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, December 9, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. at the Heritage Crossing Community Center, 7715 Heritage Crossing Way, Reunion, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum:

Mark Greenstein Steven Goldstein Trudy Hobbs John Dryburgh
Dr. Tom McKean by phone

Also present were:

Tricia Adams Kristen Trucco Steve Boyd Alan Scheerer Nicole Ailes Victor Vargas Residents

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS

Chairman Vice Chairman
Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary

District Manager District Counsel District Engineer Field Manager Yellowstone Reunion Security

Roll Call

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

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comment Period
Ms. Adams: Do we have any members of the public who would like to make a comment?
Mr. Chairman, I don't see anyone indicating that they would like to make a comment.

TIDRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Minutes of the November 11,
2021 Meeting
Ms. Adams: Included in your agenda package is a draft copy of the minutes from your November 11, 2021 meeting. I'm happy to take any corrections. Otherwise, we would be seeking a motion to approve.

On MOTION by Mr. Dryburgh, seconded by Mr. Goldstein, with all in favor, the Minutes of the November 11, 2021 Meeting as presented, were approved.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Data Sharing and User
Agreement with Osceola County Property Appraiser
Ms. Adams: A copy of the agreement is included in your agenda packet. Florida Law allows certain classifications of citizens to keep their records exempt from public records, such as law enforcement  employees,  judges and other certain classifications. Each year, the District has
seen a similar  agreement.  We  are agreeing --	in cases  where the Osceola  County  Property
Appraiser's office is holding an exemption for public records -- to keep that information private. We agree to that and comply with that. This agreement is similar to one you have seen in the past. Kristen, did you have any comments regarding this?
Ms. Trucco: You covered it perfectly. We are agreeing to the confidentiality status requirements of the county. It's really just a formality.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein, seconded by Ms. Hobbs, with all in favor, the Data Sharing and User Agreement with Osceola County Property Appraiser, was approved.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of No Parking Signs for
Carriage Pointe
Ms. Adams: Included in your agenda package is a proposal from Fausnight Stripe & Line related to the Parking Rules that the Board recently adopted for Carriage Pointe. Alan has been working with the vendor and is ready to present this proposal.
Mr. Scheerer: The Board approved a No Parking Plan. In advance of the signage, we put in parallel parking stalls already. We've done all the new reflectors and realigned the crosswalk

from the swimming pool across the other two condos. Included in your agenda is a proposal for 46 new signs. As the Board knows, we've had galvanized U-channel here. The Board requested that we go with the 3-inch round black pole, no finial, no base, just standard poles. There are 46 total and the price is $15,870. That's because we're going with the black poles instead of the galvanized U-channel.
Ms. Adams: Board Members, while you're considering this proposal, I will note that as part of your budgeting process, the Board did allocate some funding in your Replacement and Maintenance (R&M) Fund for signage related to the No Parking Rules.
Mr. Dryburgh: The only question I saw here, most of the signs are directive; .µo parking to
the left, no parking to the right. I didn't understand why we had nine that just said, "No Parking Anytime."
Mr. Scheerer: I don't know if the engineer provided some maps.
Mr. Dryburgh: Was there a map that showed places.
Mr. Scheerer: Well, we didn't lay it out, but if you look, the areas that are no parking are in red. The county requires that you have a start and a finish point.
Mr. Dryburgh: Okay.
Mr. Scheerer: Say for this area here, we have to have an arrow in to the right, this one has to have an arrow left and then we have a couple of double arrows to indicate that there is no parking in between a lot of these spots. Some of these shorter runs, we're going to have to do the same thing. Like right here, they are going to have to have an arrow in both directions because of the county.
Mr. Dryburgh: So, where would you have the no parking, just generic nine signs?
Mr. Scheerer: There are just a couple of spots, little short runs like right here. There are a couple of short runs where we're not going to be able to put arrows in as well as the curb lines where the fire hydrants are, things like that.
Mr. Dryburgh: That clears it up.
Mr. Scheerer: We ran into a challenge in another District where we had double arrows, but the county came back to us and said, "No, you need to have an arrow· in. You have to have a starting point and ending point. " So, if I have a double arrow in the middle, there better be one that says, "Okay, from this point to this point is no parking."

