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, February 10, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. at the Heritage Crossing Community Center, 7715 Heritage Crossing Way, Reunion, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum:

Mark Greenstein Steven Goldstein Trudy Hobbs John Dryburgh Dr. TomMcKeon

Also present were:

Tricia Adams Kristen Trucco Justin Meteiver Alan Scheerer Victor Vargas Mike Smith Nicole Ailes David Dangel Joshua DeVries Graham Staley Sharon Harley Residents

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS

Chairman Vice Chairman
Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary

District Manager District Counsel
Boyd Civil Engineering Field Manager
Reunion Security Yellowstone Yellowstone Inwood Consulting
Osceola County Transportation & Transit Reunion West CDD Board Member Reunion West CDD Board Member

Roll Call

Ms. Adams called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. and called the roll. All Supervisors were present.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comment Period
Ms. Adams: The next item on the agenda is a public comment period. If there are any members of the public who would like to make a comment regarding any items that are on the

agenda or any items that are not on the agenda, this is an opportunity to do so. Is there anyone physically here at Heritage Crossings who would like to make a comment? Seeing none. Is there any Zoom attendee who would like to make a comment? We do have three members of the public who have joined us via Zoom. If you have a desire to make a comment to the Board of Supervisors, please raise your hand indicating a desire to do so. Mr. Chairman, there are no public comments, so we will move forward with the agenda.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Presentation	Regarding	Proposed	Old
Lake Wilson Road Improvements
Ms. Adams: This afternoon we have scheduled Osceola County staff as well as Inwood Consulting staff to be here to present a road improvement project that has impact for both for Reunion East and Reunion West Community Development Districts. We do have the Board here in quorum for Reunion East. We also have noticed this meeting as a workshop for the Reunion West Board of Supervisors, so they have the ability to interact with staff and to comment on the project and not be concerned about Sunshine Laws. We do have some members from the Reunion West Board here as well. This afternoon we have Mr. David Dangel with Inwood Consulting as well as Mr. Joshua DeVries with Osceola County Transportation and Transit. David, do you want to take the floor?
Mr. Dangel: Sure. Thanks for having us today. I'm going to just give you an overview of where we are on the Old Lake Wilson Road improvements. We have got a public meeting coming up on February 22nd• This is essentially the same information that we will be presenting, but we wanted for all of you to see it first. Again, thanks Josh for being here from Osceola County. A Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study was conducted to meet the National Environmental Policy Act to meet federal guidelines so that future phases can be eligible for Federal funding. That's the requirement to do the PD&E Study. We look at project impacts on the surrounding environment and we try to blend the engineering improvements with the impacts of our analysis. We're focused today on this project, basically to add additional capacity to the road and also improving safety and providing pedestrian and bicycle improvements as well. On the right, it's hard to see, but that's the transportation development process. We're in the second step, which is the PD&E Study and then following up with either the design or the acquisition and construction. So, the limits are from County Road 532 or Osceola Polk Line Road to Sinclair Road. It is about two-and-a-half miles. We're looking at widening the existing road from two lanes to

four lanes with a median and also adding features for pedestrians and bicycles. I will go over some of the roadway cross sections here in a minute. So, why is funding needed? I think you all probably know. Traffic is pretty bad. It's projected to go to a Level of Service F in the future. It will be pinch-pointed. Polk County is going to be widening the road south to four lanes and there are four lanes going to Sinclair Road. This is the missing link. We're looking at over 30,000 vehicles per day by 2050. Then we would also have a gap in bicycle and pedestrian features if we don't do anything to this section. We will also look at improving the safety of the road. The existing road is a two-lane undivided rural road. The travel lanes are 12 feet wide. We have traffic signals at each end of Sinclair Road and County Road 532. We do have five other intersections along the corridor. I will touch on what we're looking at those locations here. There are also some bridges along the project. So, we're looking at two different alternative typical sections. This is the first one. Again, it's a four-lane divided roadway. We're looking at 11-foot travel lanes in each direction, a raised median, 37.5 feet wide. That's just north of Sinclair. That's what's there. We are looking at 5-foot bicycle lanes on the road, a IO-foot sidewalk on the west side and a 5-foot sidewalk on the east side. This can generally be built with an existing right-of-way (ROW); however, there are some areas and intersections where there will be some ROW that's needed to accommodate some of the additional tum lanes. I will show you those in a second. So, with this first alternative, we got the bridge. The bridge on the right is the existing bridge that's out there now. What we're talking about there is converting that to two northbound lanes by the feet and width. We would also have room for a bike lane in the shoulder. The length of the bridge requires an 8-foot shoulder. So that's where that comes from. We would also construct a raised sidewalk as part of that to carry the sidewalk that will be added on the Reunion side of the road. The other bridge will be a new bridge. That will be a southbound bridge. We would build that at a higher elevation to accommodate the future 1-4 improvements. So, right now the existing bridge will work because of 1-4, but in the future that will have to be replaced. One of the things we're looking at is having a little bit wider bridge for the southbound bridge with that wider inside median, I I -foot travel lanes and 10-foot sidewalk. In the future, when the other bridge needs to be replaced when they do the 1-4 construction, they will have to replace this bridge as part of that project. We've got four lanes on Old Lake Wilson and we can't just demolish the bridge. So, we've got the new bridge to accommodate four lanes during that construction. This is what will be shown to the public at the public meeting. It's about a 12-foot-long graphic. So, you will be able to see things pretty closely,

the intersection improvements and the areas where we need some additional ROW. It's hard to see here, but that's the concept we will be showing. As I mentioned, it primarily fits within the existing road ROW. This is the second alternative. It's essentially the same. There are a few minor differences. Instead of the 5-foot bike lanes, we would have 7-foot buffer bike lanes. It's a little safer for bicyclists along the road and a little bit more pavement. We would have an 8-foot sidewalk instead of a 10 foot. This overall width is about 2-feet wider than the other one. Again, this would generally fit within the existing ROW, except at some of the intersection locations. The bridge has the same concept. The only difference is on the new southbound bridge would only have an 8-foot sidewalk. So, it's a 2-foot narrower bridge for this alternative. Again, this has the same concept and layout. It's really hard to tell the difference when you stand there looking at it, but it's really the bicycle accommodations on the road. On the existing road, north and south, they've got four or five bike lanes. Looking at the intersection, this is the south end. The work is to the right. As I mentioned, Polk County is looking to widen Old Wilson Road to the south. They are going be doing most of the intersection improvements; however, the traffic analysis that we did, showed that there are a few other enhancements that we think are needed. In the northbound direction, we're looking to add an exclusive right turn lane. Their project didn't include that. It will require some ROW. When we look at ROW cost, that's really the biggest cost on the project. From westbound to northbound along Old Lake Wilson, will have a second right turn lane because of the heavy movement in that direction. That will fit within the existing ROW. I will drive by Excitement Drive next week and see how close it is to County Road 532. Because of the proximity, we're really limited in what we can do. We looked at the traffic signal. We looked at the requirements for the traffic signal. This is way too close to that intersection. We also looked at roundabout and because of the proximity and the potential for southbound traffic to back up into the roundabout, it just looked like it was going to create a lot of problems. So, this is the solution we're going to go to the public with. The state will provide a southbound directional into Excitement Drive. You can also tum right heading north into Excitement Drive. That's no different than it is today, but when you leave Excitement Drive, you would only go right. You can't go left. So, you have to go right. Then we provided another U-Tum area just to the north to get away from the County Road 532 intersection and allow that U-Turn to happen. That would require a little buffer. That's something that will accommodate that U-Tum. All of these alternatives that I'm

showing, just go with Alternative 1. There's really not much difference other than all new widenings.
Mr. Dryburgh: I have a question. Mr. Dangel: Sure.
Mr. Dryburgh: On Excitement Drive, there are quite a few apartments and houses down there. They are not going to be able to make a left tum to go to work or a left-hand tum into Publix and go all the way through our project.
Mr. Dangel: No, they can still go out. They can go out to Old Lake Wilson Road, but they can't go left from there. They have to go right and make a U-Tum to go south.
Dr. McKeon: How far is it from Excitement Drive to the turnaround?
Mr. Dangel: It's about 600 feet. They will be able to see it. It allows them to make a right tum and get into the median.
Mr. Greenstein: Is that feature at grade? Mr. Dangel: Yes, sir.
Mr. Greenstein: So, it's a yield situation. Mr. Dangel: Yes.
Mr. Greenstein: In order to make the U-Tum, you have to yield to traffic going south. Mr. Dangel: Correct.
Mr. Greenstein: So, your thinking is it's far enough away from the area of congestion. Mr. Dangel: Yes.
Mr. Greenstein: That during most hours of the day you'll be able to affect the U-Tum. Mr. Dangel: Yes.
Mr. Dryburgh: Is 30,000 cars a day coming down here the objective.? Mr. Goldstein: Right up, it backs up to Sinclair Road.
Mr. Dryburgh: What they use now is the tum lane becomes the second lane. You are not going through, so it makes sense to widen it.
Mr. Dangel: The traffic analysis that was done uses the model from the area. There is a lot that is developed already, but it does consider land uses that haven't been developed yet. Then they use that as a projection going out to 2050 to do this analysis. So, they've looked at how these all interact with Traffic Study to make sure that it will work with all of the other improvements

