Poinciana Community Development District

Agenda Package November 28, 2018

A GENDA
Poinciana
Community Development District

135 W. Central Blvd., Suite 320, Orlando, Florida 32801
Phone: 407-841-5524- Fax: 407-839-1526

November 21, 2018

Board of Supervisors Poinciana Community Development District

Dear Board Members:

The Board of Supervisors of Poinciana Community Development District will meet Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 11:00 AM at the Starlight Ballroom, 384 Village Drive, Poinciana, Florida. Following is the advance agenda for the meeting:

Roll Call
Pledge of Allegiance
Public Comment Period on Agenda Items
Organizational Matters
Administration of Oaths of Office to the Newly Elected Board Members
Election of Officers
Consideration of Resolution 2019-01 Electing Officers
Approval of Minutes of the August 15, 2018 Meeting and Approval of Minutes of the September 5, 2018 Joint Meeting
Consideration of Agreement from Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank to Provide Auditing Services for the Fiscal Year 2018
Consideration of Resolution 2019-02 Amending the Fiscal Year 2018 Budget
Discussion of License Agreement with Golf Course for Use of District Pond C-1
Ratification of Poinciana CDD Fourteenth Amendment to the Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement
Ratification of Limited Engagement of Latham, Shuker, Eden & Beaudine, LLP Regarding the Real Estate Amenity Transaction
Discussion of Amenity Transaction
Presentation of Termination Letter of Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement
Presentation of Termination Letter of Bond Financing Team Funding Agreement
Consideration of Resolution 2019-03 Directing Termination of Bond Validation Case and Repeal of Resolution 2018-05
Consideration	of	Resolution	2019-04  Terminating	Amenity	Debt Special Assessment Liens
Consideration of Termination of Interlocal Agreement Related to Amenity Transaction
Consideration of Termination of Gate Protocol Agreement
Consideration of Repeal of Amenity Policies, Amenity Rates and Fees, and Amenity Suspension Policy
Consideration of Termination of Agreements for Property Valuation  and Property Inspection Services, Including Delta Engineering, Environmental
Financial Group, ADA Compliance Specialists, Massey Services Pest Prevention, and Vesta Property Services
Consideration of Termination of Agreements for Amenity Bond Financing Services, Including Greenberg Traurig (for Bond Counsel Services for Amenity Transaction Only), PRAG, and MBS Capital Markets, LLC
Consideration	of Approval and Termination of Agreement for Amenity Assessment Consulting Services with Fishkind & Associates
Staff Reports
Attorney
Engineer
District Manager
Approval of Check Register
Balance Sheet and Income Statement
Field Manager
Field Manager's Report
Customer Complaint Log
Supervisor's Requests
General Audience Comments
Other Business
Next Meeting Date - December 19, 2018
Adjournment

The second order of business is the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance.

The third order of business is the Public Comment Period where the public has  an opportunity to be heard on propositions coming before the Board as reflected on the agenda, and any other items.

The fourth order of business is Organizational Matters. Section A is the administration of the Oaths of Office to the newly elected Board members. There is no back-up material. Section Bis the election of officers and Section C is the consideration of Resolution 2019-01 electing officers. A copy of the Resolution is enclosed for your review.

The fifth order of business is the approval of minutes from the August 15, 2018 Board of Supervisors meeting and the September 5, 2018 joint meeting. Both minutes are enclosed for your review.

The sixth order of business is the consideration of agreement from Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank to provide auditing services for the Fiscal Year 2018. A copy of the agreement is enclosed for your review.

The seventh order of business is the consideration of Resolution 2019-02 amending the Fiscal Year 2018 budget. A copy of the Resolution and amended budget are enclosed for your review.

The eighth order of business is the discussion of the License Agreement with the Golf Course for use of District Pond C-1. A copy of the memorandum from District Counsel and the current agreement is enclosed for your review.
The ninth order of business is the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement. A copy of the amendment is enclosed for your review.

The tenth order of business is the ratification of the limited engagement of Latham, Shuker, Eden & Beaudine, LLP regarding the real estate amenity transaction. A copy of the executed letter is enclosed for your review.

The eleventh order of business is the Discussion of the Amenity Transaction. Section A is the presentation of the termination letter of the Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement and Section B is the presentation of the termination letter for the Bond Financing Team Funding Agreement.  Both letters are enclosed for your review. Section C is the consideration of Resolution 2019-03 directing the termination of the bond validation case and repeal of Resolution 2018-05 and Section D is the consideration of Resolution 2019-04 terminating the amenity debt special assessment liens. Copies of both Resolutions are enclosed for your review. Section E is the consideration of the  termination of the  Interlocal agreement related to the amenity transaction. A copy of the agreement is enclosed for your review. Section F is the consideration of the termination of the Gate Protocol Agreement. A draft letter to the Solivita Community Association is enclosed for your review and the agreement has been separately provided by District Counsel. Section G is the consideration of the Repeal of the Amenity Policies, Amenity Rates and Fees, and Amenity Suspension Policy. There is no back-up material. Section His the consideration of the termination of agreements for property valuation and property inspection services. The agreements have been separately provided by District Counsel. Section I is the consideration  of  the  termination  of  agreements for amenity bond  financing  services.   These
agreements  have  been  separately  provided  by  District  Counsel.   Section  J is   the     consideration of
approval and termination of the agreement for amenity assessment consulting services with Fishkind & Associates. A copy of the agreement is enclosed for your review.

The twelfth order of business is Staff Reports. Section C is the District Manager's Report. Sub­ Section 1 includes the check register for approval and Sub-Section 2 includes the balance sheet and income statement for your review. Section D is the Field Manager's Report. The report containing the monthly treatment reports is enclosed  for your review.  Sub-Section 2 includes the customer complaint log for review.

