentation to the Board is that Yellowstone was unresponsive in meeting the bid requirement. When she tried to follow up, they were not responsive. I remember one of the other Board members said we should give them a little more time to get their act together, to get the bid in. The supervisor who was in charge at that time said, "Time's up, we're moving forward." Two things. I do agree with you especially when I'm looking at the bid for Fox Hollow and the costs for what we're getting. I think you're exactly right. "When it was presented, we were presenting apples to oranges and we tried to figure out if we saved money. I'm looking at it right now when I look at the annual cost for Fox Hollow. I think Prince & Sons was doing their thing. When I'm looking at what we're getting from the Fox Hollow, I'm a little concerned. They don't weed eat they just spray roundup, and we had that huge bill for them to come in and weed eat after we had the contract. We're not getting mulch anymore in the flower beds. Obviously, it's in your area, but I think it's very timely that we re-look at the requirements. As I said if you look at the Princeton's and Fox Hollow's contract,

which is four pages, and you saw the Yellowstone contract that was 30 some pages. Because they sprayed for bugs, they sprayed for insects, they did all of that. You just had to stay on top of them, but they never declined to do the work once it was pointed out. I think it's probably appropriate now that we've tried the two contractors and the two different ways do go ahead and do a reassessment as to the best way forward. Just to the issue on the golf course. The discussion has always been the hope that the golf course would be able to do the grass cutting. Even going forward, we would not want the golf course to maintain the flower beds in the HFC area because it's too time-consuming for our employees with the golf course. But we did feel that we could save a considerable amount of money by using, we have a whole maintenance yard of equipment and we have a lot of people and now we're up to full strength. If there was a way that we could save the District money and put some money in the golf course account we would be good. But I do think that it would be appropriate to re-look, especially when I look at this bill right here and what I'm getting is shrub care, roundup on the weeds, raking, and blowing.
Ms. Littlewood: I need to go through what I found on both contracts. There's no description of what it does and Cathy did tell me that we don't spray, we pull by hand. Then on here it says that they spray. I want to go through what Prince & Sons originally did not provide. I know some of this has changed now, so they didn't supply irrigation inspections. We had to do an amendment. But it now includes 12 inspections a year. If we have a problem between those inspections, and they're asked to go out and look at it again, there's an additional charge, which I'm assuming is $45 per nonscheduled visit. But they're there every other week. The previous contract included 26 inspections a year with a note that they'd been instructed to do no less than once every two weeks. So now, we've gone from once every two weeks to once a month on which I had a problem in the pet parks which I've been trying to prolong until their inspection this month. Mulch, with Prince & Sons, it's not in the Fox Hollow, with Prince & Sons it is an additional charge of
$45 per cubic yard, and that's probably more now with inflation. But with the previous
contractor, mulching was included twice a year. Now, I know we've said but they didn't do it. But there's no saying that in five years' time, if we keep this contract on with Prince & Sons, they're not going to get any more complacent. You have to keep on top of your

contractors. Palm pruning, there is now palm pruning in Prince & Sons, that's an additional cost of $35 per palm whereas with the previous contractors it included pruning the stable in Washington Palms twice a year, and the Queen's Royals three times a year. Pressure washing, they also included pressure washing the caps on the outside of the walls, which I don't think are included in Prince & Sons. I know these are real nitpicking things, but emptying the trash cans, I believe now that the pet parks are done by the crew which two times a week, but the previous contractors it was five times a week. There were in for five days. Prince & Sons do inject the Palms and I can't see that in the contract anywhere. But I do believe that somewhere it was put in. Prince & Sons only takes care of the shrubs and the beds around both pet parks, all of the lift stations and the vine on the wall surrounding the community. They will prune the trees that are in the way of the mowers free of charge. Fox Hollow don't do any trees, none at all. So I asked if they take care of the islands, or take care of the magnolias, and they don't. We have areas that are not covered. The pruning of the magnolias is not covered, pruning of any oak trees are not covered. Fox hollow don't even take care of the bottled brushes on the car park because they count as trees. I don't know how the Board feels and I know Jason might have some additional things, but I just feel that we need to specifically say what we need and then put that out there for contractors to do.
Mr. Mecsics: What you just described was an RFP, request for a proposal.
Mr. Greenwood: Yeah, that is correct. Right now you have two contractors conflicting, pointing fingers at each other. There are things that seem, speaking with Angie, being missed right now per the contract. Now, Prince & Sons, they're following a scope of services right now. I want to be fair that they can't be discredited because they're doing what's part of their scopes. But if we build a scope of services and this is something that GMS does, we have a field operations division. We have field managers who essentially oversee the contractors. We would love to assist Lake Ashton II and Angie to help build our scope of service that's tailor-made to Lake Ashton II because you've got the prior contract with Yellowstone that was, I guess more complete of just one team doing all. The irrigation, if there's a problem with the irrigation, a landscape contractor needs to fix the irrigation as they see on site, not wait to move forward. But if you can just point the finger at one company and with that scope of services, with the palm pruning,

