MINUTES OF MEETING		
	REUNION EAST		
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT		
The  regular  meeting  of	the  Board  of Supervisors  of the  Reunion	
Development District was held Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 1:00 p.m. at	the	
Community Center, 7715 Heritage Crossing Way, Reunion, Florida.		
Present and constituting a quorum were:		
Carlton Grant	Chairman		
Mark Greenstein	Vice Chairman by phone		
Steven Goldstein	Assistant Treasurer		
Don Harding	Assistant Secretary		
John Dryburgh	Assistant Secretary		
Also present were:			
George Flint	District Manager		
Andrew d' Adesky	District Counsel		
Steve Boyd	District Engineer by phone		
Alan Scheerer	Operations Manager		
Clayton Smith	GMS		
Daniel Baker	ACP Communities		
John Cruz	CWS Security		
Rob Stultz	Yellowstone Landscape		
Trudy Hobbs	Supervisor Elect		
FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call		
Mr. Flint called the meeting to order and called the roll.		

East  Community

Heritage Crossing

SECOND

ORDER

OF

BUSINESS

Public Comment Period

There being none, the next item followed.

TlllRD

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Approval of the Minutes

2018 Meeting

of

the September 13,

On

MOTION

by

Mr. Harding seconded by Mr.

Dryburgh with all

in

favor  the  minutes  of  the  September  13,  2018  meeting  were
approved as presented.

October 11, 2018	Reunion East CDD		

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS

Consideration  of  Agreement	with		
Aquatic	Management,   Inc.	to		
				
Aquatic Pond Maintenance Services		

Applied

Provide

Mr.	Flint:   Next is an	agreement with Applied Aquatic Management to provide pond		
					
maintenance services.	know there is one pond located in Patriots Landing and this is a		
Mr.	Scheerer:  As you			
					
renewal for the next 12 months with the company that has been providing service for the past		
several years.				
	On	MOTION by	Mr. Harding seconded by Mr. Goldstein with all in		
					
	favor the agreement with Applied Aquatic Management, Inc. in the		
	monthly	of $129.00 and total annual cost of $1,548.00 was		
		amount			
	approved.			

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS

Discussion of Status

Agreement (MSA)

of

Management Services

Mr.	Flint:	Next is discussion of the Management Services	Agreement addressing the		
														
stables  and  Heritage	Crossing	Community	Center.	Mr.	Greenstein  and	I	have  been		

communicating  with  Daniel  Balcer  on  this  agreement  in	hopes  to  get  an  agreement	in		
													
substantially final	form	in a	concept the Board would agree with before we would ask Legal		
						
Counsel to review that and give a Bond Counsel opinion on the	structure of the agreement.	I		
														
apologize for the lateness of														
			getting this version to you.  We just received it this morning and we		
got it to you as quick as we could.  Daniel is here and Mark is on the phone.					
Mr.	Greenstein:  We have the latest version and it is yet to be reviewed by legal.			
																	
Mr.	Flint:	We	didn't  want  to  send	it  for  legal  review  until  we  were  somewhat		
						
comfortable with the form and structure of the agreement.  Bond							
										Counsel has not yet reviewed it.		
My hope  would be  that  after	today's  meeting	if the  Board  is	comfortable with	the  general		

structure of the agreement														
			subject to some twealcing that we	would do that step after today.			
												
Mr.	d'		think what we need from the Board is general direction that this idea,		
	Adesky:  I			
this concept is what we would like to pursue.  The agreement generally reflects the concept and		
then we will come back and try to nail down the details.										
Mr.	Harding:  I would rely on Mark because of his	involvement and I think it is probably		
										
ready to																	
submit for legal to look at.												

