The public record
Friday, November 14, 2025 · Community development district meeting record
The 30-second read
Recorded outcomeWhy it matters
The official meeting record is available below. Item-level plain-language summaries are not available yet.
What happens next
No later meeting or follow-up date is stated in the reviewed record.
5 recorded votes0 split
Split votes (0)
Every recorded vote passed unanimously.
Unanimous votes (5)
3.A. Review and Approval for Geotechnical Remediation and Fund Transfer for Basin
4.A. Case No. D1-01-26, VCDD No. 1 vs. Louis W. Martin-Culet and Maria Martin-Culet-
4.B. Adoption of Resolution 2026-01: Establishment of Chapter III Rule – VCDD No. 1
Adjourn
Consent Agenda
4 recorded votes
3.A. Review and Approval for Geotechnical Remediation and Fund Transfer for Basin - Voted yes on the motion “The Board approved the geotechnical remediation for Basin 1-1 in the estimated amount of $79,600.00, approved Fund Transfer JE24782 and approved the issuance of all associated purchase orders”; the record reports passed.
Official record4.B. Adoption of Resolution 2026-01: Establishment of Chapter III Rule – VCDD No. 1 - Voted yes on the motion “The Board adopted Resolution 2026-01 establishing Chapter III of the Village Community Development District No. 1 Rule creating authorization and requirements for towing and removal of vehicles and vessels from District property as provided”; the record reports passed.
Official recordAdjourn - Voted yes on the motion “The Board adjourned the meeting”; the record reports passed.
Official recordConsent Agenda - Voted yes on the motion “The Board took formal action on the following Consent Agenda items: 2.A. Approval of the Minutes for the Meeting held on October 10, 2025”; the record reports passed.
Official recordOkay, my clock says eight o'clock. So we'll call the meeting of Village Community Development District one to order. Uh, we have all of our supervisors present this morning. Thank you for being here. Before we move on to the second, um, issue, on our second item on our agenda, I'd like to, uh, to let you know that, uh, since our last meeting, we, we found out that former supervisor, bill Jeanes has passed away. And I just wanted to take a moment to, uh, recognize him. Uh, he served on the Architectural Review Committee, uh, as well, uh, before coming on the, uh, the, the district board. And he also then served on the, uh, investment advisory committee and the Multimodal Path committee. So, bill spent a lot of time serving this community, and I certainly wanted to recognize him today. And, uh, when we get to the, uh, observation among the silence, if you're so inclined, I certainly remember his family. So we'll say, we'll go up to the Pledge of Allegiance at this time Flag of the United States of America Republic One Nation under God, individual liberty and justice Law. Thank you. Okay. At this time, we will welcome the, uh, the attendees at our meeting. If you have, uh, an issue you'd like to address the board with, please come to the podium, give us your name and address for the record, and give us your comments. And if you can limit those to three minutes. Thank you. Anyone like to address the board? See no one. We'll move along. Uh, the next item is the consent agenda. We have the approval of minutes and an amendment to our landscape and irrigation maintenance agreement. Uh, just to let the board know, um, to give credit to the staff for item B on the consent agenda, uh, they did find where there was a duplication, uh, in some of our landscape and the irrigation maintenance regarding the, uh, Maribel Villas. Uh, so they were able to correct that. And that's the, uh, the issue we have before you on item B. So at this time, we will, uh, entertain a motion. So moved. Second. We have a motion to second. Any further discussion on the consent agenda. Hearing none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously and new business. Good morning. Mike Harris, district Property Management. I'm here for your review and approval for geological re remediation and fund transfer F FE 2 4 7 8 2 for basin one, one. Over the past year basin, D one one period has periodically experienced water loss due to three identified depressions. Testing has now been completed and the repairs will involve excavating and backfilling depressions with high quality clay. The upcoming recommend recommended repairs are ED to be $79,600 in total. The final cost for this project may increase or decrease depending on the quality of quantity of clay material found needed for backfill. The total estimated cost for this project is $79,600, which includes budgeted funds for geological anomaly expenses and fund transfer JE 2 4 7 82 in the amount of $44,700. Staff request approval to proceed with geological remediation for basin one one and the estimated amount of $79,600 and the approval of fund transfer JE 2 4 7 82, and the issuance of all associated purchase orders. And I'm here if you have any questions. Any questions? Yeah, I do have a couple questions just for my clarification. Is this a fixed price contract or time materials? How do you handle something like this where there's unknowns? So what you'll see on the, uh, the estimated cost there, you'll see a, uh, uh, they'll have mobilization fees. Um, the mobilization fees, this one was five days. So in that one day, it includes all machinery, all labor costs, which are contracted labor costs, and then your quantity of clay. That's just a, just a straight out billing of the quantity of clay when they drop it off. So everything's built into that mobilization cost. With these contracts, we used to itemize a bit of guts. So grade, so we just put it in the, the mobilization cost. Yeah, I, I only ask to make sure that, I know this is a very time dependent work and wanna make sure that there's appropriate funds, irrespective. I wouldn't find that there. Uh, I also want to compliment Bart Graham. Before I had the privilege of sitting on this board, I worked with Bart on this pond. He's fabulous. He came out and met with the community, just really knew what he was talking about. And just hats off to the district and the work they've done. A lot of people have no idea, throw a lot of my neighbors pushing back, let's sue, let's do this. And I said, the guy know what he's talking about. It was, was well done. So hats off to everybody in your shop. Thank you very much. And my only question is, uh, I assume this high quality clay has a mixture of bentonite with it. When I looked at the price of it, it shocked me a little bit at $200 a cubic yard. But I understand if it, if it's mixed with bentonite. Yes, this is high quality clay. We do not want sand or gravel in this clay. I mean, to simplify, we want sticky Georgia clay that holds water, holds water, water. So any of this other mixture that's put anywhere else, we'll not do that. So that is the, the reason for the increased price of the clay. Alright, thank you. Any further questions? We'll entertain a motion, a motion to approve the, uh, for the basis of number one. Okay. Have a motion. Second and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Carrie? Unanimous. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, the next item on the agenda is public hearings. We have before case number D one dash zero one dash 26, uh, CDD one versus Lewis w Martin Collette, and Maria Maria Martin Collette. And I'll turn the, uh, the floor over to district counsel for an overview. Yes, sir. Good morning. Board. Uh, before we get into the public hearing, I just wanna go over the public hearing process. As you know, in public hearings, you act as both a judge and jury. In that capacity, you'll consider evidence, make findings of fact and draw conclusions of law. During the hearing, you may only receive evidence from district staff, the property owner, or those that will be substantially and directly affected by the outcome of the board's decision. At the conclusion of the public hearing, you will need to determine whether staff present incompetent substantial evidence to support a finding of the alleged violation. And if so, you must enter an order of enforcement against the property owner. If there's anyone here to address the board and testify concerning case number D one dash zero one dash 26, please stand and be sworn. Swear affirm evidence. I do. Okay. We will open a public hearing at this time. Good morning. Board Matter Armstrong Community Standards. So before you today, we do have case number D 1 0 1 26 Village Community Development District number one versus Lewis w Martin Collette and Maria Martin Collette at 6 7 0 San Pedro Drive, unit one lot 81. Violation of the district's rule to bring about de complaints and specifically the rule that states all outside structures for storage or utility purposes must be attached to the home. For this particular case, we received a concern about a pod that had been in the driveway for a prolonged period of time. We did go out there and verify that the pod did exist. Um, and in our investigative work, we found out that the pod has almost been there for a year. And so we inquired as to why the pod had been there for a year and there was, uh, work, there was internal damage due to water damage to the home. And there was a dispute between the homeowner and the insurance company as to what was taking place. And so the pod was brought in to store personal belongings in the pod. Um, unfortunately the de restrictions require that you have any outside storage must be attached to the home. So this is why we're having the public hearing today. We received, uh, a follow up communication after we had created this agenda item. In regards to the, to the timeline of the five days, I'm gonna recommend, um, the homeowner said that they've reached a resolution with the insurance company and the pod is planned to be removed within the next four to six weeks. So they said before the beginning of the new year that they would have the pod removed and the dispute between the insurance company resolved. So I just wanted to bring that forward as as, as part of your thought process on when we go over the order of enforcement. So it is still staff's recommendation to find the homeowners in violation of the district's decompliance rule cited by Decompliance. Staff owner has five days to remove the storage pod to bring the property into compliance. The storage pod is removed within the five days of the order of enforcement. Case number D 1 0 1 26 shall be closed. The storage pod is not removed from the property within the five days of the order of enforcement. Impose a fifth $150 daily fine or 150 fine. $150 fine to be paid within 10 days of the invoice and impose a $50 daily fine until the property is brought into compliance. The property is not brought into compliance as required hearing staff shall record this order of enforcement claim of lien of public records of Sumter County, Florida. It is the property owner's responsibility to contact Community Standards Department to request a decompliance officer revisit the property to confirm compliance. 