Mr. Dryburgh: That makes sense. The one that was just going to say, "No parldng," I couldn't see where they would use that. So, this clears that up perfectly.
Mr. Scheerer: Yes.
Mr. Dryburgh: Thank you so much.
Mr. Scheerer: Yes, sir.
Mr. Greenstein: Alan, I'm just curious, do you know what we paid for poles the last time we did this?
Mr. Scheerer: I think the poles were about $250 or $275 per pole. Mr. Greenstein: So, we are talking about a 20% increase there.
Mr. Scheerer: Yeah.
Ms. Adams: For materials.
Mr. Scheerer: It's the exact same company doing the exact same work. Mr. Greenstein: I was just curious. It seemed a little on the high side. Mr. Scheerer: It did.
Mr. Goldstein: We've got transport and use of fuel.
Mr. Scheerer: They are all powder coated when they send them and when they get there they are galvanized.
Mr. Greenstein: They are holding up pretty well from what I can tell.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein, seconded by Mr. Dryburgh, with all in favor, the proposal from Fausnight Stripe & Line for No Parking Signs for Carriage Pointe in the amount of $15,870, was approved.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Landscape Maintenance
for Reunion Village Phase 1-3
Ms. Adams: This is for some parcels that have been officially conveyed to the District that are currently being maintained by the developer. Alan has been working with the developer as well as Yellowstone who we have a current Landscape Maintenance Agreement with. Would you like to present this agreement?
Mr. Scheerer: Yes. The landscape installer is in the process of wrapping up the installation of landscaping between Osceola Polk County Line Road and the homes just past the guardhouse in Reunion Village. They are about 50% complete of the project. In talking with one of the

managers yesterday, they seem to think that they may be done in the next 30 to 60 days. So, we thought in advance of the completion of the landscape, Yellowstone had presented us with a proposal for the entire project. But because only Phases 1, 2 and 3 are going to be ready and available for us, we want to present this today. There are also two ponds that are included in Phases 1 through 3 that will require aquatic maintenance. There is a proposal later on after this one, to be considered if the Board so chooses to do that now. If you don't feel comfortable doing it now, we can present it at next month's meeting as well, but we're just trying to get ahead of the game. No beginning of maintenance will occur until we have done the walk through and accepted the landscape once it's complete.
Ms. Adams: So, if the Board took action to approve this proposal, the impact to the budget would be $8,500 a month. This has been factored into your Fiscal Year 2022 budget, which we're currently operating within. This would allow an opportunity for District Council to write up the agreement addendum to the existing landscape contract based on these terms and get that taken care of as an administrative manner. We are, as Alan said, a little, ahead of the curve. We could have held this until January, but we thought it best to get this before the Board and to take care of the administrative work.
Mr. Greenstein: So, these costs are in line with what we're currently paying. Mr. Scheerer: Yes. It's under the same scope that was approved by the Board. Mr. Greenstein: Fine.
Mr. Dryburgh: Then there is no reason to roll that off to the next month. You might as well get a head start and get it done before.
Mr. Greenstein: We're fine.
Mr. Scheerer: Again, none of this will be billed, until they've completed the work, it's been reviewed, inspected and accepted by the District.
Mr. Greenstein: Right.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein, seconded by Mr. McKeon, with all in favor, the Proposal with Yellowstone for landscape maintenance of Reunion Village Phases 1-3 in the amount of $8,500 per month, was approved.

Mr. Dryburgh: As a separate point, not a negotiation for this or anything else, obviously, we're not going out asking for other contractors to do a bid on this portion. We're just saying, "Alright, we already using Yellowstone and we are just extending them. " Do you remember the next time the contract for Yellowstone comes up?
Mr. Scheerer: I think it's next year.
Mr. Dryburgh: I think it is too, but that's why I'm bringing it up. This will then be part of that negotiation.
Ms. Adams: It was bid out in 2020. Was it a 3-year contract? Mr. Scheerer: I think it was a 3-year contract.
Ms. Ailes: We entered into it in 2020 and it was supposed to be 3 years.
Mr. Dryburgh: Should be 2023.
Mr. Scheerer: Yes. When we go out to bid, if that's what the Board's direction is, all areas that are now being maintained by the District will also be included in that bid process.
Mr. Dryburgh: Yeah, it's normally pretty good practice just to make sure.
Ms. Trucco: This is just for one year. This is just a contract that I will be drafting and will be an addendum to the current one.
Mr. Dryburgh: So, it's just bringing it to 2023, will intersect with it and then we can talk
about the whole contract. Ms. Trucco: Yes.
Mr. Dryburgh: Alright.
Ms. Trucco: So, this pricing is for the following two years or to be in conjunction with the current agreement?
Ms. Ailes: From what I understand is, this just gets added on to the current contract. Ms. Trucco: The current contract. Okay.
Ms. Adams: We'd like to run it in tandem
Ms. Trucco: Okay, so we'll run it in tandem. So, we'll do an addendum to the current agreement.
Ms. Ailes: The current contract doesn't have an increase until the end of the term. Ms. Trucco: Great. Okay.
Ms. Adams: Just for the record, this pricing does tie back to the original competitive proposal process.

