MINUTES OF MEETING REUNION EAST
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

The Regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Reunion East Community Development District was held Thursday, October 10, 2019 at 1:00 p.m. at the Heritage Crossing Community Center, 7715 Heritage Crossing Way, Reunion, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Mark Greenstein Don Harding John Dryburgh Trudy Hobbs

Chairman
Vice Chairman Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary

Also present were:

George Flint Andrew d' Adesky
Xabier Guerricogoitia Alan Scheerer
John Cruz Rob Stultz

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS

District Manager District Counsel Boyd Engineering Field Manager CWS Security
Yellowstone Landscape

Roll Call

Mr. Flint called the meeting to order, four of the Board members were  present  constituting a quorum.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comment Period
Mr. Flint: Are there any members of the public that would like to provide  comment  to the Reunion East Board? Hearing none, we will move to the next item.

TIDRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of the Minutes of the September 12,
2019 Meeting
Mr. Flint: We have approval of minutes from the September 12th meeting. Did the Board have any comments on those?
Mr. Harding: I think there's some confusion as to who said what, but I don't  think we  need to get into it.

On MOTION by Mr. Harding seconded by Mr. Dryburgh with all in favor, the Minutes of the September 12, 2019 Board of Supervisors Meeting were approved.

Mr. Greenstein: There were no substantive changes.

FOURTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of   Resolution	2020-01	Re­
Setting a Public Hearing for the Purpose of Towing Rules and Policies
Mr. Flint: At the last meeting the Board discussed setting the public hearing and consider the parking and towing policy. Then subsequent to the last meeting, I think Mr.  Goldstein realized he had a conflict with the date that was chosen. He thought it was important that he be there at the hearing and asked that we re-consider changing the date. We tried to coordinate schedules outside of the meeting. The resolution has November 2l5t at 7:00 p.m. in here. However, my recommendation would be to push it, if possible, into December. The week of the week of the 16th•    The Board has to adopt a room rental fees for Heritage Crossing and the Stables related to the MSA and if you are able to push it into December that would allow the Board, at your November meeting, to approve the proposed policy and rates. Then we could  advertise  them together, because the notice requirements for rule hearing are somewhat expensive.
Mr. d'Adesky: So, the 16th is a Monday, but we are just saying that week. So, between
the 16th and the 20th•   I prefer not Friday.
Mr. Greenstein: How's Thursday the 19th?
Mr. d'Adesky: Thursday is great. You guys want it 7:00 p.m., right?
Mr. Greenstein: Yes, I think it should be.
Mr. Flint: Or you could do it a little earlier if you wanted to. Hopefully, it works for
Steve.
Mr. Greenstein: The rate setting hearing I would expect to be more straight forward.
Mr. d'Adesky: You never know.
Mr. Greenstein: I know you never know, but I'm just saying it's not going to be
anywhere near the level of concern that we are going to get from the public  relative  to the parking and towing.
Mr. Flint: Hopefully Mr. Goldstein is available on the 19th•
Mr. d' Adesky: Everybody here is available, so that gives us a quorum.

Mr. Flint: So, if the Board is ok with that we would just change November 2ist to December 19th•

On MOTION by Mr. Dryburgh seconded  by Mr. Greenstein  with all in favor, Resolution 2020-01 Resetting the Public  Hearing  for the Purpose of Towing Rules and Policies for December 19, 2019 at 7:00 p.m., was approved.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Authorization to Set Rule and Rate Hearing
for Use of District Facilities
Mr. Flint: The Rule and Rate Hearing for Use of District Facilities, I would like to have that on the November agenda. That's the room rental rate issue. If you approve the draft policy in November, we can hold that hearing on the same day as the towing. Again as Mr. Greenstein indicated, that shouldn't be a lengthy discussion.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Ratification	of	Proposal	from	GeoPoint
Surveying	to	Provide	Boundary	Survey Services
Mr. Flint: The GeoPoint surveying for the boundary, this is related to the dog park and playground. The land area where the proposed dog park and playground are is owned by  the resort and we were proposing to do an easement agreement that would allow us to construct the playground and the dog park. As part of that, a survey was required  and  it cost $1,200. I agreed  to that, it's a good price for a survey for a commercial situation.

