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, July 8, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. at the Heritage Crossing Community Center, 7715 Heritage Crossing Way, Reunion, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Mark Greenstein Don Harding Trudy Hobbs Steven Goldstein John Dryburgh

Also present were:

Tricia Adams Kristen Trucco
Jan Carpenter (by phone) Ashton Bligh (by phone) Xabier Guerricagoitia Alan Scheerer
Victor Vargas Mike Smith
Zac Johnson (by phone)
Residents

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS

Chairman
Vice Chairman Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary

District Manager District Counsel District Counsel Bond Counsel
Boyd Civil Engineering Field Manager
Reunion Security Yellowstone Landscape Encore Development

Roll Call

Ms. Adams called the meeting to order at 1:05 p.m. and called the roll. All Supervisors were present.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comment Period
Ms. Adams: This is an opportunity for any members of the public to make a statement to the Board of Supervisors. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to make a statement to the Board?
*Due to audio issues, a resident's comment about landscaping on HOA property could not be transcribed.
Ms. Adams: Just for clarification, this is a COD meeting. The COD does have landscaping in CDD common areas. This is not a question-and-answer session with the Board, but our Field

Operations Manager is here, and he can follow up with you after the meeting, regarding if the trees you are inquiring about, are on CDD property or private property. He will be able to point you in the right direction.
Mr. Dryburgh: Have you reached out to your HOA? Resident (Not Identified): Yes.
Ms. Adams: If you leave before the meeting is over, make sure we have your telephone number to follow up. Would anyone else like to make a statement to the Board of Supervisors? Board Members, we have some public callers on the line. Are there any callers who would like to make a statement to the Board of Supervisors?
A Resident: Has the Board had any discussions over the proposed road between 429 and the Poinciana Expressway?
Mr. Harding: I don't know if they have made any final decisions. Ms. Adams: It's not a CDD matter.
Mr. Harding: I think they are still studying it.
Mr. Greenstein: They started the PD&E study last month and it is probably going to take 18 to 24 months minimum to do that study. We have yet to get to a stage on that project where there is any impact on the CDD that we would be discussing.
Mr. Harding: There are public hearings, but Board Members can only attend as citizens.
We are not paying for it or getting involved in it.
Ms. Carpenter: There is a public meeting coming up. The Chairman is correct. It will be 2023 before they complete their study and then they will have some projections. That is the only time when the CDD would know if there are any impacts. If so, we could retain a Condemnation Lawyer or see if anyone else is impacted. So it will be at least another year or two before we even know.
Mr. Harding: They are also studying Old Lake Wilson Road.
Ms. Adams: Are there any other public comments? Hearing none, Board Members, distributed today is a revised agenda. You will notice that several items were added to the agenda. These items were provided under separate cover. You also have handouts for today's meeting. You just heard from Ms. Jan Carpenter who is on the phone. I just wanted to acknowledge that for the record. Ms. Kristen Trucco is also present. We also have Ms. Ashton Bligh from Greenberg, Traurig. When we get to some of the resolutions, she will be presenting those.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of the Minutes of the June 10,
2021 Meeting and the April 8, 2021 Meeting
Ms. Adams: Are there any comments or corrections to the meeting minutes? If not, we need a motion to approve.

On MOTION by Mr. Goldstein seconded by Mr. Greenstein with all in favor the Minutes of the April 8, 2021 and June 10, 2021 Meetings were approved as presented.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Re-Purposing Former
Game Room at Seven Eagles Center Ms. Adams: Mr. Chairman, would you like to defer this item until later in the agenda? Mr. Greenstein: Yes.
Ms. Adams: That way we can take care of some financing matters and staff members, who may need to do so, can leave. Ashton, we are going to reorganize the agenda and move onto financing matters. Then we will go back to our agenda.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion	of	Proposed Development
This item was tabled until later in the meeting.

Villatel

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Financing Matters
Ms. Adams: There are several items related to the Series 2021 Financing. If Board Members recall, changes to the Engineer's Report and the Master Assessment Methodology were presented to the Board on numerous occasions. Those changes required re-presenting to the Board and some re-noticing. Some of the resolutions have been updated and are scheduled for presentation and confirmation with the Board today.

Consideration of Amended Engineer's Report
Ms. Adams: The first item under financing matters is consideration of the amended Engineer's Report. This is something that Mr. Steve Boyd has worked on. The Engineer's Report was presented to the Board in the past. With us today is Mr. Xabier Guerricagoitia of Boyd Civil Engineering who is serving for Steve who is not here. Did you want to walk the Board through the Engineer's Report?

Mr. Guerricagoitia: Yes. As Tricia mentioned, we prepared a Supplemental Engineer's Report for Reunion Village and Spectrum at Reunion. Reunion Village consists of 250 single­ family lots. Spectrum at Reunion consists of 296 condominium units. On Page 3, in Table 1, the Land Use Summary has been updated to include these parcels. They are marked by asterisks and included in the 2021 project. Further along in the report, if you look at the exhibits, starting with Exhibit A-1, behind Page 8, on the map we highlighted where Spectrum Phases 1 and 2 and Reunion Village Phases 3 through 5 are located. There is an aerial map in Exhibit A-2. Behind that are legal descriptions in Exhibits A-3 and A-4. Exhibit Bis the site plan for Reunion Village and Exhibit C is the site plan for Spectrum at Reunion. If you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them at this time.
Ms. Adams: The Engineer's Report is an attachment in several of the resolutions and documents related to the bond financing. Kristen, does the Board need to take action to approve the amended report?
Ms. Trucco: Yes.
Ms. Adams: Are there any comments or questions for the District Engineer? If not, we would be looking for a motion to approve the Amended Engineer's Report.

Mr. Greenstein MOVED to approve the Amended Engineer's Report and Mr. Harding seconded the motion.

Ms. Adams: Is there any further discussion? Are there any comments from District Counsel? Hearing none,

On VOICE VOTE with all in favor the Amended Engineer's Report was approved.

Consideration of Amended Master Assessment Methodology
Ms. Adams: The Amended Master Assessment Methodology was included in your agenda package. It was dated July 8, 2021 and encompasses the acreage that the District Engineer just walked through. Page 9, Table 1 shows that Reunion Village has 250 single-family lots and 296 multi-family condominium units at Spectrum at Reunion, for a total of 546 units. It also assigns an Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU). The single-family homes are 2 ERUs and the multi-family homes are 1 ½ ERUs, for a total of 944 ERUs. Moving to the next table, this ties back to the Engineer's Report and the qualified infrastructure expenses. Table 4 shows a breakdown with the

ERUs and the improvement cost per unit. Again, this is your Master Assessment Methodology. When the bond is issued, that will tie into a Supplemental Assessment Methodology that ties into the actual terms of the bond.
Mr. Dryburgh: Is there only one gatehouse?
Ms. Adams: Yes. For the Development Plan, this includes one gatehouse at the Reunion Village area. On Page 14, Table 6 starts to go into the par debt per unit also the net debt service payments per unit. Again your Master Assessment Methodology is in place but you will also have your Supplemental Assessment Methodology based on the actual terms of the bonds. Your Property Tax Roll is attached to it and includes all of the area to be assessed. The Board has seen this information before. This now includes the additional property areas that were identified in the Engineer's Report. Are there any questions regarding the Master Assessment Methodology that's been amended?
Mr. Greenstein: The only thing that I'm going to point out is you can see starting on the bottom of Page. 16 and continuing on Page 17, the entities that own the various parcels for Spectrum. I'll just leave it at that.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Mr. Harding with all in favor the Amended Master Assessment Methodology was approved.

