MINUTES  OF MEETING
AMELIA WALK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Amelia Walk Community Development District was held Tuesday, July 20, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. at the Amelia Walk Amenity Center, 85287 Majestic Walk Boulevard, Fernandina Beach, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Gregg Kern Jeff Robinson
Henry "Red" Jentz Mindi Gilpin

Also present were:

Daniel Laughlin Carl Eldred Danielle Adams Lori Conrad Trista Johnson

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS

Chairman Supervisor Supervisor
Supervisor (by phone)

District Manager
District Counsel (by phone) Evergreen Lifestyles Management Evergreen Lifestyles Management Evergreen Lifestyles Management

Roll Call

Mr. Laughlin called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. and called the roll.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comment
There being no comments, the next item followed.

THIRD  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Acceptance	of	Resignation	of	Michael
Harbison

On MOTION by Mr. Jentz seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor Mr. Harbison's resignation was accepted.

Mr. Laughlin stated we will send an e-blast letting residents know there is an open seat on the Board and ask interested candidates to submit applications, which we will include on the next agenda for the Board's review and then someone can be appointed.
Mr. Kern asked it has to be a resident of the District?

Mr. Laughlin responded yes.
Mr. Kern asked can we have that message shared with the HOA so we can send a joint communication?
Mr. Laughlin responded yes.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Minutes of the June 15, 2021
Board of Supervisors Meeting
There were no comments on the minutes.

On MOTION by Mr. Jentz seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favo1· the Minutes of the June 15, 2021 Board of Supervisors meeting were approved as presented.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion on Policy Regarding Fishing and
Alligator Nuisance Information
Mr. Laughlin stated this was something we discussed at the last meeting. HGS has sent some draft policies.
Mr. Eldred stated essentially, it's a policy that we've seen work in other districts just notifying primarily that fishing is at everybody's own risk, and they need to pay attention to any of the wildlife that may be close by, obviously in particular any snakes or alligators.
Mr. Robinson asked what is the definition of a patron? Is that a resident?
Mr. Eldred responded patron is something defined in the amenity policies that we have so we're consistently applying that term. Patron would be any resident and any paid user of the amenity facilities. There is a provision for people to pay a fee to use the amenity facilities.
Mr. Jentz stated my question around the no watercrafts, is that trying to eliminate risk to the community or is there a particular reason there is no boating? Personally, I think we should be encouraging people to be outside and enjoying the place, but I understand if it's about the risk.
Mr. Eldred responded typically that is an issue when it relates to those that live on the ponds. If we start allowing kayaks and other watercraft on the ponds, then essentially the people that live on those ponds have any number of kayakers and users around the ponds and that usually causes issues. The key thing to remember about these ponds is they're stormwater retention ponds that were constructed by the District for the sole purpose of collecting all of the

stormwater within the community. We like to think of them like lakes and I know many  of them look like that, but they are functional stormwater retention ponds.
Mr. Kern stated I would add that certainly the liability would be a concern because the District owns these retention ponds, but also probably accessibility. If we're going  to  encourage boating and watercraft usage, there's probably more from an engineering standpoint that would need to be done to protect the liability of the district in making them more accessible. I'd hate to encourage it and then somebody gets hurt trying to launch a watercraft into the pond.
Mr. Robinson asked what about drones? Not necessarily remote water boats, but
airborne drones over the lake. Is that a consideration?
Mr. Eldred responded I don't think that would  be a consideration  as part of this policy. I think this policy is limited to the use of the water itself. If the Board wants to put some limitation on drones, I think that would be more of a District-wide consideration. If that's something the Board wants to look at, we can certainly look at it. I'm not really prepared  to  talk about the availability of drone policies within the District at this time though.
Mr. Robinson stated I was just curious because I've seen some. Sometimes they're  water based and sometimes they're air based.
Mr. Kern stated I have two questions. One was on item two in the policy it references
exhibit A and I think that refers to locations where patrons would be able to fish. Is that prepared yet for review or is that pending?
Mr. Eldred responded I need to check on that, but I believe we will be working with
staff in trying to identify those areas because those access points would just be the District common areas.
Mr. Kern stated my second question would be enforcement of this policy. How would
the District enforce this policy and/or what other improvements would the District need in  order to be able to enforce this. Would that be signage, would this whole policy get posted, is it multiple signs? It's great in theory, but who is actually going to have this policy and the exhibit to know where they can or cannot fish and what the rules are?
Mr. Eldred responded as I understand it this issue came up due to concerns with fishing generally and the potential trespass onto those private residences. As far as the policing is concerned, we establish a policy that the District can cite to establish a baseline of

requirements and/or restrictions for use of the ponds. How we enforce that, each district is different. Often what we see is the amenity center managers will enforce it, but primarily it comes down to when we're seeing those issues where people are walking on to private residences it does give those homeowners to clearly point out this is private property, and that fishing is only allowed on those District common areas. As far as the notification and awareness of the community, certainly we can do that through the e-blast as we typically do, and I think we'd also be looking at opportunities to place appropriate signage without signage pollution.
Mr. Kern stated I believe this district has an agreement with Evergreen Lifesty!es
Management for what I will call field operations and I just wanted to ask this question here  with the Evergreen representative. Is that something that would give them the authority to enforce that policy under our agreement with Evergreen? And then the second question would be to Evergreen, is that something you guys see being feasible? To the extent that  a  homeowner is going to confront somebody fishing and try and point to a sign or policy that is nowhere nearby, they may not feel comfortable doing that so in order to make this practical,  we have to be mindful of the way this policy is enforced. Carl, I don't want to put you on the spot, you don't have to go look at the terms of that agreement today, but I think it would be important to understand does the HOA management company have the authority to enforce this policy. In my mind, that's the most logical way this gets enforced. The resident might be  calling Evergreen to say there is someone fishing, with the expectation that you're going to go down and enforce this policy. So, Carl, the first question for you is does the agreement provide for that authority to Evergreen?
Mr. Eldred stated I'll have to take a look at that. Unfmtunately, I don't know offhand whether it does or not, but I can ce1tainly look at that.
Mr. Kern stated the second question would be to Evergreen. Is that practical?
Ms. Conrad stated in the past people have called police because they were at the pond fishing and the police said they couldn't enforce it because it wasn't posted and it really wasn't the homeowner's property, so it had to be posted number one, and number two, the HOA had  to enforce it, not the homeowner, unless they were physically on their property.
Mr. Laughlin stated I imagine the CDD could to the extent there was a violation, you could suspend amenity privileges.

Mr. Kern stated which is also managed through Evergreen. I guess a follow through is just to make sure Evergreen has that authority and ultimately for law enforcement, we would need to make sure we have appropriate signage. I have experienced that in other districts where you have to have signs posted or nobody is aware.
Mr. Robinson stated it's like the speeding. It defaults to the City ordinance or County
ordinance.
Mr. Kern stated to the extent we want to adopt the policy, I have no comments and I would support it, but there is obviously some follow through here for the enforcement of this policy.
Mr. Robinson stated we have an Exhibit A that defines all the ponds. If we're going to
have signs, we're going to have to discuss those locations.
Ms. Johnson stated if that's something you wanted to amend in the document, that would just be drawing that up with the attorney and adopting that at the meeting and then it could be enforced as far as violation. It's just kind of the same thing along the lines  of when you see someone violating something and you don't know where they live, putting that person and their address to the violation, that way we could enforce, get the signs and go from there.
Mr. Kern stated maybe the HOA could provide another level of enforcement. To Daniel's point, the COD can restrict access to amenities and facilities and those kind of things, but I think the HOA can provide for a fining committee or enforcement committee and there's different levels of enforcement there so we have options.
Mr. Laughlin stated for now we could table this until the next meeting for more
information, or do you want to go ahead and approve what we have?
Mr. Eldred stated I think that's a good idea. It would allow us to bring Exhibit A to the Board as well and you will be able to see the policy in its entirety and be able to make a decision from there.
Mr. Kern asked are we able to at this meeting designate somebody to take on this
project of identifying the common areas and then bringing that back to the Board at the next meeting?
Mr. Eldred  responded  I don't think so unless there's a member  of  the Board  you want
to delegate the authority  to work with staff  on this issue. Otherwise,  I think  we're at the point

