City Commission ISBA Conflict Resolution Negotiations

MINUTES Joint City/County Meeting on ISBA 5:30 PM -Wednesday, December 18, 2019 - City Hall CALL TO ORDER: 5:39 P.M. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF QUORUM AND PROPER NOTICE PRESENT: Eustis City Commission : Commissioner Marie Aliberti, Vice Mayor Emily Lee Commissioner Karen LeHeup-Smith, Commissioner Robert Morin , and Mayor Michael Holland Lake County Board of County Commissioners: Commissioner Josh Blake, Vice Chair Wendy Breeden, Commissioner Sean Parks, Commissioner Tim Sullivan, and Chairman Leslie Campione 1. WELCOME: MAYOR MICHAEL HOLLAND Mayor Holland opened the meeting announcing it was a joint meeting between the City of Eustis Commission and the Lake County Board of Commissioners for the purpose of discussing the proposed City of Eustis lnterlocal Service Boundary Area agreement (ISBA). He thanked both City and County staff for their assistance in putting together the meeting. 2. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED INTERLOCAL SERVICE BOUNDARY AGREEMENT (ISBA) 2.1 Discussion regarding City of Eustis lnterlocal Service Boundary Agreement (ISBA) Leslie Campione, Lake County Chair, commented on the discussions prior to the meeting and cited her and Commissioner Parks experience with ISBAs stating they don't work very well. She stated they were originally using the ISBA's to facilitate interlocal cooperation for public safety. She then commented on how the planning and development aspect became incorporated into the ISBA's. She stated the County's intent to be very careful and deliberative in negotiating ISBA's with Eustis and Mount Dora. She noted an unintended consequence of neighborhoods being forced into annexing when they weren't aware of the possibility. She commented on the impression that the County is against allowing Eustis to grow and explained they are actually just wanting to be careful about unintended consequences. Chairman Campione then commented on the previous discussion and their desire to remove the East Crooked Lake area from the agreement. She stated they were told that area was to be taken out of the agreement and she just learned that it was included . She expressed opposition to that being incorporated into the agreement. She expressed support for Pine Meadows being annexed which would only leave a very small enclave. She expressed support for starting with Pine Meadows and then expanding at a later date. She stated her understanding that they were only going to discuss Pine Meadows at this time and then consider Eustis City Commission/Lake County Commission Joint Meeting Page 1 of 10 December 18, 2019  a larger ISBA and not include East Crooked Lake. She also expressed support for doing individual agreements for non-contiguous properties where developers have already expressed interest in annexing into the City. Ron Neibert, City Manager, responded that circumstances have changed since that discussion as there was included a requirement by the County that the City would have to have the County provide case-by-case approval for any annexations and there was an active application for annexation . He stated that since that time the initiating resolution passed by the County no longer includes a case-by-case approval and the application for annexation has been withdrawn from the City and the land use application was withdrawn from the County. Therefore, the City is now asking to have full rights to have annexation of enclaves within the boundaries of its entire JPA and for the City of Eustis to review its own projects for annexation . Chairman Campione stated there would be nothing preventing the previous applicant from reapplying and the residents of that area believe that the one unit to one acre is the appropriate use for that property with Mr. Neibert indicating that approval of the agreement would show that the Lake County Commission gives the Eustis Commission the benefit of the doubt that they will listen to the residents and make an appropriate decision. Chairman Campione further expressed concern regarding the desires of the residents surrounding East Crooked Lake. Eustis Commissioner Robert Morin commented that the City listened to the RedTail and Sorrento Springs residents when they expressed their desire not to be annexed and the City agreed to not enforce the developer agreements. He stated his desire that the City be able to make its own decisions and for the County Commission to trust their judgment. He noted incidents during the previous year when the City denied some developments due to opposition from residents . County Vice Chair Wendy Breeden referred to page five of the draft agreement and cited the portion as follows: "Eustis agrees to amend the Eustis Land Development Regulations to require that, for development applications received pursuant to the provisions of 3.a.ii above which generate substantial neighborhood opposition, the developer hold a community meeting to address concerns of the surrounding property owners; and to require the developer consider plan modifications to reduce those concerns." She indicated this could be a start to addressing the County's concerns. Chairman Campione agreed that was a start and cited the resident concerns regarding the previous development proposal for East Crooked Lake expressed at the community meeting held by the developer. She expressed caution until the details are put in writing. She recommended pulling out the East Crooked Lake property and not holding