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 on Thursday, October 8, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. via Zoom video conferencing, pursuant to Executive Orders 20-52, 20-69 and 20-91 (as extended by Executive Order 20-112) issued by Governor DeSantis on March 9, 2020, March 20, 2020, April I, 2020 and April 29, 2020 respectively, and pursuant to Section 120.54(5)(b)2., Florida Statutes.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Mark Greenstein Don Harding Trudy Hobbs Steven Goldstein John Dryburgh
Also present were: George Flint
Jan Carpenter
Steve Boyd Alan Scheerer Tricia Adams Victor Vargas John Cruz Zac Johnson
Brittany Eveler Residents

FffiST ORDER OF BUSINESS

Chairman  Vice Chairman
Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary

District Manager District Counsel District Engineer Field Manager GMS
CWS Security CWS Security Encore
Nvision Development

Roll Call

Mr. Flint called the meeting to order at 1:15 p.m. and called the roll. A quorum was present.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comment Period
Mr. Flint: This is an opportunity for any members of the public to provide comment on anything on the agenda or not on the agenda that you would like to bring to the Board's attention. I will be asking the Board to add an item right after the approval of the minutes dealing with the signalization of Osceola Polk Line Road (532) and Reunion Boulevard. Brittany Eveler is here to

address the Board on that issue. Are there any members of the public who would like to provide comment on anything else?
Mr. Johnson: On the east side there are two billboards. The billboard company asked if they could pay for certain maintenance around those billboards. It is CDD owned property that is impacting the view line of those billboards. So, they asked that we get with you. They will pay for it. They wanted to get your permission or to work with you.
Mr. Flint: Yes. We have been communicating with the attorney for the billboard company.
We provided them copies of conservation easements from the Water Management District.
Mr. Johnson: Okay.
Mr. Flint: However, we felt it was incumbent upon them to do the research to determine the level of maintenance can be done in those conservation areas and discuss with the regulatory agencies. I don't know that the CDD should be bearing that expense.
Mr. Johnson: I will get back to them. I didn't know that they were in direct contact with
you.
Mr. Flint: Dan has been involved as well and Steve Boyd. Mr. Johnson: Alright.
Mr. Flint: I would be happy to bring it back to the Board if they can do the research and
determine that maintenance is acceptance to the regulatory agencies to sign off and then maintain it at their expense, I don't know that we would object. I think they need to do that work.
Mr. Johnson: Okay.
Mr. Flint: Are there any other public comments? Hearing none, is the Board okay with adding a discussion item. I sent some background information to you with a memo from the representative of the developer across the street from the main entrance of Reunion.
*Mr. Harding joined the meeting.
Mr. Flint: At the intersection of Reunion Boulevard and 532, the CDD requested signaling, so it can be a three-way intersection. The developer on the south side of the intersection was required by the County to modify that signal to a three-way intersection. To meet certain setback requirements, the pole at the northeast comer of that intersection would have to be placed on Reunion East CDD property, because it's outside of the road right-of-way (ROW). So, I asked Brittany Eveler of Nvision Development, who made the request, to make a presentation to the Board. Brittany, are you ready to proceed?

Ms. Eveler: Thank you for giving me time to present this. Obviously, we would prefer to not have to impede on any of your property. Unfortunately, we have been through the ringer with the County. It's probably taken a year to get this intersection approved. They have essentially come to us and said, "You have two choices. Both of them are on your property unfortunately." Just to give you a brief breakdown of the intersection, on the south side, we have an abundance of utilities. You may be aware, that there is an existing pole there, a Gulfstream easement, Duke easement and Toho water line. We've exhausted all possibilities oflocating a pole on that south side, with the addition of a turn lane and maximizing the width of the road we are requiring for this development. We've gone to the county and they agreed. We are keeping the pole on the southeast side that serves the traffic heading east. It may be easier if I explain it in more detail. I'm not sure ifwe have that ability. Reunion's property is on the north side at the intersection and ours is on the south side. Everything has been approved except for one signal pole. It has been a challenge to even get the rest of those poles approved, but we worked to get that done. The challenge we are having is we prefer to not touch any of the poles you provided, as it is costly to replace signal poles. I know you guys understand that. Unfortunately, the county is making it a requirement for us and is taking it out of our hands. So, we want to coordinate and find a way to best place this pole without an abundance of construction at your entrance and reduce any impacts to both you and us. So, we have two options, which I am presenting to you today. The problem is on this northeast side, we have a force mainline and a 24-inch water mainline owned by Toho that are running through this piece of property in the Osceola County ROW. The dashed line is the start of Reunion property. So right now, we don't have an option to put the pole on the south side with the distance between the curb and force main. It's not wide enough. There is a maximum mast armlength requirement. We would exceed that if we placed that over here. So, the only other option is to either place it in between the force main and water main or north of the water main. The problem with placing it in between is that Toho typically requires a 10-foot distance between any structure and the edge of their waterline. They allowed us to reduce that to 6-feet, but they won't go any less than that. The distance between the two is too short to meet that requirement. So, we would either have to move either the water main or force main and place the pole someplace in the middle, or we could place the pole north, approximately 6-feet north of the water main, but it would cross a couple of feet into Reunion's property. So, our first request is whether we can place it approximately 3 to 4-feet on the property, which is what this is currently showing. Does anyone have any questions or should I keep explaining the other option?

