City Commission ISBA Conflict Resolution Negotiations

APPROVED:8/6/2020 MINUTES Joint City/County ISBA Meeting 4:00 PM -Wednesday, February 19, 2020 Lake County Emergency Operations Center, Tavares CALL TO ORDER: 4:04 P.M. ATTENDANCE: Eustis City Commission: Commissioner Marie Aliberti, Commissioner Karen LeHeup- Smith, Commissioner Robert Morin and Mayor Michael Holland Lake County Board of Commissioners: Chairman Leslie Campione, Commissioner Josh Blake, Commissioner Sean Parks, Commissioner Timothy Sullivan and Vice Chairman Wendy Breeden DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED INTERLOCAL SERVICE BOUNDARY AGREEMENT Leslie Campione, County Commission Chair, opened the meeting at 4:04 p.m. and called the County Commission to order. Mayor Holland called the City Commission to order and announced that Commissioner Emily Lee was absent due to an event at the Governor's mansion in Tallahassee. Chairman Campione thanked everyone for accommodating her family situation that ended the previous joint meeting. She read the Florida statute pertaining to interlocal service boundary agreements (ISBA) stating the purpose was to provide some context in development of the agreement. She then announced that the County had moved forward with a limited purpose, site specific, ISBA that would facilitate the annexation of the Pine Meadows property which was unanimously approved by the County Commission. She stated that there are no restrictions in the agreement, provided an overview of the agreement and cited the benefits of the limited agreement. She stated a benefit to the City of approving the annexation before the end of the year which would put the property on the tax rolls for the City for the current calendar year. She estimated the additional tax revenue to the City of $860,000. Commissioner Wendy Breeden asked to have the Pine Meadows ISBA distributed to the City Commission as there was one condition that the City might take exception to. She cited Paragraph 2, subparagraph 2, on page 2 of of the agreement which begins "Eustis shall not annex any other areas ... " She suggested omitting the first section and only leaving the second sentence as follows, "The parcels identified in the above, once annexed, shall not be used as a means of annexing additional properties unless the additional properties meet all requirements of Part I Chapter 171, Florida Statutes." Commissioner Sean Parks confirmed that the City had not approved the agreement. Cecelia Bonifay, City Attorney for the ISBA, explained that the City previously made it clear that it was not interested in approving a limited scope ISBA in place of a broad scale Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 1 of 12 February 19, 2020  ISBA. She noted that City representatives at the County's January 14th meeting made it clear again they were not interested in a limited scope agreement. Chairman Campione explained that the agreement prohibits the City from using the Pine Meadows property to further annex unless the property already meets the annexation requirements under the Florida statutes. Ron Neibert, City Manager, explained his and the City Commission's concerns that section of the agreement could be interpreted that it would prohibit the City from making any other annexations even if it meets the state statute requirements. Chairman Campione stated their interpretation that the agreement as written would not prohibit the City from doing other annexations as long as they met statutory requirements. Further discussion was held regarding the possible interpretation regarding statutory annexations with Chairman Campione stating their intent to just move the process ahead and allow the City to annex the Pine Meadows property and then proceed from there. Commissioner Robert Morin expressed support for approving the Pine Meadows agreement and then moving forward with the overall ISBA. He indicated that the Commission had not had a discussion regarding the agreement. Commissioner Marie Aliberti stated her opinion that any future agreements should be similar to the Pine Meadows agreement and indicated that there are no specific criteria contained in the agreement. She stated that any criteria used for one annexation needs to be used for any additional annexations. She questioned whether the County Commission would trust the City to allow the Pine Meadows property to be developed under existing City ordinances. Chairman Campione agreed stating they have not received any concerns from the surrounding residents. She commented on the County's efforts to develop services for the residents in that area. Commissioner Tim Sullivan noted that it took two years to develop the Groveland ISBA agreement and expressed support for the City moving ahead with the Pine Meadows agreement. Ms. Bonifay noted that the City has received two annexation requests from John Keating - one of which is contiguous and the other one might create an enclave. She commented on previous County Commission statements that certain properties within the City's JPA would need special requirements. She read a statement from John Keating regarding the Pine Meadows agreement and expressing concerns regarding treating one property differently than others. She noted that the City has not received or seen any development plan from anyone regarding the Pine Meadows property. She expressed concern regarding the possibility of treating properties differently and the legal ramifications. Chairman Campione questioned whether or not the Keating property would create an enclave with Ms. Bonifay indicating the application was just received; however, staff had concerns about the creation of an enclave after looking at the map. Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 2 of 12 February 19, 2020  Commissioner Breeden responded that all other points would still be under negotiation and the other issues are not a done deal. Mr. Neibert explained the City had received an annexation request for the East Crooked Lake property and the neighborhood's objections; however, the City has not received any applications or site plan for the Pine Meadows property. He commented on the possibility of the surrounding residents having concerns if an application is submitted for a development with 500 homes. Chairman Campione expressed concern regarding the City and others creating roadblocks. She stated other developers should not hold up Pine Meadows and stated that the County had heard the developer for that property is Hanover and they have confidence in the type of development they create. Mr. Neibert responded on the City's ability to analyze complex developments and the good sense to make good decisions based on varying different complexities with Chairman Campione expressing the County's desire for the City and County to analyze the East Crooked Lake development together. Commissioner Morin commented on delaying the East Crooked Lake development, not delaying Pine Meadows and the need to hear from all of the Commissioners. Commissioner LeHeup-Smith stated they would be setting a precedent for the future and it would tie their hands. She expressed concern about having to work with the County on every development seeking to annex into the City. She further stated her concern they are taking away the City's home rule and her frustration regarding the County moving ahead with approving the Pine Meadows agreement despite the City making it clear it was not interested in doing a limited agreement. Mayor Holland stated he is willing to look at the Pine Meadows agreement; however, the County did not listen to the City's desire. He commented on the amount of opposition expressed for the East Crooked Lake annexation and noted that the City was only asked to approve the annexation and the Commission had not seen any development plans for the property. He cited his concerns regarding the environment and what he would envision for the East Crooked Lake property. He expressed frustration regarding the unpleasantness posted out on Facebook. He asked that staff put the Pine Meadows agreement on the next Commission agenda so there will be a full Commission to consider that agreement. Mr. Neibert stated that, if the Commission decides to end the meeting today, then he would recommend holding a workshop to discuss ISBA policies. Commissioner Morin expressed opposition with moving to a workshop and not proceeding and the need for both entities to be present at the discussion . Mr. Neibert stated he is basing his suggestion on the comments by the Commissioners present to hold a discussion with the full Commission. Commissioner Morin further commented on his need to have comments from both sides. He indicated his feeling he was not getting sufficient information to make a decision. Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 3 of 12 February 19, 2020  Commissioner Josh Blake stated it was not his intent to slight the Eustis Commission when he voted for the Pine Meadows agreement. He stated there was a property owner in limbo for 15 years. He commented he is sympathetic with not wanting to be micromanaged. He noted issues with the previous developer agreements that created problems with the previous ISBA discussion. He expressed support for moving forward with the Pine Meadows agreement. Chairman Campione stated when they were asked to consider an ISBA they asked not to include the East Crooked Lake property due to the difficulties it presented. She expressed concern that it was included in the ISBA boundary when they were told it would not be included . Commissioner Breeden noted Pine Meadows is on one side of the City and East Crooked Lake is on the other and they are very different situations. She stated that if East Crooked Lake is to be included in the ISBA, then the County would probably want some conditions for that property. Commissioner Parks confirmed that the City has concerns regarding moving forward due to the possibility that there are other properties that may not be treated the same as in Phase I. Commissioner LeHeup-Smith questioned whether or not the City was going to have to come back to the County for every annexation application and at what point will they have a master agreement they can work with . Commissioner Breeden asked to have East Crooked Lake taken out of the agreement and then proceed with the joint planning. Commissioner LeHeup-Smith questioned the process that the City will have to follow for future annexations with Chairman Campione responding that it would be the same process the City now utilizes for annexations. Mr. Neibert asked if they are offering the City the right to do, under the ISBA, contiguous annexations with enclaves for all properties within the City's JPA, exclusive of East Crooked Lake with Commissioner Breeden and Chairman Campione responding "subject to joint planning". Mr. Neibert questioned what they meant by "joint planning" with Commissioner Parks responding working out the details for balancing the needs and desires of the community from 171.201. Mr. Neibert asked if they are offering the ability to do the ISBA annexations if they agree to pre-negotiate land use designations prior to doing that. Chairman Campione cited the need to still review changes made by the City to the draft agreement. She stated part of the workshop process was to address other pending issues inside the City. She suggested comparing the City's future land use map with the County's land use and zoning map and work from there. She stated they have done that with all the other cities. Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 4 of 12 February 19, 2020  Mr. Neibert responded that he is not aware of any other ISBA agreements where they have pre-negotiated and made land use changes through the ISBA. Ms. Bonifay stated the City has the right pursuant to the JPA and cited the notifications provided to the County whenever changes are made to the comprehensive plan . She questioned how the City's land uses could be compared to the County's zoning due to the County's being unincorporated and automatically having a lower density, and with the City being a utility provider, they have to have a higher density. Chairman Campione questioned whether Eustis and the County both approved Eustis' joint planning area agreement (JPA). She commented on previous comprehensive plan amendments the City approved and how old the JPA is and stated they may need to look at it anyway. She cited resident requests to maintain the quality of life in the County and various areas that are already more populated than indicated on the JPA. She commented on how the process works with cities submitting requests and County planners making sure any request is consistent with their JPA. She suggested that the next step should be having the City and County planners compare the land use maps. Commissioner Morin asked to continue the review of the rest of the agreement and stated the issues right now appear to be primarily about East Crooked Lake and Pine Meadows. Mr. Neibert explained that the County is now asking to make it a condition of the master ISBA for the City and County to re-evaluate the City's land uses within the JPA and that the County be involved with land use decisions within the City's JPA. Chairman Campione stated her desire to compare the two land use maps and see if the City and County are consistent. She indicated they would just discuss those areas where they are not consistent. She indicated negotiating an ISBA provides the County the opportunity to work on good planning . Commissioner Breeden quoted the state statute that the legislative intent of an ISBA is to "encourage intergovernmental coordination and planning ." Commissioner Parks indicated the City is worried that the County is going to get into every little detail of the City's planning. He stated he is not interested in getting into every little detail and indicated he thinks the City's code is pretty good. He expressed support for considering what the JPA and good planning is going to be which may require further meetings. Mr. Neibert responded that the City Commission needs to discuss as a full body its feelings about how to proceed . Commissioner Parks expressed support for working together on joint planning to be part of a new JPA. Commissioner Morin expressed his desire to leave the meeting with some agreement. He commented on the three Commission seats that would be up for election in November and stated that, as a resident, he was not opposed to having some County oversight. He commented on decisions the Commission has made after hearing resident input. He expressed support with leaving out East Crooked Lake. He asked to look at the rest of the agreement in order to reach some agreement on the remainder. Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 5 of 12 February 19, 2020  Chairman Campione suggested holding a workshop to just discuss East Crooked Lake. Mr. Neibert explained that, if they take out East Crooked Lake, then the City will lose its attorney as she represents Mr. Dye. He further explained they have a conflict of interest waiver due to their interests being the same. However, if they leave out East Crooked Lake, they will lose their attorney due to there becoming a conflict with their interests. Commissioner Breeden responded that, if they leave East Crooked Lake in the agreement, the County would probably want some agreed upon conditions for that property. Discussion was held regarding how the East Crooked Lake property could be handled with Mr. Neibert indicating leaving it out would leave the City without any representation as Ms. Bonifay would no longer be able to represent the City and the City's regular attorney would also have a conflict. Ms. Bonifay referred to the draft consolidated agreement with changes based on comments from the last joint meeting. She cited comments made by the County Attorney on the blue shaded document regarding language proposed by the City or County. It was noted the City distributed a pink shaded document with similar changes. She noted the concern regarding acceptance of roads due to the additional responsibility and maintenance for roads that may not be up to City standards. She stated the City's understanding that certain types of roads would remain the responsibility of the County. Commissioner Breeden responded that the County would not be able to agree to the roads that night due to the need to have County staff review the roadway requirements as well. Chairman Campione concurred that the County Public Works staff would have to review and noted the high cost that would be involved . Commissioner