TURNBULL CREEK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Turnbull Creek Community Development District was held Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. at the Murabella Amenity Center, 101 Positano Avenue, St. Augustine, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Chris DelBene	Chairman
Diana Jordan-Burks	Vice Chairperson (by telephone)
Brian J. Wing	Supervisor
Chuck Labanowski	Supervisor
Jeremy Vencil	Supervisor

Also Present were:

Ernesto Torres	District Manager
Lauren Gentry	District Counsel
Steve Collins	District Engineer
Jerry Lambert	Operations Manager
Erick Hutchinson	Amenity Manager
Jim Schieszer	RMS
Michael Johnson	Duval Landscape Maintenance
Jeff Holland	Tocoi Creek High School Athletic Director
Sete Zare	MBS Capital Markets, LLC
Bob Gang	Greenberg Traurig
Several Residents

The following is a summary of the actions taken at the June 8, 2021 meeting. An audio copy of the proceedings can be obtained by contacting the District Manager.

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call
Mr. Torres called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. and called the roll.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Audience Comments
Ms. Randolph stated Jamie is passing out pictures to the board and to Ernesto of the top left corner of her property that shows an 8-foot hole in the back of her yard that is a safety issue. It is on CDD property and now we have a problem. Mr. Collins of JMT gave me ideas about mesh and concrete and whatever. We paid him $13,000 to come up with an idea so I’m turning it back

to him. In 2018 there was a high priority list, this house was on it as it is on the 2021 list. In 2018 a CDD board member came with the past operations manager, not Jerry, and nothing was done. We are asking you to fix the problem in the back of Jamie’s yard.
Mr. Jacobs stated the CDD property has areas with grass so bad it is embarrassing. It was cut so short the last few times it is brown. The hollies at the front entrance have a disease or something, they look bad and if something isn’t done they are going to be dead and you will have to replace them. You need to address these problems now so they don’t get worse.
The county built this big high school and they didn’t put in a pool for the swim team. They are going to ask our community to allow their swim team to practice here and I think that is a bad idea and none of my neighbors are in favor of this. Ancient City soccer team came in and there were a lot of complaints about parking and use of that field when we didn’t allow our local soccer team to have home games here at that time. Amenities we pay for should be for our community.
Mr. Dickinson stated I concur with what Mrs. Randolph said since I live next to Jamie and this has been ongoing since 2018. The issue is getting worse it is not going to go away. It is an issue for everybody whether you live on a pond or not. This needs to be a top priority.
Ms. Ritchie spoke in support of the Tocoi swim team using district facilities.
Mr. Slevin stated we are here to hear the board’s resolution to the landscape issue Murabella has had over the last couple years that has fallen into a state of disrepair. We have a choice now that there is only 3-months left on the contract. We have paid for the community to look a certain way.
Ms. Haskell stated I’m here to speak in support of the high school swim team.
A resident stated I am not in favor of having the high school swim team use the swimming

pool. pool.

A resident spoke in support of allowing the high school swim team to use the swimming Mr. Schroeder asked is the board was looking at another round of pond bank