Mr. Dryburgh: No questions. Mr. Greenstein: Keep going. Mr. Goldstein: No questions.
Mr. Harding: You're good. It's not rocket science. This is easy to understand.
Ms. Eveler: Okay good. I explained it enough to where hopefully it makes sense. The other option is relocating the water main. We are trying to move it as little as possible just to meet the requirements of Toho and Osceola County. We would have to move that 6 to 7-feet north with these 45-degree angle type pieces. Toho requires an easement. In addition to the 6-feet from the structure, there is a 10-foot easement requirement from the edge of their water main, that would cross into your property. So, in addition to construction in that area, it would require an easement of about 8 to 9-feet. Does that make sense?
Mr. Harding: Yes. It sounds like we need to get on our property. Mr. Dryburgh: It sounds like we have to talk about it.
Mr. Flint: Do you have a satellite photo? Ms. Eveler: Is this a better image?
Mr. Flint: Not yet.
Mr. Goldstein: Do you have any pictures from the ground to the area, by any chance? Ms. Eveler: Sure. This is the comer in question.
Mr. Harding: Behind the light fixture.
Ms. Eveler: Yes. We have to coordinate how that light fixture would come into play. I don't think the light fixture would affect it. The County requested that we straighten this crosswalk. For whatever reason, they don't like the diagonal. It depends on where the signal goes to where that crosswalk piece will come into play.
Mr. Harding: Okay. What type of signal will it look like when it's built? Ms. Eveler: Design-wise?
Mr. Harding: Yes.
Ms. Eveler: It will be similar to these block type poles. We don't want anything cheap looking. We are not even allowed, even if we wanted to, to have the string type poles.
Mr. Harding: Over the main entrance to Reunion?
Ms. Eveler: I will show you exactly what it would look like. We asked if we could just go straight across, but Osceola County said no.
Mr. Greenstein: So, this arm would control traffic going west on 532?

Ms. Eveler: It would control traffic coming out of the south entrance. Mr. Harding: Even though it's not seen directly from your location. Mr. Goldstein: It's the wrong angle.
Mr. Greenstein: It's at a 45-degree angle. Ms. Eveler: Yes.
Mr. Harding: It will block off, to some extent, the entrance of Reunion.
Mr. Greenstein: It would hang over it.
Ms. Eveler: It would hang over it, but it wouldn't be impeding anything against your entrance.
Mr. Goldstein: What height would those be at? The same as the current lights?
Ms. Eveler: I would assume. I don't have that in front of me. Whatever was required by the county, which should be what is existing.
Mr. Harding: It's going to look ugly.
Mr. Dryburgh: Exactly.
Mr. Greenstein: Notice where the existing arm is now, between the curb and the sidewalk on the existing pole. Isn't that approximately the location of the Toho pipe?
Ms. Eveler: Yes. The force main line and the existing pole are within the 6-foot limit.
What I'm not sure of is when the force main and light pole were added.
Mr. Harding: Didn't we reach out to your company when we were putting the signage in, saying that we would like to have something from you guys as well? Wasn't that part of the discussion?
Ms. Eveler: If that happened, I'm unaware of it. Obviously, we would've loved to
coordinate with you guys and the County. I don't know if the timing just didn't line up or whatnot, but I don't believe that happened.
Mr. Boyd: When we wanted to move forward with the signal, those bases were already in place from way back in 2002/2003. So, we just basically completed it.
Mr. Harding: I seem to remember Board discussion. I would have to look back at it, but we were trying to reduce our personal expenses and share them with the guy across the street. I thought that happened, but maybe you're right. Maybe we never made that conversation happen. Mr. Greenstein: That's on a related item, but not on this one specifically. In fact, Steve,
just for our own reference purposes, when did we actually install this light?
Mr. Boyd: I would have to go back and look, but it was about two years ago.

Mr. Greenstein: I was guessing two to three. I know nothing was going on, on the south side, the Nvision property.
Mr. Boyd: That's correct.
Mr. Greenstein: There was no indication that anything was going to be done. In fact, I don't know if it changed hands during this time or not. Obviously, we are not going to resolve this right at this moment. I think, Steve, from an engineering standpoint, has to study this and give us a recommendation. It does seem extreme to have a pole that far away on the north side to control traffic coming from the south side, but I also appreciate the fact that we have utilities running through here. I can see that the pole was already there. The poles were already in place. We just finished it off.
Mr. Dryburgh: I wonder why it couldn't be in the median itself.
Ms. Eveler: Again, we asked that question and I guess it's a no for all of Osceola County. They do not want it in the median. I don't know if it's a safety issue or what, but they have given us a hard no on that.
Mr. Greenstein: Yeah, but moving Toho pipes seems extreme. Mr. Dryburgh: That can't be cheap.
Mr. Greenstein: We have some concerns. We will talk to you about it another time concerning the property on your side of the street, the south side, that is actually our property. What is 10-feet, Steve? What footage do we have on the other side of the roadway?
Mr. Boyd: From the roadway to their property. Mr. Scheerer: To the sidewalk.
Mr. Greenstein: So, it's basically the sidewalk or the intersection from the sidewalk is
ours.
Mr. Scheerer: Sidewalk to curb, I believe. Mr. Greenstein: Okay.
Mr. Flint: It's not actually our property, but we are maintaining it. Mr. Greenstein: Yes. We have the agreement with the county.
Mr. Dryburgh: Perhaps that can be wrapped into this discussion.
Mr.  Greenstein:  Forget  the  financial  aspect  of  it  for  the  moment.  Strictly  from an
engineering standpoint, to be efficient and do what is best for all parties, how do we evaluate this, so if there are any negative impacts, we identify them upfront, deal with them and refactor it in. We knew at some point  there  would  be development  across the street, but we didn't anticipate