that will be an additional line item and the Board can choose to pick to do that or not. If we can build that together, I know building a true scope of services can take a turnaround for that is maybe 30 days minimum. There could be a cost savings to it or maybe not. We would hope so. If you've got one company doing that, speaking to Bob's point with the golf course, if that was an option, if they were going to do the cut the grass changes the goalpost a little bit at that point. That's completely different.
Mr. Mecsics: Well, both you guys already talked a little bit about this. It sounds like what we need to do is come up with that. We have a 30- or 90-day clause in any of our contracts that we can terminate.
Ms. Sandy: Thirty days is typically what we have and I have them up right now so I can double-check. Our current terms for both of these contracts goes through the end of September of this year. So they would be up at that point.
Ms. Littlewood: I think this contract is renewable on the 1st of June.
Ms. Sandy: I see that in their proposal and I asked GMS to send me the final agreements so I can confirm.
Ms. Littlewood: I think what happened, Sarah, was they started with those but they didn't do the planting until later on. So I think the confusion might be from when they planted it to when they actually started. I don't know.
Mr. Mecsics: Well, how about if I would recommend that you check that out and then Jason, you and Angie come up and build a request for proposal or RFP, which will include your scope of services and then bring it to the Board and we can decide whether we're going to go off or open bid again. Bob, did you have something on that?
Mr. Zelazny: I agree. Angie, I applaud you for digging into it and getting to this point. Going forward on an RFP, I would not consider the golf course as part of your solution set at this time. I would not consider the golf course cutting the grass as a solution set at this time. I think we ought to try to get a firm contract in place to maintain it, and then if at a later date when we figure out the golf course budget and all that stuff like that, maybe that'll work, but I think we should move forward with that.
Ms. Sandy: One thing I wanted to add, I think we discussed this with the Board in the past. The threshold which we have to go out for a formal RFP procurement is
$195,000. Just adding up the current agreements we have for Prince & Sons and Fox

Hollow, I think we're at $158,000 for one year. That doesn't include any additional proposals that are brought forward to the Board, and if we're doing multiple years of renewal, we really should aggregate that. It could be a consideration, especially if you get a formal scope that's put together, we can then do a formal RFP and then we can have a contract that would be multiple years long. It's something I definitely would recommend considering.
Ms. Littlewood: I think when I looked at the savings on the two contracts as it is, I don't know when but Prince & Sons probably increased their cost, but the savings was about $8,000 a year, but we weren't getting all of the service.
Mr. Mecsics: Okay. I think that's it. Jason and Angie, let's get a good RFP out.

Discussion regarding Sawgrass Lift Station
Mr. Mecsics: Discussion regarding the saw grass lift station.
Ms. Littlewood: Sarah, you were looking into this. If you want to just fill him in on what's happening.
Ms. Sandy: I spoke with Scott Owens. The lift station is actually still owned by the developer and somehow it just wasn't caught when we conveyed over parcels in the past. We're going to prepare a deed, send it over to them and see if they will execute it and move forward. Hopefully it's as simple as that. Historically, it looks like what was done is that those tracts were conveyed over to the District. The city does have an easement over them to maintain the lift stations, but that does give the District the ability to do the landscaping on it.
Ms. Littlewood: Am I allowed to do the landscaping now or do I still have to wait?
Because Prince & Sons are asking me if they can they start the work?
Ms. Sandy: Technically, we should have a right to the property before we do landscaping on it, if you want the legal answer. If you want to talk to Scott about doing something ahead of time, if you want to get started before.
Ms. Littlewood: I'm just conscious of all the inflation. We've got these quotes in.
Mr. Mecsics: Just my perspective on that is that I would wait till we get our legal ducks in line, because God forbid somebody does something out there, and I work with Scott a lot and he'll go on.