The balance of the agenda will be discussed at the meeting. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please contact me.

CC:	Michael Eckert, District Counsel Kathleen Leo, District Engineer Alan Scheerer, Field Manager Darrin Mossing, GMS

Enclosures

S ECTION IV

S ECTl·ON C
RESOLUTION 2019-01

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ELECTING THE OFFICERS OF THE DISTRICT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE

WHEREAS, the Poinciana Community Development District (the "District") is a local unit of special purpose government created and existing pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida  Statutes; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the District ("Board") desires to elect the Officers of the District.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT:

Section 1.

Section 2.
_   _   _   _ _

_   _   _   _  _
_   _  _

_   _  _
_  _	is elected Chairperson.

_  _	is elected Vice-Chairperson.

Section 3.
- - - - - - - - - -
is elected Secretary.
Section 4.
_   _   _   _ _
_   _   _   _  _
_   _   _   _  _
_   _   _   _  _
_   _  _
_   _  _
_   _  _
_   _  _
_  _	is elected Assistant Secretary.
_  _	is elected Assistant Secretary.
_  _	is elected Assistant Secretary.
_  _	is elected Assistant Secretary.

Section 5.

Section 6.
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
is elected Treasurer.

is elected Assistant Treasurer.
Section 7.	This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of November, 2018.

ATTEST:		POINCIANA	COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

Secretary/Assistant Secretary	Chairperson/Vice-Chairperson

M INUTES
MINUTES OF MEETING POINCIANA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Poinciana Community Development District was held on Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:00 a.m. in the Starlight Ballroom, 384 Village Drive, Poinciana, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Robert Zimbardi LeRue "Skip" Stellfox David Lane
William Land Lita Epstein

Also present were:

George Flint Michael Eckert Kathy Leo Alan Scheerer Pete Deglomine
Chairman Vice Chairman
Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary

District Manager District Counsel District Engineer Field Manager
Clarke Environmental

The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the August 15, 2018 Poinciana Community Development District's Board of Supervisors Meeting.

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call
Mr. Zimbardi called the meeting to order and called the roll.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSNESS
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS
Pledge of Allegiance

Public Comment Period on Agenda Items
Mr. Zimbardi stated that residents should limit their comments to three minutes and only discuss items on the agenda at this time. Mr. Flint mentioned that if comments are regarding the budget, they might want to hold them off until the public hearing on the budget. A resident
residing at 419 Fountain Valley Lane stated that the public hearing is scheduled at the next meeting and the opportunity to vote on the assessment roll follows that. The resident stated that they did not need to vote at the next meeting, it could be deferred. Another resident asked a question about the funding agreement the Board signed with AV Homes in 2016. The resident asked what the Board's interpretation of that agreement was and what the current obligation is to the community to reimburse AV Homes for the funding agreement. Another resident asked what the appraised value of the amenities is, and what amenities are being considered for purchase by the CDD. Another resident stated that the Board is supposed to be representing the homeowners, and they should not be forcing decisions.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Minutes of the July 18, 2018
Meeting
Mr. Zimbardi presented the minutes of the July 18, 2018 meeting. Mr. Land  noted  that on page 5, Ms. Epstein did not second that motion. Mr. Flint stated that he would correct that.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Hearing
Consideration of Resolution 2018-13 Adopting the Fiscal Year 2019 Budget and Relating to the Annual Appropriations
Mr. Zimbardi opened the public hearing on the budget and special assessment resolution.

Mr. Zimbardi noted that Mr. Stellfox joined the meeting at this time. Mr. Flint explained that Resolution 2018-13 adopts the budget for Fiscal Year 2019, which starts on October 1, 2018 and that Resolution 2018-14 imposes the special assessments and authorizes staff to certify the assessment role. Mr. Flint stated that the Board previously approved a proposed budget that was approved before June 15th, as required by Statutes, was transmitted to Polk County and was Exhibit A to Resolution 2018-13. Mr. Flint explained that administrative expenses have gone

2
down from $176,000 to $163,000. Mr. Flint stated that the Operations and Maintenance expenses were going up slightly due primarily to including funding for stormwater construction repair. Mr. Eckert stated that they provided a revised resolution to the Board for the assessment. Mr. Eckert noted that in the past, they would always put the assessments for platted lots on the tax roll and direct billed the assessments that go on undeveloped land. Mr. Flint asked the residents if there were any public comments about the budget or assessment roll. A resident requested to see the special assessments or attachment B to the assessment resolution. Mr. Flint explained that imposing special assessment is a legal term that refers to the Operations and Maintenance and annual Debt assessment special assessments. Mr. Flint explained that Resolution 2018-14 adopts the assessment roll that lists each property with the per unit amount. Mr. Flint explained that special assessment has a different meaning pertaining to CDD information, then it does with HOA. Mr. Zimbardi asked for comments from the Board members about the budget. The Board discussed the $50,000 allocated for stormwater structure repairs. Mr. Flint stated  that it was based on the report that the Engineer prepared identifying certain improvements. Mr. Flint noted that none of that money would get spent unless the Board votes on it, and more proposals will be brought to the Board.

Consideration of Resolution 2018-14 Imposing Special Assessments and Certifying an Assessment Roll
Mr. Zimbardi noted that the Board received a revised copy. He stated that the only difference was in Section 3b. Mr. Eckert noted that they added Section B to number 3 to clarify that the undeveloped land will be by direct bill assessment rather than going on the County tax roll. Mr. Zimbardi asked for comments or questions on the resolution.

Mr. Flint asked for a motion to close the public hearing.