your dilemma, as far as being able to put in the fourth piece to make it a four-way intersection from a three way.
Mr. Dryburgh: We didn't realize an entrance would be right across the street from ours.
Mr. Greenstein: Steve, as the engineer, what do you recommend?
Mr. Boyd: Let me get with Brittany to discuss it. I would like to talk to the county myself. The signal is on the left side or the west side. It looks like you are modifying that mast arm as well. Brittany, is that correct?
Ms. Eveler: Yes, that's correct. We prefer to keep all of the existing poles, but we can't place a pole on the south side. So, the requirement is to put one here for the traffic to serve the community. Steve, I would love to get on the phone with you and the county to see if we can work something out. This has been a long process, and we are honestly at our wits end. We are under construction, under development, and it's a requirement. I'm sure you understand that. We can start on our turn lanes before we have a functioning intersection. We have to get this plan finalized in the timeframe that it's going to take. From that point of finalizing the location to actually having these signals, is probably six months or more. We are trying to have some retail parcels ready in April. So, we are strict on the timeframe, if we can get this coordinated as soon as we can. We want to work with you guys, but we are struggling to find a balance between Osceola County and all of the utilities.
Mr. Boyd: Can you plot the location of the existing master arm on the south side of the road on this drawing, send it to me and I will get on the phone with you?
Ms. Eveler: Absolutely. I can have my civil engineers work on this as well and they can walk through the plan and we can talk about it at any length that you wish.
Mr. Boyd: I'm just wondering if there's a way we can shift it east. Then you can project
it diagonally out onto the road to have it provide the same function. The attorney probably proposed that already.
Ms. Eveler: In this location?
Mr. Boyd: Yes.
Ms. Eveler: Osceola County said no. So, we can get on the phone with our Civil Engineers and talk through it. They have been going through this process for probably over a year now. I would love to get on the phone with you to talk through this.
Mr. Flint: Rather than trying to negotiate a non-agenda item, maybe you want to have the
engineer work with Brittany, but also delegate authority to you or another Board Member in the

interim. I'm not saying to make a final decision, but maybe to the extent that Board input is necessary, you can do that. Mark can do that as Chairman. That way, we can get this moving. Because I don't know that a decision is going to be made at the meeting right now.
Mr. Greenstein: No. That's why I went down that road. I don't believe we can actually act on this right now. It's going to take an engineering report. I will put a small "r" on that report, if you know what I mean, but there has to be a recommendation. If it does require revisiting this project with the County and we can help in some way, then I'm all for it, because they are not taking the practical approach here. As far as the saving grace over this project, does someone want to make a motion to delegate me to work with the Engineer on this matter?

On MOTION by Ms. Hobbs seconded by Mr. Dryburgh with all in favor authorizing the Chairman to work with the District Engineer, Nvision and the County to install a signal at the intersection of Reunion Boulevard and 532 was approved.

Mr. Flint: Thanks Brittany.
Ms. Eveler: Thanks. I appreciate your time. Mr. Greenstein: I'm optimistic, Brittany.
Ms. Eveler: I hope so. It is better to always be friendly with our neighbors. We want to make sure you are happy and whatever we need to do within that 8-feet, just let me know and I will see what I can do to help.
Mr. Greenstein: Sounds good.

Ratification of Right of Entry Permit with Duke Energy (Item 4)
Mr. Flint: Duke Energy requested a Right of Entry Permit that I executed for their project on S. Old Lake Wilson Road and 532. Alan, I think you met with them and talked with them. Correct?
Mr. Scheerer: It is right on the comer where all of the utilities are located. They need
access to that area. I guess they are doing some additional work there and prep work in advance of widening 532 east and S. Old Lake Wilson Road.
Mr. Flint: They are not going to encroach?
Mr. Scheerer: No.
Mr. Flint: There are no long-term impacts. They just need to get on our property to do certain work. It's pretty standard.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Mr. Dryburgh with all in favor the Right of Entry Permit with Duke Energy was ratified.

TIDRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of the Minutes of the September
1O, 2020 Meeting
Mr. Flint: Are there any additions, deletions, or corrections to the September 10, 2020 minutes?
Mr. Greenstein: On Page 18, in the middle of the page, it says, "I think we need to have a
discussion with the Master Association and with Cathy." I have no idea who Cathy is. It should be Anthony Carl. I'm good with the minutes.
Mr. Flint: Are there any other comments?
Mr. Harding: There are a few other minor changes. They are the right comments, just the wrong people making them.
Mr. Greenstein: If the intent is there, we are okay.
Mr. Harding: The intent is okay.
Mr. Flint: If there are no other corrections, we need a motion to approve the minutes as amended.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Mr. Harding with all in favor the minutes of the September 10, 2020 meeting were approved as amended.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS

This item was discussed.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS

Ratification of Right of Entry Permit with Duke Energy

Discussion	of	November	Meeting Scheduling

Mr. Flint: We placed this item on the agenda, because next month, November 12th, Reunion West has a Landowner Election. Reunion East doesn't have Landowner Elections anymore because you are fully transitioned to General Election resident control. We have one more Landowner Election in Reunion West. Because there is only a half hour between the start of that Landowner Election and this meeting, and we already announced Reunion West's Landowner Election and it's been advertised, it's not likely that we will be in a position at 1:00
p.m. to start the Reunion East meeting. So, I would like to ask the Board to consider either moving your meeting later in the afternoon or to another day, if that would work for the Board.

Mr. Greenstein: Just so you know, we will be back to in person appearances in November.
Mr. Dryburgh: I'm okay with moving it to later in the day.
Mr. Harding: How late?
Mr. Flint: It's hard to tell. I expect there will be some individual landowner participation and selection, because there has been some dialogue and discussion about representation on the Board. I don't think it's going to be an 8-hour meeting like we had that one year.
Mr. Dryburgh: Would it be better to have it before the meeting, so that ours is completed before you start the Reunion West meeting.
Mr. Flint: There's another meeting at 12:00 p.m. As long as you were done by noon, that would work.
Mr. Dryburgh: So, we either choose a time we know we can start in the morning or start
in the afternoon, depending on how late your meeting runs.
Mr. Flint: You might be better off if you think you would finish in an hour, like at 11:00
or 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Dryburgh: I would go with 11:00 a.m.
Mr. Harding: 10:00 a.m. would be good.
Mr. Goldstein: I would rather meet in the morning than later in the afternoon. Ms. Hobbs: I do too.
Mr. Dryburgh: What time? 10:30 a.m. or 11:00 a.m.?
Ms. Hobbs: 10:30 a.m. Then we can cover everything.
Mr. Harding: That's fine. Mr. Goldstein: I'm good. Mr. Greenstein: That works. Mr. Dryburgh: Sounds good.
Mr. Flint: So, we need a motion to change the November meeting date to 10:30 a.m.

On MOTION by Mr. Dryburgh seconded by Mr. Goldstein with all in favor changing the November meeting to November 12, 2020 at 10:30 a.m. was approved.

SIXTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Resolution	2021-01
Approving Dedications Contained in the Proposed Reunion Village Phase 3 Replat

Reunion East COD	October 8, 2020

Mr. Flint: Resolution 2021-01 approves the dedications contained in the proposed Reunion Village Phase 3 replat. The original plat was recorded for Reunion Village. My understanding is that the replating section of that plat is going to reduce the number of lots in that section from 50 to 43. Some of the parcels have been reconfigwed slightly, but it doesn't change who is responsible for what. I think there's a recreation tract in there. All of those don't change with this replat, although I think they are reconfigured slightly. Zac, I don't know if you have any more information for the Board?
Mr. Johnson: No. You said it right. It was originally 52 lots, but now it's 43 because of how the houses lay out on the lots. We had to modify some of the comer lots. It has a slight impact on some other portions of property that we previously dedicated to the District, but nothing material.
Ms. Carpenter: This Board probably hasn't seen many of these resolutions. This is a relatively new requirement of Osceola County and a couple of the counties that every entity that signs the plat or has easements or property on the plat, has to sign a resolution so they know there are authorized signers. It's pretty common.
Mr. Flint: Jan, correct me, but the plat itself doesn't constitute the conveyance. It does say it would be conveyed separately by a separate warranty deed.
Ms. Carpenter: Yes. It's drafted well. We reviewed  it.
Mr. Greenstein: That seems pretty straightforward.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Mr. Dryburgh with all in favor Resolution 2021-01 Approving Dedications Contained in the Proposed Reunion Village Phase 3 Replat was adopted.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS

Review	and	Discussion	of	Security Assessment Report (Closed Session)

Mr. Flint: We are reviewing and discussing some issues. The Board previously asked for a Security Assessment Report to be prepared for the Sheriff's Office to do an assessment. I think security was getting some proposals for certain items. This is one of the very limited circumstances where the Board could have discussions outside of the Sunshine. The reason that is the case is because when you start talking about things like cameras, locations and hours of operation for security, we want all of those taking place in the public, especially if someone has other motives that may not be pure. That's going to provide them information that we don't necessarily want. So, what we have planned is any members of the public that aren't Board

Members or staff, we are going to ask them to wait in the waiting room. Once this discussion is complete, we can reconvene the regular meeting and move everyone back into the Zoom meeting. Jan, is there anything else that you want to add?
Ms. Carpenter: No. Thanks.
The closed session commenced with the Board, District Mana ger, Assistant District Manager, Field Manager, District Counsel and Security. All other attendees left the meeting. At the conclusion of the closed session, all attendees returned.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Ms. Hobbs with all in favor the purchase of security cameras subject to IT review in an amount not-to-exceed $22,000 was approved.

EIGHTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Attorney
Ms. Carpenter: We had some questions about golf carts on CDD roads that the Board discussed last month. We understand that the answer we provided, legally, isn't the answer everyone wanted to hear, so we have been exploring with the Sheriff and the county other potential options. We should have something out shortly, but have not made any progress on finding alternatives.
Mr. Dryburgh: Does that mean putting out something to all Reunion property owners regarding golf cards on public roads?
Ms. Carpenter: Yes.
Mr. Dryburgh: Okay.
Ms. Carpenter: I know it wasn't the answer anyone wanted so we started reaching out to the Sheriff, some of the other county people and checking all of the various places where it's been approved in the county to see if there is any wiggle room. We have not been able to find much, so we are ready to put out something.
Mr. Dryburgh: As I recall, that requires all of the carts to be licensed and all of the drivers to be licensed. Correct?
Mr. Harding: Have those carts been properly road equipped.
Ms. Carpenter: Yes. It falls under a different statute than the traditional golf cart community statute. The sheriff indicated without us even asking, that they issue citations often for golf carts on roads. They apparently look for this. We didn't want to point out specifically,

but if they start getting calls about the improper use, they will be ticketing regularly. It's a concern for the danger for everyone.
Mr. Dryburgh: Mark mentioned that he wanted to reach out to Reunion to make sure that
they weren't surprised by this and they would have time to take action. I'm sure that's happened at least somewhat.
Mr. Harding: They have been told a number of times, John.
Mr. Dryburgh: Then there shouldn't be as much reason to delay it. I agree.
Mr. Harding: They are on the HOA Board. It's not like they won't know it when the notice goes out.
Mr. Dryburgh: Yesterday I saw people teaching their 10 to 11-year-olds how to drive a
golf cart.
Ms. Carpenter: That's incredible. We will get it out. We know that isn't what everyone wanted as an answer, but it doesn't look like we can fmd any other exemptions nor has the county been able to come up with other exemptions.
Mr. Dryburgh: Okay.
Ms. Carpenter: Those are the main things we are working on this month. I know there is a potential bond issue that Encore is talking about coming up, and we have a couple of preliminary items for that.

Engineer
Mr. Boyd: The only item that I have is to follow up with what Jan said. We prepared a Preliminary First Supplemental Engineer's Cost Report for the upcoming bond issue. It doesn't look like it's on your agenda today. I prepared that and sent it out. That's the only item I have to report on.·
Ms. Carpenter: George, for the Board that hasn't been through a bond issue, the process for a bond issue is that Reunion had an Engineer's Report that basically describes the project, what is being built by the CDD. There is a project that consists of all of the different infrastructure throughout Reunion. So, if any new bond issue is going to be issued, the District Engineer prepares a report for that specific area and shows how the elements of the project in the new area match what's been built in the other areas. Once that project is defined for water, roads, infrastructure, whatever the elements are and the costs are put together, then an Assessment Methodology is designed. Again, it's based on the same methodology that everybody else in Reunion had their assessments based on. It takes that cost, breaks it off and turns in the
13

assessments that can be levied on the area to pay the bonds back. That is the part of the process that you'll see, starting with approving the Engineer's Report, approving an Assessment Methodology Report and beginning the process to levy assessments if they are needed on the parcels. When I say "needed" it's because the parcels already have assessments. We have to look at whether those assessment liens are valid or whether new ones need to come out of the bonds or refinancing old bonds.
Mr. Flint: This impacts the Spectrum project. The existing owner of those projects desires
to pay off the existing debt and then reissues new debt. So, once that payoff occurred, then the District, if you approved it, would look at going back through the process of issuing new bonds for village and Spectrum. Only those landowners would be subject to that lien and the repayment of those bonds. At next month's meeting, you should have the Engineer's Report and Assessment Methodology. We can talk about that item more at the November meeting. Is there anything else, Steve?
Mr. Boyd: That's all I have.

District Manager's Report
Action Items Lists
Mr. Flint: The first item is the irrigation turnover. Jan?
Ms. Carpenter: We had discussions again with Kingwood's Counsel and Counsel from both CDDs. They have now offered to draft an Operation Agreement. We talked over what our terms would be. They agreed to put together an initial draft. They are still talking about cooperating and getting this resolved. The one issue that we had a stumbling block with was on the District's charging of fees and how the water system works. It sounds like in concept, we agreed to basic terms. We are hoping to get a draft in the next couple of weeks and will start pushing them to get that moving. So far, it's all cooperative. I think the basic terms have been agreed to. It's just getting it in print and making sure it will work.
Mr. Greenstein: That's promising.
Ms. Carpenter: It is. It's a good firm to work with. They understand what we are dealing with and everyone is pushing to get it done. We will keep you posted.
Mr. Greenstein: Great. Thank you.
Mr. Flint: Item 2 is the allocation of 532 costs. This item was discussed earlier in the meeting. The Chair was delegated responsibility for some of those communications. Maybe that item can be broached at least with the landowner across the street.