where this is just staff working through identifying the areas and coming back with answers to your questions about the enforcement.
Mr. Laughlin stated I can get the maps from Dan and have them all identified to be included and then I can get with Carl and Lori about enforcement.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	/	Ratification	of Village
Walk Shared Cost Agreement
Mr. Laughlin stated this is a topic we've been talking about for a while. I've been going back and forth with the Village Walk's CAM. They've agreed on the initial costs that were sent around. The only modification they had to the agreement HGS drafted was that they have a 5% increase maximum per year so we can't increase their fees by more than 5% a year. I have been working with Jennifer and Gregg on this. If the Board has no questions or comments, I just need a motion to ratify, and we will proceed.
Mr. Robinson asked where there are some blanks, like the first paragraph? Mr. Laughlin responded the dates and entities will get filled in.
Mr. Kem asked can you describe where the 21.875% comes from?
Mr. Laughlin responded I think that was in the agreement already that Hopping drafted that is used commonly.
Mr. Robinson stated Daniel had an analysis of all the costs.
Mr. Kern stated the agreement states the Landowner shall pay to the District 21.875% of all expenses incurred in connection with the operation, repair and maintenance of the Improvements. So that's 21% of our overall budget?
Mr. Laughlin responded it would just be for the entrance.
Mr. Kern stated so Amelia Walk still shares in the cost of that and Village Walk will only be sharing 21% of those costs and we carry the remaining 79%. I think the original equation was based on the number of homes. I can't remember how many they have but we have 750 and they have 21% of 750, or whatever it might be, so I think it's appropriate.
Mr. Laughlin stated I think this will help because initially we were going with just the cost and this will adjust as we go on with inflation.
Mr. Kern asked and this is collected annually or biannually?
Mr. Laughlin responded that's something we can discuss. I would imagine annually would be easiest, but I don't know if they would be more comfortable with biannually.

Mr. Eldred stated we will be invoicing the landowner semi-annually.
Mr. Laughlin  stated  yes, it says semi-annually  with  the first invoice  dated  October  1s   t
and second invoice April 1s   t.
Mr. Kern asked any idea what that dollar amount is projected for?
Mr. Laughlin responded I think for the whole year it was about $20,000. It was about
$2,500 a month I believe.
Mr. Kern stated I didn't have any other questions or changes so I can make a motion to approve in substantial form.

On MOTION by Mr. Kern seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor the Village Walk cost share agreement was approved in substantial form.

SEVENTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Ratification of Earthworks Change Order
No.13
Mr. Kern stated I've reviewed and approved the change order. It's essentially for work required on the Phase 5 ponds. There were some issues that came up post-completion, so they are regrading and resodding.
Mr. Robinson asked do you know why they looked like they were draining?
Mr. Kem responded they had to drain them down lower so they could regrade the area where the water line was. Long story short, it's such a big pond and the wind was eroding the pond banks so we're pumping them down, regrading them and then we will grass deeper than what the normal water level of the pond is, which in theory should allow for erosion control below that water line as the pond rises.
Mr. Robinson stated we've had a lot of wind over there.
Mr. Kern stated yes, it was something unexpected. This is obviously a change order to the existing agreement. This is funded through the constrnction funds, which I don't think we have any left so essentially it doesn't have any impact to operations and maintenance or the budget for any existing resident.

On MOTION by Mr. Kern seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor Earthworks Change Order No. 13 was ratified.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Conveyance of Property
from Dream Finders Homes; Resolntion 2021-05
Mr. Kern stated a little bit of back story; at a County Commission hearing maybe a year ago, several residents of the Amelia Walk community went to the commission hearing and voiced their concerns and their desire for an emergency access along the eastern boundary of our property. I think as this Board knows, there is a tract of land that basically runs the entire eastern boundary of our property, the haul road is what it was known as before. Lot development is now complete, so there is no longer a need for construction access use of that property. The County, hearing the resident's concerns came to us and asked if we could help participate in establishing this emergency access road. What that meant is there were some standards that needed to be met for stabilization, widths and access points and those kinds of things. Along with that, was the connection and how to they get from our property to Amelia Concourse. There was an existing asphalt driveway that was installed for the haul road. That was already in place, and there's a gate that has been in and out of service but is now  in  service. So, there was the existing driveway  they said was acceptable. There is a gate they say is acceptable so the District can control access. And of course, the haul road after it was done being utilized as a haul road was regraded and stabilized for erosion control, so the rest of it is pretty much up to par with what the County needs to consider it as emergency access. The problem when we looked into it deeper was that a portion of this emergency access were actually on a lot owned by Dream Finders in Amelia Concourse, and I think you can see that  lot in the exhibits that are attached to this form of deed. The County is still wanting the emergency access and being in the benefit of the District, the solution that is proposed here,  and Dream Finders is already amenable to this, is to actually deed this little triangle piece on page four of the exhibit from Dream Finders to Amelia Walk CDD. That provides  the legal title ownership to the CDD to provide and maintain this emergency access. I think that Dream Finders just in good partnership with neighbors are not charging us anything for it, but essentially this allows us to leave in place the current improvements to provide an emergency access for the community.
Mr. Robinson asked so is this part of their common area?
Mr. Kern responded yes.
Mr. Robinson asked they weren't really using it for anything?

Mr. Kern responded it would have been sold and ultimately a homeowner's property in Amelia Concourse. They have not sold this property so it is theirs to transfer so this little triangle piece will become ownership of Amelia Walk CDD and then we can leave all the improvements in place and the County will put that to use as emergency access. There is what we call a Knox Box, which provides access for first responders. They will have the only key that opens the Knox Box so they can access that gate.
Mr. Robinson asked has the County considered using that as the emergency exit? Mr. Kern responded potentially.
Mr. Robinson asked would we have the appropriate right of way in Phase 4 or 5 for whoever needed to access it?
Mr. Kern responded there are several connection points for the community. Those little
common area tracts that tie to it. There is one primary one right between Phase 4 and Phase 5 that does provide a common area with very little obstacle to that tract. I think this District should consider some other control measures, at least vehicular control measures, to only  utilize during emergencies if that makes sense. Over the years there has always been a nuisance issue with adjacent residents utilizing it for four wheelers and paiiies on the weekends and  those kinds of things, so there is probably more to be done internally to benefit in the best interest of this District, but this connection allows us to satisfy the County's needs for emergency access.
Mr. Jentz asked is there a plan to inspect it annually? Does that fall on us or  the County?
Mr. Kern responded the County ultimately has the say on what they will utilize. I don't
know if they will do annual checks. Presumably, they may. Us providing this doesn't create an obligation for us to provide this if that makes sense. We could very easily say we don't have an interest in emergency access road. There's no development obligation or District obligation to provide for this. To the extent they could ask us to upgrade it or maintain to a level that will be satisfactory for emergency access, they could, but we could also say no. Carl, anything to supplement?
Mr. Eldred responded  no, you're  right on track. This doesn't really place any obligation
upon the District and essentially facilitates the use of that emergency route. As Gregg pointed out, it's one parcel owned  by  Dream  Finders  and so Gregg has done a good job of negotiating

that arrangement with Dream Finders so what we have before the Board today is just a resolution whereby the Board accepts the conveyance of that parcel of property to the District for the purpose of developing that emergency route and attached to the resolution is a form of the deed that we would look to enter into with Dream Finders.

