Village Community Development District No. 12

Order, please rise. Roll call. Well, first roll call Supervisor that attended United States of America. One individual. Thank you. Welcome to August District 12, supervisor meeting. Please make sure your phones are on silent. If there's anything on the, that's not on the agenda that you need to discuss, please come to the microphone. Please state your name and address please at this time. Good morning. My name's Barry s Spangler. My address is 51 24 Lawler Loop. I'm here about the reclaim water for our sprinkler system. I am presenting to you a whole house filter that I'm using now to try to keep my filters on the sprinkler heads clean. Um, this is an example of a three month, um, usage, uh, sprinkling twice a week for three months. Uh, I'll take it apart and present it to you, uh, in front of you if, if you would like. Um, this is, this has been a major problem when I came. I'm here six months a year. When I came back last year, my lawn was almost destroyed. Every one of my sprinkler heads was plugged to the point where it blew some pipes apart. Um, also, uh, the solenoid valves were sticking open because of the debris coming through the lines. Um, I then started researching and I'm, I know it's overkill in a way, but I put a whole house filter in towards the end of my season this last year. And, um, so I've been gone for three months and I flew back to check to see how bad this is. So this is what we're seeing now. Um, I am like paying an average or above average of $130 a month just for water for my lawn. And this is what I'm getting. So I'm not, obviously I'm not very happy. I know my neighbors are also in the same boat. Uh, we're, you know, some of us are hiring people to check our systems and drain our things. This one actually has a self-cleaning option. So every 15 days it will clean and spray out the bottom of this. Um, I don't know what else to do. I have been in contact with, um, Jacobs and the villages concerning this. They have, um, witnessed the first two cleanings of this. And, uh, they, they were filthy dirty. So I, I'm coming, coming to you and saying, we need, we need help as ne as neighborhood. Um, they are in the process of doing some stuff. They've been flushing my system. Uh, it has looked a little better, but you know, I I, I lived up in the Amelia area for 11 years and never touched my sprinkler system. So, uh, this is the pro, this is the problem. So anybody have a question to me? I do. I'm, I'm curious. So this is the, uh, non potable water system that goes to the outside? Correct. Okay. So that's has nothing to do with the inside of the home? Correct. Oh, okay. No, because I, I have a whole home service that my inside, uh, for inside. For inside. Yeah. This, this is like, when I called the company to actually help them figure out what I needed. They're going, we've never heard of anybody having to do this. This was Ice Spring. Uh, this is made by a company called Ice Spring. And, uh, they said, and, and they've been working with me as well. Um, this has, uh, 200 micron filter in it, so it filters down with 200 microns. So, so saying this particles will kind of get trapped in there, but then they should get flushed out the bottom. Okay. I, I, I, I haven't had a problem. My, I live here in Linden. Okay. Uh, six years, never had an issue with my lawn in the irrigation system. So I'm kind of curious, what would be unique about your situation? That it's not unique to ours? I mean, do you, do you, do you have a long service or you have a regular lawn service or maintenance for on your lawn? No. Uh, so, so mow and fertilize, fertilize, uh, put, uh, you know, chemicals and we control and that type of thing. Yeah. And they can't keep up with the we problem. I mean, every time they come back Up to the mic. Oh, I'm sorry. No, uh, the, the question was whether you had a, a, a service to take care of the, uh, of the yard, the lawn. And you say you do have a, a company that comes out on a regular basis and sprays, fertilizers, uh, wheat kill, air fertilizer, that type of thing. Yes. And, uh, over the summer, I guess you're gone during the summer. I'm sorry, You, you're gone during the summer? Yes, I'm gone Six months. Yeah. And, and you lost your yard and somebody told you that it was because of the problem with the, uh, irrigation, uh, water coming up? Well, when I, when I came back, that's, that's, I'm, I'm going, my irrigation was plugged up, so I wasn't watering, it wasn't getting the water it needed. So it was basically the grass is gonna die. Okay. You know? Yeah. You have the rain, but that wasn't enough for it. How many sources are there carry for, for the non potable water for irrigation? Um, I'd have to double check on this area. Typically, it is, um, both irrigation or, I'm sorry, both, um, storm runoff. And then there could be some areas that also have the reclaimed water. Um, I don't know off of the top of my head this specific area, but it sounds like you've been in communication with Jacob. Um, they are the utility provider that handles all of this. Um, I can have them reach back out and follow up with, with him and then we can get an update for the board. But this isn't something that would fall under your purview or that I would have staff here that can address it because this is a utility issue and not a district issue. Okay. I just, the comment of the lady, I have been communicating with Jacobs and they have come out and actually seen this, uh, he was gonna come out yesterday, but probably 'cause of the rain. He got tied up some other thing. And I am sending them photos of this, you know, in different stages, uh, of, of cleaning. Had they been responsive with you? 'cause they Oh, oh yes. Okay. Because they are, we contract all utilities through Jacobs. So even the utility, um, districts throughout the community, um, we don't have on staff on hand that deal with the utilities. That is all contracted through Jacobs. So we can follow up, but what we would do to follow up is contact Jacob. So if, if they're, as long as they're being responsive with you and working through the process, you are doing the right, the right thing. And, and I'll tell you what he told me yesterday. Their, their contract, uh, they're gonna put in a bigger valve to flush the system around our area. And the contract states that they only flush it twice a year. Is that gonna be enough? That's something I can help with and, and find out because if, if that's not enough, then certainly then we, we will be looking at an alternative. This is, this is kind of bad. Yep. I, I will follow up with Jacobson specifically on that issue. Thank you. Alright. I just have one question. You say that, uh, it cleans some of the residue out every two weeks. Is that correct? Yeah. 15 days. Yeah. Every 15 day. Is that 15 days worth of, uh, residue? Well, the, the actual device, um, it's battery operated, but it's, it had four more days before it was going to self flush. It won't take, it won't take off. I'm slimy, but it won't take off. Just this kind of green debris. Okay. It won't. Got it. Now, I, I will wash this with a, with a hose. Mm-hmm. And it will clean it Alright. Down and it will be white. Okay. It'll be white like this plastic. Okay. Alright. Now I'm looking at the container right now and it's still dark. Yeah. And it's because it's got appears to have goop Yep. All over it. That's, That's so And sir, sir, we do have, we're recording the meeting, so unfortunately if you're gonna talk, you do have to be at the mic. I'm sorry. Sorry. It, it's, it is a slimy material in there. Okay. Okay. Again, where did you say you live? 51 24 Lawler Loop wall. What, what village area is that He lived at? Benny. Benny? No, no, no, its just north of, uh, north of uh, Are you on IS are you on Lyden Isle North that, are you on Lyden Isle? No, No. I'm Marsh Bend. Marsh Bend north Of Edna. Oh yeah, okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know where you are. Yeah, Just a little bit above Ednas. Yeah. Yeah. Two streets above Ednas. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I know you are Same, same side of the road. I've never seen anything like that. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Thank you. Appreciate it. No other discussions at this time. Moving on with the consent agenda. Do I have a motion from the board to approve the consent agenda or any questions at this Time? So moved. Second. All in favor. A Thank you. Yes sir. The first item on, or the only item on new business is for Mr. Armstrong to present, um, a potential modification or amendment to your rule for the neat and clean rule enforcement. Good morning Board matter Armstrong Community standards. So I wanna start off by pending an example. In community standards, we receive complaints for possible violations. And neat and clean is by far the number one complaint received by all the districts. That's typically your grass, your weeds, mold, algae growth, edge bushes, things like that. When we receive a complaint, we can only go to the complaint that is presented to us. And if it's a call, we'll say, you know, okay, it's a violation for the neat and clean tall grass. Is there anything else? Is there weeds? Is there mold? Is there hedges? Is there anything? And the person may say, no, I drive by every day. I only notice the tall grass and weeds. We go to the property and there's weeds everywhere that the, the front entryway is completely blocked because the hedges are overgrown and there's algae growth on the side of the house, but we can only address the grass that they called in. We can't address anything else. A month later, we'll get a call for maybe some of the other above other things, and then two weeks later we'll get a call for the, the remainder of the property. So over like a two, three month span, we're gonna be going to the same property for the same rule, but we're only able to address those particular items at that particular time. So this property may go before your decompliance hearing officer three times over a four to five month period for the same exact rule violation in your standards and also in your appendix B for your rules, um, that you do for your adopting your deed restrictions. You have provisions in there that talk about, um, if they're found in violation, the district can't mow the lawn. They can edge, they can weed, they can, uh, power wash the property. And those, when we have those public hearings and we define what maintenance is in the standards where you must keep your grass cut, grass, meat and clean, it can't exceed eight inches in height. It defines what the meat and clean requirement is from the deed restrictions. What we would like to do with your permission is amend the rule to where when we get a complaint for the neat and clean rule, we're gonna go for all of it. We're gonna go, okay, you know, they said tall grass, but we will look for mold, we're gonna look for the edging, we're gonna look for the weeds, we're gonna look for those provisions underneath those provisions, and also how it's defined in, uh, your standards so that we're doing it all in one shot and we're not having to come back multiple times underneath the same rule for the same property incurring additional costs and that staff time, staff visits for the district. So what we're requesting is to amend the rule at a public hearing at an October, uh, your October meeting, October 6th, to amend the rule so that we can enforce that rule simultaneously for anything regarding that particular rule and only that rule. So if someone, we go there and we notice that there's a law ornament, we can't address the law ornament 'cause we're is doing the neat and clean rule in its entirety. So you would not address the, uh, the lawn ornament? We would not. Okay. And maybe you, I'm sorry. I'll, I'll defer. I did, I didn't mean to jump in and just the thought was there, but my, my question, you know, maybe you can help us all, is, is this this neat and clean rule? Is that a separate section in the documents? I I didn't get a chance to look at it. Okay. It is self defined. In other words, everything that is under that need rule is in that stand in that section. Correct. So there is a different provi. There's one provision in the deed restrictions that is neat and clean, but the deed restrictions don't say what is neat and clean. So staff through your standards had to define neat and clean. And then we brought that to the board for approval. In your standard it says grass is considered overgrown at eight inches. The yard must be free of weeds. Um, it talks about the mold where you can't have mold on the driveway or mold on the home. So yes, the deed restrictions, there is one specific provision that is neat and clean and then that is defined in your standards. And as Mr. Armstrong stated, it is only those things that are linked to that specific neat and clean that we would look at as part of this rule change. And what that will also prevent is when we bring a property to pub, public hearing, the public hearing, in your case, it's the special hearing officer will look at a property and again, find it in violation of the tall grass and weeds. But there's mold everywhere. Well, that wasn't called in. So as Mr. Armstrong stated, then what will happen is we'll end up going to another public hearing a month later. And the way you, you, your costs are allocated through community standards is also based on the amount of decompliance restrictions, the applications, and then the public hearings. So this will allow us to do one public hearing for everything under that specific rule provision. Are we doing this to all the districts? We will be adjusting this with all the districts. Yes, sir. But it will take an initial complaint to start that. Yes sir. Yes, Sir. And it could be, I'm Sorry. No, I, I was just gonna elaborate and as Mr. Armstrong stated, if we get a call because there is a law ornament, we are not going to be looking at anything other than a lawn ornament. If we get a call that there is a sign, we are not going to be looking for anything other than a sign. If we get a call that there is mold all over the driveway, because that falls underneath and clean. If it's only mold at that point, then that, that's all we write. But if we go out there and the grass is 15 inches tall and there are vines growing up the the house, then we'll be able to address all of that at once. Absolutely. Any other questions from the board? No, I, I, I, I understand now. So you have to have a complaint about an item that is listed under the neat and clean standards. And once you get that complaint about tall grass like, uh, Carrie said, and you find other neat and clean violations, then what you're saying is you have the ability now to, you know, throw the big net around those. Whereas right now you restrict it just to what the complaint was. Correct. Okay. Do I have a motion from the board? So moved. Are