On MOTION by Mr. Harding, seconded  by Mr. Dryburgh with all in favor, the Proposal from GeoPoint Surveying to Provide Boundary Survey services, was ratified.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Playground/Dog	Park
Easement
Mr. Flint: The next item is related to the previous. We did get the survey within the last few days. The survey that was prepared was of the entire parcel. Kingwood was directing the surveyor in this effort.
Mr. Dryburgh: Do we have to pay to have the survey redone so it's accurately reflecting?

Mr. Flint: Well, we have to have that conversation with Mr. Nassar, because when we got the survey I saw that it was the entire parcel. If he wants to give us an easement over the entire parcel, that's fine.
Mr. d' Adesky: We're happy with that.
Mr. Flint: The whole reason for the exercise was that you potentially have the ability to build a home in two locations, and so I suggested they carve those out of the easement and only do the easement on the center. But right now, we've got a legal description of the entire thing. I emailed him yesterday asking for clarification and I have not gotten a response back. Once we get the legal description it's a simple matter on the easement, I think Andrew already has it drafted.
Mr. d' Adesky: Yes, the form isn't the issue, it's really the section in the legal that we
need. I think we've already gotten an authorization, but if you want to just do an authorization to the Chairman and the Vice Chairman to finalize and execute the easement once it's compiled.

On MOTION by Mr. Dryburgh, seconded by Ms. Hobbs, with all in favor, Authorization for Chairman and Vice Chairman to Execute the Easement once Compiled, was approved.

EIGHTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Resolution	2020-02
Declaring Intent to Accept Dedications on the Plat Reunion Village Phase 3
Mr. d' Adesky: The next was Resolution 2020-02 which was just a standard resolution. Anytime there's a plat in Osceola County, they now require any entity that's going to be  accepting dedications to have a resolution showing our intent to accept. Which doesn't mean we actually will accept, it just means we have the intention to accept those subject to our own procedures. It's just really more administrative paperwork that Osceola is making us do. They've asked us to do it, we've looked at the plat and it doesn't seem overly problematic. And, once again, it doesn't really commit us to too much legally.
Mr. Greenstein: Were you able to identify any changes from the original?
Mr. d' Adesky: lfl'm right, this is an update. I don't think there were many at all. Mr. Flint: The location of the resident only gate is not on this plat.
Mr. d'Adesky: Nothing to do with this. So, we would ask for approval here.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein, seconded by Mr. Harding, with all in favor, Resolution 2020-02 Declaring Intent to  Accept Dedications on the Plat Reunion Village Phase 3, was approved.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of   Amended	and Restated
Security Services Provider Agreement with the Reunion Resort & Club of Orlando Master Association
Mr. d' Adesky: Next is the amended and restated Security Services Provider Agreement. This is essentially the older agreement. I think I provided a copy last meeting as well. This meeting it was updated to include certain provisions that were negotiated with Kingwood. Supervisor Harding provided some provisions which I put in there and finalized. Do you have any comments?
Mr. Harding: Mark noticed a couple of things.
Mr. Greenstein: I think it moves us in the right direction. It gets the focus on the things that are important to us, maintaining security at a level that took us a while to achieve. In 7A it refers to the main entry guardhouse. Right now, we have three entry guardhouses that are all staffed 24 hours a day. So, it's not just not one and there will be a fourth with Reunion Village. So, if you don't want to put a number in, you could say staff all entry guard houses and just leave it at that.
Mr. d' Adesky: I guess the issue is if there's a guardhouse. If there's a guardhouse, it should be named.
Mr. Greenstein: The main thing is to indicate it's not just one, it's all entry guardhouses.
Mr. d' Adesky: These are minor. We'll finalize that and compile it and sent it over to them. We can sign it and send it over to them and say look these are the changes. So, we can approve it subject to the changes.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein, seconded by Ms. Hobbs, with all in favor, the Amended and Restated Security Services Provider Agreement with the Reunion Resort & Club of Orlando Master Association, was approved.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Security Services Interlocal
Mr. d' Adesky: The next is the Security Services Interlocal, it's the same thing that was approved at West, it pretty much just says that they consent to you guys entering into a Security

On MOTION by Mr. Harding seconded by Mr. Dryburgh, with all  in favor, the Security Services Interlocal Agreement, was approved.