improvements? My pond bank has been problematic for about ten years. The eight years I was on the board I never brought that up, but there is an issue with my pond bank and it needs to be repaired. They put in fill material about ten years ago, but it washed out.
Mr. Torres stated that is on the list and we will get an update from the engineer on that. A resident spoke in support of the Tocoi High School Swim Team using the facilities.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Landscape Manager (Presenter: Duval Landscape)
Discussion of Duval Landscape Notice (Presenter: Ernesto Torres)
Mr. Johnson stated we had a good meeting with Chuck and Jerry and went over deficiencies we found. We have completed all of them, a couple irrigation heads that we will replace tomorrow. Three or four years ago we met with Chuck, Brian and the manager of the amenity and we do this every month and it seemed to work well. Chuck and I decided it is something we will continue to go through, whether it is walking the property together, bringing deficiencies to the table and making a list and doing a breakdown of it and showing when we will be able to complete these items.
Mr. DelBene asked what is the solution for the dead grass in the common areas? Mr. Johnson stated we had irrigation issues and it should start turning green.
Mr. Labanowski stated this list is something that Mike and I talked about and if the board decides to keep this list going then we can.
Mr. Wing stated there are a couple areas that are brown because there is no irrigation there and never has been and they are not going to turn green unless it rains. I’m concerned when I saw this list in the packet because a number of these things are out of contract. Why are we citing Duval for things outside of their contract?
Mr. Labanowski stated there is a column that shows that is out of contract.
Mr. Wing stated it gave the impression that we were banging them over the head for things they were not responsible for.
Mr. Torres stated the intent was to inform the board that if these are things that you want corrected then you have to ask for a proposal and pay for it. Chuck followed up with additional items after this one and if the board would like to pursue that process where Chuck and Mike can meet with the operations manager and continue this process then we need to designate Chuck as the rep.
Mr. Johnson stated it worked well before. The board has our proposal for the next three years. No matter what you do you cannot keep decorative grasses from dying out and they have been there for almost 20 years in soil that was dug out for a pond. It is not realistic. They are also

fighting for water amongst oak trees and pine trees. The meeting went well, we got a lot of things on the table and hammered out a lot of things.
Mr. Vencil stated the entrance is our face to the world and there are weeds up to the lettering as recently as lunchtime today. I would like our operations team to remember that our work is our reference.

On MOTION by Mr. DelBene seconded by Mr. Vencil with all in favor Mr. Labanowski was authorized to work with staff and the landscape contractor to document the monthly inspection.

Mr. Labanowski stated this is supplemental to the list that Diana created.
Mr. Torres stated in accordance with the letter that was sent there is a fine of $100 per day for deficiencies, we asked that these items be completed by June 10th and they responded. Does the board accept the response or which direction do you want to proceed?
Mr. DelBene stated based on Chuck’s representation at this time there is nothing left to fine. They seem to be remedied.

Engineer (Presenter: JMT)
Update on Pond Bank Priority List
Mr. Torres stated at the last meeting this was tabled to find out about financing options and the board did not approve JMT’s proposal of $3,500 to develop a scope to bid pond bank repair. Mr. DelBene stated before we consider this we need to know what our options for financing are.
Ms. Gentry stated you have in your agenda package a memo from Jennifer who looked into the possibility of bonds to finance pond bank restoration and the possibility of financing recreational improvements. I will focus on the pond bank financing first since that is the issue at hand. You are able to issue additional debt for pond reconstruction work that is contemplated under your indentures and you can levy additional debt for that.
The next step if you are interested in issuing bonds for financing is to have your engineer come up with that cost assessment so that we know if it is a cost that justifies jumping through all the hoops that are involved in issuing bonds. If you are going to issue an amount of bonds that exceeds what you previously validated you would need to go back through validation with a court, which can take several months and there is additional expense involved in that. Regardless of if