you a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. Thank you. Thank you. Board. So this will, um, the motion was to advertise to amend and restate your rule in October because anytime we have a change in your rule, it has to be through a public hearing. So this will be presented to you again in October, at which time you will actually amend your rule Moving on old business. Yes, sir. The, um, the only item on the old business tracking sheet was for staff to communicate the maintenance concerns, um, for the property on Scardino Street. Um, we did, Mr. Armstrong has been in a lot of communication with both the city of Wildwood and Sumter County, um, because part of property falls within the city of Wildwood and their, their regulations, and then Sumter County as well. Um, Sumter County did indicate that they, um, they did declare it uninhabitable and that you could not trespass on the property until it is remedied. But that is the extent as of what they do, there is not a current code enforcement case on it. It's not something that is it, it's reached to that level. Yet according to the county, we did reach out or the homeowner reached out and we've attached a letter from their attorney on your agenda. So you can see that they are working to remedy, um, the property. This also went before, um, the special hearing officer in a public hearing. We cannot require that they go on the property and man maintain it because it's prohibited. But what we did, what the special hearing officer did find them in violation, and they have a certain amount of time, once they are able to go onto the property that they must bring it into compliance or fines would start. So we cannot force anything to happen faster than what is happening. But we have done everything that the district can do to make sure that once the sinkhole is remedied and they're able to go onto the property, that it is maintained after that point. Are we doing anything for the property to the side of it, looking at if the vehicle was grown or Anything that would not be under the, the purview of the district. That's something that the property owners would have, have to work through. Okay. Alright. And, um, again, on your old business, you'll see on that letter to the hearing officer from the attorney of the property owner. Um, so again, they are working through it and hopefully it will, um, they'll be able to get through that process. And I, again, I know this isn't really what the homeowners and the surrounding areas wanted to hear, um, but Mr. Armstrong has done more than, than really what he should have. 'cause this really doesn't fall under the purview of the district. Um, but the city and county are both aware of it. Thank you. Any questions on the information items only from the Board who are, and we did, um, we had one other item on own business, uh, which was the presentation for the age restriction deed restriction that Mr. Armstrong will go through as well. Hello Board, mad Armstrong Community Standards. So at your July 12th, 2025 meeting, you did request to have a presentation on just additional information regarding age restriction enforcements, uh, working very closely with, um, district administration and legal counsel. We've come up with, uh, this presentation for you today. And, uh, here we go. So if we receive a complaint regarding an age restriction, well first of, we'll start the DRD restrictions. The D restrictions do state that no person under 19 years of age may be a permanent resident of a home except for persons age 19, um, may be permitted to visit and temporarily reside for periods not exceeding 30 days in total in any calendar period. Uh, the subdivision is an adult community designed to provide housing for persons 55 years of age and older. All homes must be occupied by at least one person that is 55 years of age. So the purpose of the external deed restriction standards is to further. So in order to continue with any form of enforcement, we would need to define what the term visit and temporary reside mean. And so we would need to create a new standards definition for that. So we have suggested that the term temp visit and temporarily reside are used interchangeably, and they shall mean or refer to a continuous period consisting of 24 hours upon a home site or a lot. So that would have to be a new definition that we would have to adopt, uh, for any form of enforcement on this provision. If we receive a complaint for an age requirement, this is, these are the steps that we are recommending. The individual that is the complainant would need to provide evidence showing that the individual's there 31 days in that calendar year, continued evidence must be provided by that individual. We would not have staff go out to essentially camp out in front of somebody's house and see if somebody's visiting over a 24 hour period in a calendar year. Final, final evidence for the public hearing showing the violation must also be presented by the complainant in any post evidence. For us to be able to levy fines would have to be provided by the complainant as well. So this is going to be a very, um, heavy, um, process for the complainant to be able to provide all the information necessary for any form of public hearing. If we receive the concern, the concerns received for the child in the home, it would then see the complainant must also sign a legal affidavit that claims that the information that they have provided is true and accurate. We will then send notices to the homeowners in regards to the violation. The letters will include, uh, the copies of the evidence that is provided by the complainants to those homeowners. So the individual who is providing this information will not be able to be anonymous. The letters request abatement of any violation for anybody under the age of 19 who may be residing on that property. Step three would be any time of resolution or continuation. If a violation is clear due to lack of evidence, the concern will be closed and letters will be sent to the homeowner to confirm that the homeowner provides contrary evidence showing the violation does not exist. We will close the concern with, and we'll send a confirmation letter. As such. If the violation still continues, we will step onto step four. Step four is going to be the second and third letters in which we will then provide on the third letter, notice of public hearing before the decompliance hearing officer at their regularly scheduled, uh, monthly meeting. When it does go to public hearing, or if it does go to public hearing, testimony will be provided by the complainants and the property owner where the concern exists. So district staff will essentially prepare the public hearing and the complainants will be the one providing, um, sworn testimony to the hearing officer in regards to the information that they provided and their sworn affidavit. And the complainant, um, would need to swear that under oath. And then of course, the, uh, individual, the property owner that the violation exists on would be able to provide testimony to counter that the decompliance hearing officer will render a decision as to whether or not violation exists. If they are found in violation, it would be the same, um, process as we have for any other violation where an order of enforcement would be entered, fines may be assessed, and a lien could be placed on that property. If we receive a concern for, um, somebody who is not at least one person 55 or older