Sullivan cited problems they have experienced with other cities regarding the County having to maintain what are actually City roads. He stated they would not require different standards of Eustis than what is required of other municipalities. Chairman Campione stated that the City has included all of the roads in Park Place with Mr. Neibert noting those are currently County maintained roads and indicating the City would be happy to accept those roads if they are up to standards. Chairman Campione stated she get lots of resident complaints about Lake Nettie Drive. She cited the possibility of encouraging enclaves to voluntarily annex by using their tax dollars for a few years to improve the roads in their neighborhood. She suggested they may be able to include a mechanism in the ISBA for the City and County to share responsibility for road improvements. She recommended having Public Works look at the list and develop ways to address road issues. She then commented on the flooding issue with Blue Lake Estates. She proposed that, if they can get Water Management District permits, maybe they can pump water out when it hits a certain level which could then be used for irrigation . Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 6 of 12 February 19, 2020  Mr. Neibert responded that City staff is already working with the residents and St. John's River Water Management District on resolving that issue. Chairman Campione then discussed Lake Joanna water quality issues. She stated it appears that the water quality issues are due to subdivisions on the east side of old 448. She commented on the possibility of doing a water quality study to determine the source of the contamination . She suggested that the three jurisdictions could possibly develop a plan to address the water quality. If results show the problem is from septic tanks on east side, maybe Eustis can extend sewer lines to the area . Commissioner Morin expressed dismay regarding the difficulty in reaching some decisions. He reiterated that the primary issues are Pine Meadows and East Crooked Lake. Commissioner Aliberti agreed with continuing with the review of the rest of agreement to see where they stand. Commissioner Parks suggested redoing the joint planning agreement (JPA) to use as a master plan for the ISBA with Commissioner Morin concurring. He stated if there are technical issues then have Public Works review and bring back recommendations. Chairman Campione confirmed they are saying that the JPA needs to be completed first. Ms. Bonifay stated that redoing the JPA would be a huge undertaking. Whether approved jointly or not, the City has relied on the current JPA and the County has recognized it. She explained the purpose of part 2 of the state ISBA statute to allow cities to annex noncontiguous property or property that creates an enclave. Commissioner Parks responded that doing the JPA first might speed up working on the ISBA rather than going property by property. Commissioner Breeden suggested moving forward with the ISBA with the requirement that the two entities complete a review of the JPA within a certain period of time. Chairman Campione responded that would necessitate a site specific ISBA each time something comes up. Mr. Neibert asked if the intent was to approve a master ISBA without review of individual properties and then reviewing the JPA. Chairman Campione suggested that they do site specific ISBA amendments or agreements for properties that create enclaves to allow the City to move forward while working on a master ISBA and JPA review which would also allow those property owners that are wanting to move forward to do so. Mr. Neibert stated there are several broad conceptual processes that need to be discussed by the Commission. He recommended holding a City Commission workshop to discuss how they want to proceed . Discussion was held regarding reviewing the draft agreement which incorporates comments from the December joint meeting with Chairman Campione indicating what Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 7 of 12 February 19, 2020  was displayed on the screen included combined comments by both commissions at the previous meeting . RECESS: 5:29 p.m. RECONVENED: 5:47 p.m. County Attorney Melanie Marsh reviewed the onscreen changes from the original draft. Discussion was held regarding the "whereas" clause about the City's joint planning area agreement and whether or not to add a clause about the City and County agreeing to evaluate the JPA. Chairman Campione asked to add a note that as a point of discussion the City and County would continue deliberating on whether or not they need to re-open the entire JPA which would allow both sides to review the idea after the meeting and determine if it will be a long expensive process or not. It was suggested that both City and County staff could meet to review the JPA and make recommendations. Discussion was held regarding the Pine Meadows verbiage with Mr. Neibert explaining that the City's initial position was for the ISBA to cover the entire JPA with contiguous annexations and enclaves. It was noted that this was on hold for the City Commission to discuss whether or not to approve a separate agreement for Pine Meadows. Discussion was then held regarding the annexation of right of way with Mr. Neibert indicating that would also require a policy decision regarding which roads the City will accept and maintain. He then explained that if the City annexes to the roadway, they would also annex the right-of-way to establish contiguity to the other