being done, Osceola Polk Pine Road and improvements to the south. Based on the analysis they have done, it should work.
Dr. McKeon: Have you driven on this road at 3:00 p.m.?
Mr. Dangel: Yeah. It's been a while now.
Mr. Dryburgh: From a county standpoint, how do you feel? Is this something that would work if someone wanted to go to CVS?
Mr. Dangel: Yes.
Mr. Dryburgh: So, this design really doesn't address that issue.
Dr. McKean: Are you thinking that the flow is going to increase so much because it will be so many lanes all the way through?
Ms. Harley: Its four lanes.
Mr. DeVries: It is taking into consideration that it will be four lanes. Old Lake Wilson Road will be four lanes and 532 being four lanes.
Mr. Dryburgh: We were just having this conversation about the way you see the design in general for highways. We don't design for future growth. I'm sorry. We design for existing problems. If you make this three lanes, now you have designed it for existing growth.
Mr. DeVries: Are you proposing that we do the whole thing?
Mr. Dryburgh: Yes. Because you have the project going in the other direction. Anytime in the morning, that traffic backs all the way from Walmart, all the way back down the road. We are also using the tum lane as a regular lane. You are saying to keep it at two lanes. It is two lanes right now in either direction. You are not adding to it.
Mr. DeVries: Four lanes.
Multiple Voices Speaking
Mr. Dangel: As I mentioned, the traffic model that the area uses, looks at all kinds of roadway improvements and how other projects help. This is the best tool we have. So, based on that, we use this looking our 20 to 25 years. The other thing is this does have a wider median. So, there is the potential in the future that it could help accommodate this growing demand.
Mr. Dryburgh: Now I understand that is going back to some computer model and for a safety net as well, this is going to work. If it works well, let's go back and modify it in five years, but it was very disruptive to the people who live around here to go through these multiple efforts.
There was a resident comment that could not be heard by the transcriber.

Ms. Adams: Actually, this is a time for Board Member discussion with staff. We are not taking public comment right now, but we'll be happy to take public comment later on in the agenda.
Mr. Dryburgh: Hold that thought.
Mr. Greenstein: The only thing that l want to add isl know this project and all county projects are not done in the dark. Especially this particularly roadway, is heavily impacted by the lack of capacity on 1-4 and it factors in the 1-4 ultimate project, the expansion of 1-4 capacity. People take Old Lake Wilson Road and we take Old Lake Wilson Road as a get around. Luckily, we have the 429 exit, but if you factor in all the improvements around the entire area and apply that formula or that methodology, then l guess it supports the idea of two lanes in each direction. John, what you are basically saying, and l know I said this before myself, that without the other improvements, without I-4 adding capacity, instead of having a backup from 532 to Sinclair Road, you will have two lanes backed up from 532 maybe to Spine Road.
Mr. Dryburgh: Or 192.
Mr. Greenstein: Again, we know other improvements have to be made in order for this to
work.
Mr. Dangel: Right. The State DOT is looking to widen 532 over to the east. The turnpike
is looking at the Poinciana Parkway Extension to tie into the 429 interchange. So, there are other things going on.
Dr. McKean: You got to understand that as residents here, we have to determine if we running to Publix or to CVS, what time of day it is. lfwe are talking about 4:00 p.m., there is no way that l would go out that way. You would have to come in the main gate and go out that way otherwise you wait 30 or 40 minutes. I feel like that this plan is where we need to be now and not a plan for the future. It seems like we have never been ahead of the game at any point at any time for 1-4, 417 or 429.
Mr. Dryburgh: I just wanted to make a comment. Mr. Greenstein: Thank you for indulging us.
Mr. Dangel: Sure. That's why I'm here. So, Spine Road warrants traffic signals. So that's what we proposed there. There's a southbound right turn lane that is also recommended and that would require a little bit of a sliver of ROW from the west side of the road. You can see there's a red line there. It's a little tough to see. Moving up to Assembly Court, it does not warrant a signal based on the traffic analysis. That just has a full median opening, so you can make all of the

movements in and out of that location. Then up at Fairfax Drive and Marker Avenue, a signal is proposed there. With the additional turn lanes, there is some minor ROW required in three to four comers of the intersection. Again, it's pretty minor in that area. There's probably going to be some impacts with a couple of those large utility poles at that intersection as well.
Ms. Harley: Would that traffic signal allow them to travel across?
Mr. Dangel: Yes. Then on Sinclair Road, there would be a signal at that location, same as today. There would be the need for some additional ROW along the south side of Sinclair Road to expand those tum lanes. We don't have one for Pendant Court, which is just south of Sinclair Road, on the east side of the road. What we are currently proposing is what's out there today with a full connection constructed, but it's striped out so you can only exit. The striping would allow emergency vehicles to get in if they needed to. We talked to Tricia the other day about that. So, that's something that we're going to continue to talk through as part of the study. The roadway cross-section includes curbs and gutters to collect the stormwater and go through pipes under the ground to the ponds. The Reunion ponds, both along the road, were designed to account for the four laning of Old Lake Wilson Road. There are agreements in place within the County and the developers, so there's no new stormwater ponds anticipated. There will be the need for some easements to actually build the pipes to get to the ponds. So, that's something I think we will work through the study as well. Stuff like that won't be finalized until the design and construction phase are being worked on, but we can give you some ideas of what we're thinking now.
Mr. Dryburgh: Would there be any noise mitigation efforts?
Mr. Dangel: There could be. Give me one second and I'll touch on that. As far as the PD&E process, we have to consider the no-build alternative. So, that would be no improvements other than just routine maintenance. We have to keep those viable options due to the study. It's just a requirement of the process. The other thing that we are looking at are the environmental effects and impacts and these are the things that we're looking at. Most of them are not going to be an issue at all: wetlands and floodplains, species. Noise is something that we're going to be looking at. We're actually working with FDOT District 5 and a noise specialist because rental properties may be treated a little bit different. We're trying to work through some of those things, but we will be doing the full noise study. So, those are things that are ongoing.
Mr. Dryburgh: Many are not rental properties. Many are permanent properties. Mr. Dangel: Right. We are trying to figure out the best way to do that.

Dr. McKeon: If some were rentals that are subject to be looked at, you do that noise study differently or accordingly?
Mr. Dangel: I don't understand exactly what the issue is. Our noise specialist would have to determine that. I don't see why it would be treated differently or how it would be treated differently. When you do a noise study, you identify the distance from the road where there's a decimal line and you see how many people are impacted. Then you do a modeling to say how tall the wall may be to stop producing noise about 15 decimals behind it and how many people have benefited by that. Then you divide the cost of the wall by the number of people who benefit and it's like $42,000 per benefit received. There is a calculation that the Federal government uses. I don't know how the rental versus permanent residence plays into it. We will have more information on that.
Dr. McKeon: So, a noise study will be done on that. Mr. Dangel: Yes.
Dr. McKeon: Okay.
Mr. Greenstein: The vast majority of that stretch of land is golf course. Mr. Dangel: Right.
Mr. Greenstein: There's a lot of open space, but there are areas like Heritage Crossings adjacent to it, different communities, condo communities as you go up the road. Certain areas would probably qualify for it and others wouldn't.
Mr. Dangel: Then on the other part of that process is, if a noise wall is found to be cost reasonable, then we have to get to the residents and say, "Do you want this big wall behind your house?" Some people don't want it and some people do. That's the next step. That happens during the design phase when they are doing the construction plan. As part as the study, we will make recommendations on, if it is a feasible thing to consider during the design. That's the first step in the process. So, this is the evaluation matrix to compare the two options. Again, it's hard to see here, but we've got the property impacts and if you're impacted, how to relocate any residences which is not the case here, different impacts to the wetlands and floodplains. Those kinds of things will be documented and we've got cost at the bottom. These are really preliminary. We don't even have the ROW cost on here. We have it working through some details on that as well as the roadway construction costs. We're looking into the $70 to $75 million range. So, it's not a cheap issue. As far as the funding goes, there's no funding for anything currently, but the County has a