Mr. Dryburgh: I was just trying to make sure that this contract ties in with the duration of the primary contract.
Ms. Adams: Right.
Mr. Dryburgh: And we didn't have to have another dual negotiation. Ms. Adams: Good point.
Mr. Greenstein: This just piggybacks on the existing in place contract.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Pond Maintenance for
Reunion Village Phase 1-3
Mr. Scheerer: This item is for the two ponds that are located in that same Phases 1, 2 and
3.
Ms. Adams: Yes.
Mr. Scheerer: We would recommend approval so we can get into the water. We'll get into
that part while Yellowstone is getting the landscaping, but we would recommend approval by the Board. There are about five additional ponds in Phases 4 and 5 that we'll be bringing addendums back for landscaping as well as those ponds sometime next year, maybe the first quarter next year.
Ms. Adams: Board members, you can see that the impact to the budget would be $385 a month for these additional two stonnwater ponds located in Reunion Village. Your Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2022 does take this work into consideration.

On MOTION by Ms. Hobbs, seconded by Mr. Goldstein, with all in favor, the Proposal from Applied Aquatic for pond maintenance for Reunion Village Phases 1-3 in the amount of $4,620 per year, was approved.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Ratification of Proposal from LifeFitness
for	Seven	Eagles	Fitness	Center Equipment
Ms. Adams: Board Members, at last month's meeting, you approved a proposal from LifeFitness for functional fitness equipment at Seven Eagles. Included in your agenda packet, is a ratification for the proposal that was ultimately sent back to LifeFitness. It is included in your agenda packet under Tab 8. If you turn to the second to last page of the quote, you'll see that the total amount is $25,023.82. In between the time that LifeFitness provided their original proposal

and the Board approved that said proposal, they had some changes within their organization. All of the equipment orders going forward have a new fuel and delivery surcharge, that's a mandatory charge. Our representative from LifeFitness did lower the cost of the equipment by $300 to try to offset that impact as much as possible, but it's not a substantive change. Ultimately, the Board approved a proposal that was $23,815, close to $24,000. The final proposal was $25,023.82. I did confer with the Chairman, given the nature of this environment, we wanted to lock in the pricing to the best extent possible. So, this proposal was signed and sent back to the company and we're seeking a motion to ratify.

On MOTION by Ms. Hobbs, seconded by Mr. Goldstein, with all in favor, the Proposal from LifeFitness for Seven Eagles Fitness Center equipment in the amount of $25,023.82, was ratified.

NINTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration Authorizing

of	Resolution		2022-04 the		District	Manager,

Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer to Execute the Public Depositors Report and Further Authorizing the Execution of any and all other Financial Reports
Ms. Adams: The next item is an administrative document primarily that's included for Board Member consideration. Resolution 2022-04 authorizes the District Manager, Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer to execute the Public Depositors Report and any other financial reports that are required by Florida Statutes. Previously, we had a resolution that authorized the Treasurer and we needed to expand the ability for the District to file these required financial reports in a timely manner. So, this resolution would expand that to the District Manager, Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer to file these required reports. I believe that District Council has some comments regarding the resolution.
Ms. Trucco: Yes. I just have one note. Under Chapter 280, cities, counties, Special Districts, Community Development Districts are all required, when we deposit money into a bank, we have to ensure that it is a qualified public depository, as designated by the Chief Financial Officer of the State. So, there are certain requirements to qualify as a public depository. They have to have special type of insurance, for example. One of the formalities the District needs to do, is submit reports to the State. So, this resolution speaks for one of the required reports regarding our

compliance with Chapter 280 and that we're submitting or using a bank that's a qualified public depository. Again, this is just a formality. This resolution approves GMS submitting those reports that are required under law.

On MOTION by Mr. Dryburgh, seconded by Mr. Greenstein, with all in favor, Resolution 2022-04 Authorizing the District Manager, Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer to Execute the Public Depositors Report and Further Authorizing the Execution of any and all other Financial Reports, was approved.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Attorney
Ms. Adams: The first Staff Report is the Attorney's Report. We have Kristen with us this afternoon.
Ms. Trucco: Thank you. We followed up with Osceola County regarding the amended Interlocal Agreement for termination of the maintenance on the south side of County Road 532. I guess they are sending their team out and still reviewing. So, my only update is that they are working on it. They are going to come back to us and let us know if there is going to be a cost under the initial agreement.
Mr. Goldstein: We can't just video it and send it to them?
Ms. Trucco: No, unfortunately. So, we are continuing to follow up with them and we will provide an update as soon as we have it. Developer's Counsel, Moss and Moss also reached out to us and had us review a set of conveyance documents to transfer a lift station track from the developer to the CDD and from the CDD to Toho Water Authority. So, we are in the process of reviewing that. Steve also has to review that transaction. This is a customary transaction that we've done. It's required because bond funds were used to construct that lift station. So, it has to go through the CDD first. Once we have finished our review and are signed off on that, we'll bring it back to the Board for approval and ratification. That's it, unless you guys have any questions for me.
Ms. Adams: Thank you. Mr. Greenstein: Thank you.