2

October

11,

2018

Reunion East CDD

Mr.	Dryburgh:  Compensation  and	duration.  Is  three  years  the  normal  duration  of a		

contract like this and is compensation where the management company receives all revenues and		
income derived from the operation?  Is that reasonable and normal? What is the normal amount		
of money we	would pay them	if we did not	do that?								
Mr.	d'	Adesky:  The term is much easier for me to						
													answer than the other one.  The term of		
three years is not uncommon for something like an amenity contract for example in places where		
you might have a restaurant.  As for the compensation that is the part we need to review the		
closest.  I don't want to give an opinion whether or not that is standard, the structure may not be		
permissible	as it is and might need a change in how it is done.					
Mr.	Flint:	As to the												
							question about whether it was	standard, there really isn't a standard		
																
for this type of thing; it is a												
							negotiated situation and I think Daniel can probably speak to it but		
they  have  some  concerns  taking  on these  two  facilities  whether they  can  generate  enough		
revenue to	offset the	additional expenses that they are going to incur and there is some risk to		
								
that.  Daniel not only has to be worried about that but he has people on the other side he is selling		
this to so he is working	between us and the LRA folks that are ultimately going to be responsible		
									
for incurring any losses or Salamander however the structure is.  The history on the Management		
Services  Agreement,  there  was  a  period  for  a  fairly  long  time  where  the  District  bore  a		
significant part of the	operational costs and they were operating the stables, this facility  and		
									
Seven Eagles.	Then we were able, after a period of time, to negotiate a phase out of that subsidy		
					
over a				years then it just											
number of		limited it to the Seven Eagles facility.  What this is proposing		
											
to do and it is subject to Bond											
								Counsel and District Counsel	saying we can do this is, the first		
																	
year any facility fees they collected would be would be	remitted to the District or 25%	of the		
																
operating  costs,  whichever is	greater.	If	they  collect facility  fees  greater than 25%	of the		
													
operating costs we get all the facility fees and that ramps up over a three-year period to 75%.		
Originally,	we	were	looking at four years and in the fourth year it was going to be 100% and we		
							
were  also  talking  about  whether  the  stables  and  this  facility  should  be  on  two  different		
percentage phase outs and it looks like LRA, Daniel and Carlton's position is that they should be		
on the same schedule.  That was											
								something we talked about too.				
Mr.	Harding:  It is not much different how Seven Eagles is handled now, right?			
				
Mr.	Flint:	With	Seven Eagles they bear all the	expense now.  This one we are going to		

bear the first year 75%	of the												
							expense, the second year 50%, the	third year 25% of the expense.		

3

October 11, 2018	Reunion East COD		

Mr.															
	Dryburgh:  Will we have a report each year as to how much revenue they are getting?		
Mr. Flint:   They  will  submit	reports  quarterly  with  their  event  and  facility  revenue		
									
information so we can track it.												
Mr.	Baker:	From an operational	standpoint if there is a ramp up time in building that		

business base assuming there is no business on the	books  now for	it, it needs to  be phased		
													
because the revenue stream will be phased.								
Mr.	Dryburgh:  I want to make sure we have some tracking system because both sides are		
			
totally in the dark.	I don't want to enter into a contract	where I feel at a disadvantage.  It has to		
													
make sense to	everyone.  If they make a ton of money and we are carrying all the expense that is		
				
not acceptable.														
Mr.	Flint:  Hopefully, if they are making a ton of money they are making a lot of facility		
rental money as well, which we would benefit from to the extent it is greater. The only thing		
about this agreement is they are setting the facility rental fee not us and that may have to change		
based  on  Bond  Counsel  and  District  Counsel  but  at  least  we  are  guaranteed  a  minimum		
percentage, whether they set the facility rental fee at zero or $2,000 at least we know what our		
guarantee is.	The offset in here to doing this is any property owners	within the District would		
																
get a discount, they have inserted 20% on the facility rental fee in exchange for the fact that they		
are paying Debt Service and	subsidizing the O&M so if	someone wants to have a wedding they		

are proposing  that person would pay	a discounted facility  rental  fee  to  be  able to  have the		
wedding here.  Whether 20% is the right number is something we need to talk about.  We need to		
expand Section 6 on page 2 where it addresses CDD events.  The only thing it is really covering		
right now is the Board Meetings but in my mind that is more than that, it needs to cover any		
community type events for CDD residents that might be held in this facility.		
Mr.	Greenstein:  When it comes to the form of the	agreement it is different than what we		
														