Reunion East COD Regular Meeting

February 10, 2022
Page 10 of39

program for the design to begin in 2023. Then there's nothing funded for the ROW or construction. This type of roadway improvement is typically a 10-year process overall from the PD&E through construction being complete. The other thing to know is we're following the Federal process with FDOT oversight. We anticipate that some of the future phases will use Federal funds.
Mr. Greenstein: So, we would get Federal support because of the bridge?
Mr. DeVries: Doing the PD&E makes the roadway eligible. It doesn't guarantee funding but it makes it eligible for Federal funding. Before the PD&E, it wasn't eligible for Federal funds, but once the PD&E was finished, it was several million dollars for the project that we got for Neptune and we are hoping to do the same thing here.
Mr. Greenstein: The last time I looked at the county budgets, I thought that sometime back in 2020, they were earmarking this project for funding, acquiring funding in FY 2025. So, it doesn't sound like, if I went to look for a projected budget for 2025, I would not see anything.
Mr. DeVries: No, you would see design in there. That's something that we need to make sure that we follow to get the analysis done and then progress that way.
Mr. Greenstein: That's something we definitely need to support and obtain. There is no comfort working a project, you're not going to do a PD&, I hope you would not do a PD&E without ultimate funding being provided, even though of course, the whole purpose of the PD&E is to determine the cost and the value of it. I think this project would have been conducted many years ago had it not been for the fact that it was running right through the Resort. Unfortunately, that had a lot to do with it. I know a lot of people get upset with the County. The developer at the time wasn't enthralled with the idea of having a significant roadway basically cutting through the Resort, which is why we've been living with what we've been living with and having this in front of us right now.
Mr. Dangel: This is an overview of the study schedule. As I mentioned, we've got the alternatives  public  meeting  on  February  22nd•    We  anticipate  looking  at  all  of  the  comments, finalizing the preferred concept and then showing that at a public hearing around the September timeframe. After that, we will finalize all of the project reports. Then it goes to FDOT's Office of Environmental Management for ultimate approval and that's called location and design concept acceptance. That's what we're looking at in the first quarter of 2023 to be done with PD&E study. We've used newsletters to notify the public about the project as well as the project website, ImproveOldLakeWilsonRoad.com. About a week prior to the public meeting, so, sometime next

Reunion East CDD Regu]ar Meeting

February 10, 2022
Page 11 of39

week we will have the presentation on the website that people can go and review the information as well as other project information. That's where we are. This is Josh's contact and my contact information. We can answer any other question you have.
Mr. Dryburgh: You have some great slides here. You mentioned that you tried to mitigate the impact on some of these people. That's Assembly Court entrance we have quite a few residents who are permanent residents. They may be renters, but they are still permanent residents. Not everybody can afford a house. They're going to have a more challenging time again, cutting across trying to make a left to go down to where the closest shopping would be, Aldi's or something like that. If there isn't a U-Turn, they are going to have to go down to Fairfax Drive to the light and make a U-Turn.
Ms. Adams: I don't know if you can go back to the Assembly Court intersection, but that does allow for turns in both directions at the intersection.
Mr. Dryburgh: Yes. I'm noting again how heavy the volume is from about 2:30 p.m. until about 7:00 p.m., which is when most people get home thinking about, "Oh, we can do some grocery shopping and have dinner. I can make that left to go down to Aldi's and go to Publix. " Walmart is going to be happy when they can make a right.
Ms. Adams: One thing Board Members might want to consider as it relates to the Assembly Court intersection is, although there is heavy traffic on Old Lake Wilson Road, there are a very finite number of residences within Assembly Court, so you don't have the volume of traffic looking to gain access to Old Lake Wilson Road that you do at other intersections. So, that's just something to keep in mind.
Mr. Dryburgh: You are absolutely correct. I'm just saying there's no easy way for most of residents who live there.
Mr. Goldstein: If the traffic doesn't speed up and get rid of the problem, they don't have any worse problem than we're going to have on Excitement Drive going up to the U-Tum lane and trying to get in. So, assuming it flows down the street, they shouldn't have any trouble. It shouldn't be backed up there like it is now, but I don't believe it's ever going to not be backed up there personally. I don't think until seven years from now when everything else is done, you're not going to solve Old Lake Wilson. Just my personal opinion. It needs to be done, but it's not going to fix the problem because it's much greater than what you're fixing.

Reunion East CDD Regular Meeting

February 10, 2022
Page 12 of39

Ms. Harley: It's not going to be easy from the changes going on to 1-4, because currently the load of that traffic is currently attributed to 1-4.
Mr. Dryburgh: That's a 10-to-12 more-year project you're talking about. So, we're talking 2032 to 2035.
Mr. Goldstein: We won't have to worry about it. Will we? Ms. Hobbs: No.
Ms. Adams: Before we go to public comments, Supervisor Staley, did you have any questions? Supervisor Harley, any questions?
Mr. Staley: It's pretty straight forward to be honest.
Ms. Adams: Mr. Chairman, would you like to open it up questions from the floor? If there's any residents who have questions, please state your name for the record. We are recording the meeting.
Resident (Erja Julius, Watson Court): I was just wondering, does the gate have to be there? I remember that this road just on this side of the apartments, the Terraces, could just exit. It's still too close to make the light, but you could certainly make a right turn to get to CVS and Publix easier. Even if you couldn't do a left, there is a light there. They are re-doing the intersection at some point.
Mr. Greenstein: The 532 widening and the ability to make the turn-off of Old Lake Wilson Road onto 532. All of that, they are all tied together. You'll have less traffic backed up, if it clears faster and the lights are timed for good traffic management. I've seen it work in other parts of the County. I'm always thinking, "I'm so far back. I'm three bloch back. That light is going to flip on me." It holds until it clears all of that traffic. So, a lot of these improvements can work. I raised the issue too about coming out of that gate. I can appreciate the fact that you can't have a traffic signal there because it's too close to the 532 traffic light, but if we have the additional two lanes, we have that ability not to impede traffic going north and a person could basically pull the U-Turn. Then you said there is 600 feet.
Mr. Dangel: Something like that. Yeah.
Mr. Greenstein: That's not that far. I know you're going out of your way, but it's no different than in New Jersey with the jug handles, where they take you around and away from the area. Because that's the safest way to handle the traffic and to keep you away from the congestion.

Reunion East CDD Regular Meeting

February 1O, 2022
Page 13 of39

Mr. Goldstein: It may be safer for us to be able to make that left-hand tum in there, further up, than right there by the light. I mean, let's face it, everybody is fighting. There was an accident the other day.
Mr. Dangel: You have traffic coming from one direction. You go out and have to look at your left.
Mr. Goldstein: It's definitely safer.
Mr. Greenstein: Basically, in this case it's a U-Tum, but it would be like a left tum U-Tum where you have to hug the center.
Resident (Erja Julius, Watson Court): I also wanted to ask about the eight to ten years. Are you saying that the Polk County was planning the expansion of that other segment eight years ago, the one that is now expanding to go to Ronald Reagan? I don't know if it's ready yet. I realize you don't necessarily know but it seems like it was done much quicker than eight years ago.
Mr. DeVries: I don't have the answer as far as how many years they had it in the work program. I know that it's been about a couple of years that I've been seeing different plans about it.
Mr. Dryburgh: Four or five years ago, there were articles in the Polk County magazines
and newspapers about that section being wiped. The question in their newspaper was, "Why hasn't Osceola County gotten on board?" There was no answer. So, I think they did start planning that, whether or not Osceola was going to spend the money.
Resident (Erja Julius, Watson Court): I'm just questioning why it's so slow. Mr. Goldstein: It's the government.
Mr. DeVries: It's the process that it had to go through. The PD&E study is basically two years. Then when you go to do the design, it's typically a two-year process. You have to get the survey and all the construction plans, which takes time, given all the geographical investigations.
Mr. dangle: The ROW acquisition is the wildcard. Out here some ROW is required. A lot of those DOT projects could be four or five years if you got more people you're negotiating. That's kind of an unknown and then actual construction takes a couple of years less. So, that's where the eight to ten years comes from.
Mr. Greenstein: Hopefully, we'll see a compressed schedule.
Mr. Dryburgh: Are you looking at any utility poles? Is anything required for that?

Mr. Dangel: Up near the Fairfax and Marker intersection, we are going to be having to do a couple of those big ones, but for the most part, we shouldn't have to do much.
Mr. Dryburgh: You're not affecting any bridges we go underneath the golf course on one side across to the other?
Mr. Dan l: No. The only thing is there's that low spot where we got the crossings underneath. Those large pipe culverts are really old and in poor shape. Those are going to have to be replaced. We're looking at a concrete box culvert, but you won't notice any difference on the roadway. That's going to have to be replaced.
Mr. Staley: The Poinciana Expressway extension is going to come in from the south end.
Are you anticipating any impact on your design?
Mr. Dangel: No. The traffic modeling, the traffic analysis takes into account some of those things. I'll have to talk to our Traffic Consultant to see what they consider. A lot of times they won't consider something until there's a definite plan. I think that probably included in the modeling which may be why it's showing that some of this will work.
Mr. Staley: It looks like the intersect goes over at the top of Old Lake Wilson Road. I'm not quite sure how that's going to work. I know that it goes around to Assembly Court.
Mr. Greenstein: It comes in from the east. It's basically the eastern boundary, Watson Court, our neck of the woods, Gathering Court. So, it's basically staying east of Reunion property, but it has to connect at some point. It has to connect somewhere around 429. That's where the Carriage Pointe community is the most impacted, potentially, if you just look at the intersection diagram, I guess. It is the Assembly Court one. You can see it says Florida Gas Transmission and there are other utilities in that area. Of course, if you're going to connect into 429, anywhere near this area, that's where the two projects have to dovetail. Ninety percent of Poinciana Parkway is going to be to the east. We are all meeting at the same point here. It would be interesting what that group tells us.
Mr. Devries: Yeah, in that portion, it is talking about the connection to 429 down to 532. The Central Florida Expressway Authority is doing from 532 south to the existing Poinciana Parkway.
Mr. Greenstein: Right.
Mr. Dangel: I think the turnpike also has public meetings.