Engineer
Mr. Adams: Steve is here this afternoon.
Mr. Boyd: Good afternoon. The one action item I was going to report on, we received the additional survey. We went ahead and received it with the concept, providing access control.
Ms. Adams: This is going into Reunion Village.
Mr. Boyd: The first view is just the existing condition, showing the proposed extension into the Reunion Village on the south side of the bridge. If you flip over to the next page, you can see where have an overlay of the gate. It looks a little odd, since we got identical gates from both sides. We don't necessarily need exit gates on both sides, but if you're worried about somebody going around the gate, you have to have it. So, on the east side, is the one we previously planned, which we think works well because you've got Whisper Way there, which allows trucks the opportunity to back up and tum around if they can't get through. On the south side, it's a little bit tougher. We've got a lift station there just before you get to it, but that driveway is not going to be big enough for a large vehicle to tum around. Again cars, the normal sized van, a normal sized pick-up truck can make the U-Tum fine. We're talking about a larger vehicle when they go too far.
Mr. Dryburgh: Can you make this a no truck zone?
Mr. Boyd: That's what I was just about to get to. If you flip it to the last sheet, it shows what the plat looks like just to the south of where this gate will be. One option is to move that gate further south so it's closer to this subdivision side street, but I don't know if Toho is going to have an issue with their lift station here behind the gate or not. They shouldn't, because it's still really technically a COD facility. So, there are two options; one is to pull this gate further south so it's closer to the side road where it's obvious that if you can't get through, you need to use this road to tum around or we put up a sign saying, "No Access Without Gate Pass Ahead" or something like that, so nobody is surprised.
Mr. Dryburgh: Make it auto access only.
Mr. Boyd: Yeah, something like that.
Mr. Dryburgh: These truckers aren't going to necessarily leave.
Mr. Boyd: They should see it from this point too. So, there should be some sort of warning at this point that, if you know you can't get through this gate, you need to tum around now. Otherwise, we'll end up with a stack of cars from somebody trying to back up.
Ms. Adams: Do you have a recommendation for which would be the best solution?

Mr. Boyd: I would prefer to bring the gate further south, if no one has an objection to this lift station being behind the gate.
Mr. Scheerer: To be behind the gate know matter what.
Mr. Boyd: Well, in this case, it would be right before the bridge.
Mr. Scheerer: I'm talking about the gate itself?
Mr. Boyd: It's going to be behind that. So, my recommendation would be to pull this further south, closer to lot 245. I guess the next question is, is this something we turn over to the Reunion Village developers for them to execute or is this something that the Board wants?
Ms. Adams: This District is responsible to fund construction.
Mr. Boyd: So, having that the gate on the south side will impact the plans being prepared the golf course. That's the tricky part.
Ms. Adams: The coordination.
Mr. Boyd: We will basically have to give them a design for them to include in their construction plans that they're submitting to the county.
Ms. Adams: Yes. If there's any economy of scale for them to provide construction services and that's the direction the Board wants to go, then that's maybe an expeditious way to facilitate the construction.
Mr. Boyd: Right.
Mr. Greenstein: Who owns Tract R8?
Mr. Boyd: That's the pond. I'm not sure how that's platted, Mark. That's a good question.
It's a pond, so it technically can be platted to the CDD?
Mr. Dryburgh: Why wouldn't you do a combination, Steve, move it and sign it? I see no benefit to the populace, still a lot of trucks to go through there, it's going to be to a residential area. You really don't want dump trucks, etc. I don't want dump trucks running past my house and I don't think anybody else does.
Mr. Goldstein: Well, it should be available to residents.
Mr. Greenstein: Well, it was always intended to be resident access only. Right now, do any trucks enter Liberty Bluff Gate?
Mr. Goldstein: Oh no.
Mr. Greenstein: This basically is the equivalent. It does take you from a somewhat detached area of Reunion to the mainland, so to speak, but the access to avoid too much traffic coming