up the City's ISBA because of that. She also recommended pulling out the Pine Meadows property from the overall agreement. Commissioner Breeden recommended moving the ISBA forward by pulling out the East Crooked Lake property and not just including Pine Meadows. Eustis City Commission/Lake County Commission Joint Meeting Page 2 of 10 December 18, 2019  Chairman Campione indicated she had a list of things she would like to address in the Eustis ISBA with Eustis Commissioner Marie Aliberti questioning whether she also has a list for other cities. Ms. Campione indicated they can't address other cities' ISBA agreements unless the cities are willing to renegotiate which was another reason she is cautious with ISBAs. Commissioner Breeden explained that's why they want to include termination language in the Eustis ISBA as well as any future ISBAs. Mayor Holland asked if Chairman Campione wanted to pull East Crooked Lake out in order to discuss the rest of the ISBA or did she prefer to cancel the meeting . Mr. Neibert asked for time to consult with the City's attorney. Commissioner Aliberti noted that Pine Meadows is agreeable to being annexed . The East Crooked Lake residents are in the County and they are almost having more power than the property owner who wants to be annexed. She expressed concern regarding someone outside of the City dictating what happens in the City. She further expressed opposition to a group of property owners that have no stake in that property but they can dictate what happens with your property. Eustis Commissioner Karen LeHeup-Smith commented on how people get hung up on what the property could be built up to but it's not going to be due to the conditions around it. She expressed frustration and emphasized they are taking rights away from the City. Commissioner Breeden responded stating they are trying to find a middle ground. Chairman Campione stated that the City couldn't annex that property right now anyway due to the creation of an enclave. She added that the purpose of an ISBA is to open the door to allowing the County put its concerns on the table. Commissioner LeHeup-Smith confirmed Pine Meadows would create a small enclave with Chairman Campione stating that the County would have to waive that issue in order to allow the annexation. She then stated that, if they leave East Crooked Lake in, they would need to agree to development criteria for that property and include it in the agreement. Commissioner Morin asked for discussion on the other issues and to defer East Crooked Lake at that time. He further commented on the RedTail and Sorrento Springs meeting and stated he felt that the City would ensure that both city and unincorporated residents' concerns would be addressed. Chairman Campione recommended looking at Grand Island and the western side of the City's JPA noting the number of developer agreements in place. She indicated the developer agreements would need to be on the list of issues to be worked out. She emphasized that, if a development can't be annexed because it would create an enclave, then they would have to make sure the residents are in agreement with annexation. Eustis City Commission/Lake County Commission Joint Meeting Page 3 of 10 December 18, 2019  Mr. Neibert responded that none of the City's existing developer agreements can be annexed at this time even if the ISBA as proposed were passed unless other properties annexed first. He added that Lake Yale Retreat does not have significant contiguity. He commented on the City's original ISBA request. Jeff Cole, Lake County Manager, confirmed that Grand Island Estates can't be annexed either with Mr. Neibert explaining there is abandoned railroad right-of- way in between. Discussion was held regarding annexing properties that create enclaves with Mr. Neibert suggesting the City could agree to not annex developer agreement properties for a period of five years from the date of the ISBA agreement. Chairman Campione responded she did not think the County should open the door to forcing someone to annex even after five years. Cecelia Bonifay, City Attorney, stated the Florida Supreme Court has upheld the right for municipalities to require annexation for the provision of water and that all of the cities in Lake County do that. She stated that has not been stricken from any other ISBA she is aware of. Chairman Campione cited a Hernando County court case which said that if someone lived in a neighborhood where a developer had signed one of these agreements, that it is not considered a voluntary annexation for a lot owner who does not agree to be annexed. She further stated that, if the cities want to have these agreements with developers, that is fine; however, whether or not a lot owner could challenge it would be between the City and the lot owner and she did not feel the County should be a part of the equation . Ms. Bonifay questioned why it was allowed in the other ISBAs and not this one. Chairman Campione responded she did not think there were any other forced annexations as the result of an ISBA with Mr. Neibert indicating there was a subdivision in Clermont that was forced to annex. Chairman Campione responded that just because they made one mistake doesn't mean they have to continue. County Commissioner Sean Parks reviewed some of the history of ISBAs in the County and stated that most of the Clermont annexations involved commercial properties. Mayor Holland noted the City has a presentation showing the County and City's positions on different