3

Mr. Lane noted that "larvicide" was spelled incorrectly on page 5 of the budget and Mr.
Flint stated that would be corrected.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Resolution	2018-15
Accepting the Dedications on the Phase 5E-W Plat
Mr. Zimbardi asked Mr. Eckert to give the Board a summary of Resolution 2018-15. Mr. Eckert noted that the Board is aware there are multiple steps in the District accepting the conveyances from the Developer. Mr. Eckert explained that this is not the final step, but is one of the steps. He stated that the Board is agreeing to accept the dedications on the plat, specifically concerning tract C3 and C4 which are storm water management tracts. Mr. Eckert explained that there are also dedications from the developer to the District of certain easements that are needed for the CDD to access infrastructure and roads. Mr. Eckert stated that this does not mean they will own the tracts, it means that they are accepting the plat dedications. Mr. Land asked if the CDD will need road access, and Mr. Eckert stated that they will get road access to be able to access ponds and other areas they have to treat. The Board discussed the placement of easements within the District, and Ms. Leo pointed out the locations on a map for the Board to see.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion of Proposals for Amenity Real
Estate Transaction Legal Services
Mr. Zimbardi stated that they were searching for proposals for legal services relating only to the amenity transaction. Mr. Zimbardi asked Mr. Flint to explain the three proposals received. Mr. Flint explained that at the Board's direction from a prior meeting, he reached out to law firms that primarily deal with CDDs and also real estate transactional capabilities. Mr. Flint reviewed the Burr Forman, LLP, Shutts & Bowen, LLP, and Latham, Shuker, Eden, and Beaudine, LLP proposals. Mr. Flint explained that with Burr Forman there would be hourly rates for travel time. Mr. Flint stated that Shutts would not bill for travel time or reimbursement, and

4
that they are located in Orlando. Mr. Flint stated that Latham, Shuker, Eden, and Beaudine, LLP would also bill for travel. Mr. Flint noted that he reached out to a fourth law firm but they are currently working with AV Homes on an agreement with Osceola County, so they were not able to provide a proposal because of that conflict. Mr. Zimbardi asked the Board if they would be interested in having the firms come to the joint meeting in September, and the Board Members could ask them direct questions. The Board discussed getting written contracts from all three firms confirming that they have no conflict of interest with AV Homes or Taylor Morrison. Ms. Epstein stated that Latham works for other CDDs and other 55+ communities and that experience is valuable and a big plus. Ms. Epstein asked Mr. Flint if he had worked with any of the lawyers with other CDDs. Mr. Flint answered that he had worked with all three firms. The Board narrowed the firms down to Latham, Shuker, Eden & Beaudine and Shutts & Bowen, and authorized Mr. Flint to request that both firms attend the joint meeting for questioning.

EIGHTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Attorney
Litigation Update
Mr. Eckert reported that the next hearing in the validation case is related to the first validation case, and it is a dispute between the attorneys for Taylor Morrison, AV Homes, and Avatar regarding some discovery and whether or not there will be sanctions. He stated that
hearing is on August 20th
Mr. Eckert noted there is hearing set on October 23, 2018 on a motion
that will be filed by the District to try to narrow down the issues for validation. Mr. Eckert reminded the Board there is a meeting Friday with Jason Good with AV Homes, the District Engineer, and the District Manager, to talk about the conveyance issues.

Engineer
Ms. Leo noted that it had been quiet from an engineering standpoint for the last 30 days.
She stated that they do have a meeting this Friday to go over conveyances and other matters.

District Manager
Approval of Check Register
Mr. Flint presented the Check Register for July 1st through July 31st. Mr. Flint pointed out that the check register totals $251,605.68 and of that $191,454 and $4,715 are related to direct

5
bill assessments that were paid and are being transferred to the Trustee. Mr. Flint asked for questions on the check register.

Balance Sheet and Income Statement
Mr. Flint presented the Balance Sheet and Income Statement through July 31st

Mr. Flint
noted that they were nearly 100% collected on the on roll, the direct bill, and the developer, but are slightly lower on interest earnings than what the adopted budget is. Mr. Flint explained the expenses for the month and asked for questions from the Board. Mr. Land asked Mr. Flint to explain the unassigned amount of $420,797 on the balance sheet. Mr. Flint  noted that $420,000  is in an interest-bearing account, and that $155,000 is kept in the operating account for the District. Mr. Flint stated those are funds that are available to carry them through the end of the fiscal year because most of their revenue comes in December and January. 1

Approval of Fiscal Year 2019 Meeting Schedule
Mr. Flint noted that they kept the prior practice of meeting on the third Wednesday of each month. The Board discussed moving the November meeting  since their regular date falls the day before Thanksgiving. The Board decided to move the November meeting to November 28th at 11:00 a.m.

Field Manager
Field Manager's Report
Mr. Scheerer noted that the tubing was installed and that the diffusers are in a better location to serve the lakes. Mr. Scheerer stated that they are currently working on acquiring

6
proposals for raising two manholes. Mr. Flint presented the proposals for aerators; Option A totaled $8,480 and Option B totaled $12,185. Mr. Flint stated that Option A would be a good start, and the Board could always add another aerator if they felt they needed to. The Board discussed both proposals and chose to proceed with option A.