Services Agreement. Since you guys approved the agreement, you kind of have to approve this one.

ELEVENTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Aquatic	Maintenance
Agreement	with	Applied	Aquatic Management, Inc.
Mr. Scheerer: In your agenda packets the Proposal for Applied Aquatic to provide pond maintenance services for the pond located Patriots landing. The term of the agreement is from 101/19 through 9/30/20. There is no increase during that time frame. It was noted in the previous meeting that they do have and option at the end of this term to increase the contract by 3%. However, they rarely have exercised that, and they will let us now if they choose to exercise it which will in affect the contract so, if the Board so chooses to bid it out.

On MOTION by Mr. Harding seconded by Mr. Greenstein with all in favor, the Aquatic Maintenance Agreement with Applied Aquatic Management, Inc, was approved.

TWELTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Agreement with Grau &
Associates to Provide Auditing Services for the Fiscal Year 2019
Mr. Flint: The next is the agreement with Grau & Associates for the 2019 audit.
Steve Goldstein joined the meeting via phone.
Mr. d' Adesky: Regarding the audit, there's a very limited pool that do this type of audit because it's very specific auditing. We have certain disclosures we need. So, there's certain companies.
Mr. Flint: We've already been through the audit selection process. We ran a notice and
we also mailed it out. There are about five or six firms that do 95% of these. I think only got a couple of responses. The pool is shrinking and it's because the fees are such that a lot of these firms aren't able to make money on it. Grau does the most, they  do over  200 CDD audits.  They're the most experienced. But we did go through that formal bidding process.
Mr. d'Adesky: The contracts are written so they can be year to year. They price several
years out so we lock them in at the rate, but we can terminate them next year if we wanted.

October IO, 2019	Reunion East CDD

Mr. Flint: Ifwe had a problem with this audit we can bid it out again. We are locking in 5 years, but we are only entering into the annual engagements. Any questions on the Grau Agreement? Is there a motion of approve it?

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Mr. Dryburgh with  all in favor the Agreement with Grau & Associates to Provide Auditing Services for the Fiscal Year 2019, was approved.

THIRTEENTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Proposal from Fausnight
Stripe & Line for Cross Walks and Stop Signs
Mr. Flint: Next is the proposal from Fausnight Stripe & Line and, as was discussed in Reunion West, this covers the two four way stop signs that the Board discussed. One in East, one in West, and includes the additional crosswalk in front of the resort. It includes the striping and signage for a crosswalk on Reunion Boulevard. It sounds like a lot, but the decorative poles are probably a $1,000 a piece.
Mr. Scheerer: They are mimicking the way the signs are currently. If you look at the signs in Reunion the black pole, there's a black back plate and there's a base. That totals up to a lot of money.
Mr. Flint: And Fausnight is by far the best contractor out there that does this kind of
work.

On MOTION by Mr. Harding seconded by Mr. Greenstein, with all in favor, the Proposal from Fausnight Stripe & Line for Cross Walks and Stop Signs, was approved.

Mr. Dryburgh: I did have a question. It sounds crazy, but we are doing both East and West in one bill. Do you split it?
Mr. d' Adesky: We split it per the interlocal, it's based on platted units.
Mr. Flint: We have a lot of agreements that are just with one district or the other and then when we pay them, we allocate the funds.

FOURTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion of Keyed Entry at Pools
Mr. Flint: I think this was talked about at a prior meeting and Mr. Dryburgh interfaced with the resort and has some information for the Board.