On MOTION by Mr. Kern seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor Resolution 2021-05, authorizing, confirming and approving the acceptance of property and improvements was approved.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion on the Fiscal.Year 2022 Budget
Mr. Laughlin stated this item was just a placeholder in the event there was any discussion, however there is nothing of note. We will have the public hearing at the next meeting, which will be open to everybody for discussion and then after the public hearing we will move forward with adopting.
Mr. Kern stated I don't have any changes, I just wanted to point out that eventually once we're able to secure the funding from Village Walk it will show as a revenue and that will offset our expenses, but I think it's too early to apply that in this budget. We could reduce, but  I think it's early. If we're able to get a contribution from them, it just provides for more reserves, which is good for this District.
Mr. Laughlin stated that's what I was thinking. It would be a nice buffer and it could help hold off any potential increases in the future.
Mr. Robinson stated there were some things in the engineering report that we got after we locked down the total budget number, that probably should have been done last year, but of course we got the report after we did the budget last year.
Mr. Kern stated conservatively, I think it's best to move forward as is.
Mr. Robinson stated yes. The only question I have is on the speed control number under repairs and maintenance. Shouldn't that be under contract services? It's a minor thing.
Mr. Laughlin stated I can have it moved.
Mr. Kern stated just to confirm for the public that is present, there is no increase of assessments proposed here or there is?
Mr. Laughlin responded there is. It's a $163 annual increase, 17%. Fiscal Year 2021 was $971.15 annually and this would bring it to $1,134.31. It's a two-step process. There was

an approval in June and that sets the high mark and then in August when it's adopted there is a public hearing and at that point the number can go down, but it can't be increased any higher than that.
Mr. Robinson stated where you put in your definitions, have something about the speed control put in.
Mr. Kern asked what is it?
Mr. Robinson responded we've talked over the last six months in various meetings about doing things for speed control such as speed limit signs that laser your speed, speed bumps, and a host of other things and most of the recommendations from staff is that if people are going to speed, they're going to speed and the only way to really curb that is through enforcement, so we are budgeting money to have off-duty Sheriff's officers at times in random places to do speed control with radar. They would come in on a voluntary basis if Michael or Lori called and they found this would be more of a fixed thing. There's a three-hour minimum a month, but we budgeted for more than that. We may use the money for that. Most of the speed issues seem to be on Majestic Walk.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS
District Counsel

Staff Reports

Mr. Eldred stated yesterday we were informed that Jennifer was res1gnmg from Hopping, Green & Sams. There is a Florida Bar process when that happens so that provides for informing the client and providing them the opportunity to make the decision as to whether they want to stay with the existing firm or change to the new firm. You should be receiving a letter in the next day or two and that will be included on the agenda for the Board to make a decision as to whether they want to stay with Hopping, Green & Sams, or whether they want to transfer the work to Jennifer at her new firm. Hopping, Green & Sams has been your firm for many years and hopefully you will want to work with us. We certainly want to continue working with you but as that transition occurs and you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me at any time.

District Engineer
Acceptance of the 2021 Annual Engineer's Report

Mr. Laughlin stated there are some items Mr. McCranie pointed out.
Mr. Kern stated on page three of the report there is a bullet point to construct sidewalk on Fallen Leaf. That has been completed. I don't know if these are revisions that need to be done to adopt or approve it.
Mr. Robinson asked was there an invoice on that or they just did it?
Mr. Kern responded they just did it because they were supposed to have done it. That was an area where they were proposing a parking lot and other things, but we went ahead and just decided to do the sidewalk. The last bullet point there, stabilize the pond banks of Phase 5, that is in progress now.
Mr. Laughlin asked do you think it would be best to approve this with the revisions?
Mr. Eldred responded yes; I think that would be appropriate.

Mr. Robinson motioned to accept the 2021 annual  engineer's repmt as revised. Mr. Jentz seconded the motion.

Mr. Robinson stated at the next meeting we really should talk about some of these things he recommended to get them done. Especially, the potholes at Champlain and Bistineau. Those areas are in Phase 2 and that's about 10 years out before we even start thinking about resurfacing those roads, whereas Phase 1 is two or three years.
Mr. Kern stated I couldn't agree more, and we do have reserves in our budget for these
items.
Mr. Laughlin stated I'll get with Dan to confirm he wil1 be at the next meeting because
he needs to participate in this discussion.
Mr. Kern stated between meetings perhaps we can ask staff to review these items and get a couple of proposals for the work that is being identified.

On voice vote with all in favor the 2021 annual engineer's report was accepted as revised.

Consideration/ Ratification of Requisition Nos. 82 and 83
Mr. Laughlin stated number 82 is for $56,000 for Earthworks of Florida for ratification and number 83 is approval of Earthworks pay application number 18 for $48,642.

On MOTION by Mr. Kern seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor Requisition 82 was ratified.

On MOTION by Mr. Kern seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor Requisition 83 was approved.

District Manager
There being nothing to repmt, the next item followed.

Community Manager- Report
Ms. Conrad stated we've been having a lot of issues with fallen trees. It seems like we put them up and tomorrow they fall. We asked for additional support for the trees and they're still falling so I have an email out to Trim All to see what else can be done because we're planting these same live trees almost every day.
Mr. Robinson asked where are these trees located?
Ms. Conrad responded mostly down Majestic Walk where Fallen River comes in and along that area where Champlain is. They brought support kits for them but they came down support kits and all. I don't know if they're not deep enough.
Mr. Kern stated it's one of those areas that I think Trim All installed the majority of those, so they certainly should be able to figure out how to keep them standing straight. I  would assume they're not billing us for those.
Mr. Robinson asked you don't think it's vandalism or anything like that?
Ms. Conrad responded no, I don't think so. Initially it was when the storm  came through and that's when they first came down. There were times where we didn't even know if they had put them back up because the next day they were down still.
Mr. Robinson stated they probably need more dirt or something.
Ms. Conrad stated right. That is in progress. We approved the maintenance contract so now the gym will be maintained on a quarterly basis. They were just recently in do the first session. There is equipment in there that needs to be updated, the two treadmills. One requires a new monitor and the other one the hand controls need to he replaced. They feel that is likely caused by the cleaners that is used by the monitors, so I put out a notice in an e-blast but also

on the machines that they should be spraying their cloth and cleaning the screen. The cleaner is acceptable, but you can't spray it directly on the screens. The pulleys in the two bikes need to  be replaced as well, so that is scheduled but we're awaiting parts. We passed  the reinspection by the fire department. We had some violations. The sign out front was put up. The fire extinguishers were all inspected and retagged and then the emergency lighting had to be reset and most of them replaced. We got the no solicitation I no trespassing signs installed, there were four of them. There was one placed at the entry. I do have a request from one homeowner to replace the one that is on the corner of Cherry Creek. She feels it would be blocking view corning out of that corner so we would consider moving that one perhaps and they will come back and do that if we need them to.
Mr. Kern stated line of sight is important at intersections and they're fairly large signs.
Mr. Robinson stated we moved one of the signs out front because it was blocking as you were trying to make a right or left turn.
Ms. Conrad stated I haven't come out that way on Cherry Creek to notice that it's a problem, but it's one of the ones we're going to look at moving further back.
Mr. Kem asked are those on a painted white post?
Ms. Conrad responded I am actually having them come back to repaint the posts because they don't look like they were painted to me. They look like they might have been recycled. The mailboxes were moved, which was a little bit of a surprise but they're now  moved and everybody knows. We put out an e-blast and I haven't had any complaints. The  A/C in the gathering room failed so we had to have that repaired and we have a new thermostat and the one in the office failed so that was repaired. To be completed is the mailbox location for phase 5, I've received the keys. Blackflow testing has been scheduled. The landscaping proposal we were going to decide on today. I think Michael presented proposal 13575.
Mr. Laughlin stated it's in the package. It's to plant 55 three-gallon longleaf  pine trees to re-establish natural easement but there is no map or specifics.
Mr. Robinson asked do you know where that is located?
Ms. Conrad responded my understanding is it was on the corner of Champlain and Majestic Walk Boulevard, that one lot. It's the main drag and you can see it when you come in on the lefthand side. I will get him to give us an exact map.