Mr. Zelazny: Is the same situation applied to the Pinehurst lift station?
Ms. Sandy: I think Angie asked me to look into that and it shows that it's owned by the District.
Mr. Zelazny: I thought we had transferred one of them.
Mr. Mecsics: Yes. Pinehurst had been transferred. Any other discussion on that?

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Attorney
Mr. Mecsics: Staff reports. Attorney?
Ms. Sandy: I think the only thing I had to update the Board on, we are still working on the boundary amendment. Alan is working on getting the legal description finalized. He discovered some issues and is trying to work through with Chastain-Skillman on that. They're who provided us the survey and legal descriptions when we acquired the golf course. He's still working that out and once we have those, it should move quickly.
Mr. Mecsics: Good. Thank you. Any questions for Sarah? Mr. Zelazny: No, but can I go back to Angie just a second? Mr. Mecsics: Sure.
Mr. Zelazny: At the last meeting or two meetings ago before the Supervisor resigned, she gave us quotes on the lift stations and the pet parks. Do we have a contractor for the pet parks?
Ms. Littlewood: For the turf and everything? You talk about lack of communication. I know it's four or five times I asked them for the proposal because there was a proposal for the whole thing but nothing for the smaller amount that we'd passed and finally, they got it to me yesterday. So I have got them.
Mr. Zelazny: We had approved the partial reciting of both pet parks up to is it
$4,100, something like that?
Ms. Littlewood: It was $1,625 for one and I think it was $1,400 something for the
other.
Mr. Zelazny: I think our approval for you to move forward was not to exceed $4,000.
I think when you get the bids, I think we should proceed. The pet park people have been very accommodating. That's from my perspective.

Mr. Mecsics: I think you have up to $4,000 I believe was what we had. V\/hen you get that contract, then I would recommend to the Board that you execute it.
Ms. Littlewood: I actually told him because he wrote to me and said, are we still going to go ahead with this? V\/hen he sent me the proposal in and it was what Colette had said at the meeting and I said, yes, go ahead.
Mr. Mecsics: You're right.
Ms. Littlewood: It was what we proposed. So I just said, go ahead start. Let's get the work started.
Mr. Mecsics: You're good to go. Mary, I'm going to hold on you for one second.
Mary, you had one thing about the physical therapy folks that I referred.
Ms. Clark: Sure.
Mr. Mecsics: Go ahead.
Ms. Clark: I wanted to revisit, in our last meeting we talked about potentially charging rent for the occupational therapy. Go ahead.
Ms. Sandy: We did and we decided against moving forward with any lease because of the ramifications in terms of getting charged property taxes and things like that.
Ms. Clark: My question then becomes, this gentleman is operating a business
within the HFC. He uses the HFC's address as his business address if you go and look him up online. He is using HFC equipment. I have had several individuals come to me and tell me that they as a resident are in the HFC using the HFC and they have been politely asked to step off the equipment so that his patients could use the equipment. There is no identification as to whether his patients are Lake Ashton residents as many are, but there is no identification that all of the patients are residents. So my concern then is what liability does the CDD have and the community have by allowing an individual to operate a business on our facilities with no contract? I would love to operate a business where I didn't have to pay rent, I didn't have to buy equipment, I had zero overhead, that would be awesome. But more importantly than that is the liability issue that we put ourselves in by allowing this business to happen. I know it's widely popular and I'm not advocating that we do away with it. I'm just saying we need to protect ourselves.

