MINUTES OF MEETING POINCIANA WEST
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Poinciana West Community Development District was held on Wednesday, July 16, 2025, at 9:30 a.m. via Zoom Communication Media Technology and in The Gator Room, 385 Village Drive, Poinciana, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Peggy Gregory	Chair
Roy LaRue	Vice Chairman
Dr. Maneck Master by Zoom	Assistant Secretary
Irene Stecher	Appointed Assistant Secretary
Cap Doorn by Zoom	Appointed Assistant Secretary Also present were:
Tricia Adams	District Manager
Scott Clark by Zoom	District Counsel
Joel Blanco	GMS Field Staff
Residents

The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the July 16, 2025, Poinciana West Community Development District’s Board of Supervisors Meeting.

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call
Ms. Adams called the meeting to order and called the roll at 9:33 a.m. A quorum was present.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSNESS	Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comment Period on Agenda Items
Ms. Adams opened the public comment period. Ms. Janine Fowler raised her hand, but due to technical difficulties, could not be heard and there being no further comments, Ms. Adams closed the public comment period.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Organizational Matters
Review of Letter(s) of Interest/Resume(s) for Vacancies
Ms. Adams reported that there were two openings on the Board of Supervisors. The seats were previously declared vacant. There was a request for staff to solicit for letters of interest or resumes from Poinciana West citizens. Because of that communication, a letter of interest was received from Ms. Irene Stecher, which was provided to the Board via email. Ms. Gregory asked if Ms. Stecher was involved with any HOAs or CDDs and was familiar with CDD regulations. Ms. Stecher, who lived at 891 Barcelona Drive, indicated that she attended HOA Board meetings and lived in the community for 11 years. She was not familiar with any rules or regulations for the CDD but was involved with curbside recycling study for the HOA. Ms. Gregory questioned whether Ms. Stecher had time to serve on the Board. Ms. Stecher confirmed that she had a commitment once a month but otherwise had time to serve. Dr. Master voiced concern that Ms. Stecher had not attended a CDD meeting. Ms. Stecher indicated that she was used to serving on Watershed Districts but always trusted the professionals to do their job. She had no problems with the quality of what she observed and had confidence that things were being managed, but wanted to be on the Board, as she had the time and was willing to serve.

Appointment of Individuals
Ms. Adams reported that the two open seats had terms which expire in November of 2028. Dr. Master questioned whether there were additional candidates. Ms. Adams indicated that there were candidates that submitted resumes previously, but no one other than Ms. Stecher was present. Dr. Master recalled that the Board spoke to Mr. Keith Laytham at the last meeting and were aware of where he stands. Ms. Gregory further recalled that Mr. Cap Doorn attended the last meeting. Ms. Adams believed when Mr. Doorn spoke to the Board, he had not yet submitted a letter of interest or resume. After that discussion, he submitted one. Although there was no urgency to appoint new Board Members, to meet quorum requirements, Ms. Adams suggested

that the Board considers appointments today. Mr. LaRue nominated Mr. Cap Doorn to the Board. Dr. Master seconded the nomination.

On MOTION by Mr. LaRue seconded by Dr. Master with all in favor the appointment of Mr. Cap Doorn to Seat 4 was approved.

Ms. Gregory nominated Ms. Irene Stecher to the Board. Mr. LaRue seconded the nomination.

On MOTION by Ms. Gregory seconded by Mr. LaRue with all in favor the appointment of Ms. Irene Stecher to Seat 3 was approved.

Administration of Oath of Office to Newly Elected Supervisor
Ms. Adams, a Notary of the State of Florida and duly authorized, administered the Oath of Office to Ms. Stecher.
Mr. Clark explained that as a Supervisor, Ms. Stecher was a public officer of the State of Florida and as such, was required to abide to the Sunshine Law, prohibiting Board Members from speaking to each other outside of a meeting, about any item, upon which foreseeable action would be taken by the Board. This also applied to virtual discussions, emails, text messages and posts on social media, such as Facebook. The State takes Sunshine Laws seriously. She was also subject to the Public Records Law, whereby any CDD records were open to the public. Supervisors were not required to retain their emails or agenda packages, but if they send and receive emails about District business, it will become a public record and recommended that Ms. Stecher set up a separate email. Lastly, Ms. Stecher would be subject to the Code of Ethics under Chapter 112, requiring Supervisors not to do anything self-serving while sitting on the CDD Board or accept compensation or gifts in exchange for votes. There was also a public financial disclosure requirement, where Ms. Stecher would be required to file a form within 30 days of this meeting and renew it on or before July 1st of each year. Next year, she would be required to take a four-hour ethics training. Dr. Master reminded Ms. Stecher to not reply all to emails that were sent to the Supervisors by the District Manager. Ms. Gregory asked if she could throw out her past agenda packages and retain the emails. Mr. Clark confirmed that she was not required to retain any records. Ms. Adams pointed out that Ms. Stecher was required to file her Form 1

