Village Community Development District No. 5

MINUTES OF MEETING VILLAGE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 5 A meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Village Community Development District No. 5 was held on Tuesday, August 11, 2026 at 8:00 a.m. at the SeaBreeze Recreation Center, 2384 Buena Vista Boulevard, The Villages, Florida, 32162. Board members present and constituting a quorum: Gary Kadow Chair Mark Schweikert Vice Chair Walter Martin Supervisor Jerry Knoll Supervisor Jerry Ferlisi Supervisor Staff Present: Brittany Wilson Assistant District Manager Mark Brionez District Counsel Herschel Wiley District Property Management Assistant Director Shannon Boyd Community Standards Assistant Director Shawn Boyle Chief Financial Officer Katie Evans Senior Deputy District Clerk Heather Evans Assistant District Clerk FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS: Call to Order 1.A. Roll Call Chair Kadow called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. and stated for the record that all Supervisors were present representing a quorum. 1.B. Pledge of Allegiance Chair Kadow led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1.C. Observation of a Moment of Silence The Board and audience in attendance observed a moment of silence for those who serve our Country and community.

VCDD 5 – Meeting Minutes August 11, 2026 Page 2 1.D. Welcome Meeting Attendees The Board welcomed all those in attendance. SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS: Consent Agenda 2.A. Approval of the Minutes On MOTION by Walter Martin, seconded by Jerry Knoll, with all in favor, the Board approved the Minutes for the Board Meeting held on July 7, 2026. 2.B. Approval of the Fiscal Year 2026/2027 Board Meeting schedule and authorize Staff to publish as necessary. Vice Chair Schweikert expressed concern about the scheduling of the July and September Board Meeting dates so close to the Independence Day and Labor Day holidays, which could create scheduling challenges for Staff and Board Supervisors. Supervisor Martin concurred and stated that there could be an issue of having a quorum on those dates. Chair Kadow inquired if those two (2) Board meetings dates could be moved. Brittany Wilson, Assistant District Manager, advised that Board meeting dates are generally changed only when they fall on the holiday itself. Staff will ensure that they are available for the meetings. On MOTION by Jerry Knoll, seconded by Jerry Ferlisi, with four (4) Supervisors voting “Aye” and Mark Schweikert voting “Nay,” the Board approved the Fiscal Year 2026/2027 Board Meeting schedule and authorized Staff to publish as necessary. 2.C. Approval of the Seventh Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement for ARC and concurrently execute a release of Villages Community Development District (VCDD) No. 4 from the current Interlocal Agreement for Architectural Review Committee (ARC) effective August 14, 2026. Ms. Wilson advised that the District 4 Board has chosen to begin utilizing the Architectural Review Hearing Officer (ARHO) to complete the review of residents’ Architectural Review Applications, which requires all participating Boards of the Amended Interlocal Agreement for the

VCDD 5 – Meeting Minutes August 11, 2026 Page 3 Architectural Review Committee (ARC) to approve the District’s release from the Interlocal Agreement. Ms. Wilson advised that Staff is requesting that the Board approve the Seventh Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement for the ARC to release District 4 as a party to the ARC. Lee Gilpin, Village of Liberty Park, inquired if the Districts who have withdrawn from the agreement objected to any portion of the Interlocal Agreement. Ms. Wilson advised that each District participating in the ARC is represented by a primary and alternate volunteer and Districts who have been unable to fill those positions, despite advertising, have elected to utilize the ARHO to review applications on their behalf. On MOTION by Mark Schweikert, seconded by Jerry Knoll, with all in favor, the Board approved the release of Village Community Development District (VCDD) No. 4 from the Interlocal Agreement for the Architectural Review Committee effective August 14, 2026. THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS: New Business 3.A. Supervisor Knoll: Project Wide Advisory Committee After Agenda Supervisor Knoll advised that the After Agenda from the Project Wide Advisory Committee (PWAC) meeting held on August 10, 2026 was provided to the Board, as information, and highlighted the following: • The Committee chose not to proceed with the installation of push-button access at the SeaBreeze Recreational Restrooms. The Committee was concerned about the fiscal impact of the $6,000 per door cost throughout the Sumter Landing Amenities Division (SLAD) Fund. • National Night Out will be held on October 6, 2026 from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Rohan Regional Recreation Center. • The Risk Management District Gate Invoice Recovery Presentation was provided to the Committee. Following discussion, the Committee requested that Staff provide a breakdown of gate strikes, the costs associated with the repair and replacement of gate arms, review alternative collection opportunities for gate-related fines and inquire with local law enforcement about possible golf cart registrations programs.