Ms. Sandy: Absolutely. I certainly agree. I think we were discussing having a license agreement, which is something that we often do with vendors that want to come in and utilize a facility. If you're offering tennis lessons or, I'm not saying here, at other communities, that's typically how we handle it. Having a license agreement in place that requires that they have their own insurance, that they have the proper licensing, that they're certified to do what they're doing and also have their own business licenses. It is not typical that this would be their place of business, and that is new information to me. I was under the impression that there was another location.
Mr. Mecsics: What I would recommend is Mary Bosman and myself, since I see the operations here, we'll do a full review of that to make sure that we are covered and then report back to the Board with any recommendations. How's that?
Ms. Clark: I would appreciate that. I also think that within that, that since we had a discussion about a joint amenities use where we're going to charge people who don't live here, I think a pretty hefty fee to use the facilities. If a person's going to run a business here, I would think that that fee would be commensurate or at least seem more appropriate other than $250 for the year in order to run a business out of the HFC. I think there's an equity issue that if we're going to charge individuals $4,000 to use our facilities but we're going to allow a business to run in. Like I said, you can very simply Google and look the individual up and look their licensure up as well. Person is an occupational therapy assistant, which is not an occupational therapist.
Ms. Sandy: I don't know if the Board wants to have this discussion now, the pieces of direction that I would need. In these license agreements, often we would recover some of the wear and tear on the machinery either through a flat fee or a percentage to cover the District's costs in having them operate here. It's often seen as the District providing a benefit by allowing for a service to be offered to its residents and patrons of the HFCs. That's typically, I think how Districts view it instead of the District actually providing those services and having the staff. It's like having a third-party contractor come in and provide those services. But to recoup our costs, if that's something that the District would be interested in doing and how we would set that amount and then as well as would we want to limit it to patrons and by patrons, I mean residents of Lake Ashton 1, Lake Ashton 2,

and then anybody who would be paying the non-resident user fee. Those are the two things that we would need to know for a license agreement.
Mr. Mecsics: I think, Mary, we will take that on with Sarah and come back and report back to the Board all the aspects of it and recommendations.
Ms. Littlewood: If they've applied for a license, are you saying that the license for the business, the address is here? So they've had to apply to the DBPR for that, really? If they report it to the tax office, how would that affect us as a community?
Mr. Mecsics: That's the danger with it.
Ms. Sandy: Again, that is new information to me. We definitely need to look into
that.
Mr. Zelazny: I think just as important Mary is to get with Matt and make sure that
he never asks the resident to vacate a machine so that he can conduct his business. Even if he does it politely, the residents have priority.

Lake Ashton II Community Director
Mr. Mecsics: Alright. Now Community Director Mary, one Mary to another Mary.
Ms. Bosman: Good morning. Because the monthly fitness equipment orientations are popular, that means that the houses are still selling and we have new residents that are interested in getting healthy. We're real pleased about that. We've been having dances two times a month. They are very popular and they are cost effective. We're not losing money by having those dances. We're not making money, but we're not losing money. Yoga classes. This is the first year that they will be held via Zoom. Our yoga instructor goes up north for the summer and we've made arrangements at no cost to the District to have her classes be available to residents via Zoom. It just started yesterday, so we'll wait to hear how popular that is. Seminars held since the last Board meeting, sounds like a song from the '70s, living with alligators, living with spiders and snakes, but it's alligators and snakes. We had a retirement seminar. All three were well attended, we will continue to have minimally two seminars a month. Our residents like to keep abreast of things and we like to have them well informed. This week, I've been working with the Polk County Public Health Department on some clerical issues. For whatever reason, I thought I had things cleared up last year. I did it via the phone. I have since found out that

they have readjusted the staff that they have in that position. It's purely clerical, it's a matter of having the licensures for the pool, and spa 1 and spa 2. I'll just condense it to say the clerical errors were on those documents on the notification for fees. The licensure has been correct, but the notifications aren't correct. Speaking to the money issue Poolsure has told us just recently that there is going to be a temporary surcharge of 8% and that's going to be effective on the invoices in June. Just for a little history on that December of 2021, their rate increased from $567.32-$618. This increase with the 8% will increase to $667 a month. That's like $100 a month. Maintenance projects, both pet parks will be sprayed on May 26th for bugs and things. It's a onetime spray thing. The painting of the outside of the fencing along Highway 653 and the gatehouse is completed. The inside painting of that fence will begin very shortly, June 1st. When screens have been reattached three times because we've had quite a windy season. We have accounts for the pickleball courts and the tennis courts, because we have found even talk about inflation, the plastic that attaches, they are up to $50 a bag. We require at least two of them every time the wind blows strong and we have to replace those, it's $100. Service has been delayed on the pickleball net, but the good news is just yesterday the wind screens came in. I believe we were to wait on those until the resurfacing gets done. Spa 2 has had a leaky valve repaired. The Wing Foot pet park has had its gate fixed at a cost of $60 kudos to James on that in lieu of a new gate purchase of $540. We're very fortunate to have a man that knows how to fix things in our midst. New drain cover was replaced at the Pebble Beach pet park. The lights for phase 4 lighting project have been ordered and we're looking ready to complete that. We have requested so that we can manage our budgets to have a copy of the TECO. We currently don't get a copy of the TECO billing. That would be helpful for us to manage our budgets and to compare on those projects to see cost-savings.
Mr. Mecsics: Jason, would you have Sharon take care of that? Ms. Bosman: Okay. That's all I had. Any questions?
Mr. Mecsics: Well, thanks to James. I know like I said he lives up to his name. But thank you, Mary, for all you do.
Ms. Bosman: Thank you.
Mr. Mecsics: You did a great job. Thank you.