Consideration of Resolution 2021-12 Declaring Special Assessments
Ms. Adams: This was prepared by Kristen and Jan. Jan, would you like to present Resolution 2021-12?
Ms. Carpenter: Yes. I will just introduce it to let the Board know that the reason we are coming back with a revised report. This new hearing and declaration of assessments is due to the fact that when we did the last hearing, which did the same thing, you levied assessments on the Spectrum at Reunion and Reunion Village parcels. The Property Appraiser legal descriptions were not quite in sync due to construction. So to make sure that all of various lots were included, we are redoing the assessment process. Basically, this is the same process we did last year, incorporating all of the lots that were put in the Methodology Report and the Engineer's Report follows that. So this is kind of a redo of what you did before to clarify and make sure that none of the lots were missing due to the moving pieces in the development process.
Mr. Greenstein: Thanks, Jan.

Ms. Carpenter: I will now tum it over to Kristen to give the 30 second review of the declaration and public hearing resolutions.
Ms. Trucco: Resolution 2021-12 declares assessments on the property we completed for the 2021 project. The amounts specified are identical to the one you approved last year, except it includes the First Supplemental Engineer's Report that Xabier presented and the amended Assessment Methodology. We are looking for a resolution to adopt Resolution 2021-12.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Mr. Dryburgh with all in favor Resolution 2021-12 Declaring Special Assessments on Property Within the District; Indicating the Location, Nature and Estimated Cost of those Improvements whose Cost is to be Defrayed by the Special Assessments; Providing the Estimated Cost of the Improvements to be Partially Defrayed by the Special Assessments; Providing the Manner in which such Special Assessments Shall be Made; Providing when such Special Assessments Shall be Made; Designating Lands Upon which the Special Assessments shall be Levied; Providing for an Assessment Plat; Adopting a Preliminary Assessment Roll; Providing for a Public Hearing to Consider the Advisability and Propriety of Said Assessments and the Related Improvements; Providing for Notice of Said Public Hearing; Providing for Publication of this Resolution and Providing for an Effective Date was adopted.

Consideration of Resolution 2021-13 Setting a Public Hearing for Special Assessments
Ms. Adams: Resolution 2021-13 sets your public hearing for your August meeting date.
Kristen, did you want to present this?
Ms. Trucco: Sure. Again, this is just a repeat of what we had done a year ago in order to levy assessments. Therefore, for these bonds with their revised legal description, we are required to hold another public hearing or any affected property owners have an opportunity to come and be heard if they have an objection to the levy of assessments in accordance with the revised Special Methodology Report and the revised Engineer's Report. So, we just need a motion to approve this.

Ms. Hobbs MOVED to adopt Resolution 2021-13 Setting a Public Hearing to be Held on August 12, 2021 at 1:00 P.M. at the Heritage Crossing Community Center, 7715 Heritage Crossing Way, Reunion (Kissimmee), Florida, 34747, for the Purpose of Hearing Public Comment on Imposing Special Assessments on Certain Property within the District in Accordance with Chapters 170, 197, 190, Florida Statutes; Providing for Severability, Conflicts and an Effective Date and Mr. Goldstein seconded the motion.

Ms. Adams: Is there any further discussion?
Mr. Harding: What is the date of the public hearing?
Ms. Adams: The second Thursday in August, which is August 12th• It will be at your regular meeting time, which is 1:00 p.m. Is there any further discussion regarding Resolution 2021-13 setting the public hearing for your August meeting date? Hearing none,

On VOICE VOTE with all in favor Resolution 2021-13 Setting a Public Hearing to be Held on August 12, 2021 at 1:00 P.M. at the Heritage Crossing Community Center, 7715 Heritage Crossing Way, Reunion (Kissimmee), Florida, 34747, for the Purpose of Hearing Public Comment on Imposing Special Assessments on Certain Property within the District in Accordance with Chapters 170, 197, 190, Florida Statutes; Providing for Severability, Conflicts and an Effective Date was adopted.

Consideration	of	Resolution	2021-15	Amending	Resolution	2021-05 Authorizing the Issuance of Bonds - Added
Ms. Adams: Resolution 2021-15 is your Delegation Resolution setting the bond parameters. The Board had previously gone through the process, but due to the Amended Engineer's Report as well as the Amended Master Assessment Methodology, it must go through the process again. We have Ms. Ashton Bligh on the phone with Greenberg Traurig. She is going to walk the Board Members through this Delegation Resolution. It was provided to the Board under separate cover and Resolution 2021-15 was included in your agenda package. Ashton, are you on the line?
Ms. Bligh: I am. This resolution is a simple resolution. It is amending the original Delegation Resolution, which was adopted by the Board in December of last year. The original Delegation Resolution, among other items, sets forth the parameters for the bonds. The parameters for the bonds are not being amended at this time. What this is doing is it amends the preamble in that original Delegation Resolution to bring it forward. Then any references to the Engineer's

Report in that original Delegation Resolution referred to the Amended Engineer's Report, which you approved at this meeting. References to the Master Assessment Methodology Report will refer to the Amended Master Assessment Report, which you approved at this meeting as well. Any references to the Assessment Resolution are deemed to refer to the two Assessment Resolutions that you adopted at this meeting as well as an Equalization Resolution, which will be adopted at a later meeting. If you have any questions, let me know, but that is Resolution 2021- 15.
Mr. Greenstein: Thank you.
Ms. Adams: A motion to adopt Resolution 2021-15, the amending Delegation Resolution would be in order.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Ms. Hobbs with all in favor Resolution 2021-15 Amending 2021-05 Bond Delegation Resolution was adopted and the Chairman was authorized to execute.

Ms. Adams: Thank you, Ashton.
Ms. Carpenter: The bonds are expected to close right after the next meeting with the hearing. The Chairman looked at the offering document and was ready to sign off a month or two ago under the Delegation Resolution. He has that authority, so as we get close to posting an offering document, we will be bringing that before Mark again for execution. This time we are ready to close as soon as we get through that hearing next month. Thank you all for your patience getting through this process.
Mr. Greenstein: Thank you, Jan. I think our timing is going to be good on the rates. Ms. Adams: Yes. At this time we are going to revert to our revised agenda.