sections and asked to go through the agreement section by section. Chairman Campione stated there are other considerations worthy of negotiation and cited the flooding problem in Blue Lake in the City of Eustis. Eustis City CommissionA.ake County Commission Joint Meeting Page 4 of 10 December 18, 2019  Commissioner LeHeup-Smith requested that they address the agreement and then come back to her other issues. Ms. Bonifay provided a presentation beginning with the clauses pertaining to intergovernmental cooperation, State Comprehensive Plan requirements, creation of the Joint Planning Area agreement, and the lnterlocal Service Agreement Boundary. Ms. Bonifay cited the Exhibit A map showing the County's position on the boundary and stated the City requests that the entire JPA be referenced in Exhibit A. She then reviewed the City and County positions regarding annexation of properties that both meet requirements of Chapter 171 FSS and that do not meet the requirements. She stated that the County has four parcels identified by Alternate Key# that could be annexed even if they create an enclave as long as they satisfy additional stated criteria. She then reviewed the City's position on the annexation of the parcels that create an enclave stating the County would consent to the creation of any enclave resulting from an annexation so long as the City holds a public hearing prior to such annexation where the owners of all properties within the enclave are given written, first class mail notice, and an opportunity to comment publicly at the meeting. Commissioner Morin asked if they want the County and City to approve each section as they go through it with Ms. Bonifay concurring that would be helpful. Chairman Campione stated they didn't really accomplish anything with that section since by law they have the right to speak with Ms. Bonifay stating that the difference is they will get first class notices delivered to each property owner. Chairman Campione stated the County's intent was to give the residents' input consideration not just allow them to comment because they're not a City constituent. Commissioner LeHeup-Smith responded that the property owners are already our neighbors and people they see in the store and grew up with. She emphasized that the County needs to allow the City to do its job. Commissioner Breeden responded they have seen other cities that have not acted in the best interest of the County residents. Commissioner LeHeup-Smith stated her feeling that the County doesn't trust the City to do a good job for the County residents. She commented on the City's future land use and design district system. Commissioner Parks stated his feeling that the section is a positive move forward . Chairman Campione responded that, in dealing with developers, they often say one thing and do another. She indicated that the City's form based code is hard to understand. She emphasized that it is not a case of the County not trusting the City. Commissioner Parks expressed support for the section as presented by the City. Eustis City CommissionA.ake County Commission Joint Meeting Page 5of10 December 18, 2019  He asserted that he appreciates what the City does and understands they are not in the same position as other cities. He cited Clermont's ISBA stating it is one of the issues but he still supports the use of ISBAs. Commissioner Breeden committed to the County treating Mount Dora equally with Eustis. Vice Mayor Emily Lee noted she is new to the Commission but has never seen a resident not be heard or considered even though some have behaved outrageously. She emphasized her desire to see something good come out of the negotiations. She asked that the County be more open and that Eustis be treated fairly. She stated it's important that Eustis be given the opportunity to do right for the residents . Commissioner Aliberti commented on Home Rule and stated the City needs to be given the opportunity to do what's right for the City. She cited the number of meetings where the City has listened to large numbers of nonresidents speak on an issue. Chairman Campione asked to add language "and have their concerns addressed". County Commissioner Tim Sullivan suggested adding "to the maximum extent possible" since you can't always address all of their concerns . He stated he was comfortable with the section . He also stated his belief that everyone was comfortable with moving forward with Pine Meadows; however, they can't do that unless the agreement includes the waiver of enclaves. Further discussion was held regarding the proposed section with Commissioner Parks indicating he had heard a City Council tell a county resident they were not allowed to speak since they were not a City resident. Commissioner Morin responded that the Eustis Commission would not say that. Chairman Campione commented that the reason to write such language is for future commissions. Mr. Neibert asked if the County Commission agrees to replace the County's section 3.a.ii with the City's proposed section 3.a.ii with the inclusion of the language suggested by Commissioners Campione and Sullivan. There was some confusion due to differences between the County and City versions of the draft agreement. Chairman Campione clarified that the Pine Meadow references were not being eliminated but the language was for the global situation so if other enclaves were created then the proposed language would apply with Mr. Cole stating that the intent was to replace the County's section 3.b. since the City's