through here. It was really intended to be resident only. So, commercial traffic that comes in through Reunion Village's main gate, which is just beyond the hospital on Reunion Village Boulevard, will come in through there to service this Reunion Village.
Mr. Dryburgh: Precisely.
Mr. Greenstein: But they should not come from Reunion Village over that bridge to service as another part of Reunion.
Mr. Dryburgh: It will reduce wear and tear on main Reunion roads. It will also reduce the hassle that happens at the entrances for the people who have a reason to drive into our property. The trucks really are a problem. So, if we can avoid them coming in at all, I think that's great. There should be another go around. I'm sorry.
Mr. Greenstein: You may be surprised that again that the developer of the area may not have an issue with that.
Mr. Dryburgh: Phase II won't be completed though.
Mr. Greenstein: Well, this is it. This area is one of the things we didn't get to yet. But this project, this bridge will not be operational or should not be operational until the adjacent area back here, that phase is completed or at least the infrastructure for this phase has been installed.
Mr. Dryburgh: So, when would you put the gates up? After that's been completed.
Mr. Greenstein: Well, in conjunction with that.
Mr. Dryburgh: You see if you do it in conjunction with working on it, the trucks are going to want to drive right through there. It's the fastest way. They are going to go down S. Old Lake Wilson Road.
Mr. Greenstein: The thing is this, we've already told them that the official access for Reunion Village is off of County Road 532. Because in the beginning we had traffic coming over the bridge and we closed off the bridge. I don't know if there were just pylons or you put a jersey barrier across it. Right?
Mr. Boyd: Of course, it's open now and they're just buzzing back and forth there. So, again, my recommendation is you sign it and if you want to remove the gate, great, but make it real clear that this is just for vehicular or automobile access.
Mr. Greenstein: Non-commercial traffic should not be going through this way.
Mr. Scheerer: Mark, you requested an R8 according to the Property Appraiser it is owned by Reunion East.

Mr. Greenstein: Because I'm looking at the proposal or what's called the initial proposal. Right? Because I know you just got the survey back not that long ago. The control gates, basically is sandwiched between the lift station area and the entrance to the bridge. There really isn't any way of turning around. That's why we definitely have to consider moving it further down the road.
Mr. Boyd: Right.
Mr. Greenstein: But it can't interfere, let's just say or get too cozy with Lot 245. Mr. Boyd: Say that again?
Mr. Greenstein: In other words, our control point needs to be somewhere. I guess that would be east.
Mr. Boyd: I think you can put it right past where the road starts to widen out to accommodate the control point, just past the back of lot 245. You're close enough there that anybody's going to be able to still use this road to back up and turnaround if they need to or just back up and go back.
Mr. Greenstein: It would have to be landscaped appropriately so it's not like someone's looking out of their back window and see a gate or a traffic circle or whatever. I think we need to definitely move it. That was the whole purpose for moving the control point to this side.
Mr. Boyd: Right.
Mr. Greenstein: We don't want people going over the bridge and then having to make a U­ Turn to come back because they can't get through the other side.
Mr. Boyd: You need two control points because Reunion Village doesn't want traffic coming through from the north and Reunion Main doesn't want traffic coming through from the south.
Mr. Greenstein: Right. So, why don't you come up with a proposal for the placement of the gate for getting in this southern location, let's just call it, for the next meeting, since timeline-wise, we're talking about another year to a year-and-a-half.
Mr. Boyd: For what? For the construction here? Mr. Greenstein: Yeah.
Mr. Boyd: I haven't seen the final schedule, but I would guess, yes.
Mr. Greenstein: Hopefully we can have that in mind so we know when this bridge is going to become operational again basically, and just have a proposal for the placement of that project.

Then we can share it with the developer. Hopefully they don't have any major heartburn with it. We will factor in their concerns and be able to march on from there.
Mr. Dryburgh: Why don't we allow these other dump trucks to be coming through there now? Yesterday, there was a huge crane coming out of there messing up traffic.
Ms. Trucco: They are public roads, so we can't restrict them from going onto the roads. Mr. Boyd: From their construction sites?
Mr. Dryburgh: They are coming across that bridge down and out through our gates. Mr. Goldstein: That's still under construction, so you could restrict their access to that.
Mr. Greenstein: Do you recall when we made the official notification that the construction entrance for Reunion Village was the two entrances that lead to Reunion Village or for County Road 532 in the front?
Ms. Adams: I can look back on that. I wasn't directly involved with that. Through communication, we can appeal for construction traffic to use County Road 532 as an ingress and egress, is that the concern?
Mr. Dryburgh: That is the concern. Because bringing this heavy weight on these roads, you're going to be damaging the roads. Is the city are going to step up to pay to replace them? No. Mr. Goldstein: Has the bridge been inspected? Do we now look if it can handle that weight?
Mr. Boyd: It was designed to handle all highway weights. The inspection is another issue, we're woi:king through, trying to get DOT to take it over. They requested copies of the original plans. The firm that designed it, is no longer in business, so we are trying to figure that out.
Ms. Trucco: We can restrict other entrances, as long as there's one entrance into the CDD for the public, but if the roads are owned by the CDD, they are public, and we can't restrict any member of the public from using them.
Mr. Greenstein: But they have access through, let's call it the front entrance, meaning the Reunion Village official guardhouse entrance, which is off of County Road 532.
Ms. Trucco: Okay.
Mr. Greenstein: That's the reason why we're able to do a resident only access control on this, because there is a public access road. The issue is basically one of consideration for the community not to have large trucks going past the villas, going past the water park.
Mr. Dryburgh: For their children.