Consideration of Re-Purposing Former Game Room at Seven Eagles Center
(Item 4)
Ms. Adams: Back in December, the CDD took over the direct management of the Seven Eagles Center. Because of a change in organizational structure, Reunion Resort is no longer managing that facility. At that time, the Board directed staff to remove the arcade games from the Game Room. So that facility was not getting a lot of use. It was discussed at that time that the Board would like to wait  until COVID  waned  and there were more opportunities for visitation
and using that space to discuss how that room could be repurposed with the intention of potentially updating  that facility. Under separate  cover Board  Members were distributed· a  schematic  of

Seven Eagles Center, which included a marking that highlighted the area of the Grune Room. You can see that space is 14 ½ foot x 24 foot. It is tucked into the pool pavilion area, which also includes a Fitness Center, mail kiosk and men's and women's restrooms.
Mr. Harding: Did that also include the location on the backside? We are trying to figure out who owned it.
Ms. Adams: That 14 ½ foot does not include that space, but that is part of the Seven Eagles Center. It is not included with the carved out piece that is owned by the resort.
Mr. Harding: So it is ours. It is actually part of that room. You took that wall down and pulled out all the kitchen stuff.
Ms. Adams: I would categorize it more as a restroom and a break area rather than a full kitchen. There is a commercial kitchen that is owned by the resort.
Mr. Harding: I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about that little facility. Ms. Adams: Yes. It's almost like a little employee break room.
Mr. Harding: So you are going to use the room for something else. Ms. Adams: Yes. There's also a single person restroom.
Mr. Harding: That back room is 14 ½feet.It might even be 15 ½ feet or closer to 18 ½ feet or 20 feet, actually.
Ms. Adams: Maybe another 4 feet.
Mr. Dryburgh: There's not much room, though. Ms. Adams: No.
Mr. Greenstein: It's worth noting because of what are you going to do with it after it's
over.
Mr. Harding: I agree.
Ms. Adams: Also provided  under  separate cover, was a quick  video of the space so you
can see the current conditions. It's obvious that the entire facility needs to be re-purposed or re­ furbished from flooring to painting to ceiling. One of the concepts that Board Members have discussed off and on, is the fact that the Fitness Center is very popular. The Fitness Center had previously been expanded because it was well used and because fitness is a priority for so many residents and guests. One option that the Board may want to consider is if additional space can be dedicated to wellness and fitness. So just for a conversation starter, I reached out to Fitness Services of Florida. They are the company that is servicing the current Fitness Center and had a good  understanding  of  the  cardio  and  strength  equipment  that  is  currently  in  place.  They

suggested that if the Board wants to consider a wellness and fitness space, functional fitness equipment may be something that the Board wants to consider. So those are things that would complement the existing space, the rowers, upper body ergometer and cardio equipment. Also, on the back of this schematic, you see a list of some of the accessories. There might be things like kettlebells, medicine balls and battle ropes, some of the items that are popular for functional fitness now. This list would have to be pared down to be suitable for this space. When you put in fitness equipment, you want to have a certain amount of clearance around it for ADA compliance and for the benefit of user's comfort. So this is one thing to consider. The Board may have other ideas or other options that you want to discuss. This was just a conversation starter.
Mr. Harding: Do you have any idea of the cost for something like this?
Ms. Adams: No. I did not want to bring forward any costs until I had an idea if this was something that the Board wanted to consider.
Mr. Harding: The workout facility we have currently, I use frequently. It is very compact. Clearly, we have just gone through a horrible time with COVID-19 when it couldn't be used because of the compactness ofit. Other facilities I belong to continue to operate. We were able to take some of the machinery that's existing and at least move it over. You would allow people to then see that this is the free weights area and over here are the machines. If I want to do free weights, I go to the left. It wouldn't necessarily have to cost a lot of money to bring in machinery. I think we would just allow people to work out in three areas.
Ms. Adams: Yes. One option would be to just refurbish the facility with an appropriate floor, the kind of flooring you would use in the Fitness Center, painting and cleaning it up and then spread out the existing equipment that the District already owns.
Mr. Harding: You may want to bring a few pieces in, but I'm not sure you have to spend a lot of money on it.
Mr. Greenstein: Exactly. I think it's a good idea as far as considering this space as an extension of the primary Fitness Center and we can evaluate all of the equipment that is currently in there and the different functionality. You may identify some new functionality as a result, but again, it is not starting from scratch with a standalone Fitness Center.
Mr. Goldstein: You might want to find out the cost of the breezeway to the other side. If you are starting on one side and want to go to the other, it's not a big deal. You can cool off for a second.

Mr. Greenstein: As you said, it is cramped and this allows us to spread things out a little more. If it turns out to be a functional distinction too, that would be great.
Mr. Harding: Many of the women like to come here and do their aerobics, so it would be nice to have it up there, but it doesn't exist.
Mr. Goldstein: No.
Mr. Harding: We likely can use it for something like this.
Mr. Greenstein: I was surprised when we opened the door to see the hidden bathroom and breakroom, but other than to have a facility in there, we could possibly have the bathroom because the plumbing is already there. We could have it as a powder room. I would recommend leaving that in there.
Mr. Harding: As a male/female bathroom?
Mr. Greenstein: I was going to say all genders, which is a much broader term. We can then use that space as part of the primary space by knocking down the wall.
Mr. Harding: Sounds good.
Mr. Goldstein: We should get a cost for cleaning the room, refurbishing the floor and then going from there and decide after that what we want to do.
Mr. Greenstein: Yes.
Ms. Adams: So what I hear the Board saying is whether it is feasible to maintain the existing powder room, uninstall and open up everything that is in that break area and make that part of the main room.
Mr. Greenstein: Yes.
Mr. Harding: Okay.
Ms. Adams: Then to find appropriate flooring for a Fitness Center type facility. Bring that information back as far as a cost to get that far and then come back at a later time with equipment suggestions.
Mr. Harding: It is not flooring like carpeting. We would only get five to seven years out of it. You should have flooring that would give you a good 15 to 20 years.
Mr. Greenstein: This flooring looks good.
Ms. Adams: Actually Fitness Services of Florida has installed fitness center floors at multiple facilities and we can get competitive bids on that.
Mr. Harding: It looks like a wooden floor with a big mat across it.

Mr. Greenstein: It's a doable job. It is not a tremendous project. It is not the under $2,500 type of thing. Obviously, we will have to get bids on the job. I think it's manageable financially. Mr. Adams: Okay. So staff will gather proposals for setting up the bones, the floor, paint,  ceiling, any demo and remodel that needs to be done with that small space and then come back later with a schematic design for the layout, which would include whatever equipment is appropriate to relocate from the other space as well as how new equipment might be configured
into both rooms.
Mr. Greenstein: Okay. Ms. Adams: Sounds good.
Mr. Greenstein: Because this is a cross serviced area. I hope Supervisor Graham Staley from the west side is hearing this, but none of us officially want to share the proposal that we are going to come up with.
Ms. Adams: With Reunion West.
Mr. Greenstein: To get their input.
Ms. Adams: Sounds good. Do we have any comments from the District Engineer? Hearing none, do we have any comments from legal staff? Hearing none, do we have any comments from operations staff? Hearing none. We will bring back something at a later meeting. Right now, we just have Board direction and understand loud and clear the type of proposal that you are looking for and the concept for the room.
Mr. Greenstein: Okay.