electronically with the Florida Commission on Ethics, 30 days from today’s meeting. She was eligible to receive up to $200 compensation for each meeting that she attended. Ms. Stecher elected to receive it.
Public Comment Period (Item 3)
Ms. Adams reopened the public comment period. Resident (Cap Doorn) stated that he was attending by phone. Ms. Adams congratulated him on his appointment and advised he could participate in the meeting but since he was not yet sworn in, he could not vote on any motions. Resident (Janine Fowler, 942 Walnut Creek Lane) was new to these meetings and noted that a street on the CDD map, should be Estrella instead of Black Hawk Drive. She asked if policies adopted by Poinciana CDD, applied to Poinciana West CDD, such as the policies being proposed for the Fishing Club. Ms. Gregory confirmed that they do not overlap. Ms. Fowler heard that the CDD was removing some Cypress Trees on Pond 1 and questioned why they were being removal. Ms. Gregory explained that the roots were encroaching on a resident’s property. There being no further comments, Ms. Adams closed the public comment period.

Election of Officers
Consideration of Resolution 2025-02 Electing Officers
Ms. Adams presented Resolution 2025-02, for the Election of Officers. Currently, Ms. Peggy Gregory served as Chairperson, Mr. Roy LaRue as Vice Chair, the remaining Board Members as Assistant Secretaries, Mr. George Flint as Secretary, Ms. Tricia Adams as Assistant Secretary and Ms. Jill Burns, Ms. Patti Powers and Ms. Katie Costa as Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer, for processing records and for check signing purposes. Dr. Master proposed electing Mr. Cap Doorn and Ms. Irene Stecher as Assistant Secretaries and retaining the existing officers.

On MOTION by Dr. Master seconded by Mr. LaRue with all in favor appointing Mr. Cap Doorn and Ms. Irene Stecher as Assistant Secretaries and retaining the same officers was approved.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Minutes of the March 19,
2025, Board of Supervisors Meeting
Ms. Adams presented the minutes of the March 19, 2025, Board of Supervisors Meeting, which were included in the agenda package and reviewed by District management staff and District Counsel. Ms. Gregory noted that someone was going to get back to them on the aquatic

midge contracts. Mr. LaRue asked if Poinciana West was doing the edge grasses and littoral plantings. Mr. Blanco stated it would be at the direction of the Board. There were no corrections.

On MOTION by Dr. Master seconded by Ms. Gregory with all in favor the Minutes of the March 19, 2025, Board of Supervisors Meeting were approved as presented.

Ms. Adams would follow up on any outstanding action items. Mr. LaRue recalled discussion about pop up emitters and an application fee for a French drain and requested a copy of the procedure in the next agenda package. Ms. Adams confirmed that it was previously published in the March 2025 agenda package for Board review.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Hearing
Ms. Adams reported that there were two public hearings: One to adopt the budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 and appropriate funds and the other hearing is to impose special assessments and certify the Tax Roll. Mr. Clark was in favor of having the two public hearings together.

On MOTION by Mr. LaRue seconded by Dr. Master with all in favor the public hearings for the Fiscal Year 2026 budget and imposition of special assessments were opened.