Mr. Greenstein: So, there are a number of issues, but I do recall and we have to look to see when we had that discussion, what prompted that discussion.
Mr. Boyd: Let me just jump in. Because they're COD roads, it would seem that the COD would have the ability to close the road, if you decided to. So, whether you close it to all traffic or technically just this road. It could be closed to all traffic because there is no destination for the public itself.
Mr. Greenstein: Steve, for all intents and purposes, while we may not have taken that action, this roadway should be closed until we open it with the control point gates.
Mr. Dryburgh: I thought we did do that and all of sudden we had a gate. Mr. Goldstein: I thought we did too.
Mr. Greenstein: I think so.
Ms. Trucco: Do we know what the trucks are coming through for? Are they just using it as a cut through?
Mr. Dryburgh: More convenient access.
Ms. Adams: Is there also a nearby area where they're staging any equipment? Mr. Dryburgh: No. They are just buzzing down the road.
Ms. Adams: Let me explore a little bit with the developer.
Mr. Greenstein: I do see dump trucks exiting from Spine Road, making a left on Reunion Boulevard and I've seen them both dumping or going into making a left turn into the area across from the water park. I've seen them make a right turn on Sunset Valley Drive going toward the village. I don't know where they're going.
Mr. Dryburgh: They're dumping in the back.
Mr. Greenstein: I've seen them go over the bridge on the other side and just totally leave Reunion.
Mr. Goldstein: I've been behind them all the way out to 429.
Mr. Greenstein: Before we take any further action, we do need to talk with the Encore. Ms. Adams: Let's get an understanding into their situation.
Mr. Greenstein: And with Kingwood to find out what their needs are before we lower the boom. We really never intended any traffic there'd be going through there.
Mr. Dryburgh: Until they need to take a crane through there because they had no other options.

Mr. Greenstein: I understand why they are doing it, but they also have to also understand the impact of what they're doing.
Mr. Dryburgh: Exactly.
Mr. Greenstein: Well, this is great because it's been a while coming. I know it's been tough to get the survey done. Now that we have that part done, we can get some more detailed work and discuss a plan. That's good.
Ms. Adams: Did you have anything else, Steve?
Mr. Boyd: That's all I had.
Mr. Greenstein: Thank you, Steve.
Ms. Adams: Are there any other questions for Steve regarding engineering matters?
Alright.

District Manager's Report
Action Items List
Ms. Adams: Under the District Manager's Report, we have the Action Item List that's included in the agenda packet. The projects for Reunion East start on Page 1. For the irrigation turnover, there's active communication between District Council . and Kingwood's council regarding this matter. You've just heard an update on the Reunion Village Davenport Creek Bridge access points. On the functional fitness center, the estimated shipping date is March and we're hoping to have all that equipment installed by the end of March. The Carriage Pointe pool gate was approved back in October. The agreement has been fully executed and Alan recently re-met with the vendor, looked at the lock and the fabrication, and it's currently being manufactured. If this is successful, then we have four other pools that are still pending gates. This is a different fabricator than the one who did Seven Eagles. The one who did Seven Eagles did not want to continue to do the work based on fabrication issues.
Mr. Dryburgh: Because we weren't willing to pay for it?
Ms. Adams: I think there were just some specification issues.
Mr. Scheerer: I think what they may have requested an engineering drawing, whereas we went out and met in the field and said, "This is what we'd like to do", they did it. One of the problems was they were instructed to put the gate handle at three feet, which is code minimum to prevent reach overs, but they put it at four-and-a-half feet. Unless you're vertically challenged like myself, I couldn't reach it where it was, so they refabricated the gate and they chose not to do the