you go through validation there are professional costs involved in issuing bonds that Sete can speak to. Whether this makes sense depends on how much it will cost to do this work. Tonight if you would like to move forward, your course would be to authorize the engineer to do a cost assessment for how much the repairs would cost.
Mr. Wing stated if I recall at the last meeting that Jennifer made the observation that if you weren’t going to do a bond for $1 million or $1 ½ million at least it probably wasn’t worth it and the engineer wasn’t near that number.
Ms. Gentry stated if you felt all these ponds would eventually need some work it may make sense to get bond financing and get that larger amount to allow you to do that remediation as it comes up.
Mr. Collins stated you could authorize a not to exceed amount of $15,000 for us to go out and walk each pond, take photos and assess all of them and develop a schedule of what maintenance needs to be done now and what maintenance needs to be done in the future and we can develop a cost for repairs for every single one of your ponds and whether we recommend to do it now or ten years from now. The study would provide estimates and current conditions of all the ponds. If you chose $50 per linear foot for basic remediation then multiply that by all your ponds you make the assumption that at some point all of them may need some work then that is about $2 million.
Mr. Vencil stated it says that we can only take out bonds for the cost of pond banks, we can’t use the bond as a vehicle to take on other projects throughout the community.
Mr. Gang stated I did look back at every validation that the district has done and every issue it has done and you have remaining capacity for bonding of $7,135,000 of general infrastructure. You have $720,000 left of that most recent validation that you did for just pond bank remediation. You still have from all the prior 2005, 2006 validations over $7 million that can be used for stormwater, sewer, roadways, recreation, and your entry monumentation.
Ms. Zare stated to your point we have flexibility under the validation but we are limited from our add bonds test in the 2015 indenture for pond reconstruction. Other improvements would require bondholder consent, which would be a bigger hurdle to jump.
Ms. Gentry stated under Florida Law before you can issue any debt that matures over five- years you have to go to a court and get the court to sign off, we call that validation. You validate up to a maximum amount and tell the court what amounts you are spending on what type of

improvements. What Bob was mentioning is for what you validated for your stormwater you have some remaining money left, however, that money is only available through a bond issuance. If you wanted to have more money than that you would have to go back through validation. If you looked at other financing sources you could look at bank loans, that sort of thing, but anything that is paid back in over five years we would still have to go to a court to validate it.
Mr. Wing stated I’m trying to figure out if you just did the $720,000 for less than five-
years.
Ms. Gentry stated any kind of obligation you are paying back in less than five-years you
don’t have to worry about those numbers. If you went out and got a loan and said we are going to pay this back this year, that is fine. That is a burden on the community if everyone is paying back
$1 million in one year. The benefit of issuing bonds is that you can get a large amount of money and pay it back over a long period of time.
Mr. DelBene asked what are the bond rates if we were to refinance?
Ms. Zare stated the call feature is 2025 so we can’t refinance your 2015 bonds. With regard to potentially financing additional pond reconstruction infrastructure it really is contingent on the path that the district chooses whether we go with bank placement depending on your maturity and underlying credit or whether we go public offering contingent on your maturity and underlying credit.
I think first if we can identify the scope of the project it would be easier to put pen to paper and identify what it would look like on a per-unit basis for each resident within the district, regardless of whether we do public offering or we do a bank placement. In general if we were to do a public offering we are in historic low interest rate environment, we have seen very favorable rates whether we have a rating or it is non-rated. Again, that path will be determined as we move further down this process, identify the scope and identify the potential financing options for the district.
Mr. DelBene asked can you give me an example of an historic low rate?
Ms. Zare stated if you were to do a 30-year term your indices which is the benchmark we price off of is 1.44%. Then you add a credit spread depending on how strong the credit is, which is part of the financing process to determine how strong of a credit this is. What I mean by that is, is this community fully developed or are the homes all owned by end users, those metrics lend itself to a very strong credit and if that is the case then we can go to S&P or Moody’s and ask for