had with Seven Eagles and I think from my negotiations it was clear that there was risk for both		
sides and I	think the agreement	reflects that shared risk.  The	percentages, the cost coverage, if		

revenues exceed expectations no one is going to have a problem with anything.  What we have		
here is a guarantee of exposure	control on the expense side.  It is an expense exposure in the first		
							
year but that is when you have the biggest risk, it does go down over time.  I would like to read		
an email I sent George this morning after I read the draft agreement.  I agree with Daniel that this		
version  is  close to  final  MSA.   Beyond	a	general  cleanup  we  definitely  have  to  complete		

4

October 11, 2018															Reunion East CDD		
																	
Schedule C, which would	contain the specific capital	expenses the CDD will incur to bring the		

facilities up to a functional level and that refers mainly to the stables.	Also, it seems that the area		
														
of																	
operating expenses needs to be clarified. Coincidentally, I							
										received a request from our soon to		
be seated Board Member Trudy Hobbs to use Heritage in November for a one-time yoga class. I		
think  this  version  represents  verbal  agreements  in	principal  and		I'm	looking  forward  to		
													
discussion today.																
Mr.																	
Harding:  Mark, from your							point	we should have legal		
					standpoint do you think at this				
look at it and if there are any other minor things we need to do, we can do that at the next Board		
meeting.																	
Mr.			It	is definitely												
Greenstein:														
					workable.  I believe from an administrative standpoint it		
is workable.  Again, there could be some legal issues relative to fee	setting but I think it is a		
															
workable agreement and hopefully, we can proceed with all the necessary reviews.		
Mr. d' Adesky:  Since you are not actually adopting the agreement as is I think you can		
direct us to take this agreement as proposed and	review it and work with Bond Counsel to make		
									
sure it is enforceable.															
It was the consensus of the	Board for District Counsel to	review the	agreement and work		

with Bond Counsel to make sure it is enforceable.										
SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS		Discussion	of							
										Florida Statute Regarding Use		
						of Golf Carts, Low						
											Speed Vehicles and Utility		
						Vehicles (requested by Supervisor Dryburgh)		
Mr. d' Adesky:  I	am not going through all the nuances of the statute,	but the short version		
is that in order to  have	golf carts within a	community it needs to be either  (A)  an over 55		
community (B) a	mobile home park of a certain type or (C)	designated by the City or the County		

as a golf cart community.	They would have to have a map	of all the roads	in the community,		
submit it to the	County and have them designate it as a golf cart community.	If a golf cart was		
				
on a random road, City,	County, any road including these roads a police officer could pull them		
					
over and given them a ticket for													
				unauthorized use of equipment.  For normal golf carts, you have		
to get a designation from the City or County	otherwise the only use that is permitted is sort of		
								
incidental use, like a landscaper or													
				someone who is using it to service a tract.				
Mr. Flint:	If it is a golf cart that is street legal it	can't	be driven on the street?		

5

October 11, 2018													Reunion East CDD		
																	
	Mr. d 'Adesky:	Even if it is street legal it can't be	driven on the street.  If they are going		
									
from point A to point B, and it is an issue in a lot of communities, the enforcement of that is not		
our duty or issue and		I would encourage us not to wade into the	enforcement of people driving		
														
golf carts.  Specifically,									an addendum or it is		
						because of golf carts in every contract we do I have			
in the contract, a very specific provision that I put in there in the						
											last three years that covers golf		
carts and the	liability for golf carts and equipment and says if there is any	sort of issue involving		
					
golf cart equipment for example the contractor is on our property doing a service for us and they		
use											it or doing it	in an impermissible		
something like a golf cart and they are not permitted to do				
way that is on them, all the								for that.		
						liability is on them.  They have indemnified us			
	Mr. Dryburgh:  There is a house four lots down from my	house that recently brought in		
														
six golf carts and they are parking in their garage.  These are not very nice	golf carts but they are		
okay enough to have people riding in them down the streets with kids  hanging on the back		
screaming and	falling	off going about 80 mph.  We are not liable for that?				
								