Customer Complaint Log
Mr. Flint presented the Customer Complaint Log. Mr. Flint stated that there were four complaints dated back to July 1th. The first complaint was the algae on the pond, followed by the manhole cover. Mr. Flint notified the Board of a midge complaint, and then another algae complaint. He stated that in those cases, they contact Clarke. Mr. Flint noted that Clarke would then go out on site and they follow up with homeowner. Mr. Flint suggested to the residents attending the meeting, and who asked lengthy questions during the public comment period, that they email him their questions so they can address them.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor's Requests
Mr. Zimbardi asked the Board if anyone had any requests. The Board did not have any requests at this time.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	General Audience Comments
A resident addressed the midge problem, and showed the Board pictures of his neighbor's house. The Board asked the resident if he would have a problem with an aerator being in his back yard, the resident said he had no problem with that and thinks that would help solve the problem. Mr. Eckert noted that there was not a current document that would allow them to put an aerator on a private lot, but they could create one. Multiple residents brought up the issues of spiders on their houses, due to the midge flies. The Board noted that they would follow up on the spid r issue after the aerator was installed to see if it reduced the number of spiders on the residents' homes.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Other Business

7
Mr. Zimbardi asked the Board if there was any other business that needed  to  be discussed, but there was nothing brought up. Mr. Stellfox addressed the Board and discussed issues regarding AV Homes, he also brought up the subject of online posts about him. After audience members began voicing their opinions the Board decided to take a five-minute recess. Ms. Epstein stated that she has not and will not directly attack any Supervisor on the Board.

TWELTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Next Meeting Date - September 5, 2018
(Joint CDD Meeting)
Mr. Zimbardi announced that the next meeting is a joint meeting that will be held on September 5, 2018 at 11:00 a.m.

THIRTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment
Mr. Flint asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting.

Secretary/Assistant Secretary	Chairman/Vice Chairman

8

MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING
OF THE POINCIANA & POINCIANA WEST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS

The joint meeting of the Boards of Supervisors of the Poinciana Community Development District and Poinciana West Community Development District was held on Wednesday, September 5, 2018 at 11:00 a.m. in the Starlite Ballroom, 384 Village Drive, Poinciana, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum of the Poinciana CDD Board were:

Robert Zimbardi LeRue "Skip" Stellfox David Lane
William Land
Chairman
Vice Chairman Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary

Present and constituting a quorum of the Poinciana West CDD Board were:

Charles Case, III Leonard Vento Bill Brown Joseph Gecewicz

Also present were:
George Flint Michael Eckert Kathy Leo Alan Scheerer
Brian Brunhofer Pete Deglomine Clayton Smith Several Residents
Chairman
Vice Chairman Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary

District Manager District Counsel District Engineer Field Manager
Taylor Morrison, Division President Clarke Environmental
GMS

The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the September 5, 2018 Joint Meeting of the Poinciana CDD and the Poinciana West CDD Boards of Supervisors.

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call
Poinciana CDD
Mr. Zimbardi called the Poinciana CDD meeting to order. Board Members introduced themselves and a quorum was established.

Poinciana West CDD
Mr. Case called the Poinciana West CDD meeting to order. Board Members introduced themselves and a quorum was established.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSNESS
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS
Pledge of Allegiance

Public Comment Period on Agenda Items
Mr. Brunhofer, the Division President of Taylor Morrison, introduced himself and explained where they were at in the merger acquisition of AV Homes. Mr. Brunhofer stated that because they are two public companies, they are limited with the amount of information they can share. Mr. Brunhofer stated they were on track to close the merger transaction between the two companies in the early fourth quarter, which would be early October. Mr. Brunhofer added that they would spend time with all the residents to talk through everything and make sure everyone understands what is going on moving forward. Mr. Brunhofer stated that they are at the meeting to listen to everyone, but they will likely not be able to respond. Mr. Brunhofer noted that it is important to hear the questions that come up during this meeting.
Mr. Zimbardi stated that residents could come to the microphone and state which item on the agenda they would like to comment on. A resident stated that after hearing from the representative from Taylor Morrison, he respectfully requested that the Board consider postponing the agenda and the matters before the Board today. The resident suggested having the closure of Taylor Morrison and AV Homes before they move forward with spending more money in attorney's fees or other fees to protect the residents. He stated the Board should know Taylor Morrisons plans before moving forward with anything.
Another resident stated that she submitted questions to the Board as she was instructed to do at the prior meeting. A Supervisor interrupted her and stated that this public comment period is only for agenda items and there would be a general audience comment period at the end of the meeting. Another resident addressed the first resident, and suggest that the Board keep the meeting in session and follow the agenda because it is important for Taylor Morrison to understand how the residents feel today.

2

A resident stated that he is very much against the sale, and he wanted to know who at the meeting bought a house without having any idea what the market value was. He also asked who had paid three times the price of their house. The resident suggested stopping litigation until Taylor Morrison takes over.
Another resident stated that the Board was breaching their fiduciary responsibility to the community. She stated that they believed it was better to put the community in debt for 95 million dollars while increasing their tax bill. She stated there is a lawsuit claiming illegal collection of these fees from AV Homes. She asked why they would not wait to see what the outcome of the lawsuit is.
A resident asked about the dues, she questioned if everyone pays the same dues. She questioned when the amenities are sold, would everyone pay the same dues or would others be paying more. The resident asked the Board why they did not use a commercial appraiser.
The Board reminded residents that this public comment period was for agenda items only, then stated there will be a general audience comment period at the end of the meeting where residents could speak about anything.
A resident thanked Taylor Morrison for attending the meeting.
Another resident questioned item 7 on the agenda, the asset sale and purchase agreement.
The resident asked what the current situation was regarding that.
Mr. Flint stated the date for the asset sale and purchase agreement is October 1, 2018.
A resident stated that she had a question about items 7 and 8. She instead asked what the Board was elected to do.
A Board Member stated that there is a point in the agenda where the Supervisors can comment, and he would be delighted to answer the resident's question at that point. The Board Member noted that most of the questions asked have already been answered fairly clearly in a Q&A on the website.
A resident stated that she was for the takeover of the amenities and the Board thanked the resident for her opinion and time.
A resident asked for a moment of silence for the late senator John McCain. The Board thanked the resident for his service and asked the Board to honor a moment of silence.

FOURTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Minutes of the July 9, 2018
Joint Meeting

3

Poinciana CDD
Mr. Zimbardi asked for any comments, corrections, or additions to the minutes of the July 9, 2018 meeting. There being none,

Poinciana West CDD
Mr. Case asked for any comments, corrections, or additions to the minutes of the July 9, 2018meeting. There being none,

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Hearing on First Amendment to
the	Master	Methodology	Regarding Undeveloped Land in Poinciana CDD

Presentation of First Amendment to Master Methodology Regarding Undeveloped Land in Poinciana CDD
Mr. Eckert explained the amendment to the methodology that was adopted on December 13, 2017. He noted that the amendment does not change the assessment levels on residential lots, it corrects some parcel ID numbers from the undeveloped land that was owned by Avatar. Mr. Eckert stated it also recognizes that there have been 122 additional lots that have been platted, and should be folded into the methodology. Mr. Eckert introduced Kevin Plenzler from Fishkind & Associates who was there to outline the first amendment to the methodology. Mr. Eckert stressed that the result of the assessment hearing today would have no increase on residential lots above and beyond what was approved by the Board in December 2017. Mr. Eckert wanted to clarify that all residential lots would remain the same in terms of their annual and maximum debt assessments which would only be certified for collection if the Boards proceeded to close on the amenity transaction. Mr. Eckert stated the Boards were trying to set up flexibility so they could close on a transaction in the future if they wanted to, and that's all a bond validation does. Mr. Eckert summarized the funding agreement for the Board, and noted that some of that will be

4

reimbursed out of the bond proceeds if different conditions are met. Mr. Eckert stated it is a lien, but it is an inactive lien in that it wouldn't actually certify for anything for collection until you needed to purchase the amenities. Mr. Eckert reminded the Board on July 18, 2018, the  Poinciana CDD adopted Resolution 2018-11 declaring certain assessments should be reallocated. Mr. Eckert noted that on the same day Poinciana West adopted Resolution 2018-09 which declared the intent to agree with the allocation of assessments. He noted after they adopted those resolutions they also adopted a preliminary first amendment to the Master Methodology. He stated no material changes have been made.

Poinciana CDD

Mr. Eckert explained that in conclusion of this process, both Boards will be asked to adopt resolutions, and there are attachments to those resolutions. Mr. Eckert stated attachment 'A' is the Engineer's Report dated December 13, 2017 which was previously approved. Attachment  'B'	is the Master Assessment Methodology which you already approved in December. Exhibit 'C' is the First Amendment to the Master Methodology which Mr. Plenzler is going to present today. Mr. Eckert requested at this time for Mr. Plenzler come to  the podium and present the first amendment and answer any questions the Board has on the first amendment. Mr. Plenzler presented the First Amendment to the Master Methodology regarding undeveloped lands in Poinciana. He noted this amendment simply makes amendments to the true-up calculations associated with the Master Methodology you originally approved. He noted since they approved that document, a lot has happened. Mr. Plenzler stated Parcel 5A has 122 platted lots. He stated they updated the parcel identification numbers, as there had been some changes which often happens with the Property Appraiser. Mr. Plenzler added there were two parcel ID's that had incorrect acreage, which they updated. He noted all the calculations were updated to reflect how the development is currently laid out today. Mr. Plenzler noted this did

5

not affect Poinciana West, as all their lots have been platted. He stated it also did not impact developed or platted lots in Poinciana and their assessment levels. Mr. Plenzler addressed the changes to document 'Y', a text edit change to the date from 2019 to 2017, and a reference to the net acres of development in the assessment roll. He noted those were the only changes from the July document to today. Mr. Plenzler asked for questions from the Boards.
Mr. Zimbardi asked about table six on page three, specifically the difference between the current table and the original table. Mr. Zimbardi asked if the difference is that Section 5a was removed, to which Mr. Plenzler replied yes, as well as some additional edits with respect to the net acreage of the development.
Mr. Land asked if this impacted the total number of lots in the plans, to which Mr.
Plenzler answered those would stay the same.
Mr. Zimbardi asked if the phases listed on page three as 'anticipated lot count' were not platted yet, which Mr. Plenzler answered that was correct and no lots were platted. Mr. Zimbardi asked as they are platted would there be official amendments to this document, Mr. Plenzler answered no. Mr. Plenzler explained that this was the true up calculation, so in the event a developer chooses to develop 700 lots instead of 711 they would have to pay the true up in respect to those 11 units. Mr. Eckert addressed Mr. Zimbardi and explained that when platting occurs normally it is usually self-executing, and handled at a staff level in terms of the allocation of assessments. Mr. Eckert noted because they had to go back and amend the Methodology anyway, it made sense to go ahead and update the unit counts for those along with the parcel ID numbers.
Mr. Eckert asked Mr. Plenzler if, in his professional opinion, did the lands subject to the amenity assessments as reallocated receive special benefits from the amenity improvement plan. Mr. Plenzler answered yes.
Mr. Eckert asked, in Mr. Plenzler's professional opinion, would Mr. Plenzler continue to generally describe the special benefits to the assessed property, including the property subject to the reallocated assessments, to include at least the following:
Ownership and control of the existing facilities and the programming used by the residents results in increased use and enjoyment of the benefitted properties;