an underlying rating then we can price for investment grade scale. Being as this is so new and we haven’t really defined what the scope of the project is or what maturity, it will take a little bit of legwork for Bob, Lauren and myself to see where we are what path is most cost effective for the district. In speaking to credit maturity when you do get an underlying rating and you do procure credit enhancement then you price to an investment grade scale, which provides for lower borrowing cost. There is a lot to consider and I think the first step is identifying the scope of the project and then really homing in on every potential financing option for the district. Then we can do that credit analysis and show the district what it looks like on a per unit basis. With a public offering under Florida Statutes you can issue varying equal annual installments and that is less of a burden on a per year basis for the residents to actually fund the infrastructure that they are looking to bond.
Mr. Gang stated subject to what Sete said about the additional bonding prohibitions in the 2015 transaction, you do not need to validate any more bonds whether you go for recreation improvements or more pond bank work if pond bank remediation is considered to be stormwater then you have over $7 million of unissued bonding capacity for stormwater, sewer, roadways and recreation. It seems to be that pond bank repair has something to do with stormwater so you have a lot of capacity. You had a master plan in 2005 done by your engineers and you added to it when you expanded the district in 2006 and the same general master infrastructure plan was just increased. I don’t think recreation is something that is narrowly defined to just what someone was thinking of in 2005.
Mr. Wing asked are you saying that recreation could be defined as a second swimming pool, new playgrounds?
Mr. Gang stated as long as your district engineer does a supplemental report supporting the public need and all that so the community benefits from being assessed for it, it could be part of the additional bonding capacity that you started with in 2004. You validated $17.5 million in 2004,
$10 million more in 2006 and you did not issue all of it, but it included recreation and the particular recreation facilities that you may have financed were contained in an engineer’s report. You have capacity you need to decide what you want, when you want to finance and it is up to your district engineer and assessment methodology consultant, which is GMS to determine the benefit.
Ms. Gentry stated I will kick it back to Sete in a moment but since we are talking about these recreational improvements, there are two things that we look at when we determine if you

can issue additional bonds, (1) are you within the amount you validated, which is that maximum dollar amount that you got approved by the court and (2) when you issue bonds you are obligated to sign an indenture that sets out terms and what you will do in the future and that sort of thing. When Sete mentioned the “no-ad” bonds test, there are times when the bondholders want assurances that you are not going to issue certain other types of debt on top of the debt you have already issued. Sometimes you are limited by those indentures and I have not looked at these indentures, but it is my understanding that Sete and Jennifer have and you are a little bit limited by your 2015 bond issuance on what you can issue additional bonds for, even if you are under that dollar amount.
Mr. Gang stated recreation improvement have to be available for public use.
Ms. Zare stated this is something that the working team, Bob, Lauren, Jennifer and myself can further dissect. At first glance the indenture is very clear that the only improvement that do not require current bondholder consent is pond reconstruction. Any other improvement outside of that we have to go to the bondholders and ask if we could issue additional debt on top of the existing debt on the current lands within the district. There are no restrictions on pond reconstruction. It would be a much bigger hurdle to issue additional debt for recreational improvements. It is something we can explore in more detail as we dive into the indenture. Bob will give us his expert opinion on what we can or cannot do under those provisions in the indenture and come back to the team.
Mr. Wing stated we have already thrown together a preliminary budget for next year that includes pond bank repairs for the areas on Sorrento Hills based on a preliminary estimate that JMT gave us. I find this whole discussion a little overwhelming and I prefer to move along with the budget, do the repairs on the one pond bank, maybe do a special meeting where we can fully discuss this as the only issue so I understand how all this works, because I am lost.
Mr. DelBene stated JMT please outline your proposal.
Mr. Collins stated one of the things that I want to clarify, we had put together that estimate for about 20 hours of our time to be able to put a plan together to get bids for the improvements on the 2,800 feet of that single pond. That was just the area we identified when I went out with Jerry and Brian, just those repairs. That is because we recommend the entire banks be restored, not spot treatments as has happened in the past. However, we are hoping to develop a plan and