	Mr. d' Adesky:		It is just like										
							speeding, we can't enforce that.				
	Mr. Flint:  You would have to call the County Sheriffs department.  That would be the		
enforcement.																
	Mr. d' Adesky:  We had an incident in another community where someone was hit on a		
golf cart and there was a serious										
							injury and the liability was on the individual and in that case it		
was a child who was operating it under the age and shouldn't have been operating it in the first		
place.  The District doesn't	control that, we have	no ability to	enforce that, we literally cannot		

enforce that.																
	Mr. Dryburgh:  Are the homeowners who are renting the property providing those golf		
carts liable?																
	Mr. d' Adesky:		That is not our issue and	I can't give an opinion.	I understand it is a		
safety issue and I understand the concern.  That is a valid	concern, but it is beyond the scope of		
												
our powers.  Now, if the											
						Board directed us to go to the County and ask to designate these roads		
as golf cart roads we could approach them with that, but typically	Counties are very hesitant to		
															
do that	because they feel that if they do it for one they have to  do it for everybody.   They		
			
typically agree	to it	upfront when they are developing a	community and it is part of the concept		

upfront or they don't do it.											
	Mr. Harding:	I think our landscaping company is taking on their own liability.		

6

October 11, 2018		Reunion East CDD		
					
Mr. d' Adesky:  Yes, they use a lot of different equipment and they	are liable.		
Mr. Flint:  There are exemptions for tractors and that sort of thing.			
Mr.	d' Adesky:  There are				
	certain exemptions for what			
		landscapers are using but we don't		
police that.	We don't				
	police their equipment they assume liability for operating that equipment		
properly just like they operate their mowers properly.				

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS

A.	Attorney

Staff Reports

Mr.	d'Adesky:	Wednesday,  October		th	at 4:45 p.m.  we	had  an  email from Vivek		
				10					
Babbar, with Straley Robin Vericker, on	behalf	of LRA, and	I will	read it to you. We had a		
											
phone call but it summarizes that.														
Good afternoon Andrew and Jan,  as	I	discussed with Andrew	over the phone		
											
earlier, we reviewed the Trustee's letter dated	August	21, 2018	and we believe		
															
our	original letter from 2016 sufficiently	addressed the concerns and allegations		

related to	LRA Orlando and the	trustee's new letter.  We have nothing further to		
							
add at this time.	If there are any new	developments we look forward to hearing		
									
from you and the Board of Reunion CDD.									
What happened was Straley Robin Vericker, on	behalf of LRA,  sent us a letter with		
														
certain positions, legal defenses and whatnot against being assessed for bond debt, which they		
later on extended to  arguably  apply  for  O&M.		The  Trustee took	a while  to  get together a		
response letter to	that, they delivered that on August 21st_	The District has a duty to balance the		
size and make prudent and reasonable consideration on this	matter so  in that light we  gave		
															
Straley Robin Vericker the opportunity to respond to the	Trustee's letter and see if they had any		
														
additional arguments they would like to present.   They mulled it over and thought they had		
already presented all their arguments so at this point we as a District, George, myself, Jan will		
get  together,  look  at  our  methodology  as  it  is		presented,  see  if	it	accurately  reflects  our		
														
understanding of	the current legal	positions and make sure it is reasonable and then re-present it		
						
to the Board.  At that time, we would probably hear from both sides, LRA and the Trustee but at		
this time there is	no action that is required.  I'm just keeping you updated on that.  Once again		

7	'

October 11, 2018	Reunion East CDD		

that is related to the unexchanged bond series. In the next couple least have a form of proposed methodology back.

of

months I would expect to at

B.