residing in the home, what we will do is we will utilize available resources that district staff have to verify that someone on the property is 55 years of age. If there is not someone listed on the property that is 55 years of age, we'll follow the de decompliance process with letters, uh, to a public hearing in which the, the Decompliance hearing officer would render a verdict. And again, fines could be assessed, a lien placed on the property until that property is brought into compliance. And if you have any questions, So to, to just wrap this up a little bit, if you decide to move forward on enforcing this rule, it is, it has to be done a little bit differently than what all of your other rules state, because staff does not have the ability to go into somebody's house and verify that there is a child living there. Staff isn't available. Typically, when residents are saying, my neighbor has, um, you know, a, a school bus is coming and dropping somebody off and, and they're going, well, when a public hearing comes, staff has to testify that what they're saying is true. So even if a child is getting out of a school bus and walking to a home, staff can testify that, but they cannot testify that that child is living there because they, they don't know. They don't see them at night, they don't see them in the morning. So in this case, the person complaining is going to have to be the one that testifies that that person does in fact, live in there. And you may, we may have residents that don't want to do that, but that really is the only way that we can do this through your public hearing process. It allows the opportunity for it to go through the process. So if homeowners, if residents are okay doing that and saying, I I know for a fact that person is living there and I'm okay being the one that that is complaining on it and testifying with it, then this gives the special hearing officer the ability to enter into an order of enforcement, just like all of your other deed restrictions and potentially, fine. So this, this is better than the system we have now, which we don't have that ability. It, it really is up to the developer if they want to enforce it or not. This gives you the opportunity, but it certainly does require a little bit more, um, onus on the complainant because they are going to have to be the one that actually testifies and provides that information. Okay. So that, I was listening to all that, this is something that the enforcement falls under the authority of the developer. So all deed restrictions, there are three people that can, or three entities that can enforce the developer as the declarant, the property owners, because they are, they have the vested interest, they're a party to the declaration of restrictions. And if you adopt a rule, you have the ability to enforce. So right now, you don't have the ability to enforce this because this is not in your rule. If you want to have the ability to enforce it, then what we will do is amend and restate your rule with these provisions in there that then gives you the right to do it. If you, and, and you cannot do it, just like you cannot enforce any of your deed restrictions. If you decided today that you did not want to enforce neat and clean, then we would amend that out of your rule, and it would still be a violation to not have your property neat and clean. But you as a board would not enforce it. It would be up to either other property owners to essentially sue each other or the developer could enforce it. So this is just one more deal restriction that it's up to you if you want to enforce it because residents have said that they're not happy with the way the developer's doing it. So they want somebody to enforce the seat restriction. If you want to do it as part of your rule, then you, you can do that. Any comment? This is opening a can of worms here. Uh, if this is an internal deed issue, we don't have, if the developer and the, and the developer's not getting good at a lot of things lately, if he decides not to do this, why, why don't we have some ability to something more than encourage him to do what he's supposed to do? You have the ability to, to do it yourself. I mean, and if you think about, think about other communities, at some point the community gets turned over, whether it's to a CDD, whether it's to an HOA and pretty much every community at some point, things such as deed restrictions and maintenance get turned over. So this is not unusual for things to get turned over. This is the first time that we've really looked at the age restrictions, specifically the 19 and under, because it's also part of the, the development, was it the DRI or the development order? Um, that is that, and then chapter one 90 is what allows you to, to do this. So this is something that, again, is pretty common in throughout the state of Florida, whether it's turned over to a CDD or an HOA, um, but it, it's up to the board. You're, you have the ability to do it. You have the ability not to, but certainly understand that, um, you know, like you said, if the developer isn't going to do it or if the developer isn't doing it the way the residents like, um, then it's up to you. You don't have to do this. Now you can say, we don't think that we have a a problem. We don't want to do this. Now you can go ahead and adopt it in case one comes up. Uh, Mr. Armstrong sent me the stats for District 12. And in the last three years You had, um, in 2023, you had six complaints for children living in the home that are 19 or under. And of those one of them there were submitted three times the same address. So you potentially had three addresses where we got complaints in 2024, we had 15, but again, we had the same address multiple times by either the same or different, um, individuals. In May we had four, but it was for the same property. And then in 2025 we've had one. So this isn't a huge issue that we see throughout the villages, but I'll tell you the, the people who were living next to the school bus that's dropping them off, they, again, they will call community standards over and over and over again. Right now what we do is we forward that complaint onto the developer and the developer sends a letter. And that, to my knowledge is, is pretty much what happens. Um, but again, it, it's completely up up to the board. If you decide to move forward with this, then what you would do is just like the other one we would advertise for a public hearing, it would be part of the same public hearing, um, that we just talked about. But at that point, you would encourage residents to come and voice their opinion as to whether or not they want you to do this. If I may, uh, I'm with you. I think we're just opening a can of worms here, to be honest with you. We're gonna be taking the heat that belongs elsewhere. Well, it's gonna come Down to the complainant To, pardon? I'm sorry. It's gonna come down to the complainant to stand up for it. It's not us. It's gonna fall back to the complainant filing the Complaint, but not really us. Yeah, we're, we're gonna be the enforcer. Uh, you know, uh, you have a DA issues, you have, uh, court quarter issues, you have all kinds of other ramifications where, you know, and I know a situation where as I heard that the residents were grandparents and there was an issue with the children and the court said, you know, place them with the grandparents pending blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And that extended 'cause, you