side of the road. He stated that maintenance would be addressed in another part of the agreement. He indicated that the wording is the same as in other area ISBA's. Discussion was held regarding jurisdictional issues that have arisen in other areas of the County with Mr. Neibert indicating the City's willingness to annex the right-of-way and provide law enforcement to any roadways within the City. He explained that the City police officers would not have any authority to respond in unincorporated areas. He indicated that if the Sheriff agreed to deputize the City's officers that would resolve the issue and they would have authority to respond. It was agreed the County would take that section under further advisement both for maintenance issues and to discuss with the Lake County Sheriff regarding enforcement. Chairman Campione asked if the intent is to agree that, for noncollector roads, if a certain percentage of a road is annexed into the City that the City would then take over maintenance with Mr. Neibert responding that the County had provided a specific list of roads that the City needs to evaluate. Mr. Neibert indicated that Paragraphs 4 and 5 would still need to be reviewed. He asked to clarify Paragraph 5, subparagraph b - asked if b would go away if the Pine Meadows agreement is approved . Ms. Marsh responded that paragraph 4 b regarding operation and maintenance is not included in the Pine Meadows agreement. Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 8 of 12 February 19, 2020  Following further discussion, it was agreed that paragraph 5 b would come out if the City adopts the Pine Meadows agreement. Discussion was held regarding Paragraph 6 - Development applications, Land Development Regulations, Comprehensive Plan Provisions with the Commissioner Morin confirming it already notifies County residents regarding applications and allows County resident input. Mr. Neibert indicated that the City does not agree to Paragraph 6 as it would require policy decisions and noted the City's alternative language regarding requiring a developer to hold a community meeting. Chairman Campione cited their Paragraph 6, subparagraph b which stipulates the City and County compare their respective Land Development Regulations. Discussion was held regarding how long it may take to review the JPA for consistency with Commissioner Breeden suggesting that the master ISBA agreement can contain a stipulation that the JPA and development regulations will be reviewed within a certain time frame. Chairman Campione stated it makes more sense to work on the JPA and do individual ISBA agreements for properties that want to annex in the interim. It was agreed that the City and County were not in agreement with Paragraph 6 with further discussion regarding how long a review might take. Chairman Campione stated that working on a joint planning area goes to the heart of the ISBA and emphasized that they have to confirm that their comprehensive plans and development regulations are consistent. She cited the issues between the City and County regarding the East Crooked Lake property. Mr. Neibert explained that is what the Commission does when it considers an application for a development. They review the adjacent land uses for compatibility. He stated they are asking the City to agree to a specific density without the agreement of the property owner and without a public hearing which is not allowed under an ISBA. Chairman Campione responded they can negotiate land uses with a 163 agreement, developer's agreement or a three-party agreement for that property. She emphasized they could get certainty for both the property owner and the surrounding residents by trying to negotiate an allowable land use on the property. She explained she had looked at what made the property so expensive to develop and what would be needed to help the developer get the profitability they want and get water and sewer to the property. Ms. Bonifay noted the City had also done an analysis and asked what Ms. Campione's results were. Chairman Campione stated that, if the City was agreeable to get water and sewer to the location, there is a possibility they could make the numbers work. Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 9 of 12 February 19, 2020  Ms. Bonifay stated that that it can't be done without an ISBA due to creating an enclave with Chairman Campione stating they could do a separate ISBA for the property referencing the 163 agreement. Ms. Bonifay responded she has received no direction from the City or property owner to prepare an application and negotiate an agreement. She emphasized the need to have an ISBA in place which is intended to address service delivery not land use regulations. Everything is revolving around two properties when there are many other square miles of property to be considered . Commissioner Morin asked if the developer has looked at what the property is worth and what it can sell for. He stated it is up to the owner to determine the price for their property not up to the City. He stated the market has to determine the price. Chairman Campione stated that the developer attempted to negotiate with the neighborhood but it didn't work out. She stated they haven't attempted to do it with the City, County and developer. She indicated they could do it through a separate ISBA and then work on a JPA. She re-emphasized that spending time on the JPA makes sense without holding up the City's current applications. Mr. Neibert responded they are only talking about a different process. He asked