Engineer

Mr. Boyd:	I got an update from TCD yesterday, they are	waiting for Duke Energy to		
											
install the transformer and unfortunately Duke went into storm	mode.	We are hoping to get a		
											
transformer set next week and then they will put this on flash so it will basically flash in a red		
stop condition and yellow for about a week to two weeks to get everybody used to it and the		
County will sign off and it will go active but right now they are waiting	on power.		
Mr.  Greenstein:	I thought that intersection would have	a lit  sign that  said Reunion		
Boulevard.	It looks like the only illumination is from street	lamps.  Is that your understanding?		
								
Mr. Boyd:  My understanding was that there would be an illuminated sign hanging from		
the mast arm, so I need to look into that if it is not there.							
Mr. Flint:  It is	supposed to be internally lit.							
										
Mr. Greenstein:  In addition to the lighted sign, coming in from two different directions I		
think there should be a	normal sign on the roadway that says the next intersection Reunion		
Boulevard.												
Mr. Boyd:   That is not in the  scope and that would	require	additional permitting by		
										
Osceola County.  It is										
		doable but that was not included.							
Mr. Greenstein:	I understand that.	It may take a little while to get it but get the ball		
rolling and	maybe by the new year we will see it.							
								
Mr. Boyd:	I will check on that as well.							

C.

Manager

i.

Action Items List

Mr.  Flint:   Irrigation turnover,  Daniel  is there anything you want to  mention to  the		
Board?				
Mr.  Baker:   Not  at  this  time  other than  we  had	a	meeting  regarding  the  status  of		
				
negotiations with Toho.  There is a strong probability it will come close to the finish line very		
soon.				

8

October

11,

2018

Reunion East CDD

Mr.	Flint:   Allocation of 532 costs, District	Counsel prepared letters per the Board's		
									
request												
including the costs and those have been sent to each of the property owners on the south		
side.												
The MSA we talked about.								
Mr.	Harding:  On Sinclair Road do we do the landscaping there too?		
				
Mr.	Flint:  Yes.										
Mr.		Harding:  Is that all the way up to Old Lake Wilson Road?			
					
Mr.		Scheerer:  All the way to Old Lake Wilson Road.  The only area not included is the		
				
footprint of the actual 429 interchange, it goes up to 429 then picks up on the other side of 429		
and goes all the way up to Old Lake Wilson Road.						
Mr.		d'Adesky:	It is pursuant to an interlocal	agreement.	When	you have an interlocal		

agreement you can act outside your							
					boundary.  At the point of which this was entered into you		
agreed to cover that area.  You can back out of it any time and we can back out of a portion of it		
and decide not to do anything with Sinclair Road.  It is	unirrigated	Bahia.	I would advise before		
												
you stop that										
		particular service you might want to consult with the West because some of that		
viewshed would impact the West.									
Mr.		Flint:  It is a shared cost.								
Mr.		Greenstein:	As a Board							
					Member on the West let me take a look at the area and my		
understanding is it is unirrigated Bahia and we are just dealing with periodic mowing.		
Mr.		Flint:  This area is in	Reunion West CDD so it is not like this little piece is sticking		
						
out.  It is outside that development, but it is along that edge of the CDD border.		
Mr.		d' Ade sky:	If it is a shared expense they are paying based on the platted parcels.		
Mr.	Greenstein:	I can review the	situation on the West side with Alan and will make sure		
								
everyone on the East is	informed of what their assessment is.				
							
Mr.	Flint:  The rapid arm gates on the exit side	of Excitement Drive.		
Mr.	Scheerer:  They are installed and operational.				
					
Mr.	Flint:  The evaluation	of	transponder system for the gate access?		
							
Mr.	Scheerer:  I think that is with the HOA.						
							