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 property owners. The property owners are responsible for reimbursing the district for all attorney's fees, costs, and expenses associated with or related to this Board of Enforcement claim of lien. The property is brought into compliance, all fines are paid, and the Chairman authorizes staff to execute and record a satisfaction release claim of lien chairman to execute the order of enforcement. And I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Are there any Que Yes, Go ahead. Uh, is, has Kim has the pod, is there a reason it can't be moved? It according to the homeowners, the insurance companies refusing, allowing them to remove any of the items from the property 'cause of fear of it damaged and processed. And it's part of the claim about what's going on inside the house. Thank you. Um, In the logistics of enforcing the lien, I have no problem with giving them notice and things like that. Is there a way that we can say that, um, fines would be abated until January 1st? Because they have given us notice that, hey, we're we've resolved this thing, it's gonna go out. It seems a little unfair to start dinging them 50 bucks a day when it's gonna go away on, you know, on its own of court. So can we, can we delay the imposition? So you say, Hey, you told us it was January 1st, now it's January 1st. Now the fines begin. You wouldn't abate, you would just change the order of enforcement to state that the fines would begin on January 1st. Uh, Brian, I've got a little different take. Okay. Um, same concept, uh, because I do believe that, um, a lot of this issue has been outside of their control, the homeowner's control. However, um, sometimes we are promised or told things here at this board and, and things don't necessarily, um, correlate to, to what we've been told. So I would be inclined to delay, uh, the enforcement, uh, until January the first. But should the pod not be removed by January 1st that the, uh, the fines would begin within five days of this meeting? Oh, okay. Yeah, I think, okay. I think you're saying tomato and I'm saying tomorrow on this because I, it's very similar, sir. I like the idea of, 'cause I thought you were going with, we'll still have the daily fines build up, but if it's gone by January 1st, we'll waive it or something. You know, something like that. Effectively that's, that's what's happened in, uh, but, uh, because they, um, I think active in good faith, as long as that continues, they wouldn't be fined anything. Uh, but if for some reason this is not a good faith effort, the fines would go back to this particular enforcement date is what I'm saying. Mm-hmm. So there would be a severe penalty if they didn't remove it by January 1st. But if they do, there's no penalty at all. So what, it would seem to be cleaner to me to enter the order of enforcement today, given the time period provided, and add additional paragraph that states should the property owner bring the property into compliance by January one, this board will consider a waiver of the fines upon request by the property owner. That would give you then the opportunity to, so you don't have to say retroactively, it's already all there. You just have additional language that says if they do that, they can come back and ask for a waiver of the fines. Perfect. That seems reasonable to me. Mm-hmm. Okay. How, how long has the pod been from the good point? I don't know the exact date, but they said it, this dispute has been going on for about a year is what they've said for the homeowners. So the other question that was just brought up, a good question is, what are we gonna do about the lien? 'cause currently the language says if it's not brought into compliance within the time period, we record the lien. Do we want to do that? Um, it seems to me like we would just to protect yourselves in case that property transfers hands in between time leave that as it is. But when they come in for the re request for the reduction of fine, at that point, when you agree to waive it, then we will then satisfy the lien and, and record a satisfaction at that time. By reducing the fine, we will have, uh, reduced the, uh, the lien or there would be no lien correct? Because it didn't, um, get to five or $1,500. Well, we would just satisfy the lien because there would be nothing due. Right. There'd be no lien. Okay. Mm-hmm. Does that sound reasonable? Yes. Okay. Alright. We'll entertain a motion if you captured all that, Mike. I did. But you know, Sir, please come to the, uh, we, uh, can only take, wait a minute, we're in a public hearing. That's right. We're in a public hearing. So only a property owner or, uh, substantially interested party like a neighbor can address the board at this time. So Mike, you had a, a concern. Yeah. And my, my concern is the amount of time that it's been there, and I mean, we allowed this, we, everyone has circumstances. I mean, really that pod there's, that pod couldn't have physically move somewhere else. So the neighbors aren't happy to do it every day. I just wanted, you know, I I think that's the reason we had the rule. Mm-hmm. And the time that we spend and the, the money that we spend on, on these issues. And then we, then we waive the fees there purposes, in my opinion, on certain, certain issues. Okay. But I want to share That. I hear what you say. Okay? Mm-hmm. Ms. Cord, I thought you okay. Alright. So quiet a while. Mm-hmm. Yeah. I guess if there's no more, um, public comment or questions for Mr. Armstrong, we can close the public hearing and then you guys can deliberate and decide how you want to act. Okay. No further deliberation. We'll close the public hearing. Mr. Deacon, you can address the board now, at this time, Don Deacon, uh, 72 20 southeast hundred 72nd is with Loop. Um, it's my understanding from prior observations that there is a cost to filing a lien. And if you file a lien and then later withdraw the lien, there's still that cost involved. So you, before you decide to go ahead and file the lien, you might want to find out what that cost is. Thank you, sir. And that's something that can be brought up during the request for the reduction or waiver of fine. At that point, again, we're, we're putting some very broad language in the order of enforcement that will just say a property owner, if they come to compliance by January one, may request to be added, the agenda for, uh, request to reduce or waive their fines. If that happens and they do that, at that time, the board can say, okay, we're gonna waive all the fines, but we're gonna charge you $15, or whatever the case is to file the satisfaction. Okay. So I think we, we have the force, um, the idea of having some leniency because of the, uh, circumstances, but Mr. Miller makes a, uh, a case that, um, we have rules in place and we should, should follow those, those rules. So we'll entertain any discussion before we enter, um, a motion. So we have two options here. You can make a motion to approve Status's recommendation and that would be it. And that is as it's been provided, or you can make a motion to accept staff's recommendation with the change to, uh, by adding a paragraph to state that the property owner may request a waiver or reduction of fines if the property's brought into compliance by January 1st, 2026. Okay. With that in mind, we'll, um, entertain a motion. I move that in case D 1 0 1 2 6. We take staff's recommendation and we add a paragraph saying that there can be a reduction in fine. And, uh, by January 1st. Okay. Thank you Ms. We have a motion on the floor. Do we have a second? A second. We have a motion and a second on the floor. Any discussion about the motion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Forward to one. Thank you. Thank you. Board. Okay, next we have resolution 2026 dash zero one, uh, regarding the towing rule. Good morning board, Kaitlyn administration. Today I have before you the public hearing for adoption of resolution 2026 dash oh one to establish a chapter three rule for towing of improperly parked vessels. If you recall, it was discussed previously and advertised at the September 12th, 2025 meeting for district one. If you've gone through the attachments for chapter three rule, it goes into the purpose of the towing and removal of improperly parked vehicles and vessels, temporary parking areas and provisions for repeat offenders. What this will solve is people who leave their vehicles in those temporary parking areas listed in section four or the district owned roadways on a permanent basis, and allow us to start the process to tow. And I am happy to answer any questions that you may have. My first question is, um, what definition is used for temporary? Because I did not find that in the, uh, specific rule. That's a great question. And that is, um, not something that we have defined at this point. Because of it, it would be very difficult to define temporary. And if we did, there would be a lot of unintended consequences for residents who were trying to park, um, that would violate that temporary. But maybe it, it isn't a different situation. So the way we have this is that if it is impacting the normal intent of the parking area, and that's something that staff would work to define and we provide proper notice to them, it can be towed and it's not being enforced through the deed restrictions in which we would have to define that temporary. Okay. So question now for district council. Yes sir. What would be a legally defendable temporary definition? You know, we've struggled that for about, with, with that question for about six years. 