proposal went directly into section 4 - "Annexation of Right of Way." Chairman Campione suggested leaving the County language in and inserting "and any other enclave" as well as the language just discussed and agreed upon as Roman numeral 3. Eustis City CommissionA.ake County Commission Joint Meeting Page 6 of 10 December 18, 2019  Mr. Neibert explained that the intent was to provide the City's best effort to listen to the constituents; however, he clarified their concern is to have the right to do contiguous annexations with enclaves throughout their JPA and not just specifically in the Pine Meadows area. Mr. Cole indicated that the suggestion creates a conflict with the County's paragraph 3.a.ii and the City's paragraph 3.a.ii since the County's was specific to certain properties. Commissioner Breeden indicated that the suggestion would allow for the contiguous annexations with enclaves for the City if it was added as section 3.a.iii. Ms. Bonifay reviewed Page 2, 3b of the County agreement noting that the County's agreement precludes using Pine Meadows property to annex additional properties unless they meet all requirements of Chapter 171 FSS. Chairman Campione responded it was worded that way because they wanted to address Pine Meadows separately and then work on a master agreement. She emphasized the County's desire to address Pine Meadows first because it's easy and then work on the master agreement which would ultimately supplant the Pine Meadows agreement. She indicated if they can agree on the master, then they don't need the Pine Meadows agreement. Mr. Neibert responded that there was not a need to reference Pine Meadows if the County gave the Eustis Commission the right to do the contiguous annexation with enclaves throughout the JPA. Ms. Bonifay reviewed the City's 3.a.iii section which provides for the City to postpone for five years annexation of any area with an existing annexation agreement which may become contiguous by virtue of a voluntary annexation. Chairman Campione stated putting that in the agreement makes the County a party of the forced annexation. She questioned whether the residents effected would be in agreement and expressed opposition to forcing them to annex. Mr. Neibert responded that the residents would have the right to challenge the annexation in court with Chairman Campione responding that would require them to spend money for a lawyer. She stated having it in the agreement makes the County a party to it. She indicated the City could still force the annexations once they become contiguous. Mr. Neibert clarified there are two provisions. The first is that the City has the right to annex those properties if they become contiguous under normal terms. The County is proposing under the original language, if the City annexes a property that creates an enclave and it becomes contiguous with one of the parcels with which the City has a developer's agreement, the City cannot annex the property with the developer's agreement until it has normal contiguity. He explained the City is proposing that, by providing the five year delay, it informs the residents of the possibility of annexation. He emphasized that the City currently does not have any active annexation applications for that area. He added they are agreeing to the five year delay in the spirit of compromise. Eustis City CommissionA.ake County Commission Joint Meeting Page 7 of 10 December 18, 2019  Commissioner LeHeup-Smith suggested sending letters to the residents and their homeowners' association of any subdivisions subject to an annexation agreement. Mr. Neibert added that each title search policy provides references to the developer's agreements and the requirement to annex. He acknowledged that they were probably not provided a specific form that stated they would be subject to annexation; however, he stated he was unaware of anyone ever doing that. Mr. Cole responded that when you buy a house you are often not aware of all of the intricacies. He expressed concern that current residents may not be aware of the requirement to annex. Ms. Bonifay stated that's why you have a title policy. She added that is similar to saying they shouldn't have to abide by all the HOA regulations and restrictive covenants because they didn't get around to reading them . Mr. Cole further stated his concern regarding whether or not the current residents are aware of the requirement. Commissioner Parks added his concern as to whether the current residents would have signed something acknowledging the requirement with Chairman Campione responding that it would just have been included in their title policy. Mr. Neibert stated that he is unaware of any property owner ever signing something regarding covenants. Ms. Bonifay explained that almost every development is done by a master developer and they had to sign an agreement to annex the property in order to get water and sewer. Commissioner Parks asked if anywhere in the closing papers is there notification they may have to annex. He stated that if it's included in the covenants and I signed it, then it's my fault. Chairman Campione commented on a Hernando court case and recommended, in the future, requiring developers to include the annexation requirement in the property covenants and restrictions since property owners may be more likely to read those. Mr. Neibert stated the City told the Sorrento Springs project they would have to provide a separate annexation covenant so it is not buried. He emphasized that any future development