Mr. DeVries: The virtual public meeting happens to be the same day we're having a public meeting and then the in-person one I think is the 24th•    Did I get it right?
Mr. Greenstein: Yeah. It's being held at the hospital in Celebration. Dr. McKean: Are we going to get any Palm trees in the median?
Mr. DeVries: Overall, we're putting together a landscaping program. We don't have any details on those yet, as far as landscaping or the location of work. That is something we're looking at overall.
Mr. Dryburgh: Make sure it's in your budget for maintenance.
Resident (Not Identified): Nice presentation. Thank you very much. I do have some questions and concerns. I'm glad to see you're putting sidewalks for pedestrians along the roadway for the expansion, but I don't see anything from a safety standpoint, to protect pedestrians from that traffic. They were expanded to two lanes and you also put turning lanes in so that you improve the efficiency of the highway. One of the by-products is an increase in speed of the vehicle traffic. Not because you've designed it that way, but because people can simply go faster. I don't see any protection for pedestrians there. I certainly don't want to walk next to a highway where someone's going 70 miles an hour. You know what's going to happen. The other thing is, I know you're focused on this Old Lake Wilson Road project, but as you've mentioned earlier, there are two other projects that are in the works as well and that's going from the intersection of Osceola Polk Line Road and Old Lake Wilson south and making that four lanes going east. Right now, there is the same concern crossing the roadway. I see many people crossing to go to Aldi's or Wawa or Publix. You might say, "Well that's not part of your project," but our project ultimately intersects with the other projects and so on. What are you doing to coordinate with these other projects to look at the pedestrians crossing the road to get to these places?
Mr. Dangel: The Polk County Project is going to improve the 532 intersection. So, they will have all of the push buttons and sidewalks and lanes for people to cross the road which will be done before Old Lake Wilson. We're looking at just adding two tum lane improvements at the intersection. It should be done as part of that project for that intersection.
Resident (Not Identified): Well, that's part of my concern because when we add the turn lane, how many times have you seen people with the turn lane like that not stop? Okay. It doesn't matter whether you have push buttons. You know, there's a real problem in trying to get people

across. We're talking in most cases elderly people. Let's face it, they don't think its quick or maybe look at all those different directions.
Mr. Dangel: These right tum lanes, I know there was a time when they built a lot of free­ flowing right tum lanes. Everybody is getting away from those because of pedestrian issues. So, these will be designed to stop at the intersection. Hopefully you won't just go and pull out for cars coming. Hopefully that won't be as much of a concern as it had been. I know that's a big problem. The state DOT is retrofitting a lot of their roads to take those out free flowing right turns because of the same issue.
Mr. Greenstein: Is the expansion of 532 between OBT and Old Lake Wilson? I'm assuming that project is ahead of this one.
Mr. Dangel: Yeah.
Mr. Greenstein: Because you basically could not affect the changes you want to make close to the intersection at Sinclair Road unless you had the winding of the rope, basically, the additional lanes both as the gentlemen points out from the South as well as going east on 532. So, when those improvements are made, then I believe it's like when you're coming to the bottom of the funnel. At that point, I think these improvements will definitely help speed up the flow and reduce the backup. Ultimately, 1-4 is the only thing that's going to stop people from cutting through and going down Old Lake Wilson Road. I wish we had an easy way of determining where everyone is going, who is coming down Old Lake Wilson Road, so you can really almost validate the thesis that widening 1-4 is going to resolve our problems at grade level.
Mr. Dangel: Right.
Ms. Adams: Mr. Chairman, would you like to take comments from Zoom attendees? Mr. Greenstein: Sure.
Ms. Adams: We do have seven attendees on Zoom. If you would like to make a public comment, please raise your hand indicating your desire to speak. I don't see any hands raised.
Mr. Greenstein: Okay.
Ms. Adams: Are there any other questions for Inwood Consulting or Osceola County? Otherwise, they are going to gather up their equipment and move on. Thank you so much for your presentation, we really appreciate that.
Mr. Greenstein: Thank you.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Minutes of the January 13,
2022 Meeting
Ms. Adams: A draft of the January 13, 2022 minutes was included in your agenda packet for review. I have not received any comments or corrections. Are there any at this time?
Mr. Goldstein: No.

On MOTION by Mr. Goldstein seconded by Mr. Dryburgh with all in favor the Minutes of the January 13, 2022 Meeting as presented were approved.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of  Proposed	Design for
Reunion Village Bridge
Ms. Adams: At last month's meeting, the District Engineer, Steve, presented a proposed design. A copy was provided to Board Members under a separate cover. To memorialize that design in the agenda, we did include it for today. However, your District Engineer has recently visited the field location. There's an attempt being made to reduce the number of structures from two gates to one gate because of the costs and he's doing some further evaluation. I  believe  that we have Justin from Boyd Civil. Justin, do you have an update on the proposed design for the . Reunion Village gate?
Mr. Meteiver: I don't have anything to update other than there is a drainage structure that would need to be modified potentially to accommodate the widening for the gate, but other than that, I don't have anything to add.
Ms. Adams: Mr. Alan Scheerer accompanied Steve on his field visit to look at the conditions. Alan also met with the vendor, ACT who installed the security equipment. Did you have any comments regarding the project?
Mr. Scheerer: No. We will just consolidate this down to one in/one out control in both directions. The issue that we're looking at right now is not coming from Reunion Village to Reunion Proper and having a place to tum around. It's providing proper tum around for vehicles that don't have access privileges coming from Reunion Proper into Reunion Village, which I know the Board requested that we look into to prevent cut-through traffic. There is some property next to the lift station that Steve and I looked at that is going to come back, hopefully with a re-design relatively quickly. Then there will be some further discussion from staff and I guess the current

developer with economies of scale to modify the current infrastructure to accommodate the design. We're hoping it will greatly reduce the cost to the District.
Mr. Greenstein: Okay, sounds good. Mr. Dryburgh: Excellent.
Ms. Adams: No Board action is required at this time. This is really just an update on the status of the project.

SIXTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Proposal for Reunion
Village Gate House Cameras
Ms. Adams: The next item is for enhanced security at Reunion Village. As Board Members know, there is a gatehouse. This is a unique gate in that there is only one lane of incoming traffic, which means that it's shared by residents, renters and commercial vehicles. Everyone goes through the same gate lane. They are monitored by security. Security does provide access. One thing that has been discussed is security cameras. Victor, did you want to talk about the purpose for the security cameras and how they are used at the gate.
Mr. Vargas: Yes. This proposal is for cameras at the entrance. There are three at the entrance; one catching the driver, one catching the vehicle and one inside of the gate and there are three on the exit lane; one to catch the license plate, one to catch the vehicle exiting the property and I think there's one looking at the back area of the gatehouse. This is the proposal that was provided by the same company that installed the cameras at the pools.
Mr. Dryburgh: Victor, is this the same gate system or the same camera system we have protecting the residents of the primary Reunion?
Mr. Vargas: Yes.
Mr. Dryburgh: So, there are six cameras in each one of those residences as well?
Mr. Vargas: Currently I think they have five. Just because at some of the gatehouses, we have two gates, but we don't have a camera inside the gate. But we have one with the cameras at the gate. This proposal will add another one. They will be helping us to keep an eye on the gates from the office.
Mr. Dryburgh: So, we can circle back to that conversation. Since it is beneficial to this gate, we will presume it might be beneficial for all of the gates but let's first focus on this gate.
Ms. Adams: Yes. So, the total amount of this proposal is $15,575 for the camera system, monitoring incoming traffic, outgoing traffic, as well as assisting Victor with monitoring security

staff. This project had not been contemplated as part of the capital projects for this current fiscal year, although you do have some funding in Repairs and Maintenace that presumably could be allocated for this project. So, this is for Board consideration. We have the option, if Board members do not want to take action at this time, to consider it as part of next year's renewal and maintenance (R&M) projects. That's an option too.
Mr. Dryburgh: If you can refresh my memory, what is the warranty on this equipment and what is their required response time for repairing the equipment?
Ms. Adams: It's one year. Mr. Scheerer: It's typical.
Dr. McKeon: Just one question. How many bids have you put up for this type of equipment?
Mr. Vargas: We only used this one. This is the same one we used to install cameras at the pool and exit gate. We used several vendors and then we're going to have add a new system. The current system that we use is from this vendor.
Dr. McKeon: So, you are kind of locked in. Mr. Vargas: Yeah.
Mr. Greenstein: But we did look at multiple vendors.
Ms. Adams: Before this vendor was awarded the previous project.
Mr. Greenstein: We made a decision. That wasn't three years ago, but it wasn't far off. I think the only thing about this installation, of course, is this is a from scratch installation, where the other ones we did were modifications or enhancements.
Mr. Dryburgh: This is the one that's going to be accessed from Polk Line Road on the way in; that guard shack.
Ms. Adams: Yes
Mr. Dryburgh: Not the one coming from Reunion.
Ms. Adams: Correct. This is the existing gate that is staffed by security now. So, once you get past the hospital and the restaurants, there is that gate.
Mr. Dryburgh: This is a stupid question, but I just thought that I would ask. Are the roads going through that are public roads?
Ms. Adams: Yes.