Discussion of Proposed Villatel Development (Item 5)
Ms. Adams: Included in your agenda package under Tab 5 is a parcel identification and pullout, which is 11 x 17, of the proposed Villatel Development, which has the working name of Enclave at Reunion.
Mr. Harding: Is this on Polk Line Road?
Ms. Adams: Yes, this is for County Road 532 or Polk Line Road.
Mr. Greenstein: Otherwise known to golfers as Palmer Five. When they first put the signage up for the project, I called Alan because I was interested to know what the CDD connection is here.
Ms. Adams: Right now, I am just putting this on the Board's radar. I have been contacted by the developer. There was some thought that they want to inquire about some proposed

infrastructure sharing; however, they backed off from that. I think they realized that is not something they want to pursue at this time.
Mr. Greenstein: This isn't equivalent to splitting a check at a restaurant.
Ms. Adams: At this time, we are just putting this on the Board's radar. This project looks like it is coming down the pike. At this time, there is no request from Villatel for any shared infrastructure or any request to the CDD. This is just making you aware of a project that abuts your property.
Mr. Harding: As I look at this diagram, it looks like you have eight lots and two commercial buildings?
Ms. Adams: Yes, commercial buildings. I believe that they have already identified and secured their anchoring commercial vendors.
Mr. Harding: Okay. We are not being asked to pay for anything here.
Ms. Adams: The CDD is not being asked for anything at this time. Right now, everything that they are considering is on their own property or would only impact private Reunion property, for example, the shared cart path, but there is nothing under CDD consideration. There is no infrastructure that the CDD owns that is proposed to be shared and no requests from Villatel at all.
Mr. Greenstein: They are really sandwiched on both sides, but to get to The Terraces side is even more of a sandwich. The East side is towards the golf maintenance facility, which is basically conservation area.
Mr. Harding: With The Terrace's expanding, which we heard at the last meeting, it will be more of a sandwich.
Mr. Greenstein: Right, but as it stands right now, you have a building right there just past the comfort station on Palmer 5.
Mr. Harding: So their entrance may be?
Mr. Greenstein: The main entrance would be off of the exclusive address of 532.
Ms. Adams: Right. They are going through the county with this project, so the county is well aware ofroad construction plans for 532. I'm sure that they are taking that into consideration. Mr. Greenstein: It's not a large enough project, that they would be interested in proposing annexation or things along that line as Encore did when they expanded on the east side of the ramp for 429 off of 1-4. They took another parcel that they acquired and it was brought into the
Reunion West CDD, but this project is not big enough for them to want to try to do that.

Ms. Adams: So no Board action is required. It is being provided for informational purposes. If Villatel does come forward with a request in the future, that would be presented to the Board for consideration at that time.

SEVENTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Resolution	2021-14
Accepting Conveyance and Transfer of Lift Station Tract LS-1 - Added
Ms. Adams: I believe this was going from the developer to the District and then to the Toho Water Authority (Toho).
Ms. Trucco: Yes. This was a conveyance that was originally contemplated in the initial plat for the development. It is just a Lift Station track. That's all it is. I think this was previously approved by the Board about a year ago.
Ms. Adams: Yes.
Ms. Trucco: Since then, I received a map and an Engineer's Certificate or Bill of Sale. So we wanted to bring it back to the Board. It is a resolution approving the conveyance. Attached to the resolution is a deed, which transfers the actual tract to the real property. There are actually two deeds, one from the developer, Encore to the District and is a separate deed that transfers the Lift Station to Toho for maintenance of the Lift Station. There is a Bill of Sale for the associated improvements related to the Lift Station; Certificate of Completion, permits, etc. as evidence that the Lift Station was constructed and complete. The Bill of Sale is the same type of transaction that goes from the developer to the District and then the District transfers those improvements to Toho. There is also an agreement regarding taxes, which is required by the District that we draft and that the developer has signed stating that there are no outstanding taxes related to the property or the improvements that would hinder our ability to own and maintain and eventually transfer to Toho. There is also an Owners Affidavit that the developer signs and there is also a requirement from the District stating that there are no encumbrances on the property and improvements that would hinder the District from owning and maintaining the Lift Station tract. As part of our initial bond documents, there is requirement also for the District Engineer to review these types of conveyances and ensure that the property that is being conveyed has been completed in accordance with the District Engineer's Report and initial bond documents. It is improved for this type of conveyance. So we also have that. I only have an access Easement Agreement where the developer is giving us easement rights so we can access the Lift Station. Eventually Toho can do

that too. So if you have any questions, I can try to answer them now. Otherwise, we are just looking for a motion to approve.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Mr. Harding with all in favor Resolution 2021-14 Accepting Conveyance and Transfer of Lift Station Tract LS-1 was adopted.

EIGHTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Proposed	Reunion
Village Signage - Added
Ms. Adams: This information was just received by staff yesterday afternoon. It came at an opportune time to put it before the Board. Yesterday evening, I circulated via electronic mail, a schematic of the proposed signage. That is comprehensive. It shows the proposed signage as well as the proposed locations. One of the proposed locations is private property and the District does not need to be involved in that matter, but at the other proposed location, the road going into Reunion Village is CDD property. The concept for the sign is that it would be installed on the vegetated median at the entrance going into Reunion Village. The further concept is that the CDD would own and maintain the signage once that is installed, which is consistent with how entry signage is for other Reunion entrances.
Mr. Dryburgh: Yes, but there is a difference in that all of the other monuments, we don't go flipping through changes in code. That is not something we are in charge of taking care of. The developer would be on the hook for that.
Ms. Adams: That is a consideration.
Mr. Dryburgh: It is a commercial  sign. That  is my  issue. It is a 12-foot-tall  sign. It is  not a sign saying, "This is Reunion. There are residential homes. " This is a commercial sign saying, "Please come to the hospital."
Ms. Adams: Yes. Keep in mind that all of those commercial parcels contribute operation and maintenance (O&M) as well as debt service fees to the District. So they are part of the District boundaries. That is something the Board might want to consider.
Mr. Harding: But it would be a CDD owned sign. Ms. Adams: Exactly.
Mr. Harding: Would there be arrows pointing in the direction?
Ms. Adams: Let me see. The first handout today is PS. IA. This signage is exemplifying the height, verbiage that would be there. The top of the sign is the residential portion identifying that it's thecommunity entrance for the residents who live at Reunion Village. Then it identifies