Mr. Greenstein: Absolutely.
Ms. Carpenter: Steve, have you talked to the county? The county's biggest problem was that they didn't have jurisdiction of the property on the south side, but they have jurisdiction of the road improvements and the lights, so they can impose some of the costs on those southern landowners. I will make some calls to the ones who said it was a hurdle to ask for their help.
Mr. Greenstein: That would be good because they share that intersection directly across
the street. We have been hoping for this opportunity.
Ms. Carpenter: The County has a new form that they are using for road improvements. George just sent one to me for another District. It could be a good opening perhaps to change our form a little to see if we can get some help. So, we can look at the potentially ugly light as something that may help.
Mr. Greenstein: Start with them and work our way down the street. Ms. Carpenter: Right.
Mr. Flint: Alan, do you want to give an update on the implementation of the signage?
Mr. Scheerer: Yes. At a prior meeting, they approved the Proposal from Fausnight Stripe & Line (Fausnight) to install no parking signs throughout the rest of the community. Fausnight is currently in the process of installing survey stakes painted orange along with some flagging. The stake is marked for signs in the proposed locations. Once all of those have been installed, Tricia and I will meet with Fausnight to review those locations. Those survey stakes were installed for the purposes of not only identifying where the signposts will go, but also when they call for locates, so they will know the exact location of the locates. They are currently finishing up Reunion West and moving on to Re\,llllon East. We hope to have that all done in the next couple of weeks. The signposts have been received. They are being cut to size and powder coated for installation upon the locates being completed. So, we hope within the next couple of weeks, give or take a few days, we will be able to install the "No Parking" signs.
Mr. Harding: Mark, did we decide what we are going to do on Watson Court?
Mr. Greenstein: That was the next piece. I was going to ask Alan or Tricia to explain how we are finalizing the Watson Court piece.
Mr. Scheerer: I can give it a shot. Tricia and I met and drove down Watson Court. We
don't really see any need to change the current parking pattern that was approved previously. The directional flow into the cul-de-sac would be the side of the street that gets parking. We agreed that a  possible  installation  of a couple of "No  Parking" signs be installed  on either side of the

median as you enter and exit Watson Court and then continue with the ''No Parking" in the cul­ de-sac. There are two fire hydrants that would be in play on the entry side where you are allowing parking, but we don't see that as an issue. There is no parking within 15 feet on either side of that fire hydrant. We don't know that we see any reason to change the parking policy or the parking arrangement as it was identified previously, based on our site visit. I don't know if Tricia has anything to add to that.
Ms. Adams: I think you covered everything.
Mr. Greenstein: I reviewed the minutes from the last meeting. The bottom line was that Alan, Tricia and anyone else that needed to look at it, such as security, would go into the area and see if there was a meaningful difference between the number of available spaces on one side versus the other. There wasn't a material difference. I basically asked them to come back to the Board with a recommendation as to what we should do. That is what I said we would do and that is what was done. It's going to be a uniformed approach. You enter the court and park on the right side. There are a couple of spots that are sensitive like the median. When you get to the butterfly garden, that very first area, there is a little jut there. We will take care of those to make sure they are safe.
Mr. Scheerer: The location marked from Sparkling Court to where the butterfly garden begins, would be a no parking zone, because it's narrow. That was a point that was brought up at the last meeting. I think Tricia and I agree with that. Then as you are exiting the community, you have the two large homes at the comer of Sparkling Court and Watson Court, as you exit Watson Court. As an abundance of caution, there's no reason to park there, because there's a median there and there's not enough space available for a car. So, we figured that we could just add a couple of extra signs indicating no parking in that area as well. That should be a good frame of reference.
Mr. Greenstein: It's a beautiful median and I always wondered why they built it. Mr. Scheerer: You and me both sir.
Mr. Greenstein: Thanks for bringing this up. George, did you bring this up? Mr. Scheerer: George did.
Mr. Greenstein: Nothing like interactive coordination.
Mr. Scheerer: Basically Lot 180, the property line between Lots 190 and 181 would have a sign. Then also as you enter, we would add a sign or maybe three signs on the right as you come in. There would be one as you come in and one in the middle, which would be a double arrow