6

Additional recreational facilities in the amount of an estimated 11.2 million the scope of which is to be determined by residents which results in increased use and enjoyment of the benefitted properties;
The reduced need for personal recreational facilities and equipment which results in increased use and enjoyment of the benefitted properties;
The reduced cost of ownership of the amenity facilities due to the District's exemptions from State sales tax, some local property taxes, and sovereign immunity limits on liability, which results in lower cost of operation of facilities and a decrease  of assessment lien on the benefitted properties;
The low cost taxes and financing available to the District which is not available to the club, results in lower capital costs and a decreased debt assessment lien on the benefitted properties;
Elimination of club fees as a lien on the land within Solivita;
The payoff of replaced club fees in thirty years compared to the payment of club fees in perpetuity under the club land which reduces the overall capital debt lien imposed on the benefitted properties;
The fact that the CDD debt assessments are not subject to future increases as are current club fees, which reduces the overall capital debt lien imposed on the  benefitted properties;
The ability to refinance CDD debt assessments resulting in potential additional savings to residents which reduces the overall capital debt lien imposed on the benefitted properties;
The developer's payment of CDD debt and O&M assessments on their land which reduces the need to assess benefitted properties to fund those amounts;
The limitation of Solivita grand passes to non-residents which is currently not limited by the club plan, which results in increased use and enjoyment of benefitted properties and reduces the amount of O&M assessments to be levied on benefitted properties by limiting overcrowding and overuse, etc.;
The amenity facilities are not subject to foreclosure as if they are privately owned and mortgaged, which ensures continual operation of facilities which protects property values within the community;

7

The eventual resident ownership and operation of the sales administration  building, which ensures the manner of which this facility will be utilized protecting property values within the community from a non-conforming use of the facility;
Establishment of the Capital Reserve Fund without materially increasing the amounts paid, where no fund has currently been established which results in a reduced O&M assessment lien on the benefitted properties.
Mr. Plenzler, on an individual basis, agreed with each of the above statements.
Mr. Eckert asked Mr. Plenzler, in his professional opinion, would the special benefits the lands receive continue to be equal to or in excess of the amenity assessments thereon and reallocated, when allocated as set forth in the Master Methodology and the First Amendment to the Methodology. Mr. Plenzler answered yes.
Mr. Eckert asked were the amenity assessments as reallocated, and the specific reallocated assessments, reasonably apportioned among the lands subject to the assessments. Mr. Plenzler answered yes.
Mr. Eckert asked if it was reasonable, proper and just to assess the costs of the amenity improvement plan against the lands in the District in accordance with the Methodology as amended by the First Amendment which results in the amenity assessments set forth on the revised final assessment roll. Mr. Plenzler answered yes.
Mr. Eckert asked if it was in the District's best interest and the residents' best interest that the amenity assessments be paid and collected in accordance with the Master Methodology, the First Amendment, and the District's assessment resolutions. Mr. Plenzler answered yes.
Mr. Eckert asked the Board for any other questions or comments for Mr. Plenzler.
Mr. Eckert noted for the record that they received at least six written comments from five people, and those comments were provided to the Board. He stated two of those comments asked questions, answers were provided and/or the information they were requesting was provided.

Public Comment and Testimony
Mr. Eckert asked for public comment on the reallocation of the assessments on the undeveloped land.
Resident (Poinciana CDD): The resident stated that the CDD Board is elected, the residents of Solivita trust them to be fiscally responsible since it is ultimately their money that

8

they are spending. As such, each of them has a fiduciary responsibility to each Solivita homeowner. That fiduciary responsibility includes making fiscally responsible choices. Continuing to pay legal fees for items in preparation of a sale that might not go through, in the resident's opinion, is not fiscally responsible. Purchasing 15-year-old amenities without seeking a truly independent appraisal is not fiscally responsible. Accepting an offer to purchase those amenities for $73 million was not a fiscally responsible choice. The resident stated, the funding program, if read correctly by the resident, requires them to repay AV Homes for those legal fees that are still being accrued by AV Homes even if the sale does not go through. The resident suggested that Mr. Eckert might be able to give a better explanation, because they did not hear anything about that. The resident stated the Board has another invisible choice to make, hold off of any further actions that might increase our legal fees until a court or Taylor Morrison decides they are going to move forward. Or you can continue to push the purchase through, instead of waiting until they have more information. Since there is a chance that the sale will not go through, the resident urged the Board to make fiscally responsible choices at this time. The resident stated that they have read that Taylor Morrison does not have club plans, and that they turn the amenities over to the HOA. The resident stated that the Solivita homeowners have a choice to make in November, and that they were confident the residents were going to make a fiscally responsible decision.
Mr. Anthony Baron (213 Treviso Drive) asked, and to correct him if he was wrong, were
they talking about the platted and unplatted. He stated that he was one of the unfortunate 711 persons that moved into Solivita and found out his non-ad valorem taxes were double for debt compared to somebody who lives right across the street. He asked the Board to shed some light on that. He stated that he paid about $800 because of what was done in 2012 with replatting and asked if that was going to happen again here. He stated that he heard them say the assessment wouldn't change, but there are ER units.
Mr. Eckert stated he did not follow the resident exactly, but in terms of the existing debt assessments that are out there, the Poinciana West debt assessment is higher than the Poinciana CDD debt assessment. He explained that those bonds were sold about seven years apart and there were different assessment levels that went into each community. Mr. Eckert noted he was not sure which community Mr. Baron lived in.