'cause this isn't the first district to ask it. And, um, there are a lot of issues with defining that term, not just the unintended consequences, but the monitoring of that process for determining whether someone's there under what the definition might be. So it's very difficult. Can it be done? Yes. It's gonna take time and it's gonna cost money and it's gonna cost additional procedures because you're gonna have to have, um, some staff monitor the parking to ensure it meets your definition of temporary. So it can be done. Um, but this is the way that we found the best way to proceed going forward, and it's worked so far. Okay. Um, again, you know, it can be done if you, if you guys want to take a crack at it, but it'll take some time, um, and cost some money and again, involve additional processes. So in districts where this particular rule has been in place, have you been able to resolve every issue that's that's come up? As far as I'm concerned, we have, yes. Okay. Okay. I'm finished. It sounds as if it's more of a, you know it when you see it type of, uh, violation and, and you really rely on your, your staff district management to, to make that call and, and they reach out to me and we work together and figuring that out and we provide the notices and if it needs to be moved and it's moved. Okay. Just for clarification, uh, is this in your community or on the street? Can you use your microphone, ma'am? Oh, Yeah. Sorry, just for clarification. Um, is this in villa communities or just on the streets? For the most part, this is the guest parking areas in the Villa communities. I thought that the district has responsibility for, yeah. Okay. Yes, that would be correct. There are some areas in, in some district, district four, for example, in which there are just open grass areas that we had trouble with people pulling over and parking. That is something that can be added later. So if at any point in time in district one you find, or you get reports of residents saying, along this basin or in this area, it's open area and people keep parking, we would go back and add that track into this rule. So that's something down the road. If we need to expand this rule, we can, but as of now, it, it relates to that overflow parking in the villas. Okay. Further comments from the board before I open the public hearing. Hearing none will open the public hearing. If anyone in the, uh, attendance would like to address the, uh, proposed towing rule, now is your opportunity to speak. Okay. Hearing none, we'll close the public hearing. And so we have a, uh, resolution in front of us. I move reso, I move passage of resolution 2026. Oh one second. We have a motion and second on the floor. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, moving on to old business. Yes sir. The only item you have on old business was the acid washing of the, um, del sole postal boxes, which has been complete. You have no other remaining old business. Alright, thank you. Uh, any board questions on our informational items, Uh, regarding the postal boxes? Some of them, including mine, the numbers of postal box have been removed. It that something we'd have to address with the post office or with you all? Um, if it does have to be addressed with the post office, we'd be happy to do that. Uh, which postal station is it? Uh, okay, we'll take a look at it and if it does need to be reported, we will report it. If not, then we'll put that on the schedule to look at. Okay, great. There's the ones on the bottom really. Okay, thank you. Most of them are okay. Okay, very good. Thank you. Alright. Okay. District manager reports? Yes, sir. The first item is the amenity authority committee after agenda, which has been attached to your agenda for review. I'm happy to answer any questions if you have them, um, on any of those items? No, Any, i I actually do have one comment. I think now is probably the, uh, the appropriate time to, uh, to address it. Um, the issue of, uh, people that are not residents or guests of the villages use amenities has been an issue that that has certainly caused a lot of our constituents to contact me. And not only within district one, uh, but from other districts. That's, that's a very much a, a concern. And the concern is based, uh, from a lot of the people that have contacted me on actual experiences that they feel like that they've had. And I, I feel like that, um, from a district standpoint, um, if people are telling us that they're having these experiences, that they're seeing people in the pools that they, they know, uh, reasonably, uh, well, that, that are not villagers or, or guests of villages, uh, residents and, uh, on the courts and things like this, um, taking the approach of telling them that what they're seeing is, is just not true, is, is something that needs to be backed up by a factual basis. And I, and I think at this point there's, there's some effort to, uh, to undergo, to try to develop that. But quite honestly, the, uh, the, the program that has been proposed, um, is easily, um, avoided. If you want to say that, if I'm a teenager and I'm going to sneak into someplace and I walk up and there's somebody there taking role, I'm gonna walk away. Okay. So I think, I think there's a, there's a better effort that needs to be made to actually develop factual information so that we can put this issue to rest one way or the other. Uh, if people are, are using, uh, our amenities on a, on a large scale, or if they're not, I think what is needed is factual information for our residents to have access to. And so that they'll know, uh, that it stands the test of some kind of, uh, subjectivity or qualified objectivity. Uh, so that, that they know that it's, it's an accurate thing. So, because I had so many people talking to me about this, I put some thought into it and I have, uh, I've developed an, an idea and I like to give that to the staff. And, and just to give you a, a executive summary of the idea is to have a, um, district volunteers, um, and these people would be trained, uh, on how to interact with people. There would be no confrontation whatsoever, uh, no asking people to leave if they find people at the, uh, the pools or the courts that don't have the proper identification. It's just an effort to collect information, uh, that will provide factual information for decisions later. Uh, so these volunteers that would be, uh, hopefully located from across the village areas so that they can work on the, uh, the pools and courts in those areas, uh, would be trained to go, uh, to those different, um, courts and and pools at different times of the day. Take a, um, a note of how many people are there, how many people that offer to provide, uh, their credentials and, and people that don't. You just mark it down as that, you know, that that's the, the type of information that will eventually over time, uh, allow us to have factual information that will stand the, the test of objectivity so that we can provide the information that, that I think is a, a large concern of, of our community. So I offer that I will help, uh, if the district decides to move forward with that, I'll develop the training program for the volunteers. I'll do anything I can, uh, to allow us to have factual information that will bring us to the, uh, to the decision that that will, will make our residents comfortable with what's going on. So I'll offer that. Sorry about the, uh, the loan dissertation. I do have The same question I hear. Um, okay. The pool monitor shows up, people hop in the pool because they know they're not gonna be carted. How are we gonna handle people in the pool? Uh, we will just ask them, uh, in this situation if, if they'd like to provide their, um, their credentials and if they refuse, you just mark it down as they refused. You didn't mark it down as whether or not they had it, but you're collecting factual information based on what happened at the, but you're not asking anybody to leave, you're not confronting anybody. It's just a, a, uh, very, um, passive way to collect factual information without giving away that information's being collected before they step into the area. Okay. So that, and that's a great, um, common observation. The, the technology is out there and the re resources are out there to where we can ask people to get out of the pool. We can put card readers on all of the gates in which somebody would have to scan their village's ID card in order for the gate to unlock to go into it. And the thought process on both the amenity authority committee and project wide advisory committee was before we expend the time and the resources and doing that, and before we upset a bunch of residents and pulling them out of the pools, let's see if there is a problem. Let's gather information, gather facts to see is is it a perception problem that there are outsiders or invaders using the pools? Or is it an actual problem? Um, and that is why they directed staff to do this. Um, four pools in the north, four pools in the southern area in which we will staff them fully from open to close checking IDs. Um, you're correct that certainly on Monday morning it could get out which pool they're at and then, you know, people wouldn't come. This, this is another opportunity. This is another avenue in which we could collect, um, data. I will provide this to both the amenity authority committee and project wide Advisory Committee for, um, consideration. What's nice is before their next meeting, this first pilot program will have already taken place. So they will have the, the data that we collect with Mr. Rohan's proposal. They can look at that, determine whether or not they think that is a good representation of the information. Then they will also have this option, which takes it another step further. If they don't feel that they have a good representation of, of the data, um, I will and I would ask if you have residents that are telling you that they know that there are people there that, that aren't supposed to be there, if they could contact us right then we will then send somebody out. We'll ask them to get out of the pool because if we have a valid, legitimate concern that they are not village residents, we do take immediate proactive action right at that point. Unfortunately, what typically happens is we get a call three weeks later and they say, why do you let all of these outsiders in the pool, okay, provide us when, well, it was three weeks ago. Well, we can't do anything then. So I know a lot of residents don't want to go and use the, the phone right there and then be the one that calls. But even if they put community watch or recreation's phone number in their cell phone, just program it in there, all they have to do then is if they're sitting there call and say, can you please send somebody to come and check IDs at this pool? I believe that there are people that shouldn't be here. And typically within 30 minutes we can get somebody out there checking those IDs. So if you could just help us get that word out as well, um, that would certainly help with the perception, um, and us actually knowing whether it's a problem. But I will provide this to both committees for consideration. Thank You. Okay, The next item on district manager reports is introduction of Mr. Johnny Bishop, who is our new executive Director of support services. Mr. Bishop is in the back and is