agreements will require that. Further discussion was held regarding whether or not other cities have had to address this. Commissioner Breeden commented on the possibility of the City sending out notices to those subdivisions that are already subject to annexation. Mr. Neibert responded that, once an ISBA agreement is approved , the City will send out notices to all those that are affected . Eustis City Commission/Lake County Commission Joint Meeting Page 8 of 10 December 18, 2019  Chairman Campione stated that the City should just go ahead and notify the residents of the possibility. Discussion was held regarding whether or not the City should go ahead and send notices to the residents with Mr. Neibert indicating without the ISBA there is nothing to notify the residents about. Mr. Cole suggested the City survey the affected residents regarding their feelings about annexation. Mr. Neibert stated that the voluntary choice came when the resident decided to purchase a home in a subdivision subject to annexation. The question is how well the developers notified them of the possibility of annexing . Chairman Campione asked that it be left out of the agreement and stated that to have it in makes the County a party to it. Commissioner Morin agreed with leaving it out of the agreement with Mr. Neibert stating they would take it under advisement and see how the rest of the agreement develops. Ms. Bonifay reviewed Paragraph 4 - Annexation of right of way. She explained this requires the City to annex any road right-of-way and maintain that right-of- way. The City's position is it agrees to annex the adjacent road right-of-way to avoid the creation of roadway enclaves; however the City would not agree that the annexation of the right-of-way would automatically require the City to accept maintenance responsibility. Mr. Neibert explained the City agrees that it will annex and accept maintenance responsibility for the Pine Meadows road. Discussion was held regarding identifying specific types of roads that would be subject to the City assuming maintenance responsibility. Mr. Neibert suggested adding language identifying specific classes of roads that would remain in the County maintenance system and the local roads would become the City's responsibility. Mr. Cole asked if the railroad property in Grand Island is considered right-of-way with Mr. Neibert explaining that is abandoned railway but they have retained ownership. Further discussion was held regarding roads with Mr. Neibert asking their expectation regarding the Pine Meadows Road. He reviewed the minimum rural construction standard and indicated Pine Meadows is not actually a road, but is an easement. He stated it is not listed on any of the City's maintenance schedules. He indicated they are willing to accept maintenance but are concerned about language that states the City will use a third party to do that, cited the high cost and questioned who would pay for it. Eustis City CommissionA.ake County Commission Joint Meeting Page 9 of 10 December 18, 2019  Commissioner Breeden stated it would probably be the developer that would be required to build the road with Mr. Neibert indicating that the problem with that is the City does not have transportation concurrency and would not be able to require the developer to build the road. He stated the City would agree to make the improvements; however, the County would be receiving all of the impact fees. He indicated the City would be willing to do the maintenance upon a negotiated agreement regarding the cost. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, stated that the issue is that the City has been referring residents to the County regarding the road and stated that research showed that the road was deeded to the City in 1978. She indicated the City has no legal ability to maintain the road since they don't own it. She emphasized the need for the City to not send residents to the County for improvements to the road. She stated that the County can't use impact fees except for collector and arterial roads. Commissioner Breeden suggested changing the wording to "Eustis shall accept into its road maintenance system Pine Meadows Golf Course Road no later than three months from the effective date of this agreement" with Mr. Neibert stating that would be fine. He then explained there is a difference between maintenance and ownership. He indicated that the City owns the road but hasn't been maintaining . He indicated they are agreeing to include it as part of the maintenance plan. Ms. Bonifay then confirmed they would use the County's language for Paragraph 5 but eliminate the improvements to bring it to city roadway standards and adding the suggested wording . RECESS: 7:22 p.m. RECONVENE: 7:32 p.m. Mayor Holland commented on all that had been accomplished . He stated that Chairman Campione had a family emergency and had to leave. He adjourned the meeting and stated they would continue after the first of the year. 3. ADJOURNMENT: 7:37 P.M. *These minutes reflect the actions taken and portions of the discussion during the meeting. To review the entire discussion concerning any agenda item, go to www.eustis.org and click on the video for the meeting in question. A DVD of the entire meeting or CD of the entire audio recording or verbatim transcript of the meeting can be obtained from the office of the City Clerf< for a fee. MICHAEL L. HOLLAND City Clerk Mayor/Commissioner Eustis City CommissionA.ake County Commission Joint Meeting Page 10 of10 December 18, 2019