VCDD 5 – Meeting Minutes August 11, 2026 Page 4 • The Committee discussed the Sumter County Sheriff’s Office (SCSO) free, voluntary golf cart registration program which provides a primary sticker for the driver-side rear bumper and a second sticker for discreet placement to assist law enforcement in identifying a golf cart if it is reported stolen. Chair Kadow inquired if Staff had considered working with SCSO to establish a mandatory golf cart registration throughout The Villages. Ms. Wilson advised that the registration program is administered by SCSO and is not a District program. Previously Kevin Stone, Sumter Landing Community Development District Counsel, reviewed a similar question and advised that administering a mandatory golf cart registry program does not fall under the purview of the Districts. Currently, Sumter County and the City of Wildwood are the only municipalities offering the voluntary golf cart registration program. Chair Kadow expressed concern about the difficulty of identifying golf carts responsible for gate strikes when they do not display a license plate, registration sticker or other identifying markings. Chair Kadow stated that currently the PWAC meets the day prior to the District 5 Board meeting rather than in previous fiscal years when this Board met one week earlier which provided the Board time to review matters and provide input to their PWAC representative. Supervisor Knoll serves as the District’s Primary PWAC representative and can request that the PWAC delay a Project Wide Fund (PWF) action until the matter is presented to the participating Boards for review and discussion. FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: Public Hearings 4.A. VCDD No. 5 vs. D5-11-26 - Sargent P. Watts, Jr. - 2454 Southern Oak Street A. District Counsel Overview of Public Hearing Process Mark Brionez, District Counsel, provided an overview of the Public Hearing process as information to the Board and residents in attendance. B. Swearing-In of Those Providing Evidence/Testimony Katie Evans, Senior Deputy District Clerk, administered the swearing in of those individuals who identified that they would be providing evidence and/or testimony in this case. C. Open Public Hearing Chair Kadow opened the Public Hearing at 8:21 a.m.

VCDD 5 – Meeting Minutes August 11, 2026 Page 5 D. Staff Presentation of the Facts Shannon Boyd, Community Standards Assistant Director, advised that Case No. D5-11-26, Villages Community Development District (VCDD) No. 5 vs. Sargent P. Watts, Jr., 2454 Southern Oak Street, Unit 652, Lot 34, is in violation of the District's Rule to Bring About Deed Compliance, and specifically the Rule that states: “Each Owner shall keep his Homesites neat and clean and the grass cut and edged at all times…” Ms. Boyd advised that on May 15, 2026, a complaint was received regarding weeds. Staff verified the violation and also observed overgrown grass, vines growing on the bushes and bushes too close to the neighboring home. During the inspection, a realtor was present at the property managing its sale on behalf of the bank. Staff informed the realtor of the violations and the realtor indicated that he had already contacted the bank about the poor maintenance condition of the lawn and landscaping beds. A Deed Restriction Reminder was written on May 18, 2026 and the initial and second letters were sent on May 28, 2026 and June 10, 2026. After following the Procedures for Compliance of External Deed Restrictions, a Notice of Public Hearing was sent by regular mail and certified mail on July 2, 2026. Ms. Boyd advised that on July 16, 2026 the Power of Attorney (POA) for Mr. Watts contacted Staff and indicated that the property was maintained. Staff explained that the property was last inspected on June 25, 2026 and although the lawn had been mowed, the weeds, vines and bushes too close to the neighboring home remained in violation. When asked if Mr. Watts still owned the home, the POA stated that technically he did but indicated that the matter was complex. During an inspection of the property on August 7, 2026, it was determined that the property remains out of compliance. Ms. Boyd advised that Staff is recommending that the Board find the Owner in violation of the District's Deed Compliance Rule as cited by the Deed Compliance Staff; the Owner has seven (7) days to remove the weeds to bring that portion of the property into compliance; if the weeds are removed and that portion of the property is brought into compliance within seven (7) days of the Order of Enforcement, that portion of Case No. D5-11-26 shall be closed; if the weeds are not removed and that portion of the property is not brought into compliance within seven (7) days of the Order of Enforcement, authorize the District to maintain the property and impose a minimum of a $250 fine or the actual cost of maintenance, whichever is more to be paid within ten (10) days of the invoice; authorize the District to maintain the property twice a month in the summer and once a month in the winter as needed and impose a $250 fine each time the District maintains the property; if the Owner prohibits the District

VCDD 5 – Meeting Minutes August 11, 2026 Page 6 from maintaining the property then the Owner shall be fined an initial amount of $150 and an additional $50 per day until the property is brought into compliance; the Owner has seven (7) days to remove the rogue vine growth on the bushes and trim the bushes at least two (2) feet away from the neighboring home to bring that portion of the property into compliance; if the rogue vine growth is removed and the bushes are trimmed at least two (2) feet away from the neighboring home within seven (7) days of the Order of Enforcement, that portion of Case No. D5-11-26 shall be closed; if the rogue vine growth is not removed and the bushes are not trimmed at least two (2) feet away from the neighboring home and that portion of the property is not brought into compliance within seven (7) days of the Order of Enforcement, authorize the District to maintain the property and impose a $150 per maintenance hour fine, plus a $100 administrative fee to be paid within ten (10) days of the invoice; if the Owner prohibits the District from maintaining the property then the Owner shall be fined an initial amount of $150 and an additional $50 per day until the property is brought into compliance; if the weeds are removed, the rogue vines are removed and the bushes are trimmed at least two (2) feet away from the neighboring home within seven (7) days of the Order of Enforcement, Case No. D5-11-26 shall be closed; if the property is not brought into compliance as required herein, Staff shall record this Order of Enforcement/Claim of Lien in the Public Records of Sumter County, Florida; it is the Owner's responsibility to contact the Community Standards Department to request a Deed Compliance Officer revisit the property to confirm compliance; if the fines reach $1,500 the case shall be turned over to District Counsel to seek all available remedies which may include initiating a lawsuit and seeking an injunction against the Owner; the Owner is responsible for reimbursing the District for all attorneys' fees, costs and expenses associated with, or related to this Order of Enforcement/Claim of Lien; if the property is brought into compliance and all fines are paid, the Chair authorizes Staff to execute and record a Satisfaction/Release of Claim of Lien; and Chair to execute the Order of Enforcement. Chair Kadow inquired if Staff has continued communication with the POA or the homeowner and whether the homeowner was aware of the action being considered by the Board. Ms. Boyd advised that the homeowner was present when she spoke with the POA. Staff did receive an updated mailing address for the homeowner who resides elsewhere in Florida. E. Owner/Interested Parties No public comment was received.