Consideration of Resolution 2025-04 Adopting Fiscal Year 2026 Budget and Relating to the Annual Appropriations
Ms. Adams presented Resolution 2025-04, Adopting the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 budget, which was included in the agenda package, memorializing that the Board met prior to June 15th and approved a Proposed Budget, which was transmitted to Polk County, 60 days prior to this public hearing. It also set July 16th as the public hearing for this budget. The budget was posted on the District’s website and the public hearings noticed in accordance with Florida Statutes. Approval of this resolution approved the FY 2026 budget, which commences on October 1, 2025, and ends on September 30, 2026, and appropriates funds for the General and Debt Service Funds. There was also a provision to allow for budget amendments or supplemental appropriations for FY 2026, once the budget was adopted. Attached as an exhibit to the

resolution, was a copy of the Proposed Budget, which was approved by the Board. They were proposing that all the special assessments were collected on the Tax Roll and the proposed assessment amount for FY 2026, was $291,295. As part of the Revenues, they were recognizing interest earnings. Some carry forward surplus funds were recognized to balance the budget. Total Revenues were $367,418. Mr. LaRue questioned whether they would spend $6,181 for Attorney in the next four months. Mr. Clark explained that the $6,181 was the amount anticipated for regular services through the end of the year and would be surprised if they spent that much.
Ms. Gregory asked if Ms. Adams received a notice, assuming that the insurance rate was increasing another $300. Ms. Adams confirmed the District only received a preliminary insurance estimate for FY 2026. Ms. Gregory pointed out for Ms. Stecher, that this proposed budget was not what the actual amount was, because there would be a conversation at some point. Ms. Adams indicated for District Management and for Field Services, a 3% increase was proposed. There were allowances for landscaping, aquatic maintenance midge management program and budget lines for landscape replacement or stormwater structure repairs. There were also allowances for contingency and capital. Ms. Gregory recalled that the contingency was increased by $10,000. Ms. Adams pointed out what they were presenting, was a balanced budget with proposed total expenditures of $267,418. 1,650 single-family property owners were assessed $186.57 in gross CDD fees on an annual basis. In addition, 11 recreational parcels benefited from the maintenance of the CDD infrastructure. The next section of the budget provided a narrative of each line item. There was a correction on Page 41, as the narrative for the engineer needed to be updated to the current engineer, Rayl Engineering. There was also an analysis of past fund balances and projected funds for the end of the fiscal year, identifying the amount to be reserved in the Reserve Operating Account, to fund the first three months of the upcoming fiscal year, before tax revenues were received. The CDD was in a healthy cash position. The next page of the budget was for debt service, as homeowners paid, not only the maintenance fees, which were based on the budget, but they also pay debt service fees, which were imposed at the time that the bond was issued. The Board did not have the ability to change these fees but authorized the collection. The gross per unit amount was $686.58. Property owners can make these payments on the property Tax Bill or pay it in a lump sum. Interest and principal payments were due in November and May, according to an Amortization Schedule. The bond retires in 2037. There was no increase in assessments.

Consideration of Resolution 2025-05 Imposing Special Assessments and Certifying an Assessment Roll
Ms. Adams presented Resolution 2025-05, memorializing the use of Chapter 197 uniform method for collecting the CDD fees on the Assessment Roll in the non-ad valorem section with Polk County. Attached to the resolution as an exhibit, was the Assessment Roll, along with the Adopted Budget for FY 2026. Adoption of this resolution authorizes the imposition of the maintenance fee, as well as the collection of the maintenance and debt service fees. Ms. Gregory questioned why they had to pay for all the parcel ID pages. Ms. Adams would eliminate it in future agenda packets and would provide one copy for the Board’s review, as it was required to be attached to the resolution. She noted that many CDD Board’s now use iPads to review an electronic agenda package, so there was no printing or shipping expense. Mr. LaRue questioned why some parcels had no CDD fees. Ms. Adams explained that it was for any property owned by the CDD was not assessed CDD fees. Ms. Stecher questioned the parcel that was assessed
$2,052.24 on Page 93. Ms. Adams confirmed that was for a recreational parcel owned by the developer. Dr. Master suggested that it be identified by a different color. Ms. Adams would inform Rayl Engineering of any necessary map updates. She suggested taking public comments. There were no public comments.

On MOTION by Mr. LaRue seconded by Dr. Master with all in favor the public hearings for the Fiscal Year 2026 budget and imposition of special assessments were closed.