know, it takes forever. Uh, personally, I don't want to get involved in this. Uh, I think that the, uh, mechanism is there for enforcement. Uh, and that is with the developer. If the developer chooses not to do that, then I think that the residents are gonna have to, you know, figure something else out. If I, if I have a neighbor that this is creating a nuisance, I have some remedies there. You know, if the kids are getting off the school bus running in my yard, chasing the dog over there, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, uh, i, I have other avenues that I can pursue. Uh, but we're gonna get into, we're opening a Pandora's box here. Uh, and, uh, I think that, you know, I, I go along with what we talked about before with a neat and clean that I think makes sense, you know, but now we're getting into family issues. We're getting into other issues that I personally do not want to get involved with. Not to mention cost mark, or this is gonna be expensive, is it not? I'm not sure what the cost is gonna be. Actually, I'm not sure if we've actually looked at that yet. But with regard to your hearings, I mean, you have hearings now in front of the, uh, hearing officer on other deed compliance cases. So I guess it's just a matter of, um, what the ultimate outcome is and how many complaints you end up getting and proceeding with. Yeah. The, the cost would not be any more than any other deed restriction. So it, it really, again, if your, your normal community standards is allocated based on the number of complaint, is it complaints or restrictions? Complaints Received. So complaints received, and then, um, public hearings. So if you have, again, so far we've had one complaint this year for the age restriction. If that would've gone to public hearing, then you would've, you would've had that Knowing though, that when a complaint comes in, we are going to be very, um, open with the homeowner that we have. We have to take your name and we will send all of the letters. All of the letters were will come from community standards. And we're not going to put the homeowner's name in the letter. I mean, we are going to say that we received a complaint that this is the violation. Um, it is going to come before a public hearing, but at that point, we will be open with the homeowner that you would have to be the one that gets up and testifies, swears that you're going to tell the truth to the special hearing officer. That that person, that child does in fact live in the home. I, so I, I wouldn't necessarily look at it from a cost perspective. I think it's going to be minimal. But I do understand all of the other points that you're putting out and that whether or not this is something you want to get involved with. Yep. Do they have to disclose their name now? Uh, to the, do they file a complaint? Yes. Right now, district 12 requires name, address, and telephone number. So, okay. So the, the developer would require them to identify themselves as a complainant? No, the, so the developer does not require anything. You as District 12 require that people provide their, their information for you to accept any complaint. So if somebody calls about a lawn ornament, you require us to take their information. The developer does not require that. So if I have a complaint, uh, of a underage resident, uh, today, you know, before any of this, uh, we're talking about, uh, do I, who do I call? You would call community standards. Correct. And then they send an email to the developer that says, we received a complaint that a child is living at 1 2 3 Main Street. But I am not identified. Not unless you want to be. Right. Well, don't, don't you take, when you receive a complaint, don't you take name and address and telephone number regardless of what the complaint is? Yeah. For District 12, we do. For the ones that you enforce, the developer does not require that. Alright, My, my reading this first off, uh, I just have a question about, in new definition for standards, the purpose of these external deed restriction standards definitions. So this would, even though it's internal, this would come under our external deed restriction standards. We would change that name to your deed restriction standards. Okay. We've change the title of the document and the other thing, what, what do other special districts do outside of the villages? Do they have, uh, somebody's gotta be charged with enforcing age 55 restrictions for all age 55 communities, but other, uh, you know, developers and districts that have the same governance as we do, how do they deal with this? So we have done a lot of research on, and Mr. Armstrong has called multiple communities and special districts about how they do not necessarily with this deed restriction, but deed restrictions in general. And I will tell you that we have not been able to find one that does anything even remotely comparable to what we do. You have a very, very complex and, um, complete system in which has been developed from nothing. When the state statute chapter one 90 was changed, that allowed special districts to enforce seat restrictions, that was the first time in the state of Florida that that had happened. So there was no model to go off of. There was no example for us to follow. We had to create that from scratch. And it has been changed and modified as you go. But we are the example. So we are the ones that other communities call to find out how we are doing it so that they can start building their model. Correct. In most communities that you have HOAs, again, the developer develops everything, switches to the HOA, the HOA enforces everything, and they go on about their business. Okay. You, you said 23, we had six complaints. 24, we had 24 complaints. That suggests to me that maybe the six weren't solved in 23, but in 25 we only had one. Do we know if those complaints were remedi or do we still have the same conditions? Do we still have those under 19 living here? What? So the 2024 complaints, actually the residents came to this board and we, you know, worked with them on going to the developer. The 15 complaints received last year. 14 of the 15 were on the same address. And my understanding is the homeowner moved, um, and moved, moved away from the district. They moved, they moved. So I, I know that one. I don't know about the other ones in relation to that one, but I just know the one that was heavily publicized here, especially for this board, they, Okay, so the developer does not tell you, does not extend the courtesy to the district to say if We ask, if we ask, they do, but they don't just randomly let us know, generally speaking, their enforcement is to send letters. Are they cooperative if you were to ask The developer? Yeah. As far as asking for an update? Yeah. Oh, yes. Okay. Yeah, if we ask for an update, they provide us with anything that they have. So if, if, if I understand this, this proposed change, uh, is certainly very different from what the developer does. The developer, as you've indicated, spends, sends, uh, a letter. This, this rule seems hugely complex and perhaps that's necessary legally, but I wonder if any neighbor could meet the burden of proof that this rule requires. I mean, it, it, you know, if you're saying that, uh, community standards can only testify that a child gets on and off the bus, how, how can a neighbor testify that the child lives there and has lived there for more than 30 days? I, I just don't see how this could be