Mr.	Cruz:  The status of that	is the server we have in place for that is on its last leg so say		
the server goes down, it wouldn't affect those active cards now.  All those cards will still work		
because the individual access points has that database loaded in there already.  You wouldn't be		

9

October

11,

2018

Reunion East CDD

able to add or make any changes to any cards.  As far as	where we are on the new access system,		
															
I have two	proposals and I'm waiting on the third one,	which has been delayed because it is tied		

into the resort key system.  There are some upgrades they are looking into for their key system		
and one of the features that	company offers is gate access. There are advantages to using them,		
									
they would be able to put locks on the pools that would eliminate folks who don't have keys.		
Only members,		residents and guests	of	those who are	supposed to be using the pool will be		

granted		I'm just waiting on them.							
	access.								
	Mr.	Dryburgh:		It is	a	shared cost between the HOA and	CDD.  How long will it be		

before you get the proposal?											
	Mr.	Cruz:  Last I was told was next week.						
	Mr.	Dryburgh:  Once it is	approved how long before it is installed?		
											
	Mr.	Cruz:  That	depends on which system we go with.  I would guess two weeks from the		
								
time it is approved but	it all											
						depends on who we go with and the parts that are available.		
Mr.	Dryburgh:  Are all vendors providing you a product from U.S. manufacturers?  Are		
				
they all approved vendors?											
Mr.	Cruz:	They are all local companies.  Where they get their parts from I would have to		
						
research but the two companies	I have proposals from are	based in the United States.  One of		
																
them is	ACT who  we  already have an	agreement with.   The other one is the company that		
													
installed the previous						of that is from the United States.		
				software and all			
Mr.	Harding:	By the next meeting we  should	probably have  enough information to		

decide where we go.													
Mr.	Flint:  The	resolution to that issue is going to have an impact on the issue that is on		
							
our action items list, which was more geared toward access			
														control at the pools and that sort of		
thing.																	
The LED radar signs is next.								
Mr.	Scheerer:  I	am in receipt	of all the radar signs and we will begin installation of the		
first sign next week coming over the bridge by the waterpark.  We will use that as our test.  We		
have to	preassemble them, make sure the uniform brackets work that were sent and make sure		
			
we don't have any problems.	I have also received an email yesterday from our sign company		
that the "resident only" signs are available and I will pick those up tomorrow and we will also		
get those installed at the Terraces Pool.  Something else that			
														wasn't on here, Mr. Harding sent an		

10

October 11, 2018															Reunion East CDD		
																					
email, the oak trees behind the homes on Watson Court are	complete	and the pothole issue on		
																		
Sinclair Road I did contact Osceola County Road and Bridge and they are going to create a work		
order but they have told me they are several months out before they can get to that.  I also called		
them about the sidewalks on Osceola/Polk County Line Road.  There was already an existing		
work order on that and they are	telling me they can't get to those until December.			
													
	Mr.	Flint:	The	policies/guidelines  regulating  amenity  policies,  Andrew  and	I  both		
											
provided the Board	with some examples.	I don't know	if you want to have a discussion	on that		
today.																						
	Mr.	Harding:  Reading through them they are kind of	like what	Celebration has done and		
																			
it would be nice to implement something similar to theirs.								
	Mr.	d'Adesky: We spent a lot of	legal hours on that policy, getting	it done, getting it		
							
through, getting it constructed because they were very specific about what they wanted.  They		
have extremely large	events so some of them are categorically	different.	Certain requirements		

within there would be overkill for Reunion.											
	Mr.	Harding:		Whatever  would be	appropriate	for	our type	of	facility,  use  that  for		

adoption.																					
	Mr.	d'	Adesky:  We can come up with a draft.									
													
	Mr.	Harding:		It will give security a means of being able to control it better in terms of		
what goes on at those facilities.														
	Mr.	d'Adesky:  The way it works there is	whenever they want to hold an event and you		

can do	this differently but they	submit an application, the Board will come and review that.  The		
											
Board	of the	Celebration  CDD  approves  every  special  event.  We  could  have  that  be  the		
						
management company but I need that direction from you.									
	Mr.	Harding:			I	would leave that	up to the management company.	It is a matter of		
controlling the size of	the group.  Some of the concerns	expressed by the people at the Terraces		
																
was the number of people and bands and all kinds of stuff.  We need to have control, some sort		
of		to be able to have security control	it.										
policies												
	Mr.	Dryburgh:  Why would we even be allowing it now that we have a horse stable being		
				
used by Reunion.  Why would we not say if you want an event, pay for it.					