9

Mr. Baron stated he lives in Poinciana, but he pays double and that there are 711 people in the community that pay double.
Mr. Eckert noted that the O&M assessment on Poinciana CDD is exactly the same for every unit, unless somebody in the chain of title has paid down that debt assessment level as that would be the only way Mr. Baron would pay a different assessment level. Mr. Eckert added he was not sure if Mr. Baron was talking about ad valorem, he noted that is totally different.
Mr. Baron stated he was talking about non-ad valorem. He stated he pays $800 and the people right across from him pay $438.
Mr. Flint added that the question is probably not relevant to this public hearing, the question that is relevant to this public hearing is, is that going to happen here. The way it is currently contemplated is that all equally benefitting properties will pay the same Debt Service assessment. The only way that would change is if somewhere along the way someone chose to pay it off or prepay a portion of that and reduce it. It is initially levied equally among all benefitting properties. Mr. Flint added he would be happy to look at the particulars for the resident.
Mr. Baron noted it would be fair if everybody paid the same. He just wanted to make sure that wasn't going to happen here.
Another resident stated when they moved to the community in 2006, they were told that 30% of Solivita would remain undeveloped property. The resident asked how the platting of 122 new lots affect that percentage and in the future, would they be able to go ahead and develop the remaining undeveloped property?
Mr. Eckert noted that all he could say was the number of units that were originally planned and approved for Solivita had been reduced over the years. What that meant in terms of where those units go, he did not know as that is not the subject of the hearing today. Mr. Eckert suggested talking to AV Hornes and asking them to look at a map. Mr. Eckert added that the CDD does not control where the development goes, and they do not have zoning or permitting approval to do that.
Mr. David Jorio (549 Tapatio Lane) stated he had a question for Mr. Plenzler. He noted that Mr. Plenzler answered yes to all of the questions he was asked, and appreciated that but, asked if Mr. Plenzler would have answered yes to the same questions if the price was
$50,000,000 lower.

10
Mr. Eckert stated that he thought that was an unfair question, because each one of those were a different special benefit that Mr. Plenzler acknowledged. Mr. Eckert added that some of the answers to the questions are yes, regardless of the price.
Mr. Jorio stated they already have the amenities and what they get in the future, nobody knows. The resident asked would they have the same benefits that they have today if they were to pay $50,000,000 lower.
Mr. Eckert noted that again, two of the facilities that are included in the assessment process do not even exist and that is an impossible question to answer.
Mr. Jorio replied that it was not and added that it was quite simple, and that they would really like an answer. He asked to take those two off of the block, what they have standing right now, would that answer still be yes for $50,000,000 less.
Mr. Plenzler stated that he could not answer the question in that regard. Mr. Eckert stated that they are presented as an assessment consultant with certain data information and they do an analysis and provide their opinions. If all those numbers change, he could not sit there right now and tell you an answer as that is not how this works.
Ms. Ayn Luther (267 New River Drive) asked the Board were they all initially appointed to control the water in the retention ponds and if so, how did they get to this position.
Mr. Flint noted that the questions that the resident brought up under the prior audience comment were not related to the public hearing that was being held at the time. He added that there is a general audience comments section at the end. He also noted that he wrote down the resident's questions, and that they would try to address those under that section. He noted that it is not really the subject of the public hearing, but they can try to address later on under general audience comments.
Ms. Luther (267 New River Drive) asked when they are selling the amenities, what did
the road study show about how much extra money the residents are going to have to add to their HOA fees to repair and replace roads. She stated that some of their roads were in very bad shape.
Mr. Flint stated the that HOA is a separate entity that owns the roads, and the CDD is not proposing to acquire the roads. The roads would remain the HOA.
Mr. Don Smith stated that they asked Kevin several questions and, in those questions, they asked him in his professional opinion. He asked if they could explain Mr. Plenzler's

11

profession and what his experience is. Also, the appraisals were paid for by somebody so the resident did not know what their interests were and asked if the Board could also explain that.
Mr. Eckert explained that Kevin Plenzler works for Fishkind & Associates, and he had been retained solely as their assessment consultant. Mr. Eckert noted that  Mr. Plenzler has looked at the improvements that they have been contemplating acquiring and constructing and figuring out how to fairly allocate the costs among the people who would be paying assessments. Mr. Donald Ford (417 Treviso Drive stated they had a question regarding the earlier presentation, where there was a list of a dozen or so benefits. He asked if he had missed something, or did they not discuss what the risks are. He added the Board should discuss the potential benefits and the potential risks. The resident voiced his concern that he was watching a process that points only to benefits and accepts those as the basis of a decision without regard to
any potential risks.
Mr. Eckert explained the reason why they go through the benefits is because under Florida law, in order for a special assessment to be valid, there has to be a special benefit that the property receives. That special benefit needs to be fairly allocated among the properties that will be paying the assessments. That is the reason why there is a focus on benefits, because the Florida law says that you focus on benefits. Mr. Eckert explained that this Board, in the past, has talked about the risks of the transaction and the realities of running the amenities themselves instead of having a developer run the amenities. There have been discussions of the risks, but for purposes of an assessment hearing, by law they are required to focus on the benefits. Mr. Eckert stated that he appreciated the resident's comments, and that the Board was well aware of some of the risks that are associated with being the owner of the amenities.
Multiple Residents (in unison) asked what the risks are.
Mr. Eckert explained the risk would be that you have programming the community doesn't like, if a building burns down you have to rebuild, you have a limited political ability to raise additional funds for initial amenities when people want it. He added that those are all risks you are going to have to deal with. The risk could be that your O&M expenses go significantly higher, there could be a government regulation that causes your maintenance cost of, for instance, ponds to go significantly higher. He noted that there are a lot of different risks that this Board encounters on a monthly basis.