District Manager's Report- Number of Registered Voters in the District- 984
Mr. Mecsics: District Manager's report.
Mr. Greenwood: Just to get started here, we have the number of registered voters that we have within the District. This is a requirement. We have 984 of those living in the District boundaries here. Next, just to report, I'd been in communication with the Board members. Actively, about with the budget, I just have to give tremendous props again to Bob, he came in and provided really great input. I know Sharon's been working diligently on this. And Mary yourself getting this together because we had discussions on that. Putting together the scope of services first for the Board to approve before we go out for landscape RFP. I think it was a recommendation that bring this all into one contract. In this meeting you've talked a lot, which is great. But everyone has been working extremely hard. I know that there was a lot of fixing, a lot of things.
Ms. Littlewood: There's not going to be any charge to us for you helping me do this thing. I just want that as public knowledge.
Mr. Greenwood: It's something that we do. We've got our field operations guys and we're looking at your prior scope and see what we need to introduce to make sure we bring everything together. It's going to be ultimately the Board's decision, but we need basically put everything together.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Financial Report
Approval of Check Register
Mr. Greenwood: Other than that with staff reports, we have the financial reports of which is the approval of the check register, combined balance sheet, and special assessment receipt schedule. Didn't know if there was any questions. If there aren't, I'll be looking for a motion to approve the check register.
Mr. Mecsics: We have a motion to approve the check register?

On MOTION by Ms. Littlewood, seconded by Mr. Zelazny, with all in favor, the Check Register, was approved.

Combined Balance Sheet

Mr. Mecsics: You have the combined balance sheet for review. This doesn't need
action.

Special Assessment Receipts Schedule
Mr. Greenwood: Just on the check register, it's been a busy month, you guys set the public hearing to approve our proposed budget. We've done this in very good time. We couldn't wait until the June meeting. Coming together doing this today was very important.
Mr. Mecsics: Okay. Good. Thank you. Any discussion on the combined balance sheet on the special assessment schedule, Bob?
Mr. Zelazny: On the balance sheet for the month, you'll notice revenues are up. That was from the contribution of the residents around the lake. The field expenses are up because of the buffer, but half of that has been covered in the revenue section. You see a big increase again, we talked about it during the budget for security and personnel, and then the huge increase in gas and butane and electric. Other than that, Mary and the staff have kept us well in check.
Mr. Mecsics: Jason, I'm going to get with Sharon because I think our numbers that we have right now of the security are showing where we have a variance of negative. I think she's basing all of that on our original one that was modified back in January.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor Requests
Mr. Mecsics: Supervisor's requests.
Ms. Littlewood: I just have a question, who is cutting in the wetland, over here and over on the golf course? Who's approved it and who's paying for it because we've all had to pay tens of thousands of dollars to get our lakes clean. It's not the first time I've asked this question, I've asked it before, but it's been cut really down this time, just beyond the ends, and then the next set of houses, there's a big gap between those two houses on Pebble beach.
Mr. Mecsics: Is that part of the wetlands cutting problem? Ms. Littlewood: Yeah.
Mr. Mecsics: Okay. I will get with them and answer those questions for you. The last thing were my supervisor's comments, we've had a gentleman come here who's from