VCDD 5 – Meeting Minutes August 11, 2026 Page 7 F. Chair Kadow closed the Public Hearing at 8:27 a.m. Supervisor Martin inquired how many properties are held in trust or involve deceased homeowners as The Villages population grows and ages. Ms. Boyd advised that this is a normal part of the process. Properties brought before the Board during Public Hearings often involve a deceased homeowner or reverse mortgages. G. Board Determination On MOTION by Mark Schweikert, seconded by Jerry Knoll, with all in favor, the Board found the Owner of 2454 Southern Oak Street, Unit 652, Lot 34, in violation of the District's Deed Compliance Rule as cited by the Deed Compliance Staff; the Owner has seven (7) days to remove the weeds to bring that portion of the property into compliance; if the weeds are removed and that portion of the property is brought into compliance within seven (7) days of the Order of Enforcement, that portion of Case No. D5-11-26 shall be closed; if the weeds are not removed and that portion of the property is not brought into compliance within seven (7) days of the Order of Enforcement, authorize the District to maintain the property and impose a minimum of a $250 fine or the actual cost of maintenance, whichever is more to be paid within ten (10) days of the invoice; authorize the District to maintain the property twice a month in the summer and once a month in the winter as needed and impose a $250 fine each time the District maintains the property; if the Owner prohibits the District from maintaining the property then the Owner shall be fined an initial amount of $150 and an additional $50 per day until the property is brought into compliance; the Owner has seven (7) days to remove the rogue vine growth on the bushes and trim the bushes at least two (2) feet away from the neighboring home to bring that portion of the property into compliance; if the rogue vine growth is removed and the bushes are trimmed at least two (2) feet away from the neighboring home within seven (7) days of the Order of Enforcement, that portion of Case No. D5-11-26 shall be closed; if the rogue vine growth is not removed and the bushes are not trimmed at least two (2) feet away from the neighboring home and that portion of the property is not brought into compliance within seven (7) days of the Order of Enforcement, authorize the District to maintain the property and impose a $150 per maintenance hour fine, plus a $100 administrative fee to be paid within ten (10) days of the invoice; if the Owner prohibits the District from maintaining the property then the Owner shall be fined an initial amount of $150 and an additional $50 per day until the property is brought into compliance; if the weeds are removed, the rogue vines are removed and the bushes are trimmed at least two (2) feet away from the neighboring home within seven (7) days of the Order of Enforcement, Case No. D5-11-26 shall be closed; if the property is not brought into compliance as required herein, Staff shall record this Order of Enforcement/Claim of Lien in the Public Records of Sumter

VCDD 5 – Meeting Minutes August 11, 2026 Page 8 County, Florida; it is the Owner's responsibility to contact the Community Standards Department to request a Deed Compliance Officer revisit the property to confirm compliance; if the fines reach $1,500 the case shall be turned over to District Counsel to seek all available remedies which may include initiating a lawsuit and seeking an injunction against the Owner; the Owner is responsible for reimbursing the District for all attorneys' fees, costs and expenses associated with, or related to this Order of Enforcement/Claim of Lien; if the property is brought into compliance and all fines are paid, the Chair authorizes Staff to execute and record a Satisfaction/Release of Claim of Lien; and Chair to execute the Order of Enforcement. 4.B. VCDD No. 5 vs. D5-12-26 - Joseph E. Bourque, Life Estate Grantees and Brenda H. Bourque, Life Estate Grantees - 707 Willington Way Ms. Wilson advised that Case D5-12-26 has been brought into compliance. FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: Old Business 5.A. Old Business Status Update Ms. Wilson provided the following Old Business Status Updates: 1. Track Deed Compliance Complaints for one year period: Per the Board’s request, the number of Deed Compliance Complaints will be brought back to the Board on an annual basis at the November Board Meeting. 2. Provide update on Due West Drive: The old foundation was removed in preparation to lay a new foundation. Supervisor Martin stated that progress at the Due West Drive property appeared to be at a standstill. The driveway had been cleared but the structure has remained unchanged. Chair Kadow stated that portions of the existing walls were intentionally left in place. 3. Provide update if family was identified regarding Case D5-10-26 - 701 Pine Hills Place: Staff located the sisters' addresses and sent each sister a copy of the third letter, along with the Order of Enforcement. Chair Kadow stated that after he researched the property, he was able to identify the sisters as additional legal owners of the property and provided the supporting documents to Staff.