Mr. Dryburgh: Okay, so you have a gate shack. So, if someone wants to drive through, you have to let them through.
Ms. Adams: Correct?
Ms. Hobbs: Unless it's closed. Right? There are some entrances that are closed.
Mr. Greenstein: They would only be able to get into Reunion Village with security consideration, let's just say, but they won't be able to get over the bridge or be able to go anyplace else. There are only residents that will be able to get to Excitement Drive. Just through the Excitement gate.
Mr. Dryburgh: So, if I'm coming through Reunion, past the restaurants and drive-through and I get to the other end, that gate is just going to open and let me through. Ifl want to cut through, they must let me through.
Ms. Adams: No. You'll have to have remote access. Mr. Dryburgh: Can I ask for directions for that gate? Mr. Goldstein: For that one, yeah.
Mr. Scheerer: You have a single gate over there, Mr. Dryburgh, so you would have to have access both ways.
Mr. Dryburgh: Okay.
Mr. Scheerer: Whether it'd be a transponder sticker or the RFID. Mr. Dryburgh: I understand that. Thank you.
Mr. Goldstein: If we just choose to keep the Excitement gate, anybody can go out it because it's not been an issue.
Mr. Dryburgh: Not at all. I just wanted to make sure that we could cut through.
Mr. Scheerer: Right now, you can get into Reunion Village and go wherever you want. Mr. Dryburgh: I can just cut through and head to the other side.
Mr. Scheerer: That is correct. Mr. Dryburgh: Alright. Okay.
Mr. Greenstein: This basically gives us the technology, the surveillance like we have everywhere else within Reunion. Except this is a from-scratch installation. There would be an additional to wire it.
Ms. Adams: Yes. This is a security recommendation. Although the traffic at that gate is not as heavy as other Reunion gates, it's not time-sensitive, per se. This is a security recommendation.

Reunion East COD
Regular Meeting

February 10, 2022 Pagell of39

The sooner cameras are there, the sooner every vehicle in and out is recorded and activities are recorded. That's a helpful security tool.
Mr. Goldstein: We definitely want it installed before there's access across that bridge into here, for sure.
Dr. McKeon: Is there a benefit to agreeing to this price now and have a yearly increase like
everything else going down the road?
Ms. Adams: We can't predict if the cost would go up or down yet. Mr. Goldstein: It's not going to go down.
Dr. McKeon: Maybe we should lock it in. Mr. Goldstein: It's not going to go down.
Dr. McKeon: Probably not, but my question is, are we going to outdate the equipment because we bought it now and not a year from now, they improve the equipment?
Ms. Adams: Just to clarify my remarks, when I was speaking about different options that the Board has, as far as taking action or deferring this matter, should the Board choose to approve this proposal, then the vendor would be notified that this project has been approved and we would be scheduled for the installation as soon as all of the deposits and agreements are in place.
Dr. McKeon: At this price? Ms. Adams: Yes.
Dr. McKeon: When will there be a guard in the guardhouse? Is there one there now? Mr. Scheerer: There is one there now.
Mr. Greenstein: Yes.
Dr. McKeon: I don't want to ease up and not have a guard there. Ms. Adams: As of January 2nd it has been staffed by security.
Mr. Scheerer: January 2nd.
Mr. Greenstein: The point I want to make is that we have occupants, residents, maybe temporary residents if it's a rental property. Properties have been sold. Homes are occupied within Reunion Village. They have the same level of security that everybody else is afforded. So, once we basically activated the guardhouse in January, then this is the next action that's required.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Dr. McKeon with all in favor the Proposal with Central Florida Widening for the Reunion Village Gatehouse cameras in the amount of$15,575 was approved.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Attorney
Ms. Adams: Kristen is here this afternoon.
Ms. Trucco: Thanks, Tricia. My updates are pretty light today. We did receive communication from Kingwood's attorney last week that they had a successful meeting with Kingwood and that Kingwood's expressed a willingness and desire to work with us. We previously requested backup regarding assessments. I'm speaking in regards to the Irrigation System Agreement that's pending negotiation. We've asked for some backup information regarding the amount of assessments that they're charging related to irrigation. They expressed a willingness to do that. They are working on it and said that they should have by the end of the month or early next month. So, we're continuing to follow that and be in communication with their lawyer, but we felt that the right next step is trying to work out an agreement with Kingwood on that. Then the only other update that I have is we are continuing to reach out to Osceola County regarding the interlocal agreement for landscape maintenance on the south side of 532. That's our cessation of landscape maintenance to see what the cost is for us to have to restore that property to its original condition and what that will entail for us. We are required to do that under the agreement. They said that they were projected to have that for us by December after they sent some field people out to evaluate it. We still have not received it, so we continue to follow up about twice a month. I'm assuming that they're just backed out, but we will continue to follow up with them and update you hopefully next month on that.
Ms. Adams: Do you have a recommendation for the Board? One question that came up last month was, can the District immediately cease to maintain? While we understand we are waiting for them to make a determination on the uninstallation of the improvements, can we just go ahead now and stop maintaining that property?
Ms. Trucco: I think that's okay. I'll try one last time to call. I'll give them a call before week's end.
Ms. Adams: Okay. Board members, it would require an agreement addendum with Yellowstone because we would be relieving them of those maintenance tasks. So, this does require Board action in terms of an agreement addendum with Yellowstone. Would you like for us to bring that back next month or would you like to take action now?

Mr. Dryburgh: Can we make that addendum today subject to the attorney contacting and saying it's perfectly fine with the Board?
Ms. Adams: Yes.

Mr. Dryburgh MOVED to approve the addendum with Yellowstone to relieve maintenance responsibilities on 532 subject to staff verification that the District can immediately cease to maintain the property and Dr. McKeon seconded the motion.

Mr. Greenstein: I thought we took care of this last month.
Ms. Adams: We were just waiting for legal confirmation that we were okay to proceed. Ms. Trucco: I was hoping to hear back. We followed up twice.
Ms. Adams: Is there any further discussion? Hearing none,

On VOICE VOTE with all in favor the addendum with Yellowstone to relieve maintenance responsibilities on 532 subject to staff verification that the District can immediately cease to maintain the property was approved.

Mr. Greenstein: The only question I have is a Yellowstone question. Practically speaking, you get the agreement from us and you acknowledge it and agree to it that we're not going to maintain that south side of 532 anymore. So, what steps would you have to take such as capping off irrigation and stuff like that? What would you do immediately or what would you do at the end of the day?
Mr. Smith: Me and Al have been talking about this for quite some time. We've already taken all steps necessary. It will take me about 10 minutes and we are done.
Mr. Greenstein: That's exactly what I wanted to hear you say and we got a plan.
Mr. Dryburgh: So, we won't have this discussion next month. It should be shut down. Mr. Scheerer: It will be shut down before he goes home today. Trust me.
Ms. Adams: We will update the tracking sheet accordingly with the action that the Board's taken today and the status of the agreement, addendum, etc. Are there any other questions for Kristen? Alright.

Engineer
Mr. Adams: We have Justin on the line. Justin, do you have any further information to report under the Engineer's Report?
Mr. Meteiver: The stormwater inspection is in process, currently. So, we're working on
that. Other than that, I don't have anything to add.
Ms. Adams: Alright. Thank you, Justin. Mr. Meteiver: You're welcome.
Ms. Adams: Part of that inspection was related to the Stormwater Needs Analysis Report. I neglected to add that to the tracking list. Last month, the Board took action to approve that report. The plan is to have a draft presented to Board Members in May. The deadline to submit that report is in June. So, I will update the action items list to track the Stormwater Needs Analysis Report.