enforced. It, it's not going to be easy. The, and it, again, it, it really isn't. This is not going to be an easy situation or, or fun for anybody involved, but when, when it comes to the public hearing, it is going to be the complainant against the property owner. And you at least have the benefit that your public hearings are held by a special hearing officer. She is a retired judge. So she is very used to seeing these type of situations, um, which is helpful because not everybody is used to having to, to render a verdict in these type of situations. Um, but it, it really is going to be the complaint versus the homeowner. And if the complainant says, I see the, the child there in the afternoon every day, and I see the child there in the morning every morning, therefore I'm willing to testify that that person is staying there for 24 hours for longer than 30 days at a time. The homeowner says, well, my, my grandchild gets off the bus. And then their mother picks them up at 9:00 PM at night, um, when she gets home from work and then drops her back off to catch the bus in the morning, then at that point it's going to be at the social hearing officer to determine whether or not a violation exists. So, Carrie, help me here. So is the determination of the hearing officer a final adjudication, or do they have the right to then come back to this board and say, we want to appeal to you. They can appeal to you. So ultimately we could end up doing that or not in order? No, I I don't think there's an appeal process for that. Uh, and that's why you have the, the hearing master to address all those issues. The only thing that the property owner could do would be to come to you and ask you to change a rule, um, to permit whatever it is that they're doing or to reconsider. Um, but no, in order to do anything other than that, they'd have to file a lawsuit. Yeah. So the buck stops with a hearing officer and then after that we're, we're out of it. Correct. Well, if, if when you say the buck stops, the buck stops with a hearing officer, I, I would presume, and please correct me, that anyone can go to court and sue for anything so that the person, uh, who is complained against could, could go to court and this whole process might be overturned, but not the, not the process itself, but the individual complaint. So, Well, I mean, again, it's, it's, it's hard to, to think about situations that haven't arisen yet. You know, it really all depends on what the facts of the case are. You know, I go to these hearings, um, judge Neil as, as Ms. Duckett stated, is, is very familiar with this. Uh, she was a county court judge, uh, when she was a lawyer. She did a lot of HOA law, things like that. So she's very familiar how this, with how this works. Um, yeah, I mean, you know, I think you have all the information in front of you that we can provide at this point. I understand the issue, potential issue with enforcement, but again, it's sworn testimony. You know, it's gonna be a property owner versus a complainant. Um, and the judge, judge Neil will have to weigh the evidence like she did as a judge and decide based on the evidence and the testimony, who she believes and who she doesn't, and then enter an order. It's, uh, just like going to court. So, mark, let me ask you this. Uh, under the present situation, if a property owner has a complaint, uh, could they, uh, go directly to court, uh, and sue the neighbor? Yes. So that we're kind of duplicating that a little bit here. Are we not? I mean, there, Well, you would just be doing it, um, as far as an order of enforcement being entered against the, uh, property owner. But you're not filing a lawsuit in court to ask the court to enjoin or to require that they remove, um, anybody under 19. You're doing what you do with everything else, with lawn maintenance, with lawn ornaments and things like that. You just enter an order of enforcement. Uh, if they don't comply, you record it, it becomes a claim of lien and it sits there unless you decide at some point in time you direct me or my firm to file a lawsuit. It just sits there. Okay. And again, this is, this is the same exact thing that you do for all of your other, all of the other deed restrictions. This one is more of a sensitive nature, but the process is the exact same as far as Mr. Briana said, you enter into an order of enforcement, fines can be levied, a lien can be placed on the property, and then at some point, if you would like to file a lawsuit, you can, based on the, the amount of fines. But this is, this is just one more deed restriction that you would be enforcing. Just like the neat and clean lawn ornaments, I might feel, I wanna leave it with the developer, not get into it. I Want stay with the developer and let the developer do is let the des restriction for this go through the developer. Well, ideally, I think that's right. But what if the developer doesn't do it? It's my problem. And I'm, I'm listening to Carrie and I learned a little something there. If in the state of Florida, eventually the developer says, that's your baby, not mine. You rock it, I don't rock it. Right? If it passes it on to an HOA or in this instance to A CDD, it, it, uh, The o the only thing I can tell you is that the, the developer does not lose the right to enforce the deed restrictions. However, once a district is eligible, eligible to adopt a rule for all of the rules that the districts can adopt, the developer typically does not enforce those. They, he allows that to be through the residents process. So can the developer enforce a law and ornament deed restriction in District 12? Yes. Does that typically happen? No, because that is being done at the district level. So while I, I don't know what the future holds, but I can tell you throughout the community, although the developer never loses, the ability to enforce, they typically don't enforce is once the districts have the ability to enforce. I, um, yeah. And, and I agree, uh, that that's kind of the case. I, I went through a CDD turnover situation in Orlando. I went through an HOA turnover situation in Orlando at the same time, or not the same time, but the same context. Uh, and it, it's, it's a can of worms. I mean, it, it just, it really is. And, and I can tell you that, uh, turnover is fine, but, uh, you know, we've had, we had to file callback lawsuits and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And it was just a, you know, a mess. I mean, we, we ended up prevailing in the end, but it was a long drawn process. I, I just personally, again, I don't think we'd need to undertake this at this point in time. Maybe down the road, uh, depending on what happens, uh, maybe we would have to consider that. But at this point in time, I don't see the necessity personally. So as a board, are we in favor of doing this or we do we want to just put it to the side? Well, my, my position is we just don't get there, Dale. My position is, I, I would rather the board not have to do it. But if it's, if it's gotta be done and somebody's got a legitimate complaint and it has to be enforced, and if it falls on the purview of the board, then I think the board has to do it. I don't, I can see this, of course, I didn't know the staff. I appreciate the, the, the numbers there. But again, I was under the opinion that this is something that, that developer would do to protect the fact that he's advertising a 55 plus community with rules and all of a sudden it's a 55 plus community with un enforced rules, then