VCDD 5 – Meeting Minutes August 11, 2026 Page 9 SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: Informational Items Only 6.A. Financial Statements The Financial Statements as of June 30, 2026 were provided to the Board as information. 6.B. DPM Monthly Report The DPM Monthly Report was provided to the Board as information. 6.C. Village Community Development District No. 5 Public Hearing Updates The monthly Public Hearing Case Update was provided to the Board as information SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: District Manager Reports 7.A. Save the Date: A Night with DPM on September 23, 2026 Ms. Wilson advised that A Night with DPM will be held on September 23, 2026 from 4:00 p.m. to 6 p.m. at the Rohan Recreation Center Chair Kadow stated that he had recently contacted District Property Management (DPM) after receiving a call from a resident regarding a property concern. He and DPM Staff met with the resident within 24 hours and are working to resolve the concern. Chair Kadow commended DPM for its responsiveness and outstanding work. EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: District Counsel Reports 8.A. Ethics and Public Records Training Mr. Brionez provided a reminder of the two (2) upcoming Ethics and Public Records Training Sessions to be held on August 27, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. at the Everglades Recreation Center and October 29, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. at the District Office. NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: Audience Comments There were no audience comments received. TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: Supervisor Comments Supervisor Knoll referenced a recent Public Hearing in another District where a homeowner was unaware of an existing violation when they had purchased the property and inquired how frequently this

VCDD 5 – Meeting Minutes August 11, 2026 Page 10 occurs and if prospective buyers could obtain information about existing violations through a realtor or Staff prior to purchasing a home. Mr. Brionez stated that these situations occur frequently and are generally matters between the buyer and seller. Sellers are required to disclose certain property conditions and failure to do so may result in a private dispute or legal action. Community Development Districts (CDDs) do not participate in residential real estate transactions and under Chapter 190 of the Florida Statutes, CDDs are limited to enforcing Deed Restrictions related to external appearances. A private company could potentially provide this type of service, but it is not something that falls under the purview of a CDD. Chair Kadow advised that Staff, the Developer, The Properties of The Villages Sales and other realtors should establish a process that requires a compliance inspection prior to purchasing a home in The Villages. Mr. Brionez advised that the District’s recorded Orders of Enforcement assist with this process by identifying properties with existing violations and providing the amount of fines due. Chair Kadow inquired if the Developer could require a compliance inspection before closing on properties owned by The Villages. Mr. Brionez advised that the Developer sells new construction while private companies handle resales. Supervisor Knoll expressed concern about the proposed increase to the homestead exemption appearing on the upcoming ballot. While it would not directly impact the District it could reduce county revenue and indirectly affect services provided within The Villages. Sumter County has prepared budget scenarios based on whether the proposed increase is approved with potential reductions including the closing of the County Road 466 Annex and the library on Parr Drive. Supervisor Knoll stated reduced county revenue could also affect road maintenance. Chair Kadow concurred with Supervisor Knoll’s concerns. Vice Chair Schweikert stated that the proposed homestead exemption increase could benefit permanent residents who qualify for the exemption but would not apply to vacation homes, investment properties or other non-homestead properties. The county could potentially increase taxes on non- homestead or commercial properties to fund necessary services. Supervisor Martin advised that he attended the August 4, 2026 Investment Advisory Committee meeting where the Committee reviewed favorable investment returns for the second and third quarters. During the meeting, a Supervisor expressed concern regarding the potential impact of artificial

VCDD 5 – Meeting Minutes August 11, 2026 Page 11 intelligence (AI) on long-term investments, which the Committee will consider further at a future meeting. Vice Chair Schweikert stated that the Board will approve the Fiscal Year 2026/2027 Budget at the September 8, 2026 meeting and expressed concern about the projected depletion of reserves over the next four (4) years. Vice Chair Schweikert advised that he met with Staff and requested a report on how the Board can manage the depletion of reserves which could require a potential maintenance fee increase within the next three (3) to four (4) years to prevent the reserves from being exhausted. Chair Kadow stated that District 5 has not approved a maintenance assessment increase in the past 20 years and previously reduced the maintenance assessment levels six (6) times by 3% and once by 20% to keep costs reasonable for residents. Chair Kadow stated that rising expenses may require the Board to consider small increases over several years to build up the reserves. Chair Kadow expressed frustration with the response received from Sumter County pertaining to the requirements for resurfacing a road and stated that Sumter County needs to begin addressing road repairs in the older Districts rather than the newer areas. ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 8:56 a.m. On MOTION by Jerry Ferlisi, seconded by Jerry Knoll, with all in favor, the Board adjourned the meeting. Kenneth C. Blocker Gary Kadow Secretary Chairman