District Manager's Report
Action Items List
Ms. Adams: We've already started to touch base regarding some of the action items that are included. A copy of the Action Items List is included in your agenda packet. You've already heard an update regarding the irrigation turnover and some of the documents that will be provided on behalf of Kingwood as it relates to irrigation fees. You've already heard an update regarding the Reunion Village gate access at the bridge. There were no changes to the functional fitness center at Seven Eagles other than I did receive an email yesterday that although some of the equipment is expected to arrive in March, part of the order has been backordered to April. So, there will be a multi-week installation where some of the equipment will be in place sooner than the full equipment. Alan, we've chatted about the Carriage Pointe gate, recently.
Mr. Scheerer: It is still on track for end of the month in March. Ms. Adams: Okay.
Mr. Scheerer: To have that installed.
Ms. Adams: Alright. Just as a reminder to Board Members, there are four other pool gates pending after Carriage Pointe is deemed a successful project. We've already had an update regarding the maintenance on the south side of County Road 532. There were no changes with the Duke streetlights. We are just waiting for their staff to confirm that all of the work orders have

been completed. Regarding the security improvements at Carriage Pointe, we have received the legal agreement back and we have a copy for the Chairman's signature today. Once that is fully executed, there will be a field meeting between Envera, Alan and ACT who's providing the resident access controls to determine all of the next steps and any further considerations that Board Members may have at future meetings. The parking rules for Carriage Pointe and Reunion Village, Alan and I chatted last week and at that time, you thought the signs for Carriage Pointe would be going in by the end of February. Are there any changes?
Mr. Scheerer: I think Valentine's Day is the planned day for the signs to be installed. Ms. Adams: Okay.
Mr. Scheerer: I received the call that the poles will be back for powder coating. The signs are ready to go. They are looking towards Valentine's Day. We can do it the day after, but right now, it's Monday.
Ms. Adams: There are some administrative tasks that we are tracking internally. We are going to be updating the Towing Agreement as well as the Enforcement Agreement with Reunion Security, so that they're aware of the new parking maps. They are also going to be working with us regarding notification to residents. In this particular neighborhood, there was thought that we wouldn't want to be limited to just the electronic communication because that may not be going to the building occupant. So, both electronic communication and door-to-door notices would be appropriate for this community to let them know that vehicles that are found improperly parked are subject to being towed. So, there will be the signage and a communication period. There will be a warning period and then eventually there will be towing enforcement in that neighborhood. Are there any questions regarding the Action Items List? Board Members, I do just have a couple other items to bring to your attention. At next month's meeting at 1:00 p.m., similar to the format that we had today, there is another road improvement project that will have great impact on Reunion community. Board Members who were in attendance at the Reunion West meeting are already aware of it. The Central Florida Expressway Authority has been in contact with the District. They would like to come and do a presentation for the Reunion West and Reunion East
Board Members regarding the Poinciana Parkway extension project and how that will impact nearby roadways and properties. So, at next month's meeting, which is coming up on March 101h, you will be hearing from the Central Florida Expressway Authority as far as where they are in the status and proposed design.

Mr. Dryburgh: Did they indicate that they've already made a selection there and they are giving us a preview?
Ms. Adams: There are so many road improvement projects right now. I believe that staff recently sent a project sheet to the Board Members.
Mr. Dryburgh: You did. I was wondering if it has progressed.
Ms. Adams: No, that project sheet was the most up-to-date information that I have. Then the only further communication that I've had is from the consultants regarding that they are now ready to come and present to this Board. They have actually been in communication since the fall, but they just were not yet ready in terms of design and documents and information until now.
Mr. Dryburgh: Well, as a Board Member, I would like to reemphasize my concern about the additional noise that this community is going to start enjoying, and whether or not the County is excited about having to pay for these walls going up to start reducing it. We have two issues that are compounding. One is security. You're going to get more thugs. You're just going to get more people interested in breaking into high-value homes here if they see easy access. We have these nice brand-new wide sidewalks. And, you're also getting a lot more sound. I for one would like to make sure that the Board keeps in mind that as we hear of this, we keep reminding them that we would like the County to pay for our sound walls and security. Not two feet, not three feet, but significant enough to address both issues.
Ms. Adams: So, just to be clear, I think that Osceola County has the ability for funding as it relates to Old Lake Wilson road improvements. As it relates to the Poinciana Parkway improvements, I think the Central Florida Expressway would be the funding source for that, but the message is the same.
Mr. Dryburgh: I'm not so concerned about the expressway because I've never really seen them do much around Florida for expressways, but I have seen doing things on parkways where they add security to high-value areas or high value hotels. Also, these beautiful sound suppressing walls go up and they are about 80 feet tall which by de facto becomes a security enhancement because people are going to be thinking, "Oh, I can break in and steal a golf cart and go through this nice wide-open area. " So, I'm just bringing it up because I think every time someone comes, we need to be on them about this and they need to address it and not say, "Well, you are a rental community. " That really got under my skin. I don't want to hear that. Don't treat me like some

second class citizen. We have provided the majority of the sales tax dollars to the county. I'm glad that's on the record.
Ms. Adams: It's on the record. Then one other note for Board Members. This is just for informational purposes. No Board action is acquired. It's not on District property. It is a parcel within the District boundaries, but the Discovery Center signage will soon be updated. That's on County Road 532 nearby the fire station. That signage which had been designed to match some of the other interior signs here at Reunion, will now be redesigned to match the road frontage signs at Reunion Village. So, that sign design that you recently approved for Reunion Village, they are going to be using that same design at Discovery Center. Again, that's just for informational purposes. No Board action is required.
Mr. Goldstein: What is the Discovery Center? I see the sign and I don't have a clue what it

IS.
Ms. Adams: I know that it is a private parcel. Alan, do you know what it is?
Mr. Scheerer: The Discovery Center is where they had the triple while trailer in place
before as they were building out here. You could go in and take a tour.
Mr. Greenstein: It's the real estate office?
Mr. Scheerer: Yeah, it was basically their glorified real estate office. They had probably three triple wides in that place at one time. We used to have Board meetings in there.
Mr. Goldstein: Okay. So, what is it now?
Mr. Scheerer: It's a fire station and Mr. Jim Bagley's private office building.
Ms. Adams: Just to be clear, where the fire station is, that property is owned by Osceola County and then the Discovery Center is private property.
Mr. Goldstein: Right. Is anybody using that building now? Mr. Scheerer: Yeah. I'm sure they are.
Mr. Goldstein: I never see anybody there.
Mr. Greenstein: Half of it was office space and the other half was this landscape or contractor support space.
Mr. Scheerer: A lot of the Margaritaville design stuff is in there. Mr. Goldstein: Alright. I'm just curious. I thought I would ask.
Mr.  Greenstein:  It  would  be  an  improvement.  It's  an  original  monument   that  says,
"Discovery Center"  around the granite. It's not ours to deal with because it's on private property.

Ms. Adams: I don't have any other updates.

Approval of Check Register
Ms. Adams: Let me move on to the approval of the Check Register. Board Members, included in your agenda packet is a summary of the Check Register from January 1 to January 31, 2022. This does include expenses for the General Fund, R&M Fund as well as payroll. The detailed check run is included in the agenda packet. This does require a Board action, so we would be seeking a motion to approve. The total amount of the Check Register is $740,422.73.

On MOTION by Mr. Dryburgh seconded by Mr. Goldstein with all in favor the January Check Register was approved.

Mr. Dryburgh: As you go through your presentation online, after the first summary everything of course is turning sideways. Is there a way to turn it to the side?
Ms. Adams: I will find out and let you know. Mr. Greenstein: I looked for a rotate command.
Ms. Adams: I'm sure there's a way to do that, so I will happily update you next meeting.

Balance Sheet and Income Statement
Ms. Adams: The next agenda item are the unaudited financials through December 31, 2021. It does include your Balance Sheet as well as your spending to date. There is detail regarding your different accounts related to debt service as well as the R&M Fund. There's also a month-to-month comparison for spending. I'm happy to answer any questions Board Members may have. This item does not require any Board action.

Status of Direct Bill Assessments
Ms. Adams: On Page 17 is the status of your direct bill assessments. This is being monitored by staff.
Mr. Greenstein: How are we doing? Ms. Adams: We're in communication.
Mr. Greenstein: It's looking better than it did.

Ms. Adams: Some of the communication has been successful but we have November payment pending from three commercial vendors.

Replacement and Maintenance Plan
Ms. Adams: Also, Board members under a separate cover, we did provide an update to the R&M fund. That was provided in Excel format so you could review various tabs. It will be helpful as we start working on budget preparation for the upcoming fiscal year. The items that are populated right now in upcoming years, are cut and pasted from the Reserve Study. Of course, your Field Manager is noting the conditions and noting areas that may need capital improvements or R&M improvements for your next year. Again, no Board action is required. This information is provided for informational purposes. I'll clean this up for next month's meeting. This also had been reviewed by Supervisor Staley who improved the layout and formatting for clarity.

Security Report
112 Parking Violations and O Vehicles Towed
Ms. Adams: For security, they did issue 112 parking violations and one vehicle was towed last month. Do you have any other information to report to the Board, Victor?
Mr. Dryburgh: Why don't you quick rundown on the most recent major incident?
Mr. Vargas: We had an incident with the golf carts. So, we did an investigation on that. Around 10:59 p.m., three unknown gentlemen walked through the emergency entrance next to Building K on foot and walked straight to Building H. That's where one of the golf carts were missing. It looked like a new one. They walked in there, checked the area and left again on foot. Around 12:43 a.m., they came back to the same area on foot, jumped on the golf carts and took them between 12:42 a.m. and 1:00 a.m. Where they exited, it looked like it was between Buildings D and E. There's an access to the golf course. The golf carts are packed in the back and that's how they took it out. The area is very dark at night.
Mr. Goldstein: You saw this on cameras? Mr. Vargas: Yes.
Ms. Adams: It's being investigated by the Osceola County Sheriffs Office.
Mr. Vargas: I provided information to the deputies. They asked me for more information. Mr. Goldstein: The cameras that you saw this on, was that in your cameras?