getting bids for spot treatments if that is what you chose to do, but it is not what we recommend because it generally doesn’t last and we have to redo it.
Mr. Wing stated you are talking about that entire pond.
Mr. Collins stated no, just the 2,800 feet that we recommended. The stormwater system is an amenity for all homeowners. Having a functional drainage system benefits every home even if the home is not within view of the pond.
Mr. Wing stated you are the third engineer in my time on the board. Each one of the engineers has always said the integrity of the ponds are not in question, that they are not affected by any of the things we have seen and corrected, it is both aesthetic and safety factor to be sure. I don’t remember any of them saying this pond bank is going to fail if you don’t fix it. It is important to the community and an issue for everyone, but it is not like if they are not fixed that they are going to collapse and the neighborhood is going to flood.
Mr. Schroeder stated fail is a context of not treating and attenuating the stormwater as it flows through the community. But there are components like mitered end sections and so forth that are failing right now and they are going to cost more to fix them than to save them with some minor repair.
Mr. Collins stated we assessed the single pond we walked with you what you identified as the highest priority sites. We have not assessed the 20 ponds that you have. That is why we recommended that we put together this report for you. It would take about $15,000 of our time and that report could then be used and other things could be added to that report, maybe other concerns you have for flooding. Whether it is used for a bond or not it still would be a plan that would allow you to budget over time so you are not surprised. We gave you an assessment for repairing 2,800 feet and it is over $200,000 and now you are scrambling how to fund this but if you had a plan then you could try to budget for it over 10-15 years.
Mr. Wing stated let’s approve this work authorization to repair the one and have a special meeting down the road not connected with the budget to discuss possible future financing.
Mr. Torres stated the work authorization is for the pond that is bordered by Amalfi Court, South Cappero Drive.

On MOTION by Mr. Vencil seconded by Mr. Labanowski with all in favor the work authorization for JMT in the amount of $3,500 was approved.

Update of Cleaning Storm Drains
Mr. Collins stated the other thing we have been looking into was the flooding along the jogging trail. I put together a report of my assessment and I will send it to Ernesto and he can distribute it for the next meeting. Carl Larsen & Associates did a terrific survey, and this is one of the best surveys I have seen. They performed a topographic survey, the existing storm drain system has several catch basins where flooding has been observed. North of the pond there is a soccer field to the east there actually are three catch basins there right now. The surveyor found there was debris in the storm drains so during the last meeting we recommended that someone clean those out. We also found that the catch basins now have a slightly less than their as-built elevation. That means when you have a large storm the water has nowhere to go and if the pond as it is designed right now as it is functioning is when the pond fills up it is going to fill back into those storm drains and into your field and that field is part of the problem. It is functioning as it was designed because apparently that is how it was designed and permitted. Even under normal operations portions of these problem areas are going to flood periodically until the water can drain back out. There was one area north of this berm that was also observed to have a wet area and we recommend a catch basin be placed there and tying hat into the system and that will allow that water to drain back into the pond.
We came up with a few other recommendations. The first is that this may actually be an unsolvable problem and I wanted to couch everyone’s expectations that you may not have dry grass all the time out there. Part of what we recommend doing is throughout this coming wet season that we go out and monitor both the flooding that is happening along the jogging trail but also the downstream water conditions so that your pond goes under Pacetti Drive and ties into Mill Creek and if Mill Creek flood stage is high and your pond is draining to it there is nothing you can do about the flood stage on Mill Creek. The developer had assumed a certain flood stage that your pond would then drain into it and function but if that flood stage is higher there is no way for your pond to function. Before we recommend some expensive solutions we recommend monitoring it to see if there is anything that can be done to help solve this issue. One of the things that we also recommend is that part of the trail, the northeast corner where I think you are getting the flooding almost the entire trail is at an elevation of 22 and it dips down to an elevation of 19 right in that area in the corner. You can raise the trail up to the elevation of everything else so then at least the