Good morning, everyone. Good morning. Good morning, John. Okay. There we go. Yep. Yeah, that's on. Okay. Welcome to the meeting of District Five. I see some familiar faces and some new faces. Welcome. Nice to see you here. As always, I mention this is your meeting, so we have a certain protocol we follow on our agenda, which I'll explain, and any questions you have will be addressed in this meeting, that I can assure you. We begin with our roll call, which is our officers going down the line. We have Walter Martin. Present. Gary Knoll. Here. Geri Pelissier. Here. Mark Schweikert. Here. And I'm Gary Cater, your chairman for today. If you would please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by a brief moment of silence in remembrance of our military service members. Right hand over heart. That means face the roof. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. You may be seated. Thank you. Okay. Again, welcome to the meeting. Is there anyone here who has not been to a meeting previously and knows what the protocol is? Good. Then I get to explain it again. The things that are listed on your agenda will be addressed during the meeting. At any time when we're discussing those, you have the right to raise your hand and ask questions. If you have a question, we would ask you to proceed to the podium, give us your name and your address, and then proceed with your question. If it is not on the agenda and you have a question, at the end of the meeting, we have time for anybody in the audience to get up and speak and ask their questions, and hopefully we'll be able to answer it for you. Anyway, thank you for being here. Appreciate it. First order of business on the consent agenda is the approval of the minutes. Minutes are from July 7th, 2026. It does require a motion. So the audience is aware, if it looks like we're going quickly through these things, it's because we get them a week in advance, so we get to read them before we come in and don't have to spend a whole lot of time doing that here. So any questions regarding the minutes? Any changes, modifications? Hearing none, I'd entertain a motion to accept them. So moved. Second. It's been moved and seconded to accept the minutes of the meeting of July 7th, 2026. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? So moved. Thank you. Okay. Next item on the agenda, our meeting schedule. Now, we have our meetings, I know previously, right up until September. This will be for the following year. If there's any conflicts or questions, this is a good time to bring them up. Otherwise, we also need, I believe, a motion to accept these. Yeah. Yes, sir. Mark. When we adopted this new schedule last year- Mm-hmm ... I raised the point that our board meeting is going to fall one day after two holidays, Labor Day and Independence Day. It looks like it's going to happen every year with the way it is. It is. So just seems to me that creates issues for staff who are taking vacations and boards, but I also understand that this affects all the board meetings and- It does ... and it's a big deal, but I don't know. It seems to me they could pick a different schedule. But anyway, this year it was, I think, 4th of July, the actual holiday fell on a Friday. Right. This coming year, it's going to fall on a Monday, and our board meeting's going to be on Tuesday. Mm-hmm. And a similar kind of thing with Labor Day. So- So those are the only two that really are going to cause a problem ... but otherwise, it's not a problem. There's a possibility then we would not have a quorum, and that would be the same. Mm-hmm. Yeah, which is not a good thing either. That's right. Is there a possibility of just those two dates because they're holidays, having to move a meeting? So generally, we only move a board meeting date or a proposed schedule if it falls on the actual holiday itself. But staff resources will always be available on those days to support the board meetings. That's part of our responsibility. I guess there's no way around them. I mean, generally, no. I- Well, it's going to mess you up for those two holidays. Yeah. This year. And you won't be able to take a long vacation this year. Well, be aware we may be missing then some people, so just so you know. Okay. Thank you, Mark. Doesn't satisfy your question, I know. No. Unfortunately. It's just an observation. Okay. Any other questions regarding the schedule? I'd like to have a motion on the record that we do accept it, requires approval. So moved. A second? Second. Okay. Been moved and seconded to accept the schedule as presented for our meetings coming up in 2026 and '27. Yes, sir. Name and address, please. My name is Lee Gilkin, 2155 Dungeon Drive. As I pass this agenda around, somebody's going to ask me for a brief explanation of the approval of District 4's release from the Seventh Amendment, Amended Interlocal. What is that? Is there a brief explanation what I can tell people? That's the next item. We're not on that. We're not on that. We're not on that, Lee. That's the next item on the agenda. I'm sorry. I thought that's where you were. Nope. Just our schedule for meetings. That's coming up next, though, so you might as well stand right there. Let me get a vote on it, okay? We have a move and a second to accept the schedule as presented. All those in favor? Aye. Okay. Opposed? I'm a nay. You're a nay. Okay. That's good. We got some variety here. Okay. It has a majority vote, therefore it is approved, and we will go with that schedule. Okay. Next item on the agenda, approval of the DCD Number 4 release from the Seventh Amended Interlocal Agreement for the Architectural Review Committee. We're going to be dealing with probably several of these. We had one last meeting, I think- Yes ... even before, if I'm not mistaken. Perhaps we could get a brief explanation before Lee speaks how that works, why we're doing that. Yes. So good morning, board members. So this item mirrors the action you took last month, where District 1 elected to use the architectural review hearing officer. District 4 has taken the same action. And again, as the Interlocal reads, it does require consent from all parties to remove them from the Interlocal. So that would be Districts 1, 4, and 6 that have been removed from this Interlocal and will be utilizing the architectural review hearing officer. Okay. So in other words, they are looking to leave the normal architectural review like we have here. We have our representative here today, and they've chose to go with almost like a hearing officer in order to do that. Several other districts have done that, but they can't do it unless they are released from the original agreement, which had all of the districts as part of that. So the districts have to vote to allow them to leave that agreement and then go independently. That's what this is really about. It's kind of a not-to-get-excited-about item. Is there a specific part of that agreement that District 4 and the others oppose? Well, the agreement says that all parties are a party to it. Oh. So in order for them to leave, we have to give permission for them to leave that agreement and then go directly with a hearing officer. But is there a part of that agreement that people in those districts object to? Object to what? Is this a- You have to speak into the mic a little more- Yeah. Okay ... so we can hear you. Is this agreement- Yeah ... something that people would not know about? The Interlocal Agreement, is there a part of that that's objectionable? Bridget, you want to address that? Do you understand? So each party that is participating in the Architectural Review Committee, they have a primary and a secondary representative that serve on the ARC There have been some districts where they have no volunteers. They have advertised for volunteers. They don't have any. No one has shown any interest. So rather than continue to participate in the ARC structure as it exists today, they have elected to have a hired, engaged representative to review all of their applications on behalf of that board. Okay. That clarifies that I think. So thanks very much. Okay. Thank you, Lee. Any other questions? No. Okay. That does not require a motion, does it, Rita? Yes, we do need a motion. Okay. Everybody clear on what we're looking to do here? Just release them? We would need a motion in order to do that. So moved. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any opposition? No. Okay. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. It's been motioned and approved. Thank you. New business. Mr. Supervisor Jerry Knoll, who is our primary representative on the PWAC committee. Do you have your report, sir? I do. PWAC met yesterday morning in this room. A couple items that I think are of importance, the big one being the handicapped bathrooms. All our handicapped bathrooms in all of our executive courses and in the various rec centers have been checked and reviewed, and they are all ADA compliant. There was some question about that compliance, and a couple people had questions, so that has been investigated and reviewed and reported back. There's a National Night Out October 6th that's coming up. There will be more information coming out on that. The big item for the day was the review of the gate strikes and the conditions of the entrance and exit gates- Mm-hmm ... and the number of strikes and the cost involved. There are a boatload of strikes on these gates on a regular basis, some gates more than others. But when there is a strike and the vehicle that struck the gate can be identified, they send that individual a bill for $250 to cover the cost of putting the arm back in place, and if there's additional damage, those. On average, the damage is relatively minor and the costs are less than the 250. But every once in a while, there will be one that's a little more expensive. But that does cover it. Where they've had problems is in collecting. Surprise, surprise. Surprise. So there've been a number of suggestions as to some way to increase the collection. And the council for PWAC and district management are looking at those options, and they will be bringing it back to PWAC in the future. Essentially, that's it. There were some other minor things that were discussed, but that was the big one, and that took a fair amount of time. There was a presentation by our risk management department- Mm-hmm ... and a review of the statistics and some of the problems. Interestingly enough, the party that owes us the most money for gates that have been struck and not been reimbursed, and the bills have not been paid, is Amazon. Really? Uh-huh. Interesting. They're working on it. And Ryder Truck was another one. Or not quite Ryder, Penske, I believe it is. Was another one, but they've worked that out with them, and they've settled that off. So they're working on Amazon to get our just rewards back, if you will. I would hope so, yeah. But it's been a- A fairly profitable company. Yeah. But it's been a bit of a struggle. But they're working on it. We're coming up with some new ways. One of the things that is being considered, because gate strikes that happen as a result of a golf cart, it is very difficult to identify the golf cart. No license plate. Yeah. And the sheriff's department has just recently instituted a registration program for golf carts. Okay. Hmm. It's brand new. It's only a few days old. But if you register your golf cart, you get two stickers, one that goes on the rear bumper and another one that's much smaller that goes someplace that you can select, where you can hide it. Is it mandatory? If you register. There's no cost to register your vehicle. And it's voluntary to do it. Yes. But the idea being that if we could work with them, that sticker that's on the rear bumper would allow us to identify the golf cart that struck the gate. If your golf cart is stolen and that sticker is removed, there's another sticker that you place somewhere else on the golf cart, much smaller, and only you know where you put it. And hopefully it'll be there, and if they find the golf cart and they find that sticker, they can bring it back to you. I guess there's two things with that that seem strange. One, if it's voluntary, if you're a gate striker and you don't like the gates, you're certainly not going to get one of those and put it on your golf cart, so you can be identified. And that's really the purpose of it, to find out just who those people are. Is there any thought about making it mandatory if you're going to drive your golf cart in the villages, on the golf cart paths, and on the roads? I know they're Sumter County roads, not ours, but the villa roads are ours. Could we require that to make sure that we know exactly who's driving that golf cart? That I don't know. I think that would go to legal. I could be wrong. And it would also go to the sheriff as well. Right. Because they're the ones who are administering the program. And at this point, I know their program is voluntary. I'd like to see us work with them, though, because a program like that could solve this problem. People are going to be a little more... I've literally seen people drive through the gates, get out of their cars, and push them off, and then drive through. Seriously. I've been here 20 years. I think I've seen it all. But the bottom line is that we changed over to slip washers, as you know, nylon washers, so when the gates get hit, they get stripped, and it's not a major thing to replace the gate. When they were bolted on, we were paying hundreds of dollars to fix those per gate. People are still doing that. If it's some form of protest, if they don't like gates and don't want gates, then if we could see a pattern where there are certain gates that are being hit more often, maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to have somebody look, get a volunteer to sit there. So that is a Sumter County program. That's not a district program. And I know, not Mr. Briones, but Mr. Stone had looked at that from a question that came up, I believe at either an AAC or project-wide meeting, and