Ms. Gregory pointed out that the adoption of this resolution was standard procedure and one that they followed last year; however, there was a post on Nextdoor for a Poinciana resident who questioned what the special assessment was about. Ms. Adams said the term special assessment, was the statutory language that was required. Anytime the CDD was imposing maintenance fees, they were considered a special assessment. Ms. Gregory felt that there was always going to be a concern because of what the HOA and Taylor Morrison were doing. Ms. Stecher agreed and questioned whether it could be a reoccurring assessment. Mr. Clark confirmed that there were statutes that refer to maintenance fees as special assessments and they needed to use the same language in CDD legal documents. Ms. Gregory questioned the

definition of special assessment being specifically the O&M expenses. Dr. Master felt that having an asterisk and footnote explaining this would help. Mr. Clark approved of having such a footnote to clarify special assessment. Ms. Adams clarified that this change would be for future budget resolutions. Mr. Clark would work on the language.

On MOTION by Ms. Gregory seconded by Mr. LaRue with all in favor Resolution 2025-04 Adopting the Fiscal Year 2026 Budget and Relating to the Annual Appropriations was adopted.

On MOTION by Mr. LaRue seconded by Dr. Master with all in favor Resolution 2025-05 Imposing Special Assessments and Certifying an Assessment Roll was adopted.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Review of Proposal to Remove Cypress
Trees on Pond 1
Ms. Adams reported that the Field Services Manager received feedback regarding Cypress trees on Pond 1 and was asked by the Board to bring back a proposal to remove them, which was included in the agenda package, from Floralawn, the incumbent landscape service provider in the amount of $441.84.
Dr. Master left the meeting.
Ms. Gregory was appreciative of Mr. Blanco providing the proposal, which included removal of the trees and capping the irrigation, but asked if there would be damage from pulling out the trees. Mr. Blanco indicated that there were tree rings, which they could sod or leave mulched. Ms. Gregory asked if they would cut the roots, so they did not encroach any further. Mr. Blanco explained when they were flush cut, they were essentially killing the roots. Mr. LaRue asked if the homeowner approved of it. Mr. Blanco confirmed that the homeowner just wanted the root system to stop intruding. Mr. LaRue pointed out if he was the homeowner, he would want the area to be blended in with the rest of the lawn. Mr. Blanco could speak to the homeowner again, but based on prior conversations, the homeowner’s main concern was the root system encroaching his lanai. Ms. Adams pointed out that the Board had the option of approving it today and getting the trees flush cut and in the future, they could pay for stump grinding and resodding the area. Mr. Blanco would send a picture to the Board of what it would look like when it was completed and obtain a proposal for stump grinding and resodding. Ms. Gregory felt

that the proposal was inexpensive, as the cost for stump removal and resodding would be more than $441.84 and preferred that Floralawn cut the trees down as far as they possibly could. Mr. LaRue questioned the hourly rate, as Floralawn estimated that it would take 5 hours to cut them down. Mr. Blanco would ask the account manager.

On MOTION by Ms. Gregory seconded by Mr. LaRue with all in favor the Proposal from Floralawn to remove Cypress trees on Pond 1 in the amount of $441.80 was approved.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Status of Pond 19A Repairs and Cost
Recovery
Ms. Adams reported that this item was discussed at several meetings and District Counsel prepared a memorandum, which was included in the agenda package. Mr. Clark recalled at the March meeting, there was a lengthy discussion about the damage that was incurred to Pond 19A by the dewatering across the highway. On March 6th, he sent a letter to the entity responsible for the damage, but had not received any response and subsequently, the Board asked him to continue to seek reimbursement and approved a proposal with Solitude to make the repairs. However, since the last meeting, the repair had been made and inspected and he was contacted by a representative of Taylor Morrison, with an offer to pay for the cost of the repair, in exchange for the Board signing an agreement and release. Mr. Clark reviewed the agreement and responded to Taylor Morrison, that the Board would have to review and approve it at a future meeting, but did not believe that their proposed agreement was sufficient, as it pays only for the work and not any of the professional fees that have been expended. At the last meeting, it was reported that the Westview South CDD would not provide him with copies of the dewatering permits, unless he paid them. However, he did the research himself, which was part of the reason why the fees were what they were. In addition, he felt that the language in the release, was too broad, but if the Board agreed to accept some payments and issue releases, the language should be tailored to refer to the Pond 19A damage and ensure that they were not releasing any other business disputes or arrangements that might exist now or in the future between the CDD and Taylor Morrison.
Therefore, should the Board want to proceed with the agreement, Mr. Clark recommended that it be re-drafted to change the amount, cover all the expenses and be more