Mr. Kern stated yes, even if they can give us a rough plan showing where they're going I think that would be helpful.
Ms. Conrad stated I'll follow up on that. We have a lightpole down. It has been
recported to FP&L. I haven't heard back from them as to why it's not back up yet, but it's actually turning on and off so somehow it's still working. It's marked with caution tape. They said they would be out within 24 hours so I will follow up on that. Michael had brought this up before; the tennis comi. I still don't have any quotes. It needs to be soft washed rather than pressure washed because we don't want to destroy it so I'm still waiting to receive some quotes on that. We're getting close on the internet. We upgraded the internet speed  because  the internet kept dropping, but we're still having issues.
Mr. Robinson asked do they not have any idea what the issue is? Is it power related from the storms?
Ms. Conrad responded they said it's the equipment. He said it needs to be separated,
even though we have a business account it has to be completely separate from what the residents are using from what the business needs are.
Mr. Robinson asked is this building surge protected? Comcast doesn't normally work when it's surge protected so sometimes you need battery backup with surge protection separate from the rest of the electrical. We should look into that.
Ms. Conrad stated in one of my previous positions outside of Amelia Walk we had the battery backup system and it was really nice because we do have hmTicanes and storms where we lose power and that keeps the ability to keep that system up and switches it over to another tower so you can still communicate and you don't lose your data. It is a nice feature.
Mr. Robinson stated a lot of times with these storms it's a surge so you lose power to certain things but with the battery backup you don't.
Ms. Conrad stated we had a burst of activity with renting out the community room for private events and we have six yet to occur so we're bringing in a little bit of extra money in that way. They've been successful. We've set up signage when they're coming and so far it's working well.
Mr. Robinson asked are those ran separately or do you get the outside?
Ms. Conrad responded they reserve the veranda, which we had an issue with on the first rental. I don't pay attention to the Facebook page, but I've heard rumors and someone claimed

they had reserved the veranda when there was already a reservation so now we request they bring their reservation with them, because I've told them there is no separation. If you rent one, you get the other. Hopefully that will prevent it from happening again.
Ms. Conrad continued with her report stating the comments/concerns are leftover concerns from before Michael left. The residents are still concerned that there are still nonresident people coming in from the Village Walk. They think it's connected and of course we're telling them it's not connected. Others have complained the other way saying they want them to feel welcome if they need a change of scenery.
Mr. Laughlin stated there's a nonresident fee they can pay and it would give them
access.
Ms. Conrad stated right, which is what I have said. I have told them if they have an
issue they don't have to confront them. They can call the non-emergency line if they're soliciting or trespassing they will come and ask them to leave.
Mr. Robinson stated they do have their own facilities.
Mr. Kern stated I'm not sure what they have access to. The amenity attendant here, which I believe is you at this point, as the ability to enforce patrons and nonpatrons being here and asking them to leave.
Ms. Conrad stated yes, which is why they have my cell. If it came to that kind of
situation they can call me and I'm close enough to come in.
Mr. Laughlin stated usually we will have the onsite people tell them if they do argue or fight that, we will call the police. Same as if they keep coming back.
Ms. Conrad stated another issue is would you all consider putting fountains in all of the
ponds?
Mr. Laughlin responded it would be expensive and that would be my only comment as
management, but it's up to the Board. It's something we could save for in future years.
Mr. Robinson stated one of the builders approached us seven months ago about putting fountains in the ponds in Phase 4 and they were going to fund that at $20,000. We have not yet received that money and until we receive that money, we're not putting in fountains otherwise.
Mr. Kern stated those are the only additional fountains that have been considered by this Board.
Mr. Robinson stated fountains cost about $6,000 or $7,000, plus installation.

Mr. Laughlin stated and there's maintenance too.
Mr. Kern stated the short answer is it has not been considered.
Ms. Conrad  stated the last concern is sinking sidewalks. I've had a couple of addresses  I need to go out and take pictures of, but I guess my question was if I bring that to you all at the next meeting what can be done.
Mr. Laughlin stated you can send me the pictures and I will get them to Dan, that way
at the meeting he can have a solution or idea of what's causing the issue to discuss it.
Mr. Jentz stated I just wanted to say thank you to Lori. My interaction with Lori has been excellent. I work out here quite a bit and I see people come and go and I see Lori's interaction with them and I just want to say thank you for what you've done and the professionalism that you've brought to your job.

2.	Proposal for Planting 55 Pine Trees to Re-Establish Natural Easement
This item was tabled.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisors'	Requests	and	Andience
Comments
Resident Jordan Lannacchino stated we have been under contract since November 2020 with Richmond American and we are lot 109 in Phase 4. Last month we sent a letter to the Board of Directors expressing our displeasure and raised our concerns with the Board's recent decision to move 179 mailboxes from the amenity center down to Fallen Leaf Parkway.
Despite disagreements, the mailboxes were installed on the street in close proximity to our driveway. It's very disheartening to see these concerns haven't been taken seriously and we're still hearing there are no complaints about these mailboxes. I'd like to take this time to address the concerns. Our feelings on this are also echoed by lot 108 and the house directly across from ours.

thing.

Resident Erin Lannacchino stated I have letters from both of them echoing the same

Mr. Lannacchino stated they were unable to attend the meeting due to the time of day,

but they are in support of what we're addressing here today. The Board's decision to move these mailboxes from the amenity center was made because it was believed it would alleviate congestion at the amenity center parking lot. They felt the parking lot and the infrastructure at

the amenity center could not handle the amount of cars that would be coming into the amenity center and accessing these mailboxes. The Board's decision may alleviate the congestion at the amenity center, but it has now moved the problem directly in front of our home on our street and affecting our prope1ties. With this decision, the Board has not only created a safety hazard within the community and has knowingly placed an unfair burden on a few select homeowners with the community, which is unfair and unjust. Fall River Parkway as you probably know is the access street back to Phase 5. There are two access ways. One of those access ways will now have mailboxes installed on them serving 179 properties, with no off-street parking. The units were placed several feet off my property line in a very close proximity to where my driveway will be laid. The driveway of my neighbor across the street is directly in front of these mailboxes. As you can imagine, the amount of cars that are going to be coming in here and parking on the streets tiying to access these mailboxes is going to be extreme with almost 200 people coming to these mailboxes almost every day. The street here are 50' wide streets and can't handle this additional  load. There will be blockages and there will be traffic concerns, especially as the development comes to completion and the rest of the Phase 4 residents have their houses built and then as Phase 5 come in this is going to become a problem that is going to be more and more prevalent and is going to affect our families more and more. We have two small children ages four and two. Our neighbors at lot 109 have four children, two of which have learning disabilities. All these kids want to play outside all day long.
They're in the driveway riding bikes and scooters and playing outside all day. The additional pedestrian vehicular traffic is going to be outside our house and is going to cause a safety issue for our children. Additionally, the line of mailboxes is also going to block the line of sight from my driveway. As I come out of the driveway, all I can see now is 11 cluster box units and all of the cars that are going to be parked out front are going to block my sight to any cars coming and are going to block any cars coming down the street from seeing us pulling out of the driveway, or seeing our kids playing. This is going to put our family and our children at risk and also the other community members trying to access these mailboxes putting us at risk for accidents. Additionally, the handicap access to this point is really in question. I lmow they expanded the foot pad to allow for access around the mailboxes themselves, but the nearest rampway to the sidewalk is almost 200-feet down the corner onto the street so you're going to expect anyone in a wheelchair or scooter to access these mailboxes to come down an entire

sidewalk to access them, unless they take the easier path, which would be to come up my driveway right there every day. ln the discussions the Board had several discussions on the safety impacts over the couple of months that you guys were discussing this and I won't quote them all, but I read through all of the meeting minutes and the concerns that were raised is that residents are rushing and they're impatient when accessing their mailbox. One board member was quoted as saying he witnessed cars rushing in and parking across three spots to get their mail and couldn't even take the time to park properly to get out to get their mail. Another board member was quoted as saying the cars he has witnessed have been pulling up on the curb and damaging the landscaping. All of this is now going to be taking place in front of our home.
This access will be available to them all day long, every day, 365 days a year for the rest of our lives and the rest of our children's lives when we give the property to them. They are going to be dealing with this issue and it's going to open up the door for anyone with ill intentions to be able to have access and have the excuse to be parked in front of our home to track our family. We won't be able to know if that person is suspicious or if they're a neighbor with access to those mailboxes. Any of those people can sit in front of our house, track our children, track my wife, know when we're home, or know when we're gone. It's going to open up our property to any burglary or nefarious individuals. Someone could pose as a post office representative and stand there and access those boxes. This huge mail station being so close to our house will not allow us to pick up on suspicious activities that we normally would be able to. You've given people the opportunity to prey on our family and you've limited our ability to be able to defend our property. Things like this happen all of the time across America. Earlier this month there was an attempted abduction in Village Walk. There was a young girl who was playing in her driveway when a car pulled up, parked in their driveway, a man jumped out and attempted to abduct the little girl. Luckily the mom was in the area carrying a ladder back to her garage and was able to chase off the individual. No family in our community should accept an increased safety risk to alleviate congestion at the amenity center. In addition, in January 2020 Nassau County passed Ordinance 2020-07. This ordinance outlined specific requirements for the installation of cluster mailboxes. It is included in the Nassau County Code appendix D, article eight and section 8.4. The mailboxes located at this site fail to meet all of the requirements of this article. Specifically, the cluster box units since they are not part of the amenity center need to be installed on their own tract of land. I pulled the County records for the surveys done of