Mr. Vargas: Yes. It's hard to see faces.
Mr. Goldstein: Okay. So, your guys wouldn't have noticed if they were in front. Mr. Dryburgh: It was after the fact. They didn't see it while it was occurring.
Mr. Goldstein: So, it was after the fact.
Mr. Vargas: After the fact. We have some cameras in the housekeeping building and at the tennis area.
Dr. McKeon: If the camera is doing its thing and all of a sudden it picks up activity, will security know? Through some type of motion detection. I'm serious.
Mr. Scheerer: Most of these cameras can be motion-activated, but that's all motion, for example flies going by or a bug on the lens.
Mr. Dryburgh: Can you get a recommendation for people who have carts?
Mr. Vargas: Also, regarding the golf carts, there were two golf carts that had keys on them. Mr. Dryburgh: Have you recovered the golf carts?
Mr. Vargas: No, we haven't. They left the keys on the golf cart. Mr. Goldstein: Wait. The owners left the keys in their golf carts?
Mr. Vargas: Based on the information from the detective, two of the golf carts had keys on
them.
Mr. Dryburgh: Is there a recommendation from you as head of security for people who
own these golf carts that should be communicated to them via email? That if you have a cart, they should use the following device to lock their steering wheel so it cannot be turned.
Mr. Vargas: Yes, we can.
Mr. Dryburgh: Is there one you can find that you can send out that might be proactive so that when other folks who have these carts out there may not have heard of this, they would get your email and they can then make the intelligent decision to spend $58 to go buy the wheel lock or do whatever it is so they don't have another one driving off.
Mr. Vargas: You can send all of that to the HOA, so the HOA can send out an e-blast. Ms. Hobbs: The first thing that you can do is to advise them not to leave the keys.
Mr. Goldstein: That's probably a really good idea.
Mr. Vargas: If you have a house, I understand if you can keep them in the garage, but we have so many people leaving them out.

Mr. Goldstein: I wouldn't feel safe keeping it in my driveway overnight. That's why my car is in my driveway and my golf cart is in the garage. They are not really lockable. My point is that you can get a steering wheel lock. However, I'd like to go a little further with this if I can. As you're aware, I had lot of people call me and email me about this and the lady who had the problem with the ring doorbell, the eyes at her front door. It makes me think about a couple of things with security that I question. I think your guys do a great job for what they can do, for what you have and I have nothing against you at all. I think you have done an amazing job this last year here. I think things have really improved. However, I don't think you get enough money probably to have enough people to do your job. It used to be when I would go walk at night, I would see at least two security cars during a 30-minute walk. Maybe we had too many before. I don't know, but I felt pretty good about that. Every time I drive down the street coming home at night, I would pass a security car somewhere, almost always between coming through the gate and parking in my driveway and getting out of my car. Now, in a half-hour, I don't see one security car on the street and when I do see them, they may be going to a call, but they're usually driving so fast they couldn't see somebody lurking around a house if they wanted to. I know that slows down the patrols and everything, but it just seems to me like we have much fewer bodies out there than we used to have.
Mr. Vargas: We have five patrols during the day and four overnight.
Mr. Goldstein: How often is a patrol supposed to be hitting my street? If a patrol comes down my street at 6:00 p.m. tonight, when's the next time I'll see a patrol?
Mr. Vargas: They're supposed to be there every hour. Mr. Goldstein: That's unacceptable.
Mr. Vargas: We have two patrols assigned on the east side, two patrols on the west and then we'll have a supervisor crossing both sides. Within that time, they get calls and things like that.
Mr. Goldstein: I understand.
Mr. Vargas: Last Thursday, there was a big accident in Tradition. A vehicle that went to a property, crashed in a tree. There were four people that got injured. When that happened, every patrol responded to the call.
Mr. Goldstein: Of course.
Mr. Vargas: So, anything that happens on the property, we do a report. We send the report out daily to the Board and provide a log at the end of the month. It is not in detail, but it states

exactly what the call was and what exactly we did. So, we docwnent what they do, where they are, etc.
Mr. Goldstein: Just my observation is I don't feel we have as much security on the street as we used to have, nowhere near.
Ms. Adams: Board Members, I would be remiss not to just make mention of something
right now for Board consideration. At the Reunion West Board meeting earlier today, they did direct staff to bring back a proposal for enhanced law enforcement patrol, primarily for the purpose of traffic enforcement, but obviously any law enforcement presence is a crime deterrent as well. In the course of gathering information for Reunion West consideration, would Reunion East also like to consider enhanced law enforcement patrol either this fiscal year or next fiscal year?
Mr. Goldstein: Most definitely.
Mr. Dryburgh: We would be remiss not to consider it. When we signed the contracts with the company that's providing security, are we asked them at that time to provide us a certain nwnber of cars per day, not just whenever they feel like it or it's always two? Are being specific in our contract as to how many patrols we demand that they provide us for this amount of money?
Ms. Adams: No. Keep in mind, if you look at the amount of funding that the District provides for security such as staffing the entrance gates, 24/7/365 . . .
Mr. Dryburgh: Yes.
Ms. Adams: That funding would not cover security staffing the gates, if it was only District funding security. In proportion to the amount of security that the District is funding, relative to the entire security project, it's one piece of that. We want to keep in mind that there are multiple stakeholders and it is a collaborative effort.
Mr. Dryburgh: Let's harden down to multiple stakeholders. I can think of three: West, East
and Reunion. Who else is there?
Mr. Greenstein: Those are the three. There is also the Master Association.
Mr. Dryburgh: The Master Association is different than the HOA.
Mr. Greenstein: No. We have an agreement with the Master Association for the execution of security.
Ms. Adams: Right, for the facilitation of security.

Mr. Greenstein: Thank you. So, it's in that framework that you have to evaluate staffing levels and the contribution that the CDD makes and that homeowners like us make. You have to look at the whole enchilada.
Mr. Dryburgh: If look at our total percentage, do you know what that percentage is of the
total?
Ms. Adams: No.
Mr. Greenstein: We'd have to look at that. Mr. Goldstein: We should know.
Mr. Dryburgh: I agree with you, Steve. The reason I'm bringing this up is it seems to me
that in years past, we had way more cars traveling on our roads, way more cars. You wou]d see them about every 20 minutes driving up and down, not once every three or four hours as they drive through a community. Maybe your reaction is increased costs, in which case we ought to be aware of at least if nothing else or this may be some change that happened when Reunion changed ownership. I don't know what happened, but within the last 3-5 years, there seemed to be less automobiles on the road and less enforcement. Not that you guys won't enforce it, but they can only be so many places and you have two cars for all night.
Mr. Goldstein: We're not pointing fingers at your guys at all.
Mr. Vargas: We have two cars on one side, two cars on the other side and then we have a supervisor in a vehicle that goes back and forth.
Mr. Greenstein: So, basically, what you're saying is that we should have neighborhood coverage on an hourly basis. If that's insufficient, then we can pursue it further. I think the parties that pursue it with would be, again, all of the stakeholders.
Ms. Adams: Yes. For example, when we were planning for Reunion Village to be deve]oped in the last two calendar years, the current calendar year and last calendar year, we've been in communication with the POA regarding what date we anticipate staffing the Reunion Village entrance gate because that impacts their budget. So, it is a very collaborative effort with all of the stakeholders as it relates to security. The District funds a portion of security but doesn't fund all of the security services.
Mr. Greenstein: We can pursue it.
Mr. Dryburgh: That is a piece of information that we would like to pursue at the time, but I would like to know if the CDD, East or West, are funding 80 percent of it or if it is 20 percent.