Mr. Dryburgh: Yes, we got a copy of the costs. I never got the impression that the CDD would want to or have the staff to manage this process.
Mr. Flint: I agree, because I think you want to use a system where someone doesn't have to carry around five different cards. One to get in the front gate, one to get in the water park, one to get in the CDD pool.
Mr. Dryburgh: That's shifting from one spot to another to get their access code.
Mr. Flint: Exactly. So, it would be ideal to use the system compatible with what the resort is using and then hopefully have the resort agree that they would issue them on our behalf. They are issuing them anyway to a lot of folks, and they can control the access on each part.
Mr. Dryburgh: Question, I thought it was $10, this cost us $2 bucks to make, so they're making $8 dollar per card. And if you've got a thousand people, you've got $8,000. It seems to  me we should go back and ask if we could make them $5. Unless we are going to get share of some of that profit will that will reimburse us the cost of the gates.
Mr. Flint: Well, the administration of that is important to us. Mr. Dryburgh: How hard is it, it's all computer based.
Mr. Flint: It's not difficult, we do it for a lot of communities out of our office.
Mr. d' Adesky: It still takes time to set up and administer. We have other districts where they charge $25 per entry key.
Mr. Dryburgh: Are they using it as a profit?
Mr. Flint: No, you can't make a profit as a government entity. Mr. d' Adesky: No, I'm saying the District is charging $25.
Mr. Flint: In this case if you are going to have the resort issuing the card, you may decide to allow the resort to keep the revenue as payment for their administrative costs. And it would all be the same card, it's just they have different access rights on different cards, depending on who the person is.
Mr. Greenstein: I don't have a problem endorsing the resort managing on our behalf, but
$10 is more than reasonable for the administrative fee. If it was $25 bucks then maybe we'd be talking about it because we do have a lot of residents, but I think $10 is reasonable.
Mr. Dryburgh: But they're going to have to issue cards to each one of the residents as
well.
Mr. d' Adesky: This could be some work.

Mr. Greenstein: Well, if you look at our cards now, I'm walking around with a member card that's from tlie year of the flood. Which card would it be that gives you  the  universal access? Is it the prox card? Could the prox card be coded too allow access for the pool?
Mr. Cruz: No, it would be the RFID card.
Mr. Greenstein: So, it would be a different cards? The card that is used for the gates, the prox card, cannot be coded to serve the same purpose?
Mr. Cruz: Correct. The prox card is only able to be used at the gates.
Mr. Greenstein: At least this one card would give a resident, if they were a  member, access to other controlled facilities within the resort complex as well as the CDD control to the facilities. As long as it's one card that gets them everywhere, that's good. The fact that it has nothing to do with the gates for traffic control isn't a big deal.
Mr. Scheerer: They already have the equipment in place to manage that because the email says ifwe wanted to do it, it would costs us and additional $7,500.
Mr. Greenstein: Well this it, no problem at all with the $10. Mr. Flint: We don't know, the resort hasn't agreed.
Mr. Harding: So, this card would get them into the water park too?
Mr. Flint: Depending on who the individual is they can code it to have different access
rights.
Mr. d' Adesky: The water park is not treated as a CDD asset.
Mr. Flint: I'm assuming if someone is a member they can have access to the water park,
and it will allow access to the community pools. Right? If they weren't a member, then it  wouldn't allow access to the water parks.
Mr. Harding: You are getting into the CDD pools, but they couldn't get into the water
park.
Mr. Dryburgh: I'm assuming at this time that we would need to tell Kevin to get a final
proposal?
Mr. Flint: Yes and we need to price out each of the pools because this doesn't include electrical, so we are going to have to get that.
Mr. Dryburgh: Yes, it does.
Mr. Scheerer: We need to find out more about how they are going to energize that. How are they going get the information to the lock? So, we need that information. There's power on

the outside of each building, but all the electrical  panels are on the outside of the building. That's a hidden cost that we are not aware of based on the information that is provided. So, maybe we can get together for the look at it.
Mr. Greenstein: Thank you John.
Mr. Flint: So, we will re-agenda this for next month with some additional material.
Alright, it will be nice to make some progress on that.

FIFTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion of Landscape Maintenance­
Added
Mr. Flint: We added another item which is discussion of landscape maintenance services. There's no backup for this item, it's a discussion item. For the Board members that were here for the Reunion West meeting, you may have heard the discussion but the reason it's on here as a discussion item is the resort previously had terminated their agreement with Yellowstone for landscaping the resort properties. More recently the property owners, or Master Association gave notice to Yellowstone to terminate their agreement effective December Pt. The relevance of that  is that all the parties, both CDDs, the resort, the Master Association, and one of the development entities all jointly bid landscape maintenance. We selected them through an  evaluation  committee comprised of representatives of each one of those entities, and we also entered into a lease agreement for the maintenance facility where Yellowstone is currently housed. And each entity entered into a separate lease agreement, so they have separate obligation to pay a prorated portion of that lease. The fact that the resort and Master Association now will not be utilizing Yellowstone, obviously there's an issue there where they are obligated for two more years to pay lease payments on that facility. Our obligation has not changed as far as how much we are obligated to pay going forward. I think the discussion at the last Board meeting was there wasn't anything for the CDD to do at this point, but I will defer to the Board for discussion on this.
Mr. Dryburgh: Who owns that building? Mr. Flint: I think city communities owns it. Mr. Dryburgh: So, it's a private entity?
Mr. d' Adesky: Yes, we are renting space in a building. There is a contract.
Mr. Dryburgh: Is there any way that can get out of the contract?
Mr. d' Adesky: We entered into separate contracts. So, essentially we are liable for our portions of that. That is separate and individual, it's not joint with other parties, so we are not

liable for any of their share of anything. We did enter into under the concept that we would be joint bidding the broader concept. In terms of a liability we are only liable for our portion of that. That hasn't been modified. It was only brought up for practical purposes because there would be an issue if the POA, or the club tried to put another vendor in there at the same time as our vendors already in there. But that once again that's really their issue because they have separate contracts. So that's not our issue to be resolving their contract issues.
Mr. Flint: The decision was made that the parties would control the lease in case we ever changed vendors, we would control the location of the maintenance. And that's why we entered into the lease agreement and not Yellowstone.
Mr. Greenstein: At the Reunion West meeting, I kind of polled the members and asked if any of the members had any concerns with Yellowstone as our contractor, or our landscaping contractor. And we had no intent to terminate their engagement with us in the current term, and we have no reason to extract ourselves from the lease with city communities for use of that maintenance hub building. I don't know what the master and kingwood assessments  were, whether they were really familiar with the terms of that lease and what the financial obligations are. That's outside our scope. So, as far as CDD landscape support operations go, we're status  quo. We have no reason to take any action.
Mr. d' Adesky: And George said something very important during the last meeting which I'm going to repeat, even if we weren't satisfied we would have to go through and RFP process. We cannot just do what the POA and club did and just change it. We are a public entity and have to go through that process due to the size of the contract.

SIXTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS
Attorney

Staff Reports

Mr. d' Adesky: Just a couple of things, I'm going to do basic updates. Obviously I'm working with some development issues, working through the plat, just reviewing  that  for Reunion Village. There hasn't been much motion on the unexchanged  bond issue,  although we do expect some conversations to occur in the next month and we'll see where that goes. One last thing I want to note is, there is a lot of issues that Kingwood has had to catch up to speed to and I know they came into a lot of different issues that perhaps they didn't understand fully. One issue that we are going to have to talk with them about is obviously the turnover of certain irrigation

assets that were funded by CDD bond funding. Those have been kind of delinquent and held out, even though they are funded by the CDD. So, we are going to need that to discuss that in the coming months. Just bringing that to the Board's attention. That's all I have.