these properties and the tract of land where these mailboxes are located is designated for wastewater management facilities in open spaces, they're not designated for cluster mailboxes. The cluster boxes are also not to be located within the vision triangle, so I know it was purposely moved down the road to avoid the vision triangle of the intersection itself, however County Code Appendix D, article nine, section 9.5, which governs the driveway connection requirements also define obstruction and visibility requirements for driveways and you're required to maintain a clear line of sight from two and a half feet up to ten feet and you're not allowed to have any plantings or obstructions within that window and that is governed by the Florida Depaiiment of Transportation's standards index number five, 546, which applies those vision window drawings to the driveway connection. The mailboxes are within this vision triangle in connection to my driveway. Additionally, it requires off street parking be available so for 179 mailboxes there is required to be four off street parking spots available and the parking spots are not to impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic. These requirements were in full effect for one year prior to the Board deciding to plan, propose and execute this project. I talked to the County engineer's office so the requirements of this Ordinance were enacted to ensure the residents can safely access their mail. The Board failed to research and apply any of these requirements in their plan. The decision of the Board to adopt a plan not built in accordance with the latest code, which is designed for the community's safety shows a great lack of concern for the safety of the residents of this development. My family, along with the other two families that I stated and I'm sure there will be more to come, all purchased homes on Fall River Parkway prior to the Board developing the plan to move these mailboxes to this location. All ofus were told this would be common area and open area and that our mailboxes would be located at the amenity center. We all signed up for that and agreed on that and that's
what we were expecting moving into this community. That promise to us has not been fulfilled. We chose our lots on this street expecting a certain level of privacy for our families and this decision has negatively impacted the safety of our families, displacing an unfair burden on our residents and will reduce the resale value of our properties. None of our families were ever informed of this plan or asked for input. We were never given an opportunity to voice our concerns prior to the Board voting on this issue. I did have a list of questions for the Board, but in the interest ohime I'll just make these statements. If any of these statements are wrong, please feel free to correct them but to my knowledge I only know of one board member that

went down and looked at this site prior to voting on it. To my knowledge none of the board members reviewed any of the builder's accepted permits. They didn't go down and look at any of the adjacent homes and properties and layouts of their houses and driveways and how it would interact with the plans for these mailboxes. Are there any other board members that actually went down and viewed the site?
Mr. Jentz, Robinson and Kern responded that they had.
Mr. Laughlin stated there were maps and pictures inside the package that was distributed.
Mr. Lannacchino asked did any of the Board members review lot 109, 108 or any of the
other home plans that had already been approved for permit for building prior to executing this?
Mr. Kern responded in a different facet I've seen every new home application that has
been submitted and approved.
Mr. Lannacchino asked it matched up to this specific project at the time you guys voted
011 it?
Mr. Kern asked what do you mean?
Mr. Lannacchino responded I've never seen the plan, but when it came time to vote on
moving the mailboxes, did you guys actually take time to look at the interaction with the other properties?
Mr. Kern responded I don't know that this Board had any discussion related to the adjacent homes and what was to be built there. I think it was one of my recommendations to solicit interest from the community in those areas to ensure the folks who those mailboxes were going to be servicing actually agreed with this. I don't know that it was done.
Acknowledging that a lot of them had not been cleared yet and had not closed on their homes yet so the concern was the people who these boxes serviced, do they want this.
Mr. Lannacchino stated that was going to be my next question because I know in the March meeting you did request that official poll be done and you requested that include residents under contract so I was going to ask if that poll was actually performed.
Mr. Robinson stated not to my knowledge.
Mr. Lannacchino asked did any of the board members know that there is a County code governing the requirements for installation of these cluster box units?

Mr. Laughlin responded yes. The Onsight company is the one that does all of the pennitting, talk with the post office and they did everything by code. Everything was approved and they had the permits that were needed.
Mr. Kern stated what Daniel is saying is this Board relies on them to obtain any necessary approvals from the authorities. USPS primarily is the governing agency that decides and gives the approval on where these boxes can be located.
Mr. Lannacchino asked is anyone at the County actually involved in permitting?
Mr. Laughlin responded I can speak with the onsite company, and I can see ifhe can pull these permits and what not, but he would be the one that would have coordinated it with them.
Mr. Kern stated as far as I know, the County doesn't require a permit with the
mailboxes.
Mr. Laughlin stated it's the common area, so the District has the right to do these improvements on it, but I'm not sure if the County is involved. I just know the post office is.
Mr. Lannacchino asked during discussions of this project, the board members brought up valid safety concerns with the selection of this site. I wonder if the Board ever did an actual safety impact or safety assessment to validate these concerns?
Mr. Kern responded not that I'm aware of.
Mr. Lannacchino stated there were plans submitted to split the cluster box units into two groups, which would have at least reduced the safety risk and spread out the impact to the homeowners affected to two different sites. That proposal was made to the Board, but the difference of$4,000 proved to be too much to alleviate some of the safety concerns and some of the impact on our families. Obviously, we feel the cost of safety to the affected homeowners was not cared about by the Board and I would also like to ask how many members of the Board would be happy and willing to accept the placement of 179 cluster box units several feet off of their driveway of their home?
Mr. Robinson responded I purchased a lot because it was not directly on an easement where there was a post office community box, but to add to the reason why the Board on my recommendation to do two locations initially ending up going with one is to not have a 10-day delay in residents having to drive to the post office to get their mail during the transition period that option would have required.

Mr. Lannacchino stated that does still show that a temporary inconvenience to the community was outweighed by a permanent burden placed on the residents involved.
Mr. Kern stated to answer your question as well, I would not be in favor of 179 mailboxes at my home either and just for the record, this is an item I voted against for a lot of the reasons you are describing so obviously I'm suppmtive of your concerns here. What this Board does will be ultimately up to the Board.
Mr. Lannacchino stated I understand. I'd just like to point out that this rush planning and this lack of concern for homeowner safety and failure to seek community input and to brush past this job without the affected homeowner' s knowledge and the failure to develop what we feel is the open space that was adve1tised to us at the time we purchased our home and also the willingness to place a large burden on a small number of homes, a burden that none of the Board members have stated they would be willing to accept for themselves in our opinion shows a lack of ethical conduct by the Board. It's a shame the members of the Board that are a pait of this community would do that to their neighbors. I'm asking that the Board correct the safety hazard it has created in the community and remove the burden unfairly placed on a few select families by removing these cluster box units off Fall River Parkway. The cluster box units should be either moved back to the ainenity center or moved to a location where residents can safely access their mail without placing a burden on any of the homeowners and their families. I'm asking the Board to pledge this removal in the next budget cycle. Additionally, I would propose an alternate location that is not at the amenity center. In Phase 4B there is a common plot ofland that is designated as Tract B located at the corner of Majestic Walk Boulevard and Fall River Parkway. This plot is roughly 130-feet by 80-feet. There is ample room to construct a small parking lot without enough parking for both Phase 4 and the Phase 5 mailboxes at this location. Ten spaces would meet the minimum requirements for code, but you'd have plenty of room to provide up to 10 to 20 spaces as allowable with actual handicap parking access. This would provide the maximum benefit to the development. Under this, no mailboxes will be located at the amenity center and will alleviate all the congestion concerns brought up by this Board. It would meet all the County code requirements and it would meet all of the safety concerns brought up by myself and the other families. This point is a common access point for the second half of the community so all of the Phase 4 and Phase 5 residents must pass this point to get in and out of their homes and none of the Phase 1-3 homes would be