I'd like to know that. I also like to go back in the records and find out if it is the same level and same number of cars. Have we had more houses built? Clearly. Have we had more contributions coming into the HOA? Clearly.
Mr. Vargas: We do have Spectrum and Eagle Trace. Now when we patrol from the East, we expand to Reunion Village. They're going to be adding patrol there, as soon as the community develops more. That's the information we got from the HOA. When we took over, there were only six houses, I believe, and now it's up to 12 houses. They have 23 more houses that they are going to start building. As soon as it develops, then we're going to be adding more patrols.
Mr. Dryburgh: Just be aware, we've got two supervisors under your lease that recall more automobiles on security driving the roads more frequently day and night.
Mr. Goldstein: I hear constantly from homeowners that feel like they're not seeing as much security on the streets. I don't hear complaints about calling security and they not showing up because they do and you guys do a great job when there's noise at night, but people are losing that respect of the protection. They are not seeing it like they used to. That's all I'm saying. Maybe you need more people. Maybe we all have to get together and figure out who's got to cough up what, but in my opinion, get rid of golf and the number one reason people move to Reunion other than golf was because of the security of living in this gated community, probably, in my opinion.
Mr. Vargas: Currently, with the patrol, I feel that we're still in control. Maybe we can have more patrols, but I think what we have now, I feel good.
Mr. Goldstein: Okay, but we don't. We're not seeing it. So, you feel good, but you're not walking your dog. My wife won't walk the dog at night anymore because she doesn't feel safe walking by herself in here. She used to walk the dog all the time.
Mr. Vargas: But like you mentioned, you guys would like to see more patrols. I have no problem to adding more patrols.
Ms. Adams: Let me just to state for the record too, the District has the ability to fund security to protect District resources. So, the assets that the District owns are what we're allowed to spend on security services.
Mr. Greenstein: Correct.
Ms. Adams: We're not funding security for private property matters and that's why it's a collaborative effort with the HOA. So, there needs to be a discussion in tandem with the HOA as

it relates to private property matters, because the District controls just the public property and security for the public property.
Mr. Goldstein: We'd like to figure out how we can have a conversation with the HOA. They don't have meetings, so how do we communicate with the HOA? How do we all get together on this matter? Is it something your office can suggest that we discuss this?
Ms. Adams: Yes.
Ms. Trucco: Perhaps an email to the HOA by Tricia saying, "We'd like to discuss the number of patrols as part of the security agreement that we're paying into. "
Mr. Greenstein: Tricia, I'm glad you made that clarification. I responded the way I did because I wasn't clear or I wasn't sure exactly what our commitment is, if it's strictly protection of CDD assets or if it's to guard houses.
Ms. Adams: We're only allowed to spend money for public assets. Mr. Goldstein: So, our sidewalks then?
Ms. Adams: Are public assets.
Mr. Goldstein: Okay. So, my walking my dog would fall into that definitely . Ms. Adams: Yes, but not private citizen's security needs.
Mr. Goldstein: I understand.
Mr. Greenstein: The majority of the cost of security is not paid for by the CDD. Mr. Goldstein: Understood.
Mr. Greenstein: I'm sure it is true. A lot of these issues that we're talking about are HOA, homeowner, resident, individual issues that fall under the Master Association umbrella when it comes to security. We overlap in areas. Sometimes we have to talk to them because we are not sure if it's ours or theirs or whether we're going to do with a joint venture and share the cost on something that comes up out of the blue. But it's something that we definitely should make sure the issue is pursued, but it's not necessarily something that would require CDD Board action.
Mr. Dryburgh: No. I don't think it is. I was asking a question. Mr. Goldstein: We do have a cost investment.
Ms. Adams: Absolutely.
Mr. Goldstein: So, we can at least discuss it.

Ms. Adams: Absolutely. There's that common sense perspective that if security is out there in the course of patrolling District roads and District amenities and they see something, they would take action on that.
Mr. Greenstein: It's related so I'm bringing it up. I was waiting for the right time to bring up my sidewalk issue. When it comes to the cars parking on it. In our discussion during the Reunion West meeting, as Tricia referenced, Graham had brought up the issue of commercial vehicles and non-compliance with the parking rules, just basically doing some silly stuff causing these problems. We talked about how we're going to.try to communicate better with that world and the property managers are going to do a better job of making sure that the vehicles aren't parked improperly and everything. I brought up the issue. The one thing that I really wish we could do something about would be the selfish individuals who feel that they must park their cars on the sidewalk. A white vehicle was parked along Gathering Court this morning, that it would have taken a helicopter dropping the car so perfectly on the sidewalk. It's not on the pad. It's not on the driveway. It is right on the sidewalk, which is a violation of State statute. That car needs to be ticketed. We talked about the fact that Osceola County Sheriff didn't seem to have much of an interest to pursue traffic enforcement because that's really what it is, packing and traffic enforcement. So, then Tricia brought up the issue of what we could consider, hiring off-duty law enforcement personnel who would be in power to issue tickets. I said that's something we want to scope out and consider for implementation because I'm tired. We put the nice sticker on the guy's car that has the site to the State code and even recites the code to show him why they're illegal and they tear it up or give us the bird or whatever. That's the reason why we talked about spending some more money but do it for something that really requires attention. Maybe then, the word will get that out that you can't park on the sidewalk because you're going to get a $250 ticket or whatever the fine is. So, that's why that came about.
Mr. Goldstein: Yeah, or you have the rear end of your car stick out on the road.
Mr. Greenstein: Anything that impedes another's travel. That's my biggest peeve, people with carriages, have to go off into the middle of the road because a car blocking the sidewalk. That's where that came from.
Mr. Dryburgh: So, we can do something about that.
Mr. Greenstein: Well, we're going to get a proposal for the next meeting. Ms. Adams: Yes.

Mr. Greenstein: Hopefully, that will allow us to act so that we can consider hiring off-duty law enforcement personnel for a focused purpose.
Mr. Dryburgh: I have been supporting that for years.
Mr. Goldstein: I've been saying it for years that we need it.
Mr. Staley: We just have to be cautious before we make that decision next month. Once you bring that off duty officer onto the property, he will ticket for any violation on anything he sees. I'm not getting specific about what I'm thinking of, but going back to our conversation, we have to think about that carefully before we make that final decision. We can't say, come in and just look for sidewalk parking. He will ticket whatever he sees; speeding, golf carts, whatever, so we have to be conscious.
Mr. Greenstein: That's true and that's probably why we've tread likely on this issue for a long, long time.
Mr. Goldstein: I don't think you can bring him in, if that's the case. Ms. Adams: It's up to the Board.
Mr. Goldstein: You got to talk to your residents.
Mr. Greenstein: We will get to it this month, hopefully. Mr. Staley: It's a choice to make as a community.
Mr. Goldstein: Exactly. That's the resident's decision.
Ms. Adams: Is there any other discussion regarding security matters?
Mr. Dryburgh: I've got one. It's sort of a security issue regarding the back to the pools and access to the pools. Yesterday, when I was at the pool, a young  couple  came  up  with  the proper key and it wouldn't work. The guy said, "I'm really.frustrated. This is the second time I've rented here and both times I've rented.from Reunion. Both times the keys don't open these gates. What's wrong at Reunion?" I said, "Well, you can use the system." He said, "I do, but that's just seems stupid. " The security systems we're putting in play, have got to be working with whatever keys they're issuing out and whatever key I might have in my car.
Mr. Goldstein: Does your key work?
Mr. Dryburgh: My key works now. After they fixed, it works great. The point is, many aren't working and/or the owners of the properties aren't aware that they no longer work because we've got so many key types. Which one I'm I supposed to be keeping; the one that says,

"Swimming pool?" Can we not communicate? Again, it may not be our responsibility. It may be the HOA's responsibility.
Ms. Adams: You're talking about people who rent from Reunion Resort?
Mr. Dryburgh: Reunion or from Jeeves or anybody else that's got access. We might have to be putting something out saying, "If you have a key that looks like this, you have access to the pools. If the key is not working, make sure that you take it to security to find out why. " Because
once you put these gates in place, I don't want it broken down by some drunken who's key doesn't work.
Mr. Greenstein: You1ust hit this nail on the head because today, we're going to get this key malfunction issue resolved when we do have barriers that cannot be defeated. We have the experiment going on with the one at Carriage Pointe, right? It's Carriage Pointe that is putting up the new design.
Mr. Scheerer: Correct.
Mr. Greenstein: Once that is installed and it proves positive, then we will go ahead and do it with all of the other communities.
Mr. Dryburgh: Then we should follow that with the communication explaining it. Mr. Greenstein: We will. Absolutely.
Mr. Vargas: Those keys from the third-party companies, tend to expire. We always tell them to bring into the office, so we can see what's wrong. A lot of times the key expires. The key expires every 12 months. They know about it.
Mr. Greenstein: What expiration date do you put on the card?
Mr. Vargas: As soon as you come to the office, we activate it. From that moment on, it is good for 12 months from there.
Mr. Goldstein: Even if it's being used, you're still deactivating them at the end of the year? Mr. Vargas: Yeah.
Mr. Goldstein: Really? Used to be they only did if you didn't use it.
Mr. Vargas: We can make those keys for whatever we want. In the beginning, our goal was to control how many keys were out there because it was only for the homeowners in the beginning. Then the homeowners started requesting more keys to give them to their housekeepers and it got out of control. So, put it in expiration date. We tried to control that. As soon as somebody comes

to the office, we have to verify if it is an owner, rental or a guest. If it's a guest, we just activate it depending on which company.
Ms. Adams: Okay. Is there any other discussion regarding security matters?
Mr. Greenstein: Victor you didn't realize how popular you are going to be today. Ms. Adams: Always.
Mr. Vargas: The only thing that I don't like is when my guys are not doing the job because this is my department.
Mr. Goldstein: I'm not saying your guys aren't doing their job. Your guys are doing the jobs that they're capable of doing. We just want more of them doing that job. That's all.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Other Business
Ms. Adams: Do we have any other business or Supervisor requests? Did you have a request, Supervisor Goldstein?
Mr. Goldstein: No.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS
There being none, the next item followed.

Supervisor's Requests

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Next Meeting Date
Ms. Adams: Our next meeting is March 10, 2022.

ELEVENTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment

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