and one by where it juts out. We would put one there with an arrow in, basically indicating no parking.
Mr. Harding: Sounds good.
Mr. Greenstein: Yup. Thank you.
Mr. Scheerer: That's all I have with respect to the parking. Like I said, as soon as they install the survey stakes and the location of the signs, Tricia and I will review everything. If we need to make a couple of modifications, we will do that at the time and then install the signposts.
Mr. Showe: Item 4 is on hold. We are monitoring based on development timing, etc. We will keep it on the Action Item List. Regarding the COVID amenity status, we are in Phase 3, which allows all amenities to open except for water fountains, per the opening guidelines. We sent out a new communication through Artemis to the community with the updated hours and guidelines for CDD amenities. The spas are now open and we have normal hours. The Seven Eagles MSA has been converted month-to-month. So, we will continue with that. There is no cost to the District at this point under that month-to-month. It continues the arrangement we had previously. It's in the resort's court to come back to us to propose a different arrangement, but at this point, we are discontinuing our month-to-month arrangement. We addressed the golf cart community issue. What is the status of the Terrace's sign posts?
Mr. Scheerer: I haven't ordered them yet. We are working on a few other things since it's the beginning of the fiscal year. So, we will probably get with the contractor. He was the lowest bidder in previous bids as well. We will probably install those the first of November.
Mr. Flint: We had the closed session for the security issues. It is my understanding that the resort may have a solution to the issue with the pool access. What is the status of that, Tricia?
Ms. Adams: I tried to copy Alan and you when possible. Victor and John are continuing to work with a vendor on retrofitting of the gates. They have not yet found a solution for that so they are continuing to work on that issue.
Mr. Harding: Joe Whiston made a recommendation as far as a push button type of mechanism, where you push a button to exit.
Ms. Adams: You bring up a good point, Supervisor Harding. Another option rather than retrofitting the gates with the current mechanism is to disable the exit lever and install a push button on a post. That was a foot or more away from the exit gate, and anyone who is exiting the pool would push the button and that would release the mechanism. That is on an Action Item List from previous discussion.

Mr. Greenstein: I'm glad you brought that up, Don. The only thing that I was concerned about are power failures, even though I know they are rare, equipment failures, people getting locked in and a child not being able to get out. If there were a power failure, the default is that it opens.
Ms. Adams: Yes. These are utilized.
Mr. Greenstein: It is like the old buzzer where you hit the button and the door buzzes and releases the latch. I guess we can look at that.
Ms. Adams: These are utilized at other District pools. So, all of those considerations are important to have in play for an exit button.
Mr. Harding: Correct.
Mr. Flint: It sounds like the resort is continuing to work on that. We are continuing to follow up with them and some other issues. We will keep reporting back. That's all we had on the Action Items List.
Mr. Scheerer: George, you mentioned that the Spine Road monument was inadvertently placed on the Reunion West Action Items List.
Mr. Flint: It was put at the end. It should've been at the end of the Reunion East list. There was a request from Mr. Goldstein at a prior meeting for us to potentially look at enhancing the signage in that location. So, we are working on that. I don't know what the Board's thoughts are on that and whether there is any other input on that entrance or if you want to move forward.
Mr. Harding: Did we have a request from anyone in the community about putting a monument there?
Mr. Flint: I think Mr. Goldstein brought it up at the last meeting. Mr. Scheerer: Correct. We did get a price.
Mr. Dryburgh: What was the range?
Mr. Scheerer: I don't know if Tricia has the ability to show the picture. I didn't get this into the agenda on time. I apologize to the Board. It's a double-sided monument that would be parallel to Spine Road. The cost is $38,050.
Mr. Dryburgh: Wow. Mr. Harding: Holy cow.
Mr. Greenstein: Does it have a built-in lemonade stand?
Mr. Scheerer: Just so the Board knows, when Reunion West decided to install the monumentation on their property, the UCC group did not charge the full amount. They charged

the same price to build the monument. It was a smaller monument to the one in the entryway on Tradition Boulevard by the gatehouse that we refer to as the Sinclair Road back gate. It is more of a full-size monument. It's obviously not a budgeted item, but it follows the same sign plan that we already paid for in Reunion West. It would just be replicated on Spine Road in the median as you come m.
Mr. Goldstein: Can you make it half the size?
Mr. Harding: We don't have a monument off of Lake Wilson. I think we should wait to see how anybody else feels about it.
Mr. Scheerer: I don't disagree.
Mr. Greenstein: The monument at the Sinclair Road gate, came up in connection with putting in all of the other monuments, the community monuments. We took advantage of the opportunity of that gate for a variety of reasons. I'm not saying that I'm a fortune teller and can tell you that the back gate is going to end up being the main entrance of the resort at some point because of what they did to 532. Nonetheless, you are right, Don, we lived without any signage there, even though there is a guardhouse. It has never been viewed as a main or even a sub­ entrance.
Mr. Harding: For the Sinclair road gate, we had a number of people from Reunion West complain about it. In a lot of cases, this was their main gate.
Mr. Greenstein: Right. It was for The Bear's Den and Encore people. Nonetheless, I don't think we should kill it. It's something we can look at and see how things go.
Mr. Goldstein: What about doing a big painted sign that looks nicer than the ones we put up already. Something that just says, "Reunion Resort," where we don't have to spend $40,000. Why couldn't we put a bigger sign up there?
Mr. Greenstein: There is no reason why you can't use the specs that we have as far as the white post.
Mr. Goldstein: Right.
Mr. Greenstein: Come up with something that looks decent. The only problem with those signs is that they do wear. I don't know if it's a question, Alan, of lack of maintenance, where if they were cleaned and urethaned more frequently, they would actually hold up better because I think those signs are generally ignored. When they can't be read anymore, people complain and we end up putting up new signs.