I hate for that to fall on this board. But if that's the way it works in Florida, I guess somewhere down the line, we may have to accept that. I, I don't know. And, and I don't, I don't wanna, I it's not, let tell you that's the way it works in Florida. It's just generally speaking, when there's deed restrictions and you have a developer that develops something, typically, again, it's not just deed restrictions, but everything eventually gets turned over to whether it's an HOA or CDD because this developer is unique. You don't typically have developers that are still around 30 years later. If you look at any of the surrounding communities and developments, typically the developer develops and then they move on and they develop somewhere else. This developer is unique in that they have made this their, their life. This is their development and they're here a lot longer. Longer. But certainly if again, that, that is generally what happens, Yeah, we have a quirk here. We're 55 and over, which a lot of communities are not, you know, where I came from in Orlando was not 55 and over. So that, that's kind of a, that's quirky thing about this one too. So yeah, it's, it's, it's, anyway, I've shut enough. Would, would it be appropriate to ask, uh, PA what, uh, their thought is on this? Uh, I certain I certainly will, will, will see to it that it's brought up. Yeah. Obviously if it involves every, every district and it, PA, I think needs to have a say or at least needs to say something, whether they have A say It, it wouldn't necessarily be PA because PA is not funded through anything having to do with deed compliance. However, it would probably, you'd probably get a lot of good information if you ask from a, I wanna hear what the other districts are doing. Um, they'd be able to certainly tell you. I can tell you, I believe it's district six, um, and 11 wanted, nothing wanted. 11 would hear District six said, Okay, bring six doesn't want to hear. They didn't even want this presentation. So you are the first district that we're providing this presentation to. Um, so we don't know yet what other districts are going to determine if they want to amend their rule to include this. Um, but district six did not even want this on their agenda. Alright. I would move that we move it to September on the, on our agenda and see what comes from the other districts. Is that agreeable with the board? Yeah, we can do a survey. Uh, yeah, it would be interesting information. I don't know if it changes much, but I think it would be interesting. I have no problem with that, but I have, I have a couple of comments. Um, I, I agree that this is second of worms and I agree that this document appears to be overly complicated. Uh, in a previous life when I was chairman of District seven, we had instances similar to this and they seemed to just go away. Um, and I, the two that I can recall specifically, one was that a single parent, the court ordered the, uh, children to instance was the worst situation and the children were sent to a grandparent. And both of those instances we had a complaint. Uh, and it wasn't a, there wasn't a 30 day rule, it was a, who was just a complaint. Uh, and the answer was, court ordered this, that's the end of the discussion, and it never came back up again. And I don't know how long those kids stayed there, but if another neighbor complained the same complaint, that was the answer that standards would, uh, would provide. The court has ordered this and we don't have the ability to change a court order. And I appreciate that all of those issues may not be court ordered. Um, but those are the two I can recall. Um, by way of comment, if this goes forward, uh, even to other districts, I, um, question about, uh, page two, second paragraph and the last paragraph in the document. And I'll just, uh, say in the first instances, all homes that are occupied must be occupied by at least one person who is at least 55 years of age. We are not a totally age restricted, uh, development. Florida requires no more than, was it 4%? Uh, or 5% or 95% have to be, uh, so we have people, uh, living in the villages who are married and in their thirties and in their forties. Mm-hmm. And I happen to know, uh, two of them. Uh, so that needs to be rewritten a little bit. Um, So so that can't be rewritten. That is exactly per the deed restriction That can be interpreted in violation of state law. Well, again, the deed restrictions state at least one person has to be 55 and up. It doesn't state that every person has to be 55 and up. So we have to maintain a certain amount. You're right, there's a certain amount that can be under 55, but in order to be considered a 55 and up community, you have to maintain a certain amount. And that is maintained. And we actually confirmed that, um, prior to starting, considering implementing this. But the deed restrictions state that one person has to be 55 and older. I guess to just satisfy my own curiosity, I'm going to ask Mark to comment how, how do we say something like that when state law is contrary or more inclusive? Well, I think Based on what Ms. Tuckett just said and the way it's interpreted and the way they follow this, it is not inconsistent with, with Florida law. I'm sorry, it's what, it's not inconsistent with Florida law the way it is, um, acted upon and enforced All homes. So you must be occupied. Boy, that's pretty, that's pretty straightforward and specific. It's the way that they use it or do it the way they apply that provision within the districts, as Ms. Duckett stated. Okay. I'm certainly not the legal person here. I I'm not gonna argue. Um, the other one, I guess maybe it's, maybe you have the same answer in, in the last paragraph. If someone is not listed as 55 within the residency, staff will begin the adopted decompliance process. And I guess I'll use my own example as the example. My son is a approved resident in my house, has been for six years. He's 52 years old now, who lives with us because he had a, uh, a stroke, uh, is unable to work if my wife and I are killed in an auto accident tomorrow. He inherits the house by our will and law. He is not 55. What happens does, does since he is not listed as a resident and only resident and 55, less than 55, does he go to a hearing officer? If we got a complaint, then yes. And again, keep in mind this is a, a complaint driven process. So how, but, but yes, if, if you elect to do these deed restrictions and we get a complaint, then yes, that would, that would happen. Can somebody under 55 own the home? Yes. And I don't know how it works with sales that is between the sales and the homeowners as far as selling to people under 55. But per the deed restrictions, one person in the home must be 55 and up. Do do we get complaints for this on a regular basis? No, no. I, I understand that. But if we, if we did, then yes, we would have to follow the process because you have to apply it consistently across the board. We did make sure, because the deed restrictions provide for some type of, um, exception to be made or variance. Um, but the developer indicated that they do not issue those, and that is not something, again, because it's the developer. Um, is the party to the contract that there are no variances or waivers issued based on the deed restrictions? Well, we're, we're, we're we're stepping wow. Into something here, aren't we? Yeah, I'm, I'm, I'm a Wow Now, um, obviously if the worst happened and my son ended up being the sole