affected by any of the increased traffic to this location since it's past where all of their homes are. At this location there's only one available box that backs up to this property. That lot is not yet for sale, it's not even available yet by Richmond American. It would back up to their backyard and have sufficient room on that lot to provide them a privacy buffer and limit the impact to that one propetiy and they'd also be able to come in and have it advertised to them before they actually take the property and know what they were getting into. And again, the entrance can be off of Majestic Walk Boulevard and that would free up that one property in question that their driveway would come off Fall River Parkway and they wouldn't have any of these same congestion concerns that we do at our place. I believe there are members of the HOA here present or on the phone, I know up to this point you guys have not done anything on this issue. We have raised this issue to members of the HOA and I know you guys have  deemed it basically not your problem because it involves the common area grounds and is under the control of the CDD, but I'd like to remind the members of the HOA that this project has created a safety hazard to our properties and the properties that are residents and has reduced the resale value of our properties under your control. The HOA is in place to help protect the homeowners in the community from such an occurrence and I'm asking the HOA to start getting involved and take action to properly resolve this issue. In conclusion, the bottom line here is we see it as we have safe locations for the mailboxes and the Board decided to move them to an unsafe location knowingly, even though there were safety concerns presented to the Board and furthermore, the Board decided to place an unfair burden on select number of residents, which was also identified by the Board. This was wrong, this was not just and we're asking the Board to correct the situation. I do have two other statements from the families involved. I know you have time restrictions, but they echo everything in here so we can print them out and submit them to the Board.
Mr. Laughlin stated you can send them to me, and I can send them to the Board.
Mr. Jentz stated before you go any further, I just want to go on the record saying that we did consider safety, that was one of the reasons we moved them out of here. This would have impacted the safety of every child in the neighborhood that comes down here so to characterize this as we did11't care about safety is completely false. You weren't here and I'm sorry about that, but to characterize us as being unethical is also a little offensive to me.

Mr. Kern stated ifthere are any other members of the public that would like to add to this concern I think we should hear that and we can respond accordingly from there.
Ms. Larrancchino stated when we were looking for the lots, Jack was our sales guy, and he didn't say there was a possibility of anything going there and I would have never picked that spot if! would have known there would be that much traffic or that many safety concerns. We were told it was open land and that is the pumping station and that they would landscape the pumping station. It should be told to the residents that they can put anything there. They can put a dog park there, or whatever. That should be told to the people choosing their lots for where they're going to live for the next 30 years. I think with this Phase 5 they are having cluster mailboxes the same as us, but at least they get to pick if they want that prope1iy or not because those prope1iies are not bought yet. We were already under contract in November so we feel we should have been considered when it was moved because we are the most affected by it, including our neighbors across the way. Their driveway is directly across from the mailboxes. Also, our neighbors to the right of us who mentioned to me they know when people come get their mail, it is inevitable people are going to turn around and they will probably use their driveway to get back out because if they're not going back the other way it's going to become very clustered. They can do a U-turn on their lawn and affect their frass and it can also affect the safety of their children as well and they have four children. I just think it's important for everyone to remember how they would feel ifit was their house. I'm sure most of you have kids so you can understand it is a safety hazard to our kids as well and just because there is a whole parking lot here and they should be parking appropriately in the parking lot, they're not going to park appropriately on our narrow road either with no parking spaces. I wish we knew about it before we picked our property, or I would have never picked it. We did put a formal complaint in, in the form of letters so ther<7 were complaints.
Resident Brian, 85622 Fall River Parkway, stated I would echo everything that's already been said, and I'd like to add a couple of things that hopefully will add more color to it. For one, it's just sheer numbers. If you do some quick math, 175 mailboxes what I've heard from a couple people is people don't check their mail much anymore so it's not that big of a deal. Even if you only check your mail once a week, that's 25 visits a day at those mailboxes and that's once a week so the volume alone is disturbing to me. Secondly, obviously we  haven't closed on the house yet. As mentioned, it's directly across from our driveway. We

were out last week just to check on the progress and noted that it was 8:00 in the evening. A truck comes down the road, turns left and stops in front of the mailbox, gets their mail, backs down the road to turn around in the driveway in front of the pumping station through the stop sign up the road faster than anybody would be comfortable with. That's one circumstance that I happened to be there for 10 minutes to look at the house. I'm not saying everybody in the neighborhood is going to be that disrespectful or not paying attention, but all it takes is a small percentage and in the best-case scenario say 25 people a day are going to stop there and that's  if you check your mail once a week, so those are simple numbers that immediately came to mind. If someone is going backwards down the road, that's bad enough because what if someone else comes around the corner while they're backing up to turn around? As soon as our driveway  is there, if they need to go back up the road, the natural tendency is going to be let me just use their driveway to turn around, they won't mind. That's unacceptable. I wouldn't do that in anyone else's driveway and certainly not on a regular basis. As they stated, we had no idea about this. I didn't even know about these meetings until I came to check on the progress one day and said wait a minute, those weren't here last time I was here. And then I see there was a pad around the corner, and I talked to the neighbors and now all the sudden I find out. I found this out a week ago. That is insane that a week ago would be the first I'd ever hear about this. To hear that it was proposed that you do a poll to get input from people. We've been
under contract since January, and you didn't do that. That is unethical, because that's an overt action to say we should do this and then you didn't do it. I don't know what the reason is, but it seems foolish that you wouldn't ask let alone the entire community, but certainly the people right there. You know our names and you know it's under contract. No one has ever come to us and said now that you're doing this, you need to know these meetings are going on and these decisions are being made. How would I know that?
Mr. Laughlin responded for future reference, there is a website, AmeliaWalkCDD.com,
so if you do have questions I recommend going there.
Mr. Brian stated I do know that now. It just seems like no consideration was ever given to that. In addition, and you can read their statements, I just wrote something really quick because I didn't know ifl  was going to make it, but that location where it is presently at, even if you said there's nothing we can do, it has to be on this lot, it has to be in this area, we can't split it up, we can't do anything else, it's still the worst possible location that could be chosen

there. Any community mailbox I've ever seen is on a corner that at least makes it flow and more accessible. So, if you had to do something like that, which I'm not suggesting would even be acceptable, but if you said all these other things we can't do, that location in that area could be much better. I don't know what happened with what I saw as the original location, which was around the corner, I just think there's so many better choices and had someone simply talked about it I think we could have come up with a lot better idea that works for everybody. I also think that's a lot for someone who's going to be coming who knows how far from that mailbox. It's not convenient for a lot of people. We have issues because of the proximity to our properties, other people are going to have other issues for other reasons that they don't even know yet. Changing it mid-stream without knowing anything about it and not letting anybody know just isn't agreeable to me. I don't know where we go from here, but I'll leave it at that.
Mr. Kern asked is there anybody else on this issue? I would just like to start by saying thanks for coming today. I know these meetings can be difficult to attend, and for you due diligence. You've obviously done a lot ofresearch and that's greatly appreciated because so often there's little of that done and very uneducated approaches to this Board. With that, I just want to address a couple things. Some of these items being communication, we see this all the time with the CDD overseeing tl1e development of the community, so we retain ownership of these tracts and develop utilities and the roads. The home builders ultimately buy those lots and they're in charge of selling those lots. It's just not mailboxes. It's a constant battle with the message that is being conveyed to homeowners of what will happen with these areas. It's an unfortunate thing, but oftentimes no matter how many times you give that message to the sales agents, they want to make a sale. This Board has little control over what is communicated from the home builder's sales agents to the future residents of this community and that's an unfortunate thing that we have to try to overcome. Which is all the more reason where when I ask if the CDD is going to send out a notice I want the HOA to send out a notice. The more communication, the better, so you can be aware. You're here now and there are a couple of things that I would encourage. You see at the top of the meeting we have a Board seat open up. I don't know when you're closing on your properties once you're a resident of this community, you, your neighbors and anybody else can apply to be a member of this Board to make an influence and make an impact on your community. I'm  the one member of this Board that is not a resident so I try to keep iliat mindful, but I am a representative of the previous majority