trail is above water even if there is standing water next to it. That would trap water on the north side so we would put an inlet there. That option will cost approximately $61,000 plus about $7,000 for our design piece to raise that and that is based on the fill, 1 ½” asphalt, sod and everything associated and the inlets and new storm drains.
Mr. Labanowski stated we have a fixed flood gate there. Is there any chance that we could drop that gate to reduce the amount of water being held in there?
Mr. Collins stated that comes back to my third idea, which is that you could potentially retrofit the pond design entirely and the riser, maybe with one of these proprietary products called Thirsty Duck so when you have water draining out of your pond even with a weir, when it rains you still have water rising up and going back down and you can’t exceed a certain peak discharge and this product allows you to get to that peak much faster and hold it there. Ultimately, it will allow you to reduce the design peak of your hub. If we know that with a 25-year storm your system is going to be underwater, everything is designed that way we could try to reduce the design peak for the 25-year to something where you would not be getting that type of flooding. I can’t guarantee that would work and I recommend that you monitor throughout the wet season because if Mill Creek is high and you can’t drain to it, retrofitting your pond is not going to solve the flooding altogether.
Mr. DelBene asked is there any action you needed on this item?
Mr. Collins stated I will distribute this report to you. We are going to be visiting and monitoring over the summer. Simply raising the trail is likely the best option.
Mr. Wing asked have the storm drains been cleaned?
Mr. Lambert stated no, I contacted four people, two declined to give a proposal because the job was too small, one didn’t respond and I talked to Mike from Duval and he said he can do it for $500 to clean the one drain.
Mr. Wing stated cleaning the drains out is the first step.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Memorandum Regarding Funding Options
for	Improvements	(Presenter:	Jennifer Kilinski)
This item taken earlier in the meeting.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Resolution	2021-04
Classifying Surplus Property (Chain Link Fence) (Presenter: Jennifer Kilinski)
Ms. Gentry stated any time you want to dispose of public property you are supposed to classify it as surplus and as long as its value is under certain thresholds you have less restrictions on how you dispose of that. This resolution classifies as surplus a chain link fence located at your tennis courts and this will allow you to dispose of that by selling it, donating it, or throwing it away.

On MOTION by Mr. Wing seconded by Mr. DelBene with all in favor Resolution 2021-04 was approved.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion of Fighting Turtles Agreement
(Presenter: Ernesto Torres)
Mr. DelBene stated at the last meeting it was represented that there has been a 10% revenue share included in their agreement, that was false, probably an oversight by this board but it is not in there. I was supposed to sign off on that agreement as approved by the board but because that representation was made at the meeting, I have not signed it. That is our error and we can revisit that next year, but their season has started and fees have been collected. It would be unfair to tax them after the fact.

On MOTION by Mr. Labanowski seconded by Mr. Wing with all in favor the agreement with the Fighting Turtles was approved and waived the shared revenue.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Special	Meeting	for
Landscape Contractor’s Presentation (August 3, 2021 @ 9:00 a.m.)
Mr. Torres stated at the time the agenda was drafted that date was convenient for me, since then I had a commission meeting scheduled for that same day. I would like to look at August 2nd or August 4th. The intent of this special meeting is to have the landscape companies provide a presentation, question and answer type of meeting to determine if you are going to maintain the present contractor or replace them.

On MOTION by Mr. Wing seconded by Mr. DelBene with all in favor a special meeting to consider landscape proposals was set for August 2, 2021 at 4:00 p.m.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion of Fiscal Year 2022 Proposed
Budget (Presenter: Ernesto Torres)
Mr. Torres stated this is not the public hearing but to bring to the board the budget that you have already approved, but there have been some modifications. The next item is a resolution declaring the assessments so we can provide it to the county and prepare public notice to the residents. At the last meeting we made some assumptions and they are added to your budget, one was you were going to consider meeting each month. The admin budget reflects supervisors pay for those who receive the pay and also the staff time, which is the reason you have an increase in that area from last year.
The other significant increase was to the capital reserve contribution. Your study calls for
$221,000, the board wanted to consider an increase of $312,000 mainly in the event you decided to approach the pond bank as you did tonight.
The other increase would be for landscape contract and I put in $329,000 in that line item. You can change the line items around but in the end you cannot assess higher than
$1,277,211.  Last year the assessments were $1,249.22 and FY22 the assessment level will be
$1,416.78 if everything stays as is tonight.
Mr. DelBene stated that would be an increase of $167.56 for your household. Mr. Wing stated insurance is up 57%, $9,000 that is a big increase.
Mr. Torres stated we are seeing that in all of our districts.
Mr. Wing stated the $200,000 for doing the ponds is $200 per household. Also I cannot justify spending $18,500 additional dollars on our meetings.
Mr. Torres stated if the board would like to tackle that I can adjust that budget line.
Mr. DelBene stated Yellowstone did not attend the pre-bid meeting so the $329,700 has to updated to $330,000 so we can consider all proposals.
Mr. Torres stated I will make that adjustment.
Mr. Vencil stated there are about a dozen CDDs in our county and some larger and some smaller than us. We are the largest CDD in the county that does not meet monthly to meet the needs of our constituents. The others don’t seem to have the landscaping issue that we seem to spend an hour discussing every time we are together. We aren’t meeting enough to make timely