that traffic enforcement is not under the purview of special districts. Yeah. So that is with the county instituting that, and then the city of Wildwood are the two right now that are allowing for voluntary registration of carts. So the answer is there's really no way to prevent a golf cart from going through there, busting a gate, and being able to know who they are if there's no markings on it or plate or sticker or anything else. It's very difficult. It's a challenge. As I've said many times, you can't legislate stupidity, so. This may not solve all of them, but it has potential maybe to reduce that number of unidentifiable gate strikes through this. It'll take a while, and there's talk of some sort of outreach to encourage people to register their golf carts with the county sheriff at various- It's a good effort ... village functions and Government Day and so on and so on. Okay. Anything else on that to it? That should do it. Okay. We've talked about this quite often in the meeting. Our PWAC meeting is usually the day before we have our actual district meeting here. It was yesterday, I believe. Correct, Jerry? Yeah. Okay. In the past, there was a week between the time PWAC had their meeting and we had ours. One of the things in setting up PWAC is the five board members wanted to have input into some of the things that were being discussed at PWAC. We had the ability to do that in the past because we had a timeframe in between that we could take a look at these things. That now is not existent. Again, things are done on the one day. We have a meeting the next day. However, we have a representative, which is Mr. Knoll, who is our primary representative, and he has been trusted, as well he should be after being here almost 20 years on the board, to make decisions on our behalf. We have an agreement that if anything does come up that Mr. Knoll feels could be controversial and the board needs to know about it, that could be delayed for 30 days in PWAC from me taking action on it- Yes ... until it comes back to us. So that was a problem that we were concerned about for quite a while. I believe that has been resolved, and I want the board to understand that Mr. Knoll is our representative, and I would back whatever decision he makes on that because he's had enough time, and he knows how things work here. So we in agreement on that? There's no motion needed, but yes? Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Good. Okay, we can move on then. We have a public hearing coming up. Yeah. Quick overview of the public hearing process. In public hearings, the Board of Supervisors acts as both a judge and jury. In that capacity, the board will consider evidence, make findings of fact, and draw conclusions of law. During the hearing, the board may only receive evidence from district staff, the property owner, and those that will be substantially and directly affected by the outcome of the board's decision. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the board will need to determine whether staff presented competent, substantial evidence in support of finding of the alleged violation. And if so, the board must enter an order of enforcement against the property owner. If there's anyone here to testify as to case number D5-11-26, please stand and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony and evidence you're about to give in this case is the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Okay. At this point, we hereby open up the meeting as a public hearing, and you may proceed. Thank you. Good morning, board. Shannon Boyd, Community Standards. Today, I have before you case number D5-11-26, Village Community Development District number five versus Sergeant P. Watts Jr., 2454 Southern Oak Street, unit 652, lot 34. Violation of the district's rule to bring about deed compliance, and specifically the rule that states, "Each owner shall keep his home site neat and clean, and the grass cut and edged at all times. If an owner does not adhere to the above regulations, then the work may be performed on behalf of the owner, and the cost shall be charged to the owner." On May 15th, 2026, a complaint was received regarding weeds. Staff verified the violation and also observed overgrown grass, vines growing on the bushes, and bushes too close to the neighboring home. During the inspection, a realtor was present at the property managing its sale on behalf of the bank. Staff informed the realtor of the violation. The realtor indicated he had already contacted the bank regarding the poor condition of the lawn and landscaping beds. A deed restriction reminder was written on May 18th. The initial and second letters were sent out on May 28th and June 16th. And after following the procedures of compliance of external deed restrictions, a notice of public hearing was sent by regular and certified mail on July 2nd. On July 16th, a power of attorney for Mr. Watts contacted staff and indicated that the property should be in compliance. Staff explained that the property was last inspected on June 25th, and although the lawn had been mowed, the weeds, vines, and bushes too close to the neighboring home still remained in violation. When asked if Mr. Watts still owned the home, the power of attorney stated that technically he did. However, she indicated the matter was complex. During staff's inspection of the property on August 7th, it was determined that the property remained out of compliance. Staff's recommendation would be to find the owner in violation of the district's deed compliance rule, as cited by the deed compliance staff. The owner has seven days to remove the weeds to bring that portion of the property into compliance. If the weeds are removed and that portion of the property is brought into compliance within seven days of the order of enforcement, that portion of case number D5-11-26 shall be closed. If the weeds are not removed and that portion of the property is not brought into compliance within seven days of the order of enforcement, authorize the district to maintain the property and impose a minimum of a $250 fine or the actual cost of maintenance, whichever is more, to be paid within 10 days of the invoice. Authorize the district to maintain the property twice a month in the summer and once a month in the winter as needed, and impose a $250 fine each time the district maintains the property. If the owner prohibits the district from maintaining the property, then the owner shall be fined an initial amount of $150 and an additional $50 per day until the property is brought into compliance. The owner has seven days to remove the rogue vine growth and trim the bushes at least two feet away from the neighboring