the tenants of the commercial tracts. The second page shows the proposed location for PS. IA. This road is County Road 532. You can see where Reunion Boulevard is. There is a proposed vegetated median there. This sign would go right in that median.
Mr. Goldstein: Is that sign really going to say, "Reunion Resort & Golf Club Residential?" Ms. Adams: That's the proposal. This has already passed the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) with the Master Association. So I'm sure that certain stakeholders have
reviewed this.
Mr. Goldstein: So everybody that drives down County Road 532 who sees that is going to think it is the main entrance to Reunion.
Mr. Greenstein: Let me just amplify this issue. That is a good point. From what I recall, from an ACV standpoint, because I saw all of the signage and we approved it from a Master Association standpoint. We did not see this rendering basically listing who the tenants are or Reunion Resort & Golf Club Residential. It was a frame, from materials, from a combination of stainless steel and stone. It's lovely, but we did not, to the best of my recollection approve it. I saw this at least a year ago if not more. We will get back to the point about the cost of maintaining the sign. I suggest we go back to the Master Association through Mr. David Burman and point this out to him because if they want to have a sign up here that addresses Reunion Village, that's fine. This piece should be Reunion Village because the general access. In fact the access to the public to be able to get in through that guard station is going to be limited to Reunion Village, unless you are a resident or extended authorization type. You are not going to be able to go over the bridge to get anywhere else. So I think this should be modified to reflect Reunion Village.
Mr. Dryburgh: I think you should modify this and submit it to us.
Mr. Harding: I don't want to vote on this until we have it. They already have Reunion Village on the right-hand side.
Mr. Greenstein: Yes, but the content on the sign should be controlled by the Master Association because all of our signage, even though we placed it on CDD property, we have gotten approval from the Master Association and the Master Association is the one who gave us the frame and the sign, the specs, etc. I agree with you. This never should have been an issue.
Mr. Dryburgh: My person impression of the Master Association is they do tend to bend a little bit more towards the. needs of the developer than the needs of the rest of us.
Mr. Greenstein: That is true.
Mr. Harding: The developer controls the Master Association.

Mr. Dryburgh: Yes, so before I say yes, I want to know exactly what they want.
Mr. Greenstein: We can recommend that the top portion of the sign be reflective of Reunion Village only.
Mr. Harding: Right.
Mr. Greenstein: This is not a general entrance for Reunion Resort. That's one issue. The other issue and maybe someone has more experience with commercial property management in this situation, would a business be responsible for signage changes at the entrance to a shopping center or is that something that the normal protocol would be that when you rent a space in a shopping center, at the entrance to the shopping center, they pay for it because you are paying rent?
Mr. Dryburgh: Yes. In every regional store I owned, and most of them have been in strip centers, the property owner of the strip center either charges you, the lessee or absorbs it themselves through the aggregated renter they are collecting from. If the tenant goes out of business, they put up the new name.
Mr. Greenstein: Basically, the only reason why we are addressing the issue of the signage is because it is on our property.
Ms. Adams: Exactly.
Mr. Greenstein: So I would think that maintenance in this case, changed the entity on the sign. If it has changed from a Longhorn and now it becomes Shorthorn or whatever, they would be responsible. The CDD is not going to expend any funds regardless of whether they are paying assessments or not to change the logo to update the signage. This sign needs to be updated by, in this case Encore as the owner of the property that these tenants are leasing.
Mr. Harding: They won't be the permanent owner when all the houses are sold.
Mr. Greenstein: This has nothing to do with houses, though. What I'm talking about is the commercial strip where they have these five tenants listed.
Mr. Harding: Okay.
Mr. Greenstein: That is a strip shopping center that as far as I know, unless they sell the shopping center, it is going to continue to be Encore owned.
Mr. Harding: I thought they were passing that ownership over to each of the individual homeowners.
Mr. Greenstein: That's true.
Mr. Harding: Even for the restaurants.

Mr. Goldstein: They can't.
Mr. Greenstein: I don't know about that, but the bottom line is we are discussing it because it's on our property. I think we have an issue, and we can go back to the Master Association and explain that its misleading and should be changed to be a Reunion Village sign. As far as the maintenance of the other portions of the sign, that's going to be left up to the Property Manager for that parcel.
Mr. Dryburgh: Yes.
Mr. Greenstein: We are just giving him a license to put a sign there.
Mr. Dryburgh: If he's asking us to pay for this structure, that might be something we should consider.
Ms. Adams: The developer is scheduling the production and installation of the sign. They are not asking for money. Basically, the request is that the CDD approve the location and content and we will bring back a revised schematic at a future meeting for Board consideration with the changes that you requested regarding Reunion Village and get some further clarification if there's a commercial association management or who would be in charge of identifying sign needs and how that will be handled.
Mr. Harding: I just think that the ultimate decision on whatever goes on that sign or in the future what goes on that sign should be approved by the Board.
Ms. Adams: That is correct. You would own the sign and be responsible to maintain the

sign.

Mr. Harding: Right. What if they wanted to make any changes to whatever goes on there? Ms. Adams: They would have to come to the Board.
Mr. Harding: Not to the Master Association.
Mr. Greenstein: You can't have it both ways.
Mr. Dryburgh: I have two comments. The first is that we, the Board is responsible for

maintaining this.
Ms. Adams: Yes.
Mr. Dryburgh: The second is no, we are not responsible for it. It is just on our property and we are giving them permission to put it on our property.
Ms. Adams: The proposal right now is that the Board considers approving the location and installation. Once it is installed, the District owns the sign and would be responsible to maintain the sign.

Mr. Dryburgh: Exactly. Is there any way to have that on our property under an agreement?
Ms. Adams: There could be if it wasn't being proposed to be owned by the District. Say we want it proposed to be owned and maintained by someone else, then a Licensing Agreement would be required.
Mr. Greenstein: That's what I'm thinking.
Mr. Dryburgh: That's where I'm coming from as well. We as citizens have a responsibility.
Ms. Adams: So you would just be approving the location of the installation and would not be approving the sign.
Mr. Dryburgh: We cannot control what's going on there. If Mr. David Burman and the
Master Association approve it, they can have fireworks in there, if they want. They are going to make some decisions on what they want to do about it.
Mr. Greenstein: I know that we were piggybacking on the monuments. The fact that we have monuments in the communities, is a non-commercial purely residential application. This is the first time we are dipping our toe in the water of supporting a commercial entity. The hospital may give us issues that we have to deal with that we haven't even thought of. So far so good.
Ms. Adams: I'm hearing consensus that the District does not want to own and maintain the sign.
Mr. Greenstein: I think we want a license to maintain the signage. I'm not even sure if this
was included in the bond funds, but this is a commercial application. We don't want to have control over maintaining this sign because we have no experience with the material that they are using. I think it's going to be stainless steel and stone or whatever. It could weather in a matter of years.
Mr. Goldstein: We can just wait for a new proposal. Ms. Adams: Yes.
Mr. Goldstein: We discussed it for 15 minutes and have made it clear what we are not going to do or don't want to do.
Ms. Adams: There is consensus regarding changing the residential portion to Reunion Village and the District would be willing to consider giving permission to install and license a sign, but not in owns and maintaining it. Are there any comments from legal staff?
Ms. Trucco: Would that be a license for them to maintain?
Ms. Adams: They would need to agree that they are willing to maintain it.