going to be providing services to and support to district property management, asset management and fleet services. Uh, you will still see Mr. Harris, he is still the director of DPM at your meetings, but certainly Mr. Bishop is also available to, you need additional support in that area. And then finally, I would like to invite Mr. Armstrong to come and give an introduction to a new software platform that he is introducing into his department called Gov Build. Thank you Ms. Duckett. Hello Board. So I am very excited to introduce this to you. Um, we have been looking for quite a few number of years, uh, a software opportunity that would help us be more efficient in community standards. And we finally have found, uh, a software that will help us with our architectural review process and our DECOMPLIANCE process. So for an example, last year we processed almost 13,000 a RC applications by hand on paper. And where actually now this program will allow us to automate that process where we're able to submit applications online. Residents will be able to see in real time the status of their application as it's going through the process with a, with a status bar. And then it, once the application is reviewed, get an immediate response to approval or denial versus waiting two days for us to manually process and get it online and get the status to the individual. So we're looking to streamline that process where, as far as efficiencies go, and getting communication to our residents with our ARC applications as well as our decompliance process. Currently right now we're working in various Microsoft programs and file folders that go across various division, um, between community standards inside ARC and decompliance. So it's gonna streamline all the information into one location. Staff can easily see the information, we can see where we are in our process. So great efficiencies gained there. And we're looking at implementing this internally in this in December. And residents will be able to see that online platform as well for their ARC applications in December as well. And hopefully in December I'll be able to come back and show you what it looks like once we've gone live with it and we can get the screenshots, but we're very excited. So Matt, was this a, uh, a product that was, was kind of on the market as a software product that you, you had the company modify to, uh, to make it village specific? Or did you have to develop it from scratch? Um, we started off almost trying to find something where we had to develop from scratch, but no, this is a, a recent company that was acquired by, um, our company that we currently use at MCCI that does laser fish. And they said, Hey, we actually just acquired this company and it does what you're looking for. So they're actually 80% customizable with a 20% base. So the foundational components of the software, but then they can tailor it to our needs. And over the past three months, we've been meeting with them every Tuesday to go and build how this workflow goes. So for example, the ARC application as you see on paper is exactly how you're gonna see it on the online format as well. So the visualization is still the same and instead of getting all these paper copies and getting it in a packet and giving it to us, you can upload it in and it's gonna be all seamless in one packet. So you're, are you gonna migrate any legacy data in there or are you just going to start fresh from Correct. We're, We are gonna begin to do that transfer. It's a lot of data, but that's gonna be kinda like a phase two project for, it's currently on our district server now, so it's easily accessible, but getting it in there is gonna, that's gonna take time. Yeah. For cause Could you comment on, uh, any financial expenditures or cost for this, Uh, village Center approved this acquisition? Um, as far as the day-to-day operations, it comes out of the, the, the general fund budget. Mm-hmm. So it wouldn't impact individual districts? No. Your accounting process or your budgeting process is still gonna be what we approved a couple years ago in the last budget process with a number of ARC applications, process received applications or the decompliance concerns in the public hearings. This is covered as part of your management services agreement. Yep. I think it's an excellent improvement in customer service. So thank you. Thank you. Can you tell he's excited? I can Cut down on my paper budget. Alright. District counsel, no reports. Okay. Supervisor comments. Uh, Mr. Gerwin, we'll start with you, sir. Uh, just again, a hats off to, uh, I, you know, I've watched this group work for three months and I wish residents could see the dedication, professionalism, and intelligence that I have the privilege to serve with. Thank you, sir. Any further? Supervisor comments? Okay. Um, Mr. Gerwin, you had an agenda request for the update, Uh, that was actually met with the, the pond. Same pond. Okay. Alright. So we, we addressed that earlier. Just wanted to make sure we covered everything for you. Okay. Hearing none, we, uh, again, have, uh, completed our task and record pace and there will be no problem meeting, uh, any, uh, commitments later on in the day. Right. It's 40 minutes. This is considered long meeting for district. This is long for us. Isn't I? Move? We adjourn? We have a motion. And a second. Second. All right. All in favor? A. Any opposed? Alright, we adjourned. Thank you. Board. Thank.
MINUTES OF MEETING VILLAGE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 A Meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Village Community Development District No. 1 was held on Friday, November 14, 2025 at 8:00 a.m. in the Ashley Wilkes Room at the Savannah Regional Recreation Center, 1545 N. Buena Vista Boulevard, The Villages, Florida 32162. Board members present and constituting a quorum: Rocky Hyder Chair Mike Miller Vice Chair Brian Goodman Supervisor Stephen Gerwin Supervisor Ellen Cora Supervisor Staff Present: Carrie Duckett Deputy District Manager Mark Brionez District Counsel Bruce Brown Assistant District Manager Jennifer Liunoras Finance Director Shawn Boyle Chief Financial Officer Caitlyn Bessoni Executive Coordinator Melissa Schaar Purchasing Director Karen Clary Budget Assistant Director Matt Armstrong Community Standards Director Jennifer Farlow District Clerk Rebecca Johnson Assistant District Clerk FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS: Call to Order 1.A. Roll Call Chair Hyder called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. and stated that all Supervisors were present representing a quorum. 1.B. Pledge of Allegiance Chair Hyder led the Pledge of Allegiance.
VCDD No. 1 – Meeting Minutes November 14, 2025 Page 2 1.C. Observation of a Moment of Silence Chair Hyder advised that prior Supervisor, Bill Jenness, passed away and requested that those in attendance dedicate the moment of silence to his family and friends. 1.D. Welcome Meeting Attendees The Board welcomed all those in attendance. 1.E. Audience Comments There were no Audience comments. SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS: Consent Agenda Chair Hyder advised the Board that 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. On MOTION by Mike Miller, seconded by Brian Goodman, with all in favor, the Board took formal action on the following Consent Agenda items: 2.A. Approval of the Minutes for the Meeting held on October 10, 2025. 2.B. Approval of Amendment Two to the Agreement for RFP #23P-005 with Yellowstone Landscape Southeast, LLC, reducing 1,212 square yards of maintained Bahia Turf along Morse Blvd Rio Grande Ave to Hacienda Hills for an amended agreement amount of $348,603.40 for the remaining 10 months of Fiscal Year 2025/2026, as outlined in Exhibit A and authorized the Chair/Vice Chair to execute the Amendment. THIRD ORDER OF BUSSINESS: New Business 3.A. Review and Approval for Geotechnical Remediation and Fund Transfer for Basin 1-1 Mike Harris, District Property Management (DPM) Director, advised that over the past year Basin D1-1 has periodically experienced water loss due to three (3) identified geological anomalies. It is anticipated that the repairs will be completed during the dry season, which will involve excavating and backfilling the depressions with high-quality clay, at an estimated cost of $79,600. The final cost of the project will depend on the quantity of clay material needed for backfill. Mr. Harris advised that Staff is requesting that the Board approve proceeding with geotechnical remediation for Basin 1-1 for an
VCDD No. 1 – Meeting Minutes November 14, 2025 Page 3 estimated cost of $79,600, approval of Fund Transfer JE24782 and the issuance of all associated purchase orders. Supervisor Goodman inquired if this is a fixed priced contract. Mr. Harris advised that the contract addresses the mobilization fee, labor and machinery that is required to complete the job. The cost of the clay is separate. Chair Hyder inquired if the high-quality clay has a mixture of bentonite. Mr. Harris advised that the clay does include bentonite and is the highest quality possible for the purpose of holding water. On MOTION by Mike Miller, seconded by Brian Goodman, with all in favor, the Board approved the geotechnical remediation for Basin 1-1 in the estimated amount of $79,600.00, approved Fund Transfer JE24782 and approved the issuance of all associated purchase orders. FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: Public Hearing 4.A. Case No. D1-01-26, VCDD No. 1 vs. Louis W. Martin-Culet and Maria Martin-Culet- 670 San Pedro Drive A. District Counsel to Provide Overview of Public Hearing Process Mark Brionez, District Counsel, provided the Board and audience in attendance with an overview of the Public Hearing process. B. Administer Swearing in of Those Providing Evidence or Testimony Jennifer Farlow, District Clerk, administered the swearing in of those individuals who identified that they would be providing evidence or testimony. C. Open Public Hearing Chair Hyder opened the Public Hearing 8:08 a.m. E. Owner/Interested Party Presentation Matt Armstrong, Community Standards Director, advised that Case No. D1-01-26, Village Community Development District (VCDD) No. 1 vs. Louis W Martin-Culet and Maria Martin-Culet, 670 San Pedro Drive, Unit 1, Lot 81, is in violation of the District’s Rule to Bring about Deed Compliance and specifically, the Rule that states: “All outside structures for storage or utility purposes must be attached to the home…” On September 10, 2025 a complaint was received that a Pod has been in the driveway for over a year. Staff verified the violation, and a Deed Restriction Reminder was written on the same day.