work without an engineering drawing. So, we reached out to Access Control technologies who currently does all of our security gates. As Tricia said, once the contract was signed by both parties and then filled with fabricators, we went over everything. I gave them a sample mock drawing, went over the scope again to make sure that, this is what we were expecting from you, and they told me at the time, it was probably about 4 to 5 weeks out.
Mr. Dryburgh: Would the same gate access key work? Mr. Scheerer: Yes. It will be the exact same lock.
Mr. Dryburgh: Perfect.
Ms. Adams: So, hopefully, this gives us a successful template and we can replicate that with the other four gates. But we're just starting with one.
Mr. Greenstein: Thanks, Alan.
Ms. Adams: You've already had an update regarding the status of being relieved from landscape responsibilities on County Road 532. I did send out an electronic update from Duke after last month's meeting. At the time of that report, there was one location in Reunion East, which was Liberty Bluff. Liberty Bluff was still pending implementation of the LED lights, but that project should close out very soon. We just discussed Reunion Village in terms of the landscape maintenance and pond maintenance. Regarding the security improvements at Carriage Pointe, the Board approved a remote monitor security program. Right now, District Council is in communication with Envera's counsel regarding the terms on the agreement. You had an update for the implication of the Parking Rules at Carriage Pointe. We will be working in tandem with the Homeowner's Association here to communicate to residents before that signage gets installed. So, I'll be in communication with Alan on that matter. We also have a five-year Replacement and Maintenance (R&M) Fund or Capital Plan. That is a work in progress. I'll send out an electronic copy to the Board when we have those five years populated on a spreadsheet.
Mr. Goldstein: Is that where you would find things like money being set aside for roofs to be replaced?
Ms. Adams: Yes. The current fiscal year is based on the items that you budgeted for or subsequent to budget adoption the Board has approved and are in process. So, there are projects for Reunion West and projects for Reunion East under the current fiscal year. Then what will be forming in the future years is the Reserve Study.
Mr. Goldstein: Okay.

Ms. Adams: As we get closer to budget development for the specific years, field conditions would also inform the budgeting process. So, we look at the Reserve Study as a point of reference and then also assess assets based on the field conditions. On the Reunion West Action Items List, we have several projects here. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer those. I'm happy to run through those, should the Board like for me to review them. It's up to the Board.
Mr. Dryburgh: The only question I did have, was about this building. You were at one time discussing Reunion wanting to use it. They were going to replace the kitchen. They were going to actually update the building. They were going to do a lot of things and we're still looking at the same building and same carpeting. Have you heard anything from them?
Ms. Adams: Yeah. I will mention just a couple of things. For the record, we do have a Management Services Agreement for the Heritage Crossings Community Center. That is a multi­ year agreement. The resort pays for the operations of the building and then the District compensates them a certain fee for the management of the building. That agreement also requires that a portion of the rental income is transmitted to the District. What happened is when that agreement was initially conceived and executed, it happened to coincide with the COVID pandemic, which really just wiped out the rental market for social events. So, that business is starting to come back. We have not been in communication with Reunion Resort regarding any recommended capital improvements for this building. I think they are probably assessing the condition and maintaining it, but there are some signs of wear and tear with the carpet and the furniture.
Mr. Dryburgh: It's an activity and I'm thinking if they just decided to ignore it for the next six months again, now would be the time to do the improvements. They don't have any social obligations that are going to be interfering with their having workers in here.
Ms. Adams: Yeah. The market in terms of rental properties, I think they probably have a good sense of what the market is demanding in terms of what types of events are seeking venues and what type of venues are being sought. I've seen more outdoor events in Florida and fewer indoor events.
Mr. Goldstein: What about the stables? Ms. Adams: There's some activity there. Mr. Dryburgh: What does that mean?
Ms. Adams: They are using that as a location for events.

Mr. Dryburgh: So, they have had events down there?
Mr. Scheerer: A couple of them. There is also $2,500 capital fee. So, anything over $2,500, if we wanted to replace the carpet and redo the kitchen, it would fall on the District under the Management Services Agreement (MSA). At the time, when Encore moved out, from a historical perspective, they had their Welcome Center next door. They took down all of that, put everything back the way it was and when we met with them, they said they're okay with the carpet. So, they'd rather spend the money on a hot kitchen, but that's not been discussed. There isn't $2,500 or anything over that.
Mr. Dryburgh: Alright. I didn't want to beat that horse.
Ms. Adams: It is such a different world today compared to when that MSA was executed. The pandemic has made some changes and we're still assessing the impact on rentals that are short­ term versus long-term desirability for event rentals and what that looks like.
Mr. Dryburgh: You don't have the number of conventions coming in either Ms. Adams: Not yet.
Mr. Greenstein: It is starting to come back. I may be wrong, but the only thing they are really using Heritage for is yoga. Trudy, am I right?
Ms. Hobbs: Yes. As far as I know. They still use it for yoga, but other than that, I don't
know.
Mr. Greenstein: Now, as you know, subsequent to putting this property, the stables under
an MSA, it was probably a year, maybe a year or so that they canceled the MSA for Seven Eagles. Obviously for the maintenance of this building is a lot less than maintenance of the Seven Eagles complex, but I do see things coming back. Hopefully, they will recognize the value of this space. If there's anything in particular you see that's out of line...
Mr. Dryburgh: No, no, no. I guess there was absolutely nothing happening.
Mr. Greenstein: We had all the air walls, all these dividers the air walls, the fabric repair and painting. So, there was a lot of work done to the building. If you look at it, it's not bad.
Ms. Adams: It's in remarkably good shape.
Mr. Greenstein: There is very high-grade carpeting. I think when they priced it out, it was unbelievably expensive. It was out of sight.
Mr. Dryburgh: It's in great shape.
Ms. Adams: Are there any other questions related to the action items list? Alright.