responses or actions on issues like the fishing policy. The drinking fountain was removed over a year ago and we still haven’t moved on it, we haven’t had time in our meetings to get to it. We go on and on about the drainage and if we met more frequently we could get the feedback and make decisions on how to move forward. It would align our meetings with the HOA so we would be more able to partner with them to serve the community. We shouldn’t let 1% of our budget keep us from meeting and being responsive to the community.
Mr. DelBene stated prior to me joining the board and coming to these meeting when they met every month, the board had to push off 50% of every agenda topic because there wasn’t enough time to act between meetings, you would have one agenda item for three plus months. I understand what you are saying.
Mr. Vencil stated maybe we need to be more agile as to getting to things quickly.
Mr. DelBene stated it wasn’t that the board couldn’t act, it is that the board’s vendors didn’t act on those things.
Mr. Torres stated the meeting we are having in August is a special meeting. We can call special meetings when we need to. The current contract with my firm allows for two special meetings at no charge. If the board wants to go in a different direction to have 12 scheduled meetings we can entertain that, but that is almost a $30,000 increase.
Ms. Burks stated the suggestion that we meet more frequently I disagree with that.

On MOTION by Mr. DelBene seconded by Mr. Wing with all in favor the budget as proposed will be discussed at the next meeting.

Mr. Torres stated I made one additional adjustment, I increased the landscape line by $300 and reduced the pressure washing by $300.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Resolution	2021-05
Declaring Budget O&M Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022 (Presenter: Ernesto Torres)
Ms. Gentry stated because you are contemplating raising assessments you do need to declare them in a resolution, set a public hearing on them, which we will set for the same date as your budget hearing. Then we will publish a notice and we will send mailed notices to the community as well.

On MOTION by Mr. Wing seconded by Mr. DelBene with all in favor Resolution 2021-05 was approved.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports (Part 2)
Attorney - (Presenter: Jennifer Kilinski)
There being none, the next item followed.

Manager - (Presenter: Ernesto Torres)
There being none, the next item followed.

Operation Manager – (Presenter: Jerry Lambert)
Memorandum
Mr. Lambert gave an overview of the memorandum, a copy of which was included in the agenda package then presented a request for replacement of the spiral slide and stated a straight slide would only be about $1,200, a curved one about $1,300, but the spiral slide is $6,119.

On MOTION by Mr. Wing seconded by Mr. DelBene with all in favor staff was authorized to replace the slide in an amount not to exceed $2,500.

Mr. DelBene stated last month we asked that you get proposals for a different water fountain. That is not in the agenda packet?
Mr. Lambert stated Jeremy asked last time about warranty and was it stainless steel. They are all stainless steel that I quoted the last time and warranties were anywhere from 60 days to 1 year, you aren’t going to get any more than that.
Mr. DelBene stated have that on the agenda for next time. Mr. Wing asked are we only looking at refrigerated?
Mr. Hutchinson stated from the last meeting you decided not to do refrigeration because that is what we had before and that is what rusted out and everything goes underneath the soil and the water stays cool and we didn’t have to look into the refrigerated fountain.
Mr. DelBene stated let’s add that to the agenda for the next meeting.