Mr. Harding: It could be a plastic type of structure, very similar to the sign at the unmanned gate. There could be a sign there.
Mr. Greenstein: Don, what does the sign say? Mr. Harding: It says it's an unmanned gate.
Mr. Scheerer: It says, "Residents Only- Keep Out."
Mr. Harding: Why couldn't we design a sign the size of the monument. The monument you were going to put in is a pretty good size. Why couldn't we design a white sign on a white post, approximately the same size? The whole purpose is so people coming down S. Old Lake Wilson Road will be able to know that's actually an entrance to Reunion, because it's very confusing to people coming to the east side thinking they can turn in on the west side.
Mr. Greenstein: I agree. That's why I said we are not going to kill this thing. We should investigate other signage options. By the way, you mentioned lighting. We are in the process on the west side of figuring out how to light up all of the monuments we installed. Everything is going to get lighting or already has lighting, with the exception of White Marsh Circle and Tradition Boulevard. It's the other way around. You have Golden Bear Drive and White Marsh Circle, Legends Corner and Masters Landing.
Mr. Scheerer: Right.
Mr. Greenstein: We are going to light those up. As a result of that, we drove around and said, "Well, you know we have some locations on the east side that don't have lighting." We are looking to get that resolved as well.
Mr. Goldstein: Why don't we have Alan, bring us back a proposal for a sign that matches what we have and take a look at that at the next meeting?
Mr. Greenstein: Steve, you can do it, because the specs for the signage are minimal, like real estate and directional signs and like the sign we just put up that says, "Residents to the right. "
Mr. Boyd: Yes. Exactly.
Mr. Greenstein: Nothing but white posts. Don't worry about the spec sign. Just think about what we would do. Even Don mentioned something about plastic or other materials. I'm not saying put up foam, which we know will get beat up overnight. Let's think of something else other than a $40,000 Rock of Gibraltar.
Mr. Goldstein: I agree. $40,000 is ridiculous. Mr. Boyd: I got it.

Mr. Greenstein: So, we are going to have some kind of signage for that entrance and hopefully you can help us, like you did with the doggie park.
Mr. Boyd: Alright, I will look into it.
Mr. Greenstein: Did you look at the east side, Steve? Mr. Boyd: Yes.
Mr. Greenstein: So, you know we are thinking of having a dog park on the west side. Mr. Boyd: Sure.
Mr. Greenstein: Hopefully, when we put the survey out, you will throw in your two cents. Mr. Boyd: No problem. Alan and I learned what to do.
Mr. Scheerer: We got this. Steve and I will handle it.
Mr. Flint: Anything else on the action items? Hearing none,

Approval of Check Register
Mr. Flint: You have the September Check Register for the General Fund, R&M and payroll totaling $499,604. Were there any questions on the Check Register? Hearing none,

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Mr. Harding with all in favor the Check Register for the month of September was approved as presented.

Balance Sheet and Income Statement
Mr. Flint: You have the unaudited financial statements through August 31st. No action is required by the Board, but if you have any questions, we can discuss those.

Status of Direct Bill Assessments
Mr. Flint: All direct bills are current for Fiscal Year 2020.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Other Business
Mr. Flint: Is there any other business that the Board would like to discuss that was not on the agenda? Hearing none,

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor's Request
Mr. Flint: Are there any Supervisor's requests?
Mr. Harding: I just wanted to ask Alan about the equipment in the Fitness Center, which was brought up at our last CDD meeting by a resident. Did they take care of that yet?

Mr. Scheerer: Not yet. They are working on it. On our site visit Tricia and I reviewed Seven Eagles. Anthony said he is working on it, but I don't have confirmation as of this meeting that it has been repaired.
Mr. Harding: Okay. The other thing that I was going to mention is I think I'm going to get a hold of Joe Whiston after listening to the west, as far as stepping up some monitoring here in Reunion for the speeding. They reacted to that way in the past. We will have them come in. I am going to send a note to Joe as the Neighborhood Watch Coordinator to ask him to step it up a little.
Mr. Greenstein: They hide on Sinclair Road in that little enclave. They probably have something similar at the construction entrance to The Bear's Den off of Grand Traverse Parkway. It's that long stretch when you come over the bridge where people gun it. It's unfortunate, but they do it.
Mr. Harding: Quite a few golf carts come blasting down there going 15 miles-per-hour with a little kid driving them.
Mr. Goldstein: I think you are exaggerating. There aren't many little kids driving carts
around here.
Mr. Greenstein: Hopefully there won't be any accidents , but it needs to be under control. Mr. Harding: There are kids driving carts, believe me.
Mr. Greenstein: There are.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS
This item was not discussed.

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS

Next Meeting Date

Adjournment

On MOTION by Mr. Harding seconded by Mr. Goldstein with all in favor the meeting was adjourned.

Chairman/¥ice Chltirmm1