Approval of Check Register
Ms. Adams: The next item on the agenda is approval of the Check Register. Board Members included in your agenda packet, under Tab 2, is a summary of the Check Register from November pt through November 30, 2021. The total amount for the General Fund, R&M and payroll $101,211.15. The summary is included in the agenda packet with some detail. I'm happy to answer any questions Board Members may have, but we are seeking Board action on this item.

On MOTION by Mr. Greenstein, seconded by Mr. McKeon, with all in favor, the November Check Register, was approved.

Balance Sheet and Income Statement
Ms. Adams: The next item is included for informational purposes for Board Members. Under Tab 3 are your Unaudited Financials through October 31st. This is your first look at the current fiscal year. Page one shows your cash balance for your General Fund, as well as your R&M Fund. Pages 2 and 3 have an overview of your prorated budget expenses and compares that with your actuals through October 31st• I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Greenstein: Just in one month?
Ms. Adams: Yes, one month. It's your first look. You're tracking on par with the budgeted expenses and actuals.

Status of Direct Bill Assessments
Ms. Adams: We have several direct bill assessments that were due November 1st, that staff has followed up on. As of last week, I was informed from the hospital that that check was being processed and others are being followed up on as well.
Mr. Dryburgh: Hospital?
Ms. Adams: I believe it was Orlando Health. Mr. Dryburgh: Is it a full hospital?
Ms. Adams: I'm not familiar with the scope of the services they provided
Mr. Greenstein: They start out with the emergency room operations and then in the subsequent phase, you will actually see a normal hospital.

Ms. Adams: Also, just for a note, Page 16 of your financials show that we are starting to receive the electronic transmission from the Osceola County Tax Collector. So, your cash balance position when you see your next financials will look a little different. Page 17 is actually the detail on the direct billed assessments.
Mr. Greenstein: Right.
Ms. Adams: The different entities and the dates that the monies are due.

Discussion of Road Project Presentation for January Meeting
Ms. Adams: The other item I want to bring to the Board's attention, just so you're aware, at next month's meeting, the District was contacted by the Osceola County Roads Department. They are planning a widening project for Old Lake Wilson Road. They are in a very preliminary design phase right now. They hope to internally make a decision about the design and do a presentation for this Board at your January meeting on the 13th of the month. We are going to schedule the road project presentation as your first item and notice that as a workshop opportunity for Reunion West Board Members. That way, there are some efficiencies with the timing on that presentations.
Mr. Dryburgh: There is no change in the time of the meeting.
Ms. Adams: Correct. Just so you're aware the only change will be that we'll do that as early as possible on the agenda. We will do that presentation first and Reunion West Board Members may be in attendance to the extent they want to be in attendance. It will be noticed so that they can discuss and opine on the project without any concern regarding Sunshine Laws.
Ms. Trucco: Okay. That's good.

Security Report
'	201 Parking Violations and O Vehicles Towed
Ms. Adams: Board Members received under separate cover an electronic copy of the Security Report for the month of November. It did note that there were 201 parking violations and no vehicles towed. We do have the Director of Security, Mr. Victor Vargas, with us this afternoon. Do any Board Members have questions regarding any security matters or Victor, do you have any additional information to report to the Board of Supervisors regarding security matters?

Mr. Vargas: No. We haven't had a lot of parking violations. A lot of those violations were more of all property in the West. We're doing good over here on this side and don't have a lot of violations.
Ms. Adams: Sounds good.

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

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supenrisor's Requests
Ms. Adams: Are there any Supervisors requests? Alright.

THIRTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Next Meeting Date - January 13, 2022
Ms. Adams: Your next meeting date is January 13th at 1:00 p.m. We need a motion to adjourn.

FOURTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment

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

dhUULdc	  		:s

Secretary/Assistant Secretary	ChairinanNiee Chairmm1