Mr. Greenstein: We don't control what they put on the sign.
Mr. Harding: I know, but how do we control them changing from Reunion Resort to Reunion Village?
Mr. Greenstein: As a courtesy, we want that to show Reunion Village.
Ms. Trucco: We can look into the legal implications with respect to advertising from a commercial entity.
Ms. Adams: Okay.
Ms. Trucco: Is this all within Reunion East?
Ms. Adams: Yes. They are within the District boundaries. Ms. Trucco: Let me report back.
Ms. Adams: Are there any comments from the District Engineer? Mr. Guerricagoitia: No.
Ms. Adams: Are there any further comments?
Mr. Greenstein: I didn't mean to have a sidebar here.
Mr. Harding: Its really in their best interest for that not to be Reunion Resort & Club because all those people coming in there think it's a way to the resort and it's not.
Mr. Greenstein: I think they will be fine with it. They just plugged it in. We did not see this. It was just a frame.
Mr. Harding: You kind of wonder why you have to have that on the sign. Mr. Greenstein: That's the style that they like.
Mr. Harding: Anyway, let them have it. Ms. Adams: Alright. Sounds good.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Attorney
Ms. Adams: Kristen is here this afternoon.
Ms. Trucco: As you know, we are working on completing the bond issuance. So we will keep you updated on that. We were also tasked with looking into parking on sidewalks. I wanted to report that we did some research and it turns out that the Florida Legislature enacted legislation through the Florida Statute that dictates the law on this particular issue. We are precluded from declaring a rule regarding this because there is already a Florida Statute that states the rule regarding parking on sidewalks and the penalty for doing such. That is also echoed in an Osceola County Ordinance, but it does help us determine who we can call, which is law enforcement for

this particular issue. I have a copy of the Statute with me today and the Osceola County Ordinance.  It states, "It is definitely necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic to be compliant  with the law and the directions of a Police Officer or official traffic-control device, no person shall stop or park a vehicle on a sidewalk." It goes on to say, "A law enforcement officer or parking enforcement specialist who discovers a vehicle parking in violation of this section or municipal and or county ordinance may issue a ticket. " It goes on to specify where that ticket needs to be placed. It states, "A violation of this section is not a criminal traffic infraction under Chapter 318 of the Florida Statutes." It also states, "Ordinance 2239 restates the Florida Statute."  Our opinion on this is that the Florida Statute governs and is controlling over the District, so we will encourage the District to call the police if they notice a car parked on a sidewalk.
Mr. Dryburgh: Does it issue a ticket for a car parked on a sidewalk?
Ms. Trucco: It doesn' t specify. It says a violation under Chapter 316.1945 is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a nonmoving violation. There is a fee that is in the Statute under Chapter 318. I wanted to report back to the Board on this. With respect to Kingwood Irrigation Agreement, that's on the checklist. We are moving forward on that. We have comments out. We are working to complete it and hopefully by the next meeting, we will have more information.
Mr. Goldstein: Are we authorizing security to call the Sheriff every time there is a car on the sidewalk and have it ticketed? How are we going to handle it since we now know that it is against the law?
Mr. Greenstein: We knew that it was always against the law. You just confirmed what we
knew.
Ms. Trucco: Does the Board want to direct security when they see a car parked on a
sidewalk to call police law enforcement to ticket them or will you leave that just up to individual residents that notice someone is breaking the law?
Mr. Greenstein: Its all of the above as far as I am concerned.
Mr. Goldstein: Anybody should be able to do it. Security should definitely be doing it. Mr. Harding: Can you put a warning sign on those cars? Do you do that now?
Mr. Vargas: Yes.
Mr. Harding: Could they tow a car that is on the sidewalk? Mr. Greenstein: No. That' s the problem.

Ms. Trucco: The law says it's a law enforcement issue and that a law enforcement officer may issue a ticket. Then it says, "If the vehicle is unattended, a law enforcement officer can attach such ticket to the vehicle in a conspicuous place. " The remedy under the law is to issue a ticket.
Mr. Dryburgh: But you can't get the police to take action.
Mr. Greenstein: The protocol is for security to try to correct the situation by contacting the residents with their cars parked. If they don't comply, give them the sticker. He should make a record of the fact that you called the Osceola County Sheriff to have an officer come out and ticket the vehicle. Maybe we need to have some human-interest story from an ADA standpoint or some other issue and make more of a hullabaloo about it to get them to raise it up on their priority list.
Mr. Dryburgh: They might appreciate it because the police are underfunded and understaffed. They may need more people like us saying to the county how much we need the police to address this.
Mr. Greenstein: Are we limited in only contacting the Osceola County Sheriff? Could we contact the Florida Highway Patrol? Troopers come into Reunion all the time to give out moving violation tickets. Is parking out of their realm?
Mr. Goldstein: They could only issue moving violations on State highways like Old Lake Wilson or 532. They can' t come in here.
Mr. Greenstein: These are public roads.
Mr. Goldstein: They are not State roads. They can only issue moving violations on State
roads.
Mr. Greenstein: I'm only asking a jurisdictional question.
Mr. Goldstein: When the Sheriff comes, he won't handle it. He will call the Highway
Patrol because Old Lake Wilson Road is a State road.
Mr. Greenstein: Unbelievable. Mr. Goldstein: I know. It's crazy.
Mr. Dryburgh: Walking yesterday on the sidewalks, I noticed that where they have the pipes going over to Palmer 1, all of the sidewalks are destroyed.
Mr. Scheerer: They will take care of that. In communication with Anthony, there are some sod repairs where they were staging all of the heavy equipment.
Mr. Dryburgh: That's great.

repaus.

Mr. Scheerer: We are doing sidewalk work as a District and are identifying the ones for

Mr. Dryburgh: Thank you.
Ms. Adams: Are there any other questions for Kristen? Mr. Dryburgh: No. Thanks Kristen.
Mr. Greenstein: Thank you.

Engineer
Ms. Adams: Xabier is here to provide the District Engineer's Report. There may be some additional questions as we go through the Action Items List. Xabier, did you have anything outside of the Action Items List?
Mr. Guerricagoitia: I don' t.

District Manager's Report
Action Items Lists
Ms. Adams: Included in your agenda package is the Action Item List for the Reunion East CDD. Kristen, you just mentioned that you might have some comments regarding the irrigation turnover.
Ms. Trucco: We were working on comments to the existing agreement. We are working through them right now and trying to get it finalized as quickly as possible.
Ms. Adams: Sounds good. The next item is something that was discussed last month regarding the resident only access from Reunion Proper to Reunion Village. There was discussion that the first step would need to be to engage a surveyor. I believe that the District Engineer was facilitating that. The Board took action last month to approve.
Ms. Adams: Xabier, do you have an update on the status of the survey of that area before the bridge?
Mr. Guerricagoitia: I don't have a completion date. I know that it is in process. We did have communications with the Department of Transportation (DOT) about that bridge over the creek because they were asking for backup documentation of the plans. The Engineer of Record for that bridge is no longer in business. So we had to get that information through Osceola County. Ms. Adams: Okay. That was related to getting that bridge back onto the regular DOT Inspection List, which happens every other year. That is something that has been in process for a
while.