VCDD No. 1 – Meeting Minutes November 14, 2025 Page 4 The initial and second letters were sent on September 23, 2025 and October 15, 2025, and after following the Procedures for Compliance of External Deed Restrictions, a Notice of Public Hearing was sent by regular mail and certified mail on November 3, 2025. Mr. Armstrong advised that the homeowners contacted the Community Standards Office to advise that they are working with an attorney to resolve issues with their insurance company stemming from severe water damage in their home. Due to the damage, the homeowners had to place their belongings into a Pod unit and are now attempting to move their belongings to a storage facility. The homeowners advised that they had been encountering significant obstacles because their insurance company is not permitting them to move or remove the Pod from the property. This restriction has prompted the homeowners to retain legal counsel to help remedy the situation and work through the dispute with the insurance company. A resolution with the insurance company has been made and the Pod is scheduled to be moved within 4-6 weeks. During an inspection of the property on November 12, 2025, it was determined that the property remains out of compliance. Mr. Armstrong advised that Staff recommends the Board find the homeowner in violation of the District’s Deed Compliance Rule as cited by the Deed Compliance Staff; homeowners have five (5) days to remove the storage Pod to bring the property into compliance; if the storage Pod is removed within five (5) days of the Order of Enforcement, Case No. D1-01-26 shall be closed; if the storage Pod is not removed from the property within five (5) days of the Order of Enforcement, impose a $150 fine to be paid within ten (10) days of the invoice and impose a $50 daily fine until the property is brought into compliance; 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 homeowner’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 homeowners; the homeowners are responsible for reimbursing the District for all attorney’s fees, cost, 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. Supervisor Goodman inquired if fines could be waived until January 1, 2026 because the homeowners have provided notice that the Pod would be removed in 4-6 weeks. Mr. Brionez advised that
VCDD No. 1 – Meeting Minutes November 14, 2025 Page 5 the Order of Enforcement could be revised to state that the fines would begin accruing as of January 1, 2026. Chair Hyder stated that he would be in favor of revising the language to state that if the Pod has not been removed by January 1, 2026 then the fines would be retroactive to five (5) days following this meeting. Mr. Brionez advised that the Order of Enforcement can be issued today based on Staff’s recommendation and include an additional paragraph to state that if the homeowners are in compliance by January 1, 2026, the Board can consider a waiver of the fines at the request of the homeowners. Mr. Brionez recommended that the Board proceed with recording the Order of Enforcement five (5) days after today’s meeting, and if the homeowners are in compliance by January 1, 2026, the lien shall be satisfied. Supervisor Miller expressed concern about the Board waiving the fines because it defeats the purpose of the compliance system, and he is not in favor of waving the fines. F. Close Public Hearing Receiving no public comments, Chair Hyder closed the Public Hearing at 8:16 a.m. Don Deakin, Village of Briar Meadow, advised that there is a fee when recording the lien. Mr. Brionez advised that when the homeowners request a waiver of the fines, the administrative costs can be evaluated at that time. On MOTION by Ellen Cora, seconded by Brian Goodman, with four (4) Supervisors voting “Aye” and Mike Miller voting “Nay”, the Board found the homeowners of 670 San Pedro Drive, Unit 1, Lot 81, in violation of the District's Deed Compliance Rule as cited by the Deed Compliance Staff; homeowners have five (5) days to remove the storage Pod to bring the property into compliance; if the storage Pod is removed within five (5) days of the Order of Enforcement, Case No. D1-01-26 shall be closed; if the storage Pod is not removed from the property within five (5) days of the Order of Enforcement, impose a $150 fine to be paid within ten (10) days of the invoice and impose a $50 daily fine until the property is brought into compliance; 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 homeowners’ 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 homeowners; the homeowners are responsible for reimbursing the District for all attorney’s fees, cost, and expenses associated with, or related to, this Order of Enforcement/Claim of Lien; if the property is brought into compliance and all fines
VCDD No. 1 – Meeting Minutes November 14, 2025 Page 6 are paid, the Chair authorizes Staff to execute and record a Satisfaction/Release of Claim of Lien; if the homeowners are in compliance by January 1, 2026, the Board can consider a waiver of the fines at the request of the homeowners and Chair to execute the Order of Enforcement. 4.B. Adoption of Resolution 2026-01: Establishment of Chapter III Rule – VCDD No. 1 Towing Rule A. Overview of Resolution 2026-01: Establishing Chapter III Towing Rule Caitlyn Bessoni, Executive Coordinator, advised that adoption of Resolution 2025-07 will establish Chapter III of the District’s Rule to provide for the process of the towing vehicles or vessels that have been parked on a permanent basis or are inoperable from District property. Chair Hyder requested clarification of the definition being utilized to define “temporary”. Carrie Duckett, Deputy District Manager, stated that Staff has not defined the word “temporary”, but the way the Rule is written, it states that if a resident or individual is impacting the intent of the use of the parking area that individual will be found in violation of the Rule. Chair Hyder inquired if other Districts that have already adopted the Rule have been able to enforce the towing without the word “temporary” being defined. Mr. Brionez advised that all Districts that have established this Rule have enforced it. Supervisor Cora inquired if the Rule effects only villa communities. Chair Hyder stated that the Rule will enforce all guest parking areas in the villa communities within District 1. Ms. Duckett stated that in other Districts there have been issues with individuals parking in the grass areas near basins, and if that were to become a problem in District 1 then consideration can be given to adding verbiage to the Rule to prevent parking in those areas. B. Open Public Hearing Chair Hyder opened the Public Hearing at 8:25 a.m. C. Close Public Hearing Receiving no public comments, Chair Hyder closed the Public Hearing at 8:25 a.m. D. Adoption of Resolution 2026-01 Creation of Chapter III Towing Rule
VCDD No. 1 – Meeting Minutes November 14, 2025 Page 7 On MOTION by Brian Goodman, seconded by Mike Miller, with all in favor, the Board adopted Resolution 2026-01 establishing Chapter III of the Village Community Development District No. 1 Rule creating authorization and requirements for towing and removal of vehicles and vessels from District property as provided for in §§190.012 and 715.07, Florida Statutes. FIFTH ORDER OF BUSSINESS: Old Business 5.A. Old Business Status Update Ms. Duckett provided an update on the following Old Business Status Update items: Non-VCDD No. 1 Items: • Maintenance condition of the Tierra Del Sol postal boxes: Acid washing has been completed. Supervisor Cora stated that the numbers on the postal boxes at the Tierra Del Sol Postal Station have been removed from some boxes, and consideration should be given to replacing the numbers. Ms. Duckett advised that Staff will complete a review. Items of Consideration: • FEMA Update: No update to be provided. • SECO Update: No update to be provided. • Install speed bumps in villa units following road repaving SIXTH ORDER OR BUSINESS: Information Items Only 6.A. Financial Statements The Financial Statements of September 30, 2025 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. Deed Compliance and Architectural Review Annual Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Statistics. The Deed Compliance and Architectural Review Annual Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Statistics were provided to the Board as information. 6.D. Village Community Development District No. 1 Public Hearing Updates The Village Community Development No. 1 Public Hearing Updates were provided to the Board as information.