landowner who is the developer of the community so I can speak a little bit to the evolution of mailboxes in this community. This community dates back to early 2000's and you'll notice that Phase 1 has single serve mailboxes all up and down the road. USPS is really the driver of all of the mailboxes. They determine where they go, how many and all these kinds of things. In  Phase 2 of development USPS realized they didn't have the budget and they didn't want to serve single service homes, so they said they have to be cluster mailboxes, so you see periodical single 16-unit mailboxes. Those are manageable. For that street, everybody around them goes to that box. By the time we got to Phase 3, they started to do it where we had to put more together and by the time we got to Phase 4 and 5 they said we want basically one location for all of these boxes, which as a developer creates challenges. All the challenges you guys have noted: is that the right spot for it, is there parking, is there lighting, is there safety, is there access, all have to be considered so when we were doing Phase 4 with these new policies from USPS, the decision at that time that this Board made was to put them at the amenity center because it alleviated a lot of those concerns and a lot of those issues. It provided parking, it provided handicap accessibility, it provided lighting after hours and during the winter months. I wasn't but a couple of months ago that this Board was presented with an alternative to relocate those Phase 4 boxes back to Phase 4. I frankly voted against it, for most of the reasons that you've outlined. I would vote against it again today. I would supp01t a solution that made sense. To your call to action, I think there was a couple things in there for consideration that I want to comment on. I think where you were locating was Majestic Walk Boulevard and Fallen Leaf. There was a common area as you come in there and you look over the pond.
Mr. Lannacchino stated Fall River Parkway.
Mr. Kern stated that little area there was considered originally when USPS said you have to put them all in one spot and I said almost 200 homes, or however many there may be on a main boulevard driving down that road with everybody stopping, people trying to get out, people trying to get in, pulling up on the grass, there's just not the infrastructure there. Now you're stopping and you're getting out into the road and it's still a main road that has to service not just Phase 4, but Phase 5 as well with another couple hundred homes or however many is back there, so now you have 400 people driving past, parking and getting out into the road to get their mail. I personally didn't feel like that was a good decision, which is ultimately why

we ended up here. There's not a great answer when they say you have to put 200 mailboxes in one spot.
Mr. Lannacchino stated that is why I suggested not to put it out onto the street, but to
create a parking lot on that lot where you could pull off to access them.
Mr. Kem stated so that's what I wanted to speak to. As this Board considers solutions, if it has that interest, the one issue there is obviously cost. It's fairly prohibitive. We'd have to find a way to fund the construction of a parking lot, meaning it has to be engineered, permitted through the County and then ultimately built. That is a significant cost. For that exact same reason is why we already had the infrastructure here. It's a much more cost-effective solution to locate them here than it is to go construct another parking lot, lights, ADA parking, all the above when we already have it in this District. That's ultimately what drove that decision not to do it. I just wanted you to know that it was considered and that is something this Board will have to consider for that to be a solution. The easiest solution in my mind is just to put them back where they were. That's something that would obviously have to be voted on by this Board and supported by the majority of the Board, which gets me back to my other previous comment of we need interest from this community and from the people impacted by the decisions of this Board to be members of the Board. If there's any consideration you guys could get to that, I would celiainly encourage you to do that.
Mr. Robinson stated I took the action to look at all sites for Phase 5 and Phase 4. I had picked for review at the post office the original person that approved or disapproves locations three different locations for Phase 4 and three different locations in Phase 5 and we drove
around. The first stop the post office made was where you suggested on 		[inaudible]
and I said well, since the decision was made not to put it there for other reasons I did not want to relive that discussion. Ultimately there were two sites in Phase 4. We talked about splitting them. We talked about the cost issue and the logistics issue of splitting them and we decided to go with one in Phase 5. I picked locations for suggestions; the post office is the one who makes the actual decision to say they can go here. I don't like to put them on cul-de-sacs. I thought it was a better location in Phase 5 and more out of the way.
Mr. Jentz stated I think we spent a lot of time on this, contrary to what he thinks and we
thought it was the best solution that we could come up with.

Mr. Robinson stated once the sites were located but not 100% approved by the Board, I personally visited each sales office with the exception of Riverside, because they don't have one and didn't answer their phones, so I sent an email letting them know where the possible locations were. After decisions were made, I visited three sales office that are onsite here and let them know and gave them maps and everything. What they do with it is their business.
A resident stated I know it was a quick statement with the abduction that had taken place a couple of weeks ago. I know that was in Village Walk and was closer to the exit, which you'd think that makes more sense because you'd think why would they go all the way to Fall River Parkway, but this happens all the time. This is a mother that was in her garage and the child was playing in her driveway. When there's going to be cars there all the time, which you don't know if they live in our neighborhood or some other person, they can literally sit there all day. It would be suspicious at that point, but who is going to be watching out when you're living your life. It is a big deal because it is putting specific homeowners and their children at risk because it's right in front of their residence and I'm not saying no one can be abducted here, but are there cameras here in the parking lot where the mailboxes were? Because they could have installed that, but would you put a camera right at the end of our driveway, no.
There's not going to be any type of security right where our driveway is. Are there lights around the mailboxes for people to get their mail at night?
Mr. Laughlin responded no, just these lights.
The resident stated so obviously  that's a concern for safety, but also if they put that light in for safety reasons to get their mail at night will affect our house because it's going to be right in front ofus. Not so much as a streetlight, but a safety light for the mailboxes.  Not only is it the resale value going down and the safety concerns, but the noise. I'm not sure if any of you have lived in an apartment complex and they usually have a mail center in the front of the complex and it's a central location for all of the residents. We lived near that one time, and it is super loud if they're slamming the mailboxes. The mail people are not careful about shutting it. They're trying to rush and get on to the next place. This may be a small thing to people that made the decision, but it's noise, it's light, it's a safety concern, it's traffic, it's resale value,
it's unhappy residents that are going to be relaying that message that Richmond American doesn't care about protecting their homeowners that have already purchased. I know it's the CDDs that makes these decisions along with the mail people, but they are also supposed to be

our voice if we can't be there. I think that should all be considered. If a camera was going to be installed here, that would be more appropriate than installing a camera for safety purposes down in someone's driveway. If this recent abduction didn't factor into the consideration for safety, there is a problem with that because I feel the local news channel should be aware of this and get involved because I think the town needs to be aware of what's happening, and we shouldn't be shunned away from expressing our feelings on it because we do own a property there. Just because we haven't closed doesn't mean we shouldn't have a say in it and it does create a safety risk and I think the local news would be very interested in that. I just hope everyone here can consider all of it and try to put themselves in someone else's shoes.
Mr. Kern stated I just want to add one thing, something to consider moving forward.
Things can change. The boxes are set in concrete, but they don't have to stay there. They were set in concrete here before they moved down there. Things can change, but sometimes those take time. Ultimately what would have to happen for this to change is this Board would have to vote in favor of some solution. What that solution ends up being is ultimately up to this Board, so an item would have to be presented at a meeting with all the considerations such as cost, time, coordination, etc. and that would need to be approved for something to change. I feel perfectly comf01iable saying that the most practical solution in my mind is to move them back to the amenity center. I could put that on the agenda every single month and we could consider it every single month, I would support it, but without the majority support of this board, it won't happen. It needs to go through that process in order for something to change, but it can change.
Ms. Gilpin stated if it was something to be considered, how would we put it on the
agenda for a future meeting with a proposed solution?
Mr. Laughlin responded you can just request it from me, and I can have it added to the agenda.
Ms. Gilpin asked is that something we could do and start the conversation over with the people that are living there now or moving into that area?
Mr. Laughlin responded that's definitely a possibility.
Ms. Gilpin stated with ideas on where to put the mailboxes. What other options make more people happy than less?