resident of the house, I'm sure he would sell the house because he doesn't need a four bedroom house. But if he, and he loves the villages and his golf groups are here, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, he will stay and he would go to something much smaller in a neighborhood which might not like him. So I just be, I just became a wow on program process and the elimination of this document. Okay. So as a board, what do we want to do? Put this Aside. Go. I wanna say one more thing if I can, Mr. Chairman, uh, I don't wanna be believe this, but I'm a little confused. You said District 11 said they don't even want to hear this. District six, district six, I'm sorry, district six. Other districts were hesitant, So they're just turning the blind eye to No, I I think that like you, they have already probably thought about all of the potential unintended consequences that could come about this. And at this point, this is not something that they're interested in amending their rule to include. Again, not to say that six months, two years down the road, they, they won't change their mind, but after the initial discussion, um, at the board, they, they elected that at this point in time, they, they are not in favor of moving forward. Okay. Well that'll come out in PA at Pwac. I assume that somebody there will speak up to that. Yeah. Well, as far as the, the chair's comment, I would move that we set this aside, uh, until next month until, Uh, We have some information from PW. You don't really need a motion, just direct staff to bring it back in September or whenever you want it. Uh, okay. In front of you. We'll Bring it back for the September on the agenda. Are we looking for That's fine. Go ahead. Do you just want it on old business for discussion or is there something specific you're wanting staff to bring back? Uh, Put it on there. Old the business. Yeah. And then we can bring it up For, for discussion. Yes. For discussion. Okay. We'll discuss it again. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Moving on. Information only. Any comments from the board at this time? The district manager, I have no reports other than to have a great weekend District council. Just one report or reminder that the next ethics and public records training is scheduled for August 18 at one 30, and that will be held at the district office if you can't attend that one. There's another scheduled for October 27th at one 30. And that one is also at the district office. That was August one. Again, I think, I think I signed up for October. October 27th is the second thank. Yes. That one's on a Monday, August 18th On Monday. Any comments from the supervisors at this point? Yeah, just quickly with regards to PA, uh, from the 14th amenity fee cap was brought up, it's, it's deferred till August. Um, a lot of discussion about wreck and sport pool, uh, usage and schedules and that kind of thing. I don't think there's anything that we aren't being kept up to date on with emails. Access was a big thing. We discussed it here a while back. That just means that access to a lot of things, gates, pools, everything else, uh, Mr. Brown was, was pretty emphatic that you district is very close to deciding on what to do here? Yes. We actually have a joint meeting, um, that is scheduled for the a a C and PA. Um, you will have an intro into what will be at that joint meeting on Monday, but then we'll go into details and have the financial analysis and everything on the joint meeting. Okay. Good stuff. And then finally with what we took to, to the PWAC meeting, the past striping, they basically told me they've just, PAC has decided they're not gonna do anything. So if District 12 wants to do something, it's on District 12. Is that not the report you got Kerry? I mean they basically, the chairman and the second in command there basically said this was decided. So, um, I got nowhere with that. I think this will be a topic at the multimodal pad discussion group, which also consists of districts one through four. They are also, um, looking at mostly the race pavement markers. Even the districts like four who currently have stripes are looking at that. So I think that that may be a topic at that group that, um, you'll get a little bit more feedback from districts as to what they would like to do. Okay. And I have a couple other things. Once it's my turn, you don't have anything quickly? We'll, are the mail drops our responsibility? Um, the postal stations, yeah. They are of, um, project wide, not of the residential district. Okay. They fall under amenities because The, I had people at my house last night at seven o'clock complaining about the insects at Willow Tree. At Willow Tree. Willow Tree. It is infested. Okay. It's even getting into the mail. So I will bring that up there And I'll, I'll go ahead and report it as well and we'll, we'll get an update for you. I Appreciate that. Uh, I traded emails with some find people from the Finney area with regards to the rezoning at Coleman. I thought they were gonna be here today, um, uh, to, to, to have some questions, but, uh, I guess that didn't, that didn't happen. I have some basic questions there, but I was not able to make, make the meeting that was held in Coleman. I mean, I have some concerns there, especially if it affects that Eagle Nest area, which I'm told belongs to District 12. Um, and so, uh, I guess again though, if it's not under our purview, this is not the place for it and they aren't here today. I don't guess there at least they didn't ask for an audience. Uh, uh, and then finally, thanks for the packet with regards to the mailing on Monday. That, that helped greatly. Very good. So for the, the, what you're talking about in Coleman, are you referring to like the County Road 3 0 1 widening and No, This was the rezoning of 15 acres. Oh, the rezoning. Okay. Yeah, I mean, I, I traded several emails with, with a gentleman there and tried to make a meeting, uh, that they had it at Finney Rec Center and, and couldn't get there in time. And then he later told me there was a meeting in Coleman, uh, with the city or the rezone or the zoning commission mm-hmm. In Coleman. So Sumter, Sumter County does all of the zoning for Coleman. Um, so when they actually have the hearing, that will be through Sumter County. I sent the information. Did you receive it in your email about the staff report? Right. Um, the county has indicated that, you know, in it, it potentially could be a, a good change for the surrounding properties because of how it's owned now. I mean, it could, it could be anything. It could be a hog farm, it could be a chicken farm. Um, and based on what they foresee it becoming, it, it, they are estimating that it will be a value to the, the, um, properties around it. But certainly that's pretty much all I know about it. Um, Mr. Bradley Arnold is very aware of it, so certainly, um, if you want information, we can reach back out to the county. That's all I have. Thank you, David. I'm all set. Um, I was unable to meet with the, uh, advisory board on, on The IAC, The IAC investment advisory, uh, and found out, uh, that we did not have a designated alternate, so no one attended. Uh, I think, uh, either today or on the next, uh, meeting, we need tos specifically identify an alternate, um, For an alternate So it doesn't have to be noticed on the agenda. So if you'd like to have that discussion and, and select somebody for the alternate, now we can do that. Okay. Anybody interes