reasonable in its language. A copy of the expenses that have been incurred, was included in the agenda package, as well as an estimate of some additional costs that Mr. Clark would expend to negotiate the agreement and bring this matter to conclusion, which total $22,600. Mr. Clark further recommended that any settlement and release of the claim, be in exchange for payment of
$22,600, under a Settlement Agreement that was acceptable to him. Ms. Gregory pointed out that the agreement was not even a legal agreement and felt that Mr. Clark should make it as long or short as he wanted to and make it specific to the property, but questioned whether the $22,600 needed to be increased, to prepare another release and agreement that they needed. Mr. Clark stated it depends on how difficult Taylor Morrison wanted to be, but he could take their form of release and revise it within that scope but wanted a full recovery of all costs. Mr. LaRue felt that it needed to be built into a statement, so if this needed to proceed into a lawsuit, those damages would be assessed as well. Mr. Clark did not imagine that Taylor Morrison would want to have a lawsuit, because of the nature of the matter and the amount of money. Mr. LaRue felt that the Board needed to be prepared for it and if Taylor Morrison wanted to play hardball, the CDD should not be absorbing that cost. Mr. Clark believed that they would reach an agreement on this after this meeting and if so, would inform the Board at the next meeting that it was all handled, but if not, he would come back with recommendations for next steps. Mr. LaRue and Ms. Gregory were satisfied with this.

On MOTION by Ms. Gregory seconded by Ms. Stecher with all in favor approving a settlement with LT Westview LLC, the Westview South Community Development District and Junior Davis Construction in exchange for full compensation of District costs including professional fees relating to the Pond 19A damage and with a form of release to be approved by District Counsel was approved.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Attorney
Mr. Clark reported that the only matter that he was working on, was the Pond 19A matter and he had nothing further to report.

Engineer

Ms. Adams reported that because they did not have any District engineering matters on the agenda, the Chair elected to excuse the engineer from today’s meeting, but historically, the District Engineer has performed a once per year inspection of the entire stormwater system with a detailed inspection of the outfall structures, pond banks, etc. This was not required but was considered best practice and questioned whether the Board wanted to see a work authorization on a future agenda for such an inspection. Ms. Gregory questioned whether Ms. Leo performed one last year. Ms. Adams confirmed that Ms. Leo performed one in May 2024. Ms. Gregory did not see the need for one now, as Ms. Leo always performed an extremely thorough job, now that Pond 19A was cleared up and she was continually driving around the community. There may need to be remediation with a pond here or there, but it was easily remedied. However, based on what was going on with the weather, suggested getting through hurricane season first and then having a report completed next year. Ms. Stecher asked if it was best practice to do it during the dry season. Ms. Adams confirmed that this was the best practice to do it during the dry season and in advance of the budget discussion. There was Board consensus to consider a work authorization for an inspection of the stormwater system in the spring of 2026. Ms. Adams would inform the District Engineer. She asked for confirmation if the Board wanted pond ownership map updated to show the location of the recreational parcel which was identified as a recreational parcel that was owned by Avatar. There were 11 units, which were assigned to this one parcel. Ms. Gregory noted there was no need for Mr. Rayl to update the map as there would be an expense to do so.

District Manager
Approval of Check Register
Ms. Adams presented the Check Register for May 1, 2025, through May 31, 2025, in the amount of $92,759.70, which included the detailed invoices and Check Run Summary. Mr. LaRue asked if the check numbers were actual checks or electronic transfers. Ms. Adams indicated that it had Check #’s 2121 through 2128. It did not appear that any of them were electronic payments. Ms. Gregory recalled ongoing discussions about this and Clarke and Floralawn stating that they were not set up for electronic transfers, but they include a routing number and account number on their invoice for ACH transfers and could not believe that their payments were not through ACH. Ms. Adams believed that the ACH information was added at the request of the accountant and would check on the status of implementing ACH for accounts