VCDD No. 1 – Meeting Minutes November 14, 2025 Page 8 SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: District Manager Reports 7.A. Amenity Authority Committee After Agenda Ms. Duckett advised that the After Agenda from the Amenity Authority Committee (AAC) meeting held on November 12, 2025 was provided to the Board as information. Chair Hyder stated that residents have approached him with their concerns about individuals utilizing the pools and other amenities who are not residents of The Villages. Chair Hyder recommended that factual information be obtained to determine whether the amenities are be utilized by non-residents and provided a proposal to Staff to accomplish ID checks at the pools and other amenities, utilizing resident volunteers. Ms. Duckett advised that there are options available to verify that only Villages’ residents and visitors are utilizing the amenities, but the AAC and Project Wide Advisory Committee (PWAC) have directed Staff to first complete a short study to determine if a problem exists before funds are expended. Ms. Duckett advised that the proposal presented by Chair Hyder will be forwarded to the AAC and PWAC for consideration. Ms. Duckett stated that if residents see an individual who is not supposed to be utilizing the facilities, they should report it immediately to Recreation and Parks Staff so that the concern can be addressed. 7.B. Introduction of Jonny Bishop, Executive Director of Support Services Ms. Duckett introduced Jonny Bishop, Executive Director of Support Services and provided a brief overview of his background. Mr. Bishop will provide support to District Property Management, Asset Management and the Fleet Department. 7.C. Community Standards- GovBuilt Mr. Armstrong advised that GovBuilt is an online platform that is specifically designed for governmental entities. The District will begin utilizing GovBuilt in December to transition the current Architectural Review Modification Application paper process to a fully online process, which will allow residents the ability to track the approval process for applications submitted. Additionally, GovBuilt will also be utilized to streamline the deed compliance process so that all documents are located in one location, versus multiple spreadsheets and files.
VCDD No. 1 – Meeting Minutes November 14, 2025 Page 9 Chair Hyder inquired if the software was modified specifically for Community Standards. Mr. Armstrong advised that the software has been revised too meet the specific needs of both ARC and Deed Compliance. Chair Hyder inquired if historical data will be added to the software. Mr. Armstrong advised that the transfer of historical data will occur at a later date. Supervisor Cora inquired about the cost of the software. Mr. Armstrong advised that the Village Center Community Development District (VCCDD) Board approved the purchase of the software from the General Fund, and it will not have a direct impact on the individual Districts. Chair Hyder stated that this is an excellent improvement to the level of customer service provided. EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: District Counsel Reports There were no District Counsel Reports at this time. NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: Supervisor Comments 9.A. Supervisor Gerwin: Update of Hacienda East Pond Liner Failure Supervisor Gerwin thanked Andreyev Engineering for the professionalism that was provided while addressing the geological anomaly concerns. TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 8:41 am. On MOTION by Brian Goodman, seconded by Stephen Gerwin, with all in favor, the Board adjourned the meeting. Kenneth C. Blocker Rocky Hyder Secretary Chair
Showing the first 24,000 of 36,249 characters. The full document is at the source.
Okay, my clock says eight o'clock. So we'll call the meeting of Village Community Development District one to order. Uh, we have all of our supervisors present this morning. Thank you for being here. Before we move on to the second, um, issue, on our second item on our agenda, I'd like to, uh, to let you know that, uh, since our last meeting, we, we found out that former supervisor, bill Jeanes has passed away. And I just wanted to take a moment to, uh, recognize him. Uh, he served on the Architectural Review Committee, uh, as well, uh, before coming on the, uh, the, the district board. And he also then served on the, uh, investment advisory committee and the Multimodal Path committee. So, bill spent a lot of time serving this community, and I certainly wanted to recognize him today. And, uh, when we get to the, uh, observation among the silence, if you're so inclined, I certainly remember his family. So we'll say, we'll go up to the Pledge of Allegiance at this time Flag of the United States of America Republic One Nation under God, individual liberty and justice Law. Thank you. Okay. At this time, we will welcome the, uh, the attendees at our meeting. If you have, uh, an issue you'd like to address the board with, please come to the podium, give us your name and address for the record, and give us your comments. And if you can limit those to three minutes. Thank you. Anyone like to address the board? See no one. We'll move along. Uh, the next item is the consent agenda. We have the approval of minutes and an amendment to our landscape and irrigation maintenance agreement. Uh, just to let the board know, um, to give credit to the staff for item B on the consent agenda, uh, they did find where there was a duplication, uh, in some of our landscape and the irrigation maintenance regarding the, uh, Maribel Villas. Uh, so they were able to correct that. And that's the, uh, the issue we have before you on item B. So at this time, we will, uh, entertain a motion. So moved. Second. We have a motion to second. Any further discussion on the consent agenda. Hearing none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously and new business. Good morning. Mike Harris, district Property Management. I'm here for your review and approval for geological re remediation and fund transfer F FE 2 4 7 8 2 for basin one, one. Over the past year basin, D one one period has periodically experienced water loss due to three identified depressions. Testing has now been completed and the repairs will involve excavating and backfilling depressions with high quality clay. The upcoming recommend recommended repairs are ED to be $79,600 in total. The final cost for this project may increase or decrease depending on the quality of quantity of clay material found needed for backfill. The total estimated cost for this project is $79,600, which includes budgeted funds for geological anomaly expenses and fund transfer JE 2 4 7 82 in the amount of $44,700. Staff request approval to proceed with geological remediation for basin one one and the estimated amount of $79,600 and the approval of fund transfer JE 2 4 7 82, and the issuance of all associated purchase orders. And I'm here if you have any questions. Any questions? Yeah, I do have a couple questions just for my clarification. Is this a fixed price contract or time materials? How do you handle something like this where there's unknowns? So what you'll see on the, uh, the estimated cost there, you'll see a, uh, uh, they'll have mobilization fees. Um, the mobilization fees, this one was five days. So in that one day, it includes all machinery, all labor costs, which are contracted labor costs, and then your quantity of clay. That's just a, just a straight out billing of the quantity of clay when they drop it off. So everything's built into that mobilization cost. With these contracts, we used to itemize a bit of guts. So grade, so we just put it in the, the mobilization cost. Yeah, I, I only ask to make sure that, I know this is a very time dependent work and wanna make sure that there's appropriate funds, irrespective. I wouldn't find that there. Uh, I also want to compliment Bart Graham. Before I had the privilege of sitting on this board, I worked with Bart on this pond. He's fabulous. He came out and met with the community, just really knew what he was talking about. And just hats off to the district and the work they've done. A lot of people have no idea, throw a lot of my neighbors pushing back, let's sue, let's do this. And I said, the guy know what he's talking about. It was, was well done. So hats off to everybody in your shop. Thank you very much. And my only question is, uh, I assume this high quality clay has a mixture of bentonite with it. When I looked at the price of it, it shocked me a little bit at $200 a cubic yard. But I understand if it, if it's mixed with bentonite. Yes, this is high quality clay. We do not want sand or gravel in this clay. I mean, to simplify, we want sticky Georgia clay that holds water, holds water, water. So any of this other mixture that's put anywhere else, we'll not do that. So that is the, the reason for the increased price of the clay. Alright, thank you. Any further questions? We'll entertain a motion, a motion to approve the, uh, for the basis of number one. Okay. Have a motion. Second and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Carrie? Unanimous. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, the next item on the agenda is public hearings. We have before case number D one dash zero one dash 26, uh, CDD one versus Lewis w Martin Collette, and Maria Maria Martin Collette. And I'll turn the, uh, the floor over to district counsel for an overview. Yes, sir. Good morning. Board. Uh, before we get into the public hearing, I just wanna go over the public hearing process. As you know, in public hearings, you act as both a judge and jury. In that capacity, you'll consider evidence, make findings of fact and draw conclusions of law. During the hearing, you may only receive evidence from district staff, the property owner, or those that will be substantially and directly affected by the outcome of the board's decision. At the conclusion of the public hearing, you will need to determine whether staff present incompetent substantial evidence to support a finding of the alleged violation. And if so, you must enter an order of enforcement against the property owner. If there's anyone here to address the board and testify concerning case number D one dash zero one dash 26, please stand and be sworn. Swear affirm evidence. I do. Okay. We will open a public hearing at this time. Good morning. Board Matter Armstrong Community Standards. So before you today, we do have case number D 1 0 1 26 Village Community Development District number one versus Lewis w Martin Collette and Maria Martin Collette at 6 7 0 San Pedro Drive, unit one lot 81. Violation of the district's rule to bring about de complaints and specifically the rule that states all outside structures for storage or utility purposes must be attached to the home. For this particular case, we received a concern about a pod that had been in the driveway for a prolonged period of time. We did go out there and verify that the pod did exist. Um, and in our investigative work, we found out that the pod has almost been there for a year. And so we inquired as to why the pod had been there for a year and there was, uh, work, there was internal damage due to water damage to the home. And there was a dispute between the homeowner and the insurance company as to what was taking place. And so the pod was brought in to store personal belongings in the pod. Um, unfortunately the de restrictions require that you have any outside storage must be attached to the home. So this is why we're having the public hearing today. We received, uh, a follow up communication after we had created this agenda item. In regards to the, to the timeline of the five days, I'm gonna recommend, um, the homeowner said that they've reached a resolution with the insurance company and the pod is planned to be removed within the next four to six weeks. So they said before the beginning of the new year that they would have the pod removed and the dispute between the insurance company resolved. So I just wanted to bring that forward as as, as part of your thought process on when we go over the order of enforcement. So it is still staff's recommendation to find the homeowners in violation of the district's decompliance rule cited by Decompliance. Staff owner has five days to remove the storage pod to bring the property into compliance. The storage pod is removed within the five days of the order of enforcement. Case number D 1 0 1 26 shall be closed. The storage pod is not removed from the property within the five days of the order of enforcement. Impose a fifth $150 daily fine or 150 fine. $150 fine to be paid within 10 days of the invoice and impose a $50 daily fine until the property is brought into compliance. The property is not brought into compliance as required hearing staff shall record this order of enforcement claim of lien of public records of Sumter County, Florida. It is the property owner's responsibility to contact Community Standards Department to request a decompliance officer revisit the property to confirm compliance. 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 property owners. The property owners are responsible for reimbursing the district for all attorney's fees, costs, and expenses associated with or related to this Board of Enforcement claim of lien. The property is brought into compliance, all fines are paid, and the Chairman authorizes staff to execute and record a satisfaction release claim of lien chairman to execute the order of enforcement. And I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Are there any Que Yes, Go ahead. Uh, is, has Kim has the pod, is there a reason it can't be moved? It according to the homeowners, the insurance companies refusing, allowing them to remove any of the items from the property 'cause of fear of it damaged and processed. And it's part of the claim about what's going on inside the house. Thank you. Um, In the logistics of enforcing the lien, I have no problem with giving them notice and things like that. Is there a way that we can say that, um, fines would be abated until January 1st? Because they have given us notice that, hey, we're we've resolved this thing, it's gonna go out. It seems a little unfair to start dinging them 50 bucks a day when it's gonna go away on, you know, on its own of court. So can we, can we delay the imposition? So you say, Hey, you told us it was January 1st, now it's January 1st. Now the fines begin. You wouldn't abate, you would just change the order of enforcement to state that the fines would begin on January 1st. Uh, Brian, I've got a little different take. Okay. Um, same concept, uh, because I do believe that, um, a lot of this issue has been outside of their control, the homeowner's control. However, um, sometimes we are promised or told things here at this board and, and things don't necessarily, um, correlate to, to what we've been told. So I would be inclined to delay, uh, the enforcement, uh, until January the first. But should the pod not be removed by January 1st that the, uh, the fines would begin within five days of this meeting? Oh, okay. Yeah, I think, okay. I think you're saying tomato and I'm saying tomorrow on this because I, it's very similar, sir. I like the idea of, 'cause I thought you were going with, we'll still have the daily fines build up, but if it's gone by January 1st, we'll waive it or something. You know, something like that. Effectively that's, that's what's happened in, uh, but, uh, because they, um, I think active in good faith, as long as that continues, they wouldn't be fined anything. Uh, but if for some reason this is not a good faith effort, the fines would go back to this particular enforcement date is what I'm saying. Mm-hmm. So there would be a severe penalty if they didn't remove it by January 1st. But if they do, there's no penalty at all. So what, it would seem to be cleaner to me to enter the order of enforcement today, given the time period provided, and add additional paragraph that states should the property owner bring the property into compliance by January one, this board will consider a waiver of the fines upon request by the property owner. That would give you then the opportunity to, so you don't have to say retroactively, it's already all there. You just have additional language that says if they do that, they can come back and ask for a waiver of the fines. Perfect. That seems reasonable to me. Mm-hmm. Okay. How, how long has the pod been from the good point? I don't know the exact date, but they said it, this dispute has been going on for about a year is what they've said for the homeowners. So the other question that was just brought up, a good question is, what are we gonna do about the lien? 'cause currently the language says if it's not brought into compliance within the time period, we record the lien. Do we want to do that? Um, it seems to me like we would just to protect yourselves in case that property transfers hands in between time leave that as it is. But when they come in for the re request for the reduction of fine, at that point, when you agree to waive it, then we will then satisfy the lien and, and record a satisfaction at that time. By reducing the fine, we will have, uh, reduced the, uh, the lien or there would be no lien correct? Because it didn't, um, get to five or $1,500. Well, we would just satisfy the lien because there would be nothing due. Right. There'd be no lien. Okay. Mm-hmm. Does that sound reasonable? Yes. Okay. Alright. We'll entertain a motion if you captured all that, Mike. I did. But you know, Sir, please come to the, uh, we, uh, can only take, wait a minute, we're in a public hearing. That's right. We're in a public hearing. So only a property owner or, uh, substantially interested party like a neighbor can address the board at this time. So Mike, you had a, a concern. Yeah. And my, my concern is the amount of time that it's been there, and I mean, we allowed this, we, everyone has circumstances. I mean, really that pod there's, that pod couldn't have physically move somewhere else. So the neighbors aren't happy to do it every day. I just wanted, you know, I I think that's the reason we had the rule. Mm-hmm. And the time that we spend and the, the money that we spend on, on these issues. And then we, then we waive the fees there purposes, in my opinion, on certain, certain issues. Okay. But I want to share That. I hear what you say. Okay? Mm-hmm. Ms. Cord, I thought you okay. Alright. So quiet a while. Mm-hmm. Yeah. I guess if there's no more, um, public comment or questions for Mr. Armstrong, we can close the public hearing and then you guys can deliberate and decide how you want to act. Okay. No further deliberation. We'll close the public hearing. Mr. Deacon, you can address the board now, at this time, Don Deacon, uh, 72 20 southeast hundred 72nd is with Loop. Um, it's my understanding from prior observations that there is a cost to filing a lien. And if you file a lien and then later withdraw the lien, there's still that cost involved. So you, before you decide to go ahead and file the lien, you might want to find out what that cost is. Thank you, sir. And that's something that can be brought up during the request for the reduction or waiver of fine. At that point, again, we're, we're putting some very broad language in the order of enforcement that will just say a property owner, if they come to compliance by January one, may request to be added, the agenda for, uh, request to reduce or waive their fines. If that happens and they do that, at that time, the board can say, okay, we're gonna waive all the fines, but