Mr. Kern stated it's probably best served that we have some direction if we're going to ask residents for input. We're familiar enough and sophisticated enough to know what the solutions are. There are only so many common areas. The USPS makes us put as many together as possible. They have certain guidelines and regulations that they have to follow, so there's only so many options.
Ms. Gilpin stated that's kind of what I'm getting at is ifwe get a list of where they have to be in regard to the County and post office, so we know exactly where the options are.
Mr. Robinson stated the post office said one would be ideal for Phase 4 or Phase 5, two would be acceptable. What was done in Phase 2 where they're basically clusters of 16 or 32 is not acceptable because they don't want to be bouncing around. A lot of it went into the efficiency of the post office carrier.
Mr. Kem stated what we do know is we have two locations that have been approved by the USPS so that's a starting ground. There are probably some others for consideration, but I feel pretty confident that they were considered so that's why we landed on these two different locations. To answer your question, any board member can put an item on the agenda in advance of a meeting for the Board to consider so if there's something you'd like to add moving forward, you're welcome to do that, just email Dan and it will be on the agenda.
Mr. Robinson stated the mistake that was made on Fall River where they cut out the sod for the pad but was not the right location, has that been resodded?
Ms. Conrad responded that is supposed to be resodded. Mr. Robinson asked but it hasn't been done yet?
Ms. Conrad responded no.
Mr. Laughlin stated we appreciate you coming. Meetings are every month. Do we have any other comments?
Resident Connie Philips, 85032 Williston Court, stated with Michael leaving, I'm
concerned as to who is monitoring the covenant requirements.
Mr. Laughlin stated Michael worked for Evergreen so they filled the spot. Ms. Philips asked who is picking up for him until that is filled?
Ms. Conrad asked do you mean in tenns of violations?
Ms. Philips responded yes.

Ms. Conrad responded I have been doing violations and now Daniele will be helping us out as a CAM. She will be design CAM and I will remain here.
Ms. Philips asked what is a design CAM?
Ms. Conrad responded she is the Community Association Manager for Amelia Walk. I am here assigned full-time to Amelia Walk as support services so I will be onsite here.
Mr. Laughlin stated that is separate for the CDD.
Ms. Conrad asked in conjunction with that is the same old issues with the ponds being crappy, the contractors blowing grass into the ponds. Those issues are continuing and that's you guys. Maybe when we're reviewing contracts, we can put some penalties in if they're not doing what they're supposed to do, so since we're doing our financial statements, is that finalized?
Mr. Laughlin responded there is a 30-day provision in the agreement. Typically, there are not fines attached but there will be that notice so ifthere are issues and they continue, the Board can direct staff to put that company on notice saying you have 30-days or 60-days to correct this or we will find a new company. If they make that correction the Board can stay with them, or they can ask for bids from new companies. As of now I haven't heard of any issues with the landscape company.
Ms. Philips stated so with the storm damaged property with the trees and all that, is that
you guys or the homeowners?
Mr. Laughlin asked is that the preserve area?
Ms. Philips responded Majestic Walk right where you're turning at the circle there was storm damage where the trees were knocked down and the cut some of them and some of them are still sitting there.
Mr. Laughlin stated I believe they just dropped those. I don't know that particular area, but they can't be removed if they're in the preserve. They're meant to be untouched. Ifit's on the CDDs common area, then the CDD needs to clean it up and ifit falls into a resident's property then it's their responsibility to clean it up.
Ms. Philips stated it's kind of like a big gaping nest. Could there be bushes planted in front of it? They would be right by the sidewalk.
Mr. Robinson stated if it's a wetlands area then it's the CDDs property. Mr. Laughlin stated if it's the preserve area the CDD can't disturb it.

Mr. Robinson asked if it's preserve area you couldn't plant a tree?
Mr. Laughlin responded correct. With issues like that if you could take pictures and send me an email, I can bring it to the Board.
Ms. Philips stated I guess it just gets back to our contractors don't seem to be doing
what is required of them.
Mr. Laughlin stated if you see that let me know and I' II get with Lori, or whoever is onsite. That is what we rely on. For a long time this was a developer board and they don't live here so the issues aren't as visible, but any issues you see please let me know, I'll get with Lori and she can contact them.
Ms. Philips stated I remember the discussion about leasing the equipment over here and
now I've learned today you have to have a maintenance contract to maintain the equipment that is on lease over there and that is part of why we were leasing is because they would maintain it all.
Mr. Laughlin stated it's a lease to own so we will own the equipment when the lease is
up. I do not believe maintenance was part of the lease agreement.
Ms. Philips stated you were going to talk about on item V about the alligator nuisance and you were going to give us some information.
Mr. Laughlin stated we tabled that discussion to get more information to actually
approve the policy. There's some stuff that's needed such as a map showing what lakes fishing is allowed in, common areas and access areas so at the next meeting we will have all of that.
Ms. Philips asked but the alligators?
Ms. Laughlin responded that's part of that policy, but we didn't discuss that. The alligators are not something the CDD handles, you would call the trappers for that.
Ms. Conrad stated if the alligator is a nuisance, you can call the alligator hotline as a homeowner and they will give you a reference number, but what happens is I have to call them and give them the reference number because they need permission to access propetty.
Mr. Laughlin stated there's a website too that gives information, such as it has to be over four feet, otherwise they won't trap it.
Mr. Robinson stated and it has to be 10 or 15-feet, I think it's closer to 15-feet from the
water line and that's actually CDD prope1ty, that's why you need access there. The nuisance can be four feet or greater.

Ms. Philips stated I thought since the agenda item referenced the alligator information we were going to talk about it.
Mr. Laughlin stated no, this is just general information. We're really just discussing the
fishing policy.

Mr. Kem stated this may be a supervisor request, but to continue this conversation, I'd like for the HOA to consider maybe performing a polling of the affected residents by those pa1ticular mailboxes on what solution they would like to see or if this is a concern for the greater residents that are affected by those mailboxes, not just necessarily the folks directly adjacent just to continue to understand what the real interest is. That was something I asked for early on from this Board and didn't get and that's part of the reason I voted against it. I know there's some thought that needs to go into that.
Ms. Conrad stated one of the issues that I have or have had is that we can send out an e­ blast obviously, but that's actually residents whose files have been transfetTed. So, for the people that have purchased a home, but haven't actually closed, how do we get those email addresses?
Ms. Johnson responded the homeowner has to volunteer that. Otherwise, we adjust
what we have in our system, which can take eight to twelve weeks and at that time we get the new owner information, and we impmt those contacts and email addresses into Mail Chimp and that's how we can easily do a survey.
Mr. Kern stated I don't understand how to capture the under contract.
Mr. Robinson stated for the new homes, usually the builders are working with the title companies so it's a fairly well-planned process. But if somebody buys a home that is a resale, I have several on my street, I had to forward them emails that I got from the HOA to get into the distribution list.
Mr. Kern stated what we could do is get with the homebuilders and ask if there is some
contact of existing sales in that area and maybe the homebuilders themselves would have some input.
Ms. Johnson stated we could import that; we just have to get permission. I don't want
to upload perspective owners that haven't given us permission. Mr. Kern stated Daniel, you mentioned this is the CDD.

Mr. Laughlin stated this District operates different than most that I have. It's different companies completely for the HOA and CDD so Vesta for instance would send out e-blasts because the information for the homes and the amenity cards and all that is CDD information.
Mr. Kern stated right, but this District also has an agreement with Evergreen, and they could provide that.
Mr. Laughlin stated right, and they could either way, so if the District wants the HOA
to do it is a possibility.
Mr. Robinson stated there are two aspects to the distribution list. One is the email blast, but is that the same distribution list as the directory that I can go in and look at? For example, if Connie decided she didn't want anybody to know her email address she can get the emails, but she can say hide my email so no one else can see it.
Ms. Conrad stated yes, they can opt out.
Mr. Robinson asked so if they opt out, does that mean they're not getting the email blast or are they still getting them?
Ms. Conrad responded if you unsubscribe you do not get the eblasts.
Mr. Laughlin stated if you guys could talk to the homebuilders and see if that's an option and what they can do.
Mr. Kern stated I know it takes time but if that's something we can work on and have prepared for a future meeting. I still have an interest in understanding what those residents feedback would be.
Mr. Laughlin stated I think the homebuilders working with them would be the best
option.

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Other Business
There being none, the next item followed.

THIRTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Financial Reports
Balance Sheet & Income Statement
Assessment Receipts Schedule
Approval of Check Register
Mr. Laughlin stated the check register totals $51,598.28.

On MOTION by Mr. Jentz seconded by Mr.  Kern  with  all  in favor the check register was app roved.

FOURTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Next Scheduled Meeting - August 17, 2021
at 2:00 p.m. at the Amelia Walk Amenity Center
Mr. Laughlin noted the public hearing to adopt the budget will be held at the August meeting.

FIFTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment

On MOTION by Mr. Jentz seconded by Mr . Robinson with all in favor the meeting was adjourned.