Mr. Greenstein: The one thing that I think we agreed to at the last meeting was the fact that in order to have effective control of traffic to avoid backups because we the lack of turnaround area, we need to have a control point basically on both sides of the bridge.
Ms. Adams: Right.
Mr. Greenstein: I went on a little tour and the area that's problematic has limited space when you get to the base of that bridge.
Mr. Guerricagoitia: I know.
Mr. Greenstein: It looks like a very, very deep retention pond area to the right as you are approaching the bridge and a small parcel to the left. Because they haven't gotten to that phase of development yet, we really can't tell if there is going to be area there where you can put in a turnaround. The bottom line is, please communicate to Steve the need to hopefully have by the next meeting, whatever is on the books currently for that parcel so we can see if there is any potential whatsoever to putting in a control point with an access gate on the Reunion Village side of the bridge. The good thing is there won't be access to that bridge until they get to a later phase of development, which is going to be at least 12 to 18 months down the road. For planning purposes, I would like to know what the feasibility is.
Ms. Adams: Right. So that survey will identify what can be constructed in that area and then a schematic would come back to the Board for approval and bidding out.
Mr. Greenstein: Exactly.
Mr. Dryburgh: It will be tough enough with a car, forget about a truck. Ms. Adams: Yes.
Mr. Greenstein: We don't want anybody going on the bridge and then trying to back out or force their way over to the other side to make a U-Turn.
Ms. Adams: Sounds good. With Seven Eagles Management, we already discussed the Game Room. All of the utility transfers have been completed and confirmed. We are looking at the pro-rata share to bill back the restaurant in cases where there are shared utilities. Some of the signage updates will happen in conjunction when we can coordinate a painter to patch and repair walls where we are going to be changing out some signage. So that will be happening over the summer months. Also at Seven Eagles, there is some fitness equipment that is currently out of order. The Technician has been here and assessed. Repairs are being facilitated. I reached out yesterday, but the parts have not been received back, but those repairs are moving along. There is also an item with Seven Eagles, which is listed later on the Action Items List, which is securing

all of the pool access gates. As you know, we have been looking at Seven Eagles as the prototype for securing gate access. Alan, do you have an update on the status of that?
Mr. Scheerer: We are just waiting on the gates to get back. Things are taking a little while. Ms. Adams: We are waiting to bring back proposals for the other pool gates until that is installed and we know that it is done right. Make sure that it's the right template and that is the right fabrication and mechanisms. Once we have that, then we will move on to proposals for the other pool areas. There are no active security items right now, but I did leave it on the Action Item List as on hold for consideration of other security enhancements down the road. You have quite a few updates on your 2021 bond issuance today. They are expected to price out the bonds in mid-July. As you know, we will do the levying of the assessments and pre-close on August 12th• Then we are hoping to close by August 18. One other thing that has been changed is that all of the Series 2015-1, 2 and 3 debts will be retired as part ofthis new bond issuance. Originally it was going to be 2 and 3 of the Series 2015 debt and now it's going to be 1, 2 and 3. So you will see those changes on your financial documents. We haven't had any information back from Kingwood regarding their interest in purchasing the roads. The contact sheet for the RECDD is in conjunction with the signage and the updated Amenity Policies. We will continue to work with
Kristen and Jan on the Construction Easement Agreement with Encore for Reunion Village.
Ms. Hobbs: Has that been completed?
Ms. Adams: No. The Seven Eagles pool furniture has been ordered. Mr. Scheerer: It should come in any day now, I hope.
Ms. Adams: We are being conservative and saying by the end of August. We are hoping for better than that. Regarding County Road 532, last month the Board made a decision that the only area that you want to be relieved of maintaining landscaping improvements is the south side of 532. I believe District Counsel will be bringing back an amendment to the agreement or a new agreement.
Ms. Trucco: It will be an amendment to the Interlocal Agreement. It is already drafted, but we are working with the District Manager for a map of the area, specifying what we are not going to be maintaining any longer.
Ms. Adams: Okay.
Ms. Trucco: Yes, we will bring it back to the Board so that they can approve it.
Ms. Adams: Sounds good. The Duke streetlights are still in process. They have done their verification, put everything on order and as soon as those materials arrive, you will see the crews

out here changing out the streetlights. No action is required on this, but if there is anything that the Board would like to see added or I didn't cover, I'm happy to do so.
Mr. Goldstein: I have questions. It was probably discussed on the west side, but we discussed it last time too. The engineers were trying to talk to the county about what we were going to do on Sinclair Road about turning cars around. Do we have any kind of report on that?
Ms. Adams: Yes. The Sinclair Road gate was discussed at the Reunion West CDD Board meeting. The District Engineer reported that they had not successfully been in communication with the county. I have been copied on numerous emails where they attempted to reach out to the county. There have been some personnel changes in the county, which has made it difficult to get to the right person. However, while Xabier and Steve continue to work on that matter, the Board directed staff to implement a temporary or experimental sequestering of resident and visitor lanes using traffic cones and other temporary traffic management tools that are needed and signage improvements to try to separate the residents and people with gate openers between visitors who need to be let in by security. So Alan is getting information from the District Engineer regarding how many cones are required to do that. If there is a standard that needs to be adhered to.
Mr. Goldstein: There are a couple of hundred now.
Ms. Adams: Exactly. Alan is going to purchase the cones and provide those to Reunion Security. Reunion Security is going to work on implementing that and experimenting with different formations that may be helpful to get people in the right lane. With the goal being expediting resident traffic.
Mr. Goldstein: Is that a shared expense between themselves and the other side?
Ms. Adams: Yes. On this matter, one thing that I made a note to discuss with the Board, is there is consideration about whether its legally feasible to designate the Sinclair Road entrance gate as resident only. So while the Reunion West CDD Board is considering different options, one thing that Kristen suggested from a legal perspective is that if the Board wants to consider that, their first step would be to confer with the Reunion East Board of Supervisors regarding whether this Board is amenable and would you consent to no public access at Reunion West and designating your main entrance as public access. So the Board can have that discussion now or we can bring that back at a future meeting if you run out of steam today. I will say that beyond this Board consenting, that is just one step. Kristen had also identified that they would need to confer with Bond Counsel. Reunion West may decide that it's not in all stakeholders best interest to even close that out, but the first step in considering that is would this Board consent?