home to bring that portion of the property into compliance. If the rogue vine growth is removed and the bushes are trimmed at least two feet away from the neighboring home within seven days of the order of enforcement, that portion of case number D5-11-26 shall be closed. If the rogue vine growth is not removed and the bushes are not trimmed away from the neighboring home and that portion of the property is not brought into compliance within seven days of the order of enforcement, authorize the district to maintain the property and impose $150 per maintenance hour fine, plus a $100 administrative fee to be paid within 10 days of the invoice. If the owner prohibits the district from maintaining the property, then a fine of initial amount of $150 shall be imposed and an additional $50 per day until the property is brought into compliance. If the weeds are removed, the rogue vine growth is removed, and the bushes are trimmed at least two feet away from the neighboring home within seven days of the order of enforcement, case number D5-11-26 shall be closed. If the property is not brought into compliance as required herein, staff shall record this order of enforcement claim of lien in the public records of Sumter County, Florida. It is the property owner's responsibility to contact the Community Standards department to request a deed compliance officer revisit the property to confirm compliance. If the fine reaches $1,500, the case shall be turned over to district counsel to seek all available remedies, which may include initiating a lawsuit and seeking an injunction against the property owner. The property owner is responsible for reimbursing the district for all attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses associated with or related to this order of enforcement claim of lien. If the property is brought into compliance and all fines are paid, the chairman authorizes staff to execute and record a satisfaction and release of claim of lien. Chairman, to execute the order of enforcement, and I'm here to answer any questions that you may have. We are dealing directly with someone who has power of attorney for the owner. Is that correct? Correct. Or the owner themselves? Correct. When I spoke with the power of attorney, the homeowner was there as well. They were? Yes. Okay. So the homeowner's aware that we're taking this action. Correct. And there is nobody here today to speak on behalf of the homeowner? No, I did get a new mailing address when I was speaking with the power of attorney, so he's located somewhere else in Florida. Okay. Yeah. This is nothing new, obviously. We hear this all the time. Unfortunately, neighbors have to live next door to people who just don't care about their property, and that needs to stop as best we can do it. In this particular case, I think it would make sense to move. Any other questions? We'll close the hearing and then discuss. No? Okay. Public hearing's hereby closed. Discussion regarding the presentation. Comments, supervisors? A question. As

Community Development District 5 Seat 1 - Walter Martin, Supervisor Seat 2 - Jerry Knoll, Supervisor Seat 3 - Gerald Ferlisi, Supervisor Seat 4 - Mark Schweikert, Vice Chair Seat 5 - Gary Kadow, Chair August 11, 2026 at 8:00 AM SeaBreeze Regional Recreation Center 2384 Buena Vista Boulevard The Villages, Florida 32162 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ AGENDA The District encourages citizen participation in the democratic process and recognizes and protects the right of freedom of speech afforded to all. As the Board conducts the business of the District, rules of civility shall apply. District Board Supervisors, Staff members, and members of the public are to communicate respectfully. It is preferred that persons speak only when recognized by the Board Chair and, at that time, refrain from engaging in personal attacks or derogatory or offensive language. Persons who are deemed to be disruptive and negatively impact the efficient operation of the meeting shall be subject to removal after two verbal warnings. Audience Comments on all issues will be received by the Board. 1. Call to Order 1.A. Roll Call 1.B. Pledge of Allegiance 1.C. Observation of Moment of Silence 1.D. Welcome Meeting Attendees 2. Consent Agenda A motion to approve the Consent Agenda is a motion to approve all recommended actions. All matters on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and no discussion is required unless desired by a Board Supervisor or a Member of the Public. 2.A. Approval of Minutes 2.B. Approval of Fiscal Year 2026/2027 Meeting Schedule 2.C. Approval of VCDD No. 4 - Release from 7th Amended Interlocal Agreement for the Architectural Review Committee 3. New Business 3.A. Supervisor Knoll: Project Wide Advisory Committee After Agenda 4. Public Hearings 4.A. VCDD No. 5 vs. D5-11-26 - Sargent P. Watts, Jr. - 2454 Southern Oak Street A. District Counsel Overview of Public Hearing Process B. Swearing In of Those Providing Evidence or Testimony C. Open Public Hearing D. Staff Presentation of the Facts E. Owner/Interested Party Presentation F. Close Public Hearing G. Board Discussion/Determination 4.B. VCDD No. 5 vs. D5-12-26 - Joseph E. Bourque, Life Estate Grantees and Brenda H. Bourque, Life Estate Grantees - 707 Willington Way

A. District Counsel Overview of Public Hearing Process B. Swearing In of Those Providing Evidence or Testimony C. Open Public Hearing D. Staff Presentation of the Facts E. Owner/Interested Party Presentation F. Close Public Hearing G. Board Discussion/Determination 5. Old Business 5.A. Old Business Status Update 6. Informational Items Only 6.A. Financial Statements 6.B. DPM Monthly Report 6.C. Village Community Development District No.5 Public Hearing Updates 7. District Manager Reports 7.A. Save the Date: A Night with DPM on September 23, 2026 8. District Counsel Reports 8.A. Ethics and Public Records Training 9. Audience Comments 10. Supervisor Comments 11. Adjourn HOSPITALITY STEWARDSHIP INNOVATION & CREATIVITY HARD WORK NOTICE Each person who decides to appeal any action taken at these meetings is advised that person will need a record of the proceedings and that accordingly, the person may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, incoming the testimony and evidence upon which such appeal is to be based. Audio recordings of Board meetings, workshops or public hearings are available for purchase per Florida Statute 119.07 through the District Clerk for $1.00 per CD requested. Any person requiring special accommodations at this meeting because of disability of physical impairment should contact the District Office at (352) 751-3939 at least five calendar days prior to the meetings.