we're gonna charge you $15, or whatever the case is to file the satisfaction. Okay. So I think we, we have the force, um, the idea of having some leniency because of the, uh, circumstances, but Mr. Miller makes a, uh, a case that, um, we have rules in place and we should, should follow those, those rules. So we'll entertain any discussion before we enter, um, a motion. So we have two options here. You can make a motion to approve Status's recommendation and that would be it. And that is as it's been provided, or you can make a motion to accept staff's recommendation with the change to, uh, by adding a paragraph to state that the property owner may request a waiver or reduction of fines if the property's brought into compliance by January 1st, 2026. Okay. With that in mind, we'll, um, entertain a motion. I move that in case D 1 0 1 2 6. We take staff's recommendation and we add a paragraph saying that there can be a reduction in fine. And, uh, by January 1st. Okay. Thank you Ms. We have a motion on the floor. Do we have a second? A second. We have a motion and a second on the floor. Any discussion about the motion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Forward to one. Thank you. Thank you. Board. Okay, next we have resolution 2026 dash zero one, uh, regarding the towing rule. Good morning board, Kaitlyn administration. Today I have before you the public hearing for adoption of resolution 2026 dash oh one to establish a chapter three rule for towing of improperly parked vessels. If you recall, it was discussed previously and advertised at the September 12th, 2025 meeting for district one. If you've gone through the attachments for chapter three rule, it goes into the purpose of the towing and removal of improperly parked vehicles and vessels, temporary parking areas and provisions for repeat offenders. What this will solve is people who leave their vehicles in those temporary parking areas listed in section four or the district owned roadways on a permanent basis, and allow us to start the process to tow. And I am happy to answer any questions that you may have. My first question is, um, what definition is used for temporary? Because I did not find that in the, uh, specific rule. That's a great question. And that is, um, not something that we have defined at this point. Because of it, it would be very difficult to define temporary. And if we did, there would be a lot of unintended consequences for residents who were trying to park, um, that would violate that temporary. But maybe it, it isn't a different situation. So the way we have this is that if it is impacting the normal intent of the parking area, and that's something that staff would work to define and we provide proper notice to them, it can be towed and it's not being enforced through the deed restrictions in which we would have to define that temporary. Okay. So question now for district council. Yes sir. What would be a legally defendable temporary definition? You know, we've struggled that for about, with, with that question for about six years. 'cause this isn't the first district to ask it. And, um, there are a lot of issues with defining that term, not just the unintended consequences, but the monitoring of that process for determining whether someone's there under what the definition might be. So it's very difficult. Can it be done? Yes. It's gonna take time and it's gonna cost money and it's gonna cost additional procedures because you're gonna have to have, um, some staff monitor the parking to ensure it meets your definition of temporary. So it can be done. Um, but this is the way that we found the best way to proceed going forward, and it's worked so far. Okay. Um, again, you know, it can be done if you, if you guys want to take a crack at it, but it'll take some time, um, and cost some money and again, involve additional processes. So in districts where this particular rule has been in place, have you been able to resolve every issue that's that's come up? As far as I'm concerned, we have, yes. Okay. Okay. I'm finished. It sounds as if it's more of a, you know it when you see it type of, uh, violation and, and you really rely on your, your staff district management to, to make that call and, and they reach out to me and we work together and figuring that out and we provide the notices and if it needs to be moved and it's moved. Okay. Just for clarification, uh, is this in your community or on the street? Can you use your microphone, ma'am? Oh, Yeah. Sorry, just for clarification. Um, is this in villa communities or just on the streets? For the most part, this is the guest parking areas in the Villa communities. I thought that the district has responsibility for, yeah. Okay. Yes, that would be correct. There are some areas in, in some district, district four, for example, in which there are just open grass areas that we had trouble with people pulling over and parking. That is something that can be added later. So if at any point in time in district one you find, or you get reports of residents saying, along this basin or in this area, it's open area and people keep parking, we would go back and add that track into this rule. So that's something down the road. If we need to expand this rule, we can, but as of now, it, it relates to that overflow parking in the villas. Okay. Further comments from the board before I open the public hearing. Hearing none will open the public hearing. If anyone in the, uh, attendance would like to address the, uh, proposed towing rule, now is your opportunity to speak. Okay. Hearing none, we'll close the public hearing. And so we have a, uh, resolution in front of us. I move reso, I move passage of resolution 2026. Oh one second. We have a motion and second on the floor. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, moving on to old business. Yes sir. The only item you have on old business was the acid washing of the, um, del sole postal boxes, which has been complete. You have no other remaining old business. Alright, thank you. Uh, any board questions on our informational items, Uh, regarding the postal boxes? Some of them, including mine, the numbers of postal box have been removed. It that something we'd have to address with the post office or with you all? Um, if it does have to be addressed with the post office, we'd be happy to do that. Uh, which postal station is it? Uh, okay, we'll take a look at it and if it does need to be reported, we will report it. If not, then we'll put that on the schedule to look at. Okay, great. There's the ones on the bottom really. Okay, thank you. Most of them are okay. Okay, very good. Thank you. Alright. Okay. District manager reports? Yes, sir. The first item is the amenity authority committee after agenda, which has been attached to your agenda for review. I'm happy to answer any questions if you have them, um, on any of those items? No, Any, i I actually do have one comment. I think now is probably the, uh, the appropriate time to, uh, to address it. Um, the issue of, uh, people that are not residents or guests of the villages use amenities has been an issue that that has certainly caused a lot of our constituents to contact me. And not only within district one, uh, but from other districts. That's, that's a very much a, a concern. And the concern is based, uh, from a lot of the people that have contacted me on actual experiences that they feel like that they've had. And I, I feel like that, um, from a district standpoint, um, if people are telling us that they're having these experiences, that they're seeing people in the pools that they, they know, uh, reasonably, uh, well, that, that are not villagers or, or guests of villages, uh, residents and, u
Community Development District 1 Seat 1 - Brian Goodman, Supervisor Seat 2 - Ellen Cora, Supervisor Seat 3 - Mike Miller, Vice Chair Seat 4 - Stephen Gerwin, Supervisor Seat 5 - Rocky Hyder, Chair November 14, 2025 at 8:00 AM Savannah Regional Recreation Center 1545 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 1.E. Audience Comments 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. Amendment Two – Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance Agreement with Yellowstone Landscape Southeast, LLC (RFP #23P-005) 3. New Business 3.A. Review and Approval for Geotechnical Remediation and Fund Transfer for Basin 1-1 4. Public Hearings 4.A. Case No. D1-01-26, VCDD No. 1 vs. Louis W. Martin-Culet and Maria Martin-Culet - 670 San Pedro Drive 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. Adoption of Resolution 2026-01: Establishment of Chapter III Rule – VCDD No. 1 Towing Rule A. Overview of Resolution 2026-01 Establishing Chapter III Towing Rule B. Open Public Hearing C. Close Public Hearing D. Adoption of Resolution 2026-01 Creation of Chapter III Towing Rule 5. Old Business 5.A. Old Business Status Update 6. Informational Items Only 6.A. Financial Statements 6.B. DPM Monthly Report 6.C. Deed Compliance and Architectural Review Annual Fiscal Year 24-25 Statistics 6.D. Village Community Development District No. 1 Public Hearing Updates 7. District Manager Reports 7.A. Amenity Authority Committee After Agenda 7.B. Introduction of Jonny Bishop, Executive Director of Support Services 7.C. Community Standards - GovBuilt 8. District Counsel Reports 9. Supervisor Comments 9.A. Supervisor Gerwin: Update of Hacienda East Pond Liner Failure 10. 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.
Recording and media
Records considered
Not claimed by this page
No source correction or revision history is recorded for this meeting. A corrected artifact will appear here as a new version rather than replacing what is shown above.
Canonical record: 930500a7cd52292f23a5d1bfe5d590d8. This page changes as stronger artifacts are published; it never overwrites an agenda with minutes.
Publisher tools