Field Operations Manager Picture Report
A copy of the operations manager’s picture report was included in the agenda.

Duval Audit Reports
A copy of the Duval Audit reports was included in the agenda package.

Amenity Center Update (Presenter: Erick Hutchinson
Consideration of Dog Event

On MOTION by Mr. Wing seconded by Mr. Vencil with all in favor dogs will be allowed on the amenity field for special dog events only.

Consideration of Flea Market
Ms. Gentry stated typically CDDs have in their policies that you don’t allow commercial activities on your property, but we do have a number of communities that have these events and if the board wants to approve it we can work to get everything in place.
Mr. Hutchinson stated I would treat them like food trucks, with no revenue coming to the district.
Ms. Gentry stated we have a vendor agreement we use for these sorts of things to make them responsible for having any necessary licenses and that sort of thing.

On MOTION by Mr. DelBene seconded by Mr. Wing with all in favor staff was authorized to allow flea market type events.

Presentation from Tocoi Creek High School Swim Team (Jeff Holland)
Mr. Holland, athletic director at Tocoi Creek High School stated we are in search of a pool for our swim team. I have a couple of options as to the times to be utilized, most are prior to 9 a.m., Monday through Friday and afternoons on Wednesday. We can help with facility upgrades such as starting blocks.
The board discussed the following: did they request use of other facilities, specifications of pool, options for days of usage and hours, opening time of the pool not compatible with requested hours, no immediate plans of the parks and rec department to build a pool and lighting

issues. The board discussed the fact that they did not have lighting installed to allow the pool to be open before sunrise.
Mr. DelBene stated I’m totally in support of the swim team, but the morning hours don’t work, and afternoon hours would be difficult. If circumstances change you can bring this back for board consideration.

Presentation from Ancient City Soccer Extension (Casey O’Linn)
Mr. Fallon representing Ancient City Soccer requested use of the field from August to November and from February to May.
Mr. Labanowski stated last year there were issues with use of the field between the two soccer leagues and I want to prevent that from happening again.
Mr. Fallon stated it is a matter of sitting down and scheduling together to avoid that conflict.

On MOTION by Mr. DelBene seconded by Mr. Wing with all in favor the request from Ancient City Soccer to extend their agreement was approved.

Presentation for Amenity Soccer Extension
Mr. Hutchinson stated Amenity Soccer also wants to do an extension.

On MOTION by Mr. Wing seconded by Mr. DelBene with all in favor the amenity services soccer league extension was approved.

Mr. Hutchinson stated Amenity wants to introduce a winter flag football at Murabella. I have some dates if you are willing to entertain it and I can get more information for the next meeting.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor’s	Requests	and	Audience
Comments
The following items were brought up by residents and supervisors: why does the property look so bad and the fields cut so short, all the lights in the neighborhood were switched to LED except for two, look forward to the landscape monitoring and pay attention to the contract, itemize the issues rather than getting contentious, pay attention when they are accessing the berm and how

they cross people’s property, Jerry is leaving and is training his replacement, property behind the houses on Terracina no one is under contract to even monitor it and there is no signage to stay out, there is one large tree halfway down, look into the cost of a bench, table and shade structure in San Marino.

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Consent Agenda (Presenter:
Ernesto Torres)
A.	Approval of Minutes of the May 11, 2021 Meeting

On MOTION by Mr. Labanowski seconded by Mr. DelBene with all in favor the minutes of the May 11, 2021 meeting were approved as amended.

THIRTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Next Scheduled Meeting – August 10, 2021 at
6:30 p.m.
Mr. Torres stated the intent is to have the workshop before the next meeting, which is scheduled for August 10, 2021 at 6:30 p.m.

On MOTION by Mr. Wing seconded by Mr. DelBene with all in favor the meeting adjourned at 9:23 p.m.

Secretary/Assistant Secretary	Chairman/Vice Chairman