11

October 11, 2018

Reunion East CDD

Mr. d' Adesky:	It is up to you if you wanted your facilities to be used by residents for a		
different type of	use.  For example, you could put a prohibition on weddings.  That was one of		
the comments brought up at a previous meeting,				
			someone was trying to hold a wedding there.			
Mr. Dry burgh:  You can say not more than 25 people.			
Mr.	Harding:	I think it would be nice to come back with a draft based on the type	of		
							
facilities that we have, which is primarily the pools and these facilities can be managed by the		
Resort and	is different.					
Mr.	d' Adesky:	Is there any sort of limitation you would like us to keep in mind like		
under X amount	of people?  Obviously, there are building limits but any sort of hard limit such		
as every event has to be under 50 people or something like that.			
Mr.	Dryburgh:  Nothing more than 25.				
Mr.	Harding:  I think that is what				
			Celebration had and as far as limitations on alcohol, I		
think we should have those in our policies too.				
Mr.	d' Adesky:	I will come back to the Board with			
				something that is geared more toward		
Reunion.							
Mr.	Dryburgh:	I had a question on the number of speed limit signs on the roads.  If you		
drive in from Sinclair you don't see a speed limit sign for some time.  We need a post that says		
all roads in Reunion 25 mph so people are aware.				
Mr.	Goldstein:	Having a sign like that might catch their eye.  It is cheaper than a lot	of		
other things we are trying to do.  I don't know if there is	a way to have it right after the gate	so		
they have to see it when they come through the gates.				
Mr.	Flint:	We  will  get with  Steve Boyd.  Any	regulatory  signs  we  would  want the		
						
engineer to make sure that he is giving us input.				
Mr.	Greenstein:	I am aware of the issue I have spoken to Alan in the last few weeks.  We		
							
drove through and noticed there were no speed limit signs coming in from the West gate.  There		
is one sign within your jurisdiction on Gathering				
			Drive as you approach the sign on Excitement		
and Gathering I believe there is a sign there that says 30 mph.  That may be an anomaly it should		
be 25 throughout the resort.				
Mr.	Harding:  Once we get our initial five radar speed signs set up I think we are going to		
							
want to put in some more.  That might be the answer.  One of the biggest complaints I get from		

12

October 11, 2018	Reunion East COD		

people is us trying to speed of traffic going

do something to control speed. through this place.

We

need to have something to control the

Mr.

Flint:

I will add to the

list, the

evaluation

of

speed limit signs.

ii.

Approval

of

Check Register

Mr.

Flint presented the check register from

September in the

amount

of

$239,312.21.

On MOTION by Mr. Harding seconded by favor the check register was approved.

Mr.

Dryburgh

with

all in

iii.

Balance Sheet and Income Statement

A copy

of

the

balance sheet and income

statement were

included

in

the agenda package.

iv.

Status

of

Direct Bill Assessments

A copy

of

the

status

of

direct bill assessments was included in the agenda package.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Other Business	
There being none, the next item followed.	
NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor's Requests	
A resident:  I want to say thanks a million because the sidewalks and cobblestones were	
cleaned.  The parties at the pool, there was one time when they had a party at the pool and there	
was a guy swiping them in with his card.  They used the bathroom and after the party it took	
three of us to clean it up.  If access to the pool with the new gate control is installed if that works	
that would help alleviate the problem.		
TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Next Meeting Date	

The next meeting date is November

8,

2018.

13

October 11, 2018	Reunion East CDD		

On MOTION by Mr. Harding seconded by Mr. favor the meeting adjourned at 1 :59 p.m.

Dryburgh

with

all

in

Secretary/Assistant Secretary

Chairman/Vice

Chairman

14