the Lake Ashton east side, he asked us about screening behind the houses for the golf course. I think we've told him many times that that's not part of the golf course and not what we're going to be doing, but he said that we did not officially say so. In this case, I'm going to just advise the Board that it's my recommendation is that, that discussion is dead. We're not going to put in any screening nor recommend to the golf course to put screening up because that is a liability for the Board and I don't think it's good. Unless there's any more comments on that, that's a dead discussion that should satisfy the gentleman's concerns. Any other supervisor requests?
Mr. Zelazny: This isn't a request but it is an update for the people who play pickleball. As you know, we did approve a contract for the resurfacing of the pickleball courts. They had a 12-week time period to come out and do it. I talked with them two weeks ago, the time period has slipped. They don't have a firm date on when they're going to come out, Chuck sent me an email. The resurfacing takes between one and two days and then you have to let the court sit for another two days. V\lhen we do it, the courts will be out of play for about seven days. I also sent him an email and Mary alluded to it. Due to the cost of screening and amount of manpower it takes to replace them, I made the decision that we will not be replacing the windscreen between the courts, inside the courts, we will continue to do the screening on the outside, we're not going to do any on the inside. I visited a number of places that do play pickleball, most of them, if not all of them do not have interior screening. It's costing us almost somewhere in the vicinity of
$10,000 a year to maintain the screening around the pickleball courts. If we put them up and take them down, it's two days of labor for both James and Karen. As Mary said, the cost of just the little things is $50 a bag and it's two bags to do the course. I'm going to meet with Chuck from the pickleball club when he comes back. But unless there's some overriding requirement that changes my mind, we will not be doing that. If they want them then the pickleball club can assume that responsibility and cost and then I have no problem with it. The screens, like everything else was back dated, they did come in yesterday. We will not be putting the new screens up until the resurfacing occurs because we have to take them down to do the resurfacing. We're just going to hold that off.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comments

Mr. Mecsics: Public comments, Jason. Can we have any public comments out there? Mr. Wellinger?
Joe Wallinger (1209 Sawgrass Drive): Couple of comments aboutthis meeting and some items that are pretty disturbing. First one is the lift station on Sawgrass. If this is a property not owned by us and it's still owned by the developer, why are we just going to accept the delivery of this property in the state that it is in. It doesn't even have a final grade? We're already looking for estimates to put the trees around it, why is that not the builder's responsibility? I know that the city is involved here too. Well, one of the builders, subcontractors, backed into the gate. One of the gates is bent, and so as a resident, why are we accepting something that's really not in an acceptable state? The next item that is so shocking that we're operating this way, is who allows a subcontractor to come in and use our facility and not have insurance and not have any liability issues? What's to say then, if we let him come in, why can't I open something up here selling soft ice or something like that? This is not right. I know it's a nice luxury for our residents, but the exposure to this community potentially is there. Just like we said, how do we know if these are residents or if this individual, which I'm shocked he's using our address as his place of business. I'd be really interested to see what licensing gets involved here between the state and the county to operate the way they are. This next part is to Mary.
Mr. Mecsics: No you address the Board, Joe. Joe Wellinger (1209 Sawgrass Drive): I'm sorry.
Mr. Mecsics: Not the staff, you address the Board.
Joe Wellinger (1209 Sawgrass Drive): Your report mentions a temporary surcharge from the pool company. What's the surcharge for? We need to address the contract. Does their contract allow them to just inflict the surcharge on us? I know this is everybody else's money, but this all adds up. I'm sitting back here listening and we're talking about a budget surplus. But then there's 8 or 10 things that are going to continue to deteriorate the surplus, and so it's a little discouraging.
Mr. Mecsics: Joe you hit your three-minute mark. I'm sorry.
Joe Wellinger (1209 Sawgrass Drive): Well, on my way out, we need to have scope of work written up for any bid that we go out with.

Mr. Mecsics: Thank you, Joe. As just a so we will be looking at that contractor. But we cannot say at this time that they don't have insurance. That's still to be determined. Any other public question? Yes, sir.
Pierre Duquette (1049 Sawgrass Drive): This is just a suggestion as opposed to a complaint. With all these landscaping stuff that we're doing and lighting etc., can we please focus on downlighting as opposed to up lighting? I don't know when's the last time anybody here saw a star in the sky, but they're up there, you just don't see them too well. The other thing is that in our previous life, we had a lot of screening issues where we used to live. You don't fix those with cable tie, you use hog ties. Hog ties don't ever break their metal.
Mr. Mecsics: Thank you. Any other public comments?
Mr. Zelazny: We have information on the next Board meeting.
Mr. Mecsics: Oh, yes, the next Board, I'm sorry. Our next Board meeting will be in
June.
Mr. Greenwood: Our June meeting is going to be on the 17th. Mr. Mecsics: Nine o'clock here. Anything else?

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment

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