Ms. Trucco: Essentially all of the entrances in Reunion West would be resident only and the public would be able to access Reunion West through an entrance at Reunion East.
Ms. Adams: If this Board consents and if Bond Counsel agrees that is legally feasible and if Reunion West decides to take that step.
Mr. Dryburgh: I think we should work with bond counsel to at least looking into can it be done if that's what we want to do because what's the sense of just saying let's do it and find out later that we can't.
Ms. Adams: We are just inquiring if Bond Counsel is going to charge a fee to provide that opinion and if so, that information will be brought back.
Mr. Greenstein: Beyond the legality of it, where we kind ofleft it on the West side is that we agreed that we need to evaluate the pros and cons of such a maneuver.
Mr. Dryburgh : I agree.
Mr. Greenstein: We need to decide whether we need legal advice on the issue, do we have an administrative need or a management decision that we want to move in that direction. So what I think we need to do and the west will do it and we can jointly do it, but we need to really evaluate the pros and cons because again, they didn't create multiple entrances because there wasn't a need.
Mr. Harding: Maybe we need to survey the residents.
Mr. Greenstein: No. We represent the interest of the community. We have a resort that you have to look at as a commercial activity as well as residential activity. We are not going to jump to that yet.
Mr. Harding: No, I know, but early on, I heard from the resort too that they just assume it be for hotel guests only.
Mr. Greenstein: Let them put pen to paper and tell us that they think it is in the best interest of the community and their business to have one entrance. Because if it backs up on 532, you have no place for traffic to go. Again, we are going to evaluate it, but I just don't see how we can limit it to one entrance road.
Ms. Adams: Yes.
Mr. Greenstein: We have a lot of acreage here.
Mr. Dryburgh: So the bottom line is, yes, we want to find out what the cost is and yes, we need to have an evaluation.
Ms. Adams: Yes. There is a lot of consideration.

Mr. Dryburgh: I agree 100%, but I think we need to find out where the entrances are. Ms. Adams: Sounds good. So that is a summary of the discussion from Reunion West. Mr. Dryburgh: Okay.
Mr. Goldstein: I'm glad you guys are talking about today.
Ms. Adams: Are there any other Reunion West action items that the Board would like any updates on? Hearing none,

Approval of Check Register
Ms. Adams: Included in your agenda package under Tab 2, is your June 1 through June 30, 2021 Check Register in the amount of $404,698.96. The detailed for your Check Register is included behind your summary. This does require Board action. Are there any questions? If not, we would be seeking a motion to approve.

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

Balance Sheet and Income Statement
Ms. Adams: These are the unaudited financials for May 31, 2021. No Board action is required; however, staff is happy to answer any questions. It does show your prorated spending through May 31st as well as your actuals for your General Fund and Replacement and Maintenance Fund.
Mr. Dryburgh: We refinanced a couple of bonds, so I'm assuming that was for a more attractive interest rate that is not effective this year.
Ms. Adams: You will see a new page for debt service for Series 2021. The interest rate on that will be lower. The primary beneficiary is going to be those people who are paying that debt service fee. Some of your pages, like Page 6, your debt service 2015A will still be there, but the debt service for 2015-1, 2 and 3 is all being retired as part of your new issuance. So there are some expenses related to your debt service such as your arbitrage reports and trustee fees. I am speculating it will almost be a wash because you have some going away and then your new Series 2021 coming forward. So overall, I'm not certain that you will see much of an impact. All of the platted lots at Reunion Village are on the tax roll. All of the unplatted lots have been paying.
Status of Direct Bill Assessments
Ms. Adams: You will notice on Page 15, there were several payments on May 1st with EHOF. We have been in communication with them. We provided a retirement amount for Series

2015-1, 2 and 3. So the only payment that they will be making and they confirmed yesterday that was in process, is the one related to the General Fund. So that is EHOF Acquisition 2, LLC, which is your fourth box down where you see the amount for the General Fund that will be coming in. Everything else is going to be paid as part of that debt retirement.

Security Report
Parking Violations and Towing Reports
Ms. Adams: Provided to the Board under separate cover was a summary of the parking violations for the month. There was quite a bit of data. We decided rather than having all those pages in your agenda package to email that. There were 120 parking violations issued and one vehicle towed. So security has been busy. Also, Reunion Security has officially taken over at that Encore section of Reunion West CDD. So we now have one security provider for all of Reunion.
Mr. Harding: Good.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Other Business
Ms. Adams: Is there any other business? Hearing none,

ELEVENTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor's Request
Mr. Harding: The only thing that I was curious about, at the last meeting, I think we were talking about having a summary of the meetings.
Ms. Adams: Yes.
Mr. Harding: Where do they  get posted? Ms. Adams: They are posted on the website.
Mr. Harding: I thought we were going to have them posted through our HOA sending them out to residents.
Ms. Adams: I've been sending out the meeting reminder to the Master Association for their Distribution List. I don't recall if I sent the summary notes to the Master Association for distribution or posted on the website.
Mr. Harding: I thought you were going to do both.
Ms. Adams: I may have, but if there is a strong preference for the Board one way or another.
Mr. Harding: People were complaining about communications. Unfortunately, people don't go in and check the websites. They complain about things not having information, but then they don't go onto the website to look at it.

Mr. Greenstein: Maybe they need to.
Mr. Harding: I agree with that. Even those kinds of communications help. I think it makes it easier.
Mr. Greenstein: We asked the Master Association and Artemis to do a lot for us out of necessity because they have an email address for almost every property. So meeting notices as reminders and general information, we can put out as well as the summaries and any other information such as financial information that has to do with the CDD, not the Master Association. I'm just saying that we are expectipg them to take on a load.
Mr. Harding: We were just talking about the actions that were discussed at the last CDD meeting for information purposes only.
Ms. Hobbs: We could put a disclaimer to the site. Mr. Harding: You can do that too. Whatever.
Mr. Greenstein: We keep prodding people to get with the program and we are trying to spoon feed them.
Mr. Harding: People need to be spoon fed in some cases. It behooves us to have people know what is going on too. The more that we can do to ensure that, even issuing a little summary of what took place in the CDD via the HOA or whatever, I think would be in the best interest.
Mr. Greenstein: I think we are asking Artemis to do more for us than is reasonable. Mr. Harding: We pay them.
Mr. Greenstein: We don't pay them for that. We are going to resolve this issue. Mr. Harding: I thought we agreed to do it, but anyway.
Mr. Greenstein: We are putting together the minutes and doing summaries. Ms. Adams: Summary notes have been posted on the website.
Mr. Greenstein: Artemis is putting out a note that tells people when our meetings are. Ms. Adams: I will add a link to the website.
Mr. Greenstein: Have them include a link on this. I would like for residents to see who is on the Board, know more about the Board and what the Board covers. There is a whole bunch of information that they learn from our website. We can't expect to duplicate our website on the Master Association. That's my point, even though I know you are not saying that. It's only a piece of that, but it's the same basic concept.
Ms. Adams: Just for Board Members awareness, when I send notices to the Master Association, I send that same notice to Artemis who manages Encore at Reunion West CDD.

They indicated their plan to post anything that the CDD sends via electronic notice on their website, but not send it out via electronic mail. Just so you are aware.
Mr. Staley: On the website, there should be a heading for meeting notes. Mr. Greenstein: How about meeting summary?
Mr. Staley: Yes. Something that will catch your attention.
Ms. Adams: Sounds good. Are there any other Supervisor requests or other business?
Hearing none,

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Next Meeting Date
Ms. Adams: Your next meeting date is August 12th at 1:00 p.m. We will also be adopting your budget that date.

THIRTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein seconded by Ms. Hobbs with all in favor the meeting was adjourned.

Secretary/Assistant Secretary

ChairmanNise ChfttnntlH

-