if Mr. Snyder had come in several months ago and proposed 500 units and the Pine Meadows residents had then come in complaining, would they be having this discussion . Chairman Campione discussed the history of the Pine Meadows property from 15 years ago and stated the surrounding residents always knew that area would eventually develop. Mr. Neibert responded that the East Crooked Lake residents also anticipated the Dye property being developed. Chairman Campione stated that those residents expected the property to be developed at one unit to one acre. Mr. Neibert stated that the City only has Mr. Dye wanting to annex his property and emphasized that the City does not have an active development application. He indicated the City ran into an issue with the annexation due to the creation of an enclave. He further explained that Mr. Dye is not a developer and only wants to annex so he can sell his property. He cited other property owners who want to annex but are not developers. Chairman Campione reiterated her opinion that it would be better for the property owner to do a separate ISBA for that property. Ms. Bonifay reiterated that she has not been directed by the property owner to prepare an application for development. She commented on the other constraints on the property that would limit density noting that the property is in the Wekiva River study area. Discussion was held regarding whether or not the Wekiva River study area regulations apply to the Dye property. Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 10 of 12 February 19, 2020  Mr. Neibert stated that the proposal is a policy decision that the Commission will have to discuss. He then asked to discuss Paragraph 7b pertaining to Fire and EMS services. He statement the City's agreement to maintain the provisions of the auto-aid agreement. He then indicated that the City cannot commit to providing unknown fire stations at that time. He stated they can commit to the provisions of the auto-aid agreement throughout the negotiations and for the term of the ISBA. Jeff Cole, County Manager, asked why they wouldn't want to work together to plan additional stations and services. Mr. Neibert responded that the agreement seems to require determination of stations and locations as part of the negotiation. He added that, as long as the negotiation doesn't commit the City to specific station locations, he is comfortable with committing to planning . Further discussion was held regarding the intent and need for joint planning for the fire and EMS services. It was a consensus of both the City and County to approve the paragraph as re-stated by Ms. Marsh: "The parties agree that the provisions of the Automatic Aid Agreement for Fire Protection and Other Emergency Services between the City of Eustis and Lake County dated May 22, 2018, shall remain applicable . The parties shall determine how additional stations and services shall be allocated and how funding for those services will be assessed ." Discussion was then held regarding Paragraphs 10, 11 and 12 with agreement to amend the timeframe to ten years with Ms. Marsh noting the Pine Meadows draft agreement is for ten years. Discussion was then held regarding Paragraph 13 regarding termination of the agreement. It was agreed to state that the agreement may be terminated if either party is in breach; however, the party will be given twelve months to cure the breach . Chairman Campione proposed including language regarding the City and County working together on Lake Joanna, Blue Lake and existing enclaves with stormwater issues such as Lake Nettie Court. She suggested the possibility of incentivizing annexation and cost sharing to make improvements. She further suggested they create a mechanism such as the County creating an assessment with the County providing half the funding and the City providing half. She stated then they would have a mechanism already in place for dealing with various situations. Commissioner Parks expressed support for moving forward with the JPA review. Commissioner Morin asked if the land planning staff could work together on the review rather than the two commissions. Discussion was held regarding City and County staff working together to identify areas of inconsistency. Commissioner Morin suggested setting up regular meetings every two months until an agreement is reached. Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 11 of 12 February 19, 2020  Discussion was held regarding scheduling regular meetings with Commissioner Cole responding they don't know the length of time necessary until staff has the opportunity to assess recommended changes. Commissioner Morin expressed concern regarding the possibility of change over on the Commissions in January. Commissioner Campione confirmed they would start working toward scheduling the next meeting with staff working together. She re-emphasized the County's willingness to do separate ISBA's for individual properties that want to go ahead and move forward in the interim . Mayor Holland confirmed the City Commission will take up consideration of the Pine Meadows agreement. Commissioner Breeden thanked the City for continuing the dialogue. Chairman Campione extended an invitation to the City to attend the Friday dedication of the Groveland Four memorial. She noted all of their families would have representation. ADJOURNMENT: 6:55 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 Clerk for a fee . MICHAEL L. HOLLAND City Clerk Mayor/Commissioner Joint City/County /SBA Meeting Page 12 of 12 February 19, 2020