payable. Ms. Gregory asked if GMS could accept and send out ACH payments. Ms. Adams was aware of ACH payments going to Board Members and electronic transmittals being received from the Tax Collector. Ms. Gregory pointed out if GMS could receive electronic transmittals, they could do a transfer out the same way. Mr. LaRue recalled that a check was stolen and fraudulently processed. Ms. Adams indicated that fraud protection services were added and offered to reach out to the accountant on the status of ACH. Ms. Gregory questioned the cost for bank fees for fraud protection, because of the fact that the daily reports for checks going out, were not being reviewed, they had this discussion and the Board had been asking for a year and a half, to get their contractors converted over to ACH, so they did not have all of these bank charges, which equated to $25 per check, per month. Ms. Gregory provided a statement in the morning before the meeting regarding the payments and bank fees and deficiencies with GMS accounting.
Mr. LaRue requested that someone from the accounting department attend the next meeting. Ms. Gregory agreed, as she was upset that this matter was taking a long time. If it was not resolved, she wanted this to be part of the contract negotiation for the October 1st renewal of GMS. Ms. Gregory opined GMS should be verifying payments with the bank every day. Ms. Adams understood. Mr. Doorn asked if there was compensation for the CDD since this matter had been brought up for several months. Ms. Gregory indicated this this must come from Mr. Mossing or Mr. Flint or whomever is responsible for the oversight of accounting. The major issue was why something so simple had not been accomplished. Ms. Adams confirmed that she represented GMS, and the District Management team is responsible for accounting procedures.

On MOTION by Ms. Gregory seconded by Mr. LaRue with all in favor the Check Register as stated above was approved.

Financials
Ms. Adams presented the Unaudited Financials through the end of May 31, 2025, which were included in the agenda package. General Fund monies were invested with the State Board of Administration (SBA) account, Money Market account, as well as a CD that was maturing at the end of this month. The District was 100% collected on their special assessments for the current fiscal year. Ms. Gregory pointed out that there must be three months of working capital for October, November and December, until residents pay their Tax Bills. However, there was a CD that had a balance of $154,460 at an interest rate 5%. Ms. Adams confirmed that the current rate of the Money Market at Bank United was 4.06%, but they could get a six-month CD at 3.75%- or 12-month CD at 3.0%. She reached out to another bank for a competitive rate. Their interest rate for a three-month CD was 3.97%, a seven-month CD was 3.8%, 11- and 12-month CDs were 3.4% and there were lower interest rates for longer terms. Ms. Gregory asked if the interest rate for Florida SBA was 4.47%. Ms. Adams confirmed that the SBA had the highest interest rate at this time. Ms. Gregory could not believe that it was dropping down to 3%. Ms. Adams pointed out that the Money Market was earning more interest than the CDs. Ms. Gregory requested that $50,000 of the $154,460, be moved into the SBA account and the balance go into the Money Market. There was Board consensus.

Presentation of Registered Voters – 2,540
Ms. Adams stated that the District was required annually to present each year on the record, the number of registered voters. A letter was provided by the Polk County Supervisor of Elections office, confirming as of April 15, 2025, there were 2,540 registered voters within the boundaries of the Poinciana West CDD. It was more significant to the District in the early years when a District was established, as they must have a certain number of registered voters to transition from a Landowner Election to General Election process, which the District already met, but once they met that threshold of 250 registered voters, there was no provision to stop reporting the information to the Board. No Board action was required.

Approval of Fiscal Year 2026 Meeting Schedule
Ms. Adams presented the Fiscal Year 2026 meeting schedule, which started in October and was consistent with the prior year’s meeting schedule, with meetings on the third

Wednesday of every other month at 9:30 a.m. in the Gator Room, starting on November 19, 2025, and ending September 16, 2026.

On MOTION by Mr. LaRue seconded by Ms. Stecher with all in favor the Fiscal Year 2026 meeting schedule as presented was approved.

Ms. Gregory asked if the Board Members were amenable to meeting in September, as there must be discussion before October 1st, on the contracts and the status of ACH payments. Ms. Adams confirmed that historically at the September meeting, GMS presented agreements for the upcoming fiscal year, including the renewal of the landscape maintenance, pond maintenance and midge maintenance. Ms. Gregory was not available to meet in August and October. There was Board consensus to meet in September.

District Goals and Objectives
Presentation of Fiscal Year 2025 Authorizing Chair to Execute
Adoption of Fiscal Year 2026 Goals & Objectives
Ms. Adams presented a Memorandum, which was included in the agenda package and was presented last year, when a new Florida Law was implemented, requiring Florida Special Districts to adopt annual goals and objectives for community communication and engagement, infrastructure and facilities maintenance and financial transparency and accountability. GMS looked for ways to meet this new law with the most efficiency. They identified tasks and business that the District was already conducting. As a result, the Board adopted goals for FY 2025. This agenda item was being provided as an interim status report and requested a motion to authorize the Chair to execute the final form of the report, which was required to be filed on the District’s website by December 1st. At the end of the fiscal year after September 30th, the report would identify whether those goals were met, and it would then be presented to the Chair to execute the final form of the report.