Engineer
Mr. Flint: Xabier, Engineer's Report?
Mr. Guerricogoitia: Thanks George. Good afternoon Board members. So, we've prepared plans for the entry approval on the Boulevard. And this also includes adding additional parking and sidewalk at the mail kiosk at the southernmost area in Reunion West.
Mr. Greenstein: So, this all West?
Mr. Flint: Yes, but it's a shared expense.
Mr. Guerricogoitia: Yes, correct. All the improvements here are on the West side. And again, you have the guardhouse on Tradition Boulevard, and you have additional parking and sidewalk. We are here to answer any questions that you may have.
Mr. Dryburgh: How many feet are you adding?
Mr. Guerricogoitia: It's just a couple of feet, it's not very much.
Mr. Dryburgh: How many additional?
Mr. Guerricogoitia: Roughly just looking at it, to me it looks like it's probably 60 to 70 feet, so an additional 3 car lengths.
Mr. Dryburgh: Can you not go farther?
Mr. Guerricogoitia: Potentially. I don't know what the direction was given for how long the improvement needed to be. That's certainly something we can look at and see if there are any issues with that.
Mr. Greenstein: You can have a lot of cars in that left-hand lane.  Worst-case  scenario let's say cars are lined up on that left side all the way down.  When  you are driving  up, you get to a point where the road narrows, and the people in the left lane are encroaching on your right lane and you can't get by. So, the whole idea was just to widen it so that we can we can get past that choke point. Once you get that, you would have free access no matter how many cars are backed up.
Mr. Dryburgh: Are you saying with this extension there will no longer be any choke points?

Mr. Greenstein: Right because if you look at the roadway, the way  the road was laid out  it narrowed at that particular point. Where they are building like the Eagle Trace construction entrance, there is a cut in the road and there's a driveway. From that point forward is where the widening is occurring because when you go a little bit past that, that's where you would get choked out. So hopefully by just widening it we'll be able to continue on through.  In theory, there should be no backup in the right lane because everybody has a prox card and the gates are just going up. It's only cars in the left that are getting inspected by an officer. We only did what we felt we needed to do to eliminate the choke.
Mr. Flint: Thank you Xabier.

District Manager's Report
Action Items Lists
Mr. Flint: The action items, MSA is complete. It has been signed  by the resort. I have it  in the signature file for the Chairman to execute. The next thing we will need to focus on is the rates, the room rental rates, and the fanning the roof. Mainly it is items we've agreed to do in advance of that going into effect. The rule hearing for parking will be December 19th•    The small retention pond and Patriots landing what's the status of that?
Mr. Scheerer: I met with Jarvis last week. He thought he could get to it the next week,
unfortunately his schedule is still tied up on a couple of other jobs. Hopefully  he'll  get started the pt of November and we'll get that project off the books.
Mr. Flint: The Dog Park playground, Steve, before you got on I explained to the Board that we engaged a surveyor to prepare a legal description, but the legal description we got was  for the entire parcel. I've asked Kingwood if they want the easement across the entire parcel, or what we need to do with that. And I copied you on that email.
Mr. Goldstein: I got it.
Mr. d' Adesky: We'll take it if they want to give us the entire parcel.
Mr. Flint: I haven't gotten a response back yet from Richard on that.
Mr. Goldstein: Ok, whatever works. Either way, it doesn't really matter. Whatever  Richard wants to do.
Mr. Flint: And then the cross walk in front of the resort you all improved in the Fausnight
Agreement. Any other items?

Mr. Harding: You mentioned this whole thing with the concern about the irrigation thing.
Mr. d' Adesky: I'll get back to that. I will circle back to around to it, I have to talk with Kingwood about it.

Approval of Check Register
Mr. Flint: The check register for the month of September, does the Board have any questions on the check register?

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Mr. Harding, with all in favor, the Check Register as presented, was approved.

Balance Sheet and Income Statement
Mr. Flint: You have the balance, the unaudited financial statements through the end of August. Are there any questions on those? Hearing none,

Status of Direct Bill Assessments
Mr. Flint: All the direct bills are current that are due.

SEVENTEENTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Other Business
Mr. Flint: Is there any other items the Board wanted to discuss that was not on  the agenda?

EIGHTEENTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor's Request
Mr. Flint: Are there any Supervisor's requests? Hearing none, we will move to adjourn.

NINETEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS
This item was not discussed.

TWENTIETH ORDER OF BUSINESS

Next Meeting Date

Adjournment

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Mr. Dryburgh, with all in favor the meeting adjourned.

Secretary/Assistant Secretary