On MOTION by Mr. LaRue seconded by Ms. Stecher with all in favor authorizing the Chair or Vice Chair to execute the completed 2025 goal report was approved.

Ms. Adams reported that there was an attempt during the legislative session this year, to repeal this law; however, it failed and CDDs were required to go through this process again. Therefore, the goals and objectives for FY 2026, were included in the agenda, which were the same goals and objectives that were previously approved. Mr. Clark noted that Goal 2.2 required an annual inspection by the engineer, but there was an earlier conversation about doing it less frequently. Ms. Adams would change this t, on an as needed basis.

On MOTION by Ms. Gregory seconded by Mr. LaRue with all in favor adopting the Fiscal Year 2026 goals and objectives as amended was approved.

Field Manager’s Report
Field Manager’s Report
Pond Maintenance Report
Midge Management Report
Customer Complaint Log
Consideration of Proposal for Cypress Tree Removal on Pond 5
Mr. Blanco presented the Field Manager, Pond Maintenance and Midge Management Reports and Customer Complaint Log, which were included in the agenda package. GMS staff continues to review the ponds around the District. Ponds experiencing low water levels, have filled noticeably, as they transition from the dry Spring to Summer rain and assisted with the exposed edge grasses. He was pleased with the ponds that he had been monitoring with the exposed edge grasses and banks, notably Ponds 19A, 16 and 15. During reviews, field staff noted that P-6 had aggressive dollar and penny weeds growing on the pond edges. The vendor utilized the spray treatment with the treatment taking affect, as noted by its color change. Staff would continue to monitor and update the Board. During the landscape maintenance review, GMS staff noted that littorals were consistently being cut by residents on 468, 464, 460, and 456 Bel Air Way bordering P-22. Letters were sent in April, requesting that the residents cease. He reviewed the littorals prior to the meeting, and many were starting to grow back. Staff would continue to monitor it; in case a resident started to cut them again. If so, Mr. Blanco would reach out to the Board. A landscaping review had been conducted on the dry ponds. The reviewed landscaping remained in satisfactory condition at the end of resident property lines, with pond banks at appropriate height levels. Dry ponds tracts have been serviced consistently when able, with some

dry ponds holding water in the sumps. The vendor was advised to consistently string trim drain areas and spill stations, as they should always be neat and free of weeds. They were also trying to get drain areas in the sump areas, to be clear of vegetation. However, if the sumps had vegetation, the drains should have no vegetation at all. This was communicated to Floralawn. Staff would continue to review it during the summer season and report back to the Board with the next report.
Mr. Blanco also reported that field staff continued to monitor the repairs and completion of Pond 19A by Solitude and coordinated a post inspection. During the inspection, it was noted that the Bahia that was laid, was found brown initially, but turned green and has been consistently maintained since then. Water levels have continued to increase at a healthy rate, due to the scattered Summer rain. Feld staff noted last week, an irrigation break on the landscaping bed behind 350 Estrella Dr. It was trickling and causing minor erosion on the CDD tract. Juniper was notified and they informed him, that the irrigation was repaired and followed up to see if the area was repaired, but had not yet received a response. Once he was notified, he would perform a post inspection. He would continue to monitor water levels of ponds throughout the summer. Mr. LaRue had not seen any midge complaints. Mr. Blanco had a resident reach out to him for P-22, which was resolved, but had not received any further midge complaints. Mr. LaRue pointed out that everything looked good. Ms. Gregory agreed.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor’s Requests
There being no comments, the next item followed.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	General Audience Comments
There being no comments, the next item followed.

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Other Business
There being no comments, the next item followed.

THIRTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Next Meeting Date – September 17, 2025;
The Gator Room
The next meeting was scheduled for September 17, 2025, at 9:30 a.m. in The Gator
Room.

FOURTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment

On MOTION by Ms. Gregory seconded by Mr. LaRue with all in favor the meeting was adjourned.

Secretary / Assistant Secretary	Chair/Vice Chairman