12

Mr. Ford asked if the Board could potentially make a list of those risks for the benefit of the folks making the decisions about going ahead with this or not.
Mr. Eckert answered that George and himself could tell them from working with many Districts, the federal government can pass a regulation saying the community has to comply with something within 30 days and the manufacturer doesn't make the product for a year. Mr. Eckert explained that situation happened in recent years with pool filters and hair getting caught in  them, a product wasn't made to fix that for multiple months later and pools across the State of Florida were shut down until they were in compliance.
Mr. Michael Luddy (101 Sevilla Court): The resident stated his question was concerning the current funding agreement between the Poinciana CDD and AV  Homes. As he understands it, the agreement exempts the Poinciana West CDD. The resident explained in April 2016, the Poinciana CDD Board entered into and executed a funding agreement whereby AV Homes agrees to pay for the legal expenses for the amenities purchase. This agreement also states that the Poinciana CDD Board will or shall repay all expenses paid by AV Homes. They have agreed to three options for the repayment; the Board will issue bonds and use the bond money  to pay AV Homes, if they fail to issue bonds within five years the developer shall be deemed paid in leu of taxes or assessment, or the Board will issue a special assessment for all residents of the Poinciana CDD. The resident stated that he believes the expenses are in excess of $1.5 million. He added that if you divide that out among the approximately 3,600 homes in Poinciana CDD, that would mean each of the residents already owe approximately $416. He asked what the Poinciana CDD Board's understanding of this agreement was and what was the plan of the Poinciana CDD Board to pay for the legal and court expenses? He asked how much has the Board obligated the residents of the Poinciana CDD to pay AV Homes for fees as of today? The resident added he only has an approximate number, so if the Board has a better number he would love to hear it. The resident asked Mr. Eckert if he could give an assessment as to what he thinks, going forward for the bond validation and the court case, a ballpark figure is to cover that so the residents have an idea of the total legal fees would be for the proceeding. He also asked what the reason for the Poinciana West CDD not being included in the expense of this funding agreement was and why was it only the Poinciana CDD residents. He asked if the Board waits for the  Taylor Morrison and AV Homes deal to close, will that require the Board to start over with the bond validation. He asked, after hearing Mr. Eckert state that the Board does not have to pay

13

back these legal fees, is there a new funding agreement or an additional amendment because in Section 11 under Capital, it clearly states it must be paid. He stated he would appreciate some clarity on that.
Mr. Eckert noted that this was the third meeting where the Board has dealt with the false narrative of what the funding agreement provides and added that he believed Mr. Luddy was at each one of those meetings where it was explained. Mr. Eckert stated if the bonds are not issued, there is no obligation for any resident to pay any assessments to reimburse those funds and asked the resident if he understood that.
Mr. Luddy replied if it was his statement that no resident has to pay, that is technically correct. The resident then added that what it says is the Board, the Poinciana CDD, shall pay out of the bond proceeds or AV Homes.
Mr. Eckert explained that is not what it says. He added that he was not trying to confuse Mr. Luddy by saying resident versus the District. If the bonds are never issued neither one of the Districts nor residents have any obligation to repay those monies. He asked the resident again if he understood that.
Mr. Luddy replied that he heard Mr. Eckert and asked where in the document does it say that. He stated again in Section 11, under Capital, it dictates the repayment of that loan. The resident asked if the document had been amended, or if there was a new document.
Mr. Eckert asked the resident if he knew the difference between paying in the past and paying in the future. Mr. Eckert added that the language in the agreement says shall be deemed paid in lieu of assessments, that this Board could have levied assessments over the last three years to pay these costs. Instead, Avatar said no, that they did not want the Board to levy assessments on people to pay these costs and that Avatar would go ahead and advance the money. If the bonds are never issued there is no obligation to repay because it will be deemed paid in lieu of taxes and assessments. Mr. Eckert stated that he has explained this at three different meetings and that the false narrative that is being advanced to scare people to think they have some liability for these legal fees that isn't paid through the bond proceeds, is completely false. Mr. Eckert added that he would be happy to sit down with Mr. Luddy and show him where it says paid in lieu of assessments.
Another resident stated that if the Board Members paid a lot less, they would not have to exercise the full bond that they could afford. The resident noted that they thought if they didn't

14

pay as much they would have a lot more borrowing power that they could use to make repairs in case something happened. The resident added, if they go through with the deal at this price, the Board is putting many of the residents on a fixed income in jeopardy of losing their homes. The resident added it is inevitable that something will happen and that instead of paying $95 million they should pay them $50 million. She stated they do not have to use the whole bond.
Mr. Zimbardi replied that he did not think there was anybody in the room that wouldn't like it for free, or for $20 million. He stated he wished he had paid $100,000 for his house, but they wouldn't sell it to him for that. He added that they have some market  issues that they have to deal with. He stated again, nobody would disagree with the resident that they would like to  pay less. He stated that is outside of what the Board is trying to discuss right now, which is a public hearing on this particular item.
A Resident added that the Board is not addressing the fact that they could be putting people out of their homes.
Mr. Eckert stated that they were too far off topic, in terms of the assessment hearing, and he hadn't heard one comment related to the item. He asked for anymore audience comments that relate to the assessment reallocation.
Ms. Patricia Schmid (772 San Raphael Street) asked if the Board was speaking  on Section SA.
Mr. Eckert replied yes, that is one of the areas involved.
Ms. Schmid asked what the geographic location of that is, and if it is near the driving
range.

Mr. Eckert replied that they could provide that to the resident. Mr. Zimbardi asked for any other comments.

15

Consideration of Resolution 2018-16 Adopting the First Amendment to the Master Methodology Regarding Undeveloped Land in Poinciana CDD
Mr. Eckert explained that at this time, they are sitting as an equalization Board. Based on the comments they heard, and their own individual thoughts, he asked were there any changes to the First Amendment to the Methodology Report that the Board wished to make as a result of those comments. Mr. Eckert asked that the record reflect that there are no changes suggested by the Board. Mr. Eckert stated he was going to briefly describe Resolution 2018-16. Section 1 sets forth the Board's authority to adopt the assessment resolution. Section 2 makes certain findings based on the steps taken as well as the evidence presented today. Section 3 confirms the authorization the acquisition, construction, and reconstruction amenity plan as set forth in the Engineer's Report. Section 4 confirms the estimated cost of the amenity improvement plan. Section 5 adopts the first amendment to the Master Methodology and equalizes, approves, confirms, and levies the reallocated amenity assessments. Section 6 provides the recording of the assessment notice in the public records with Polk County. The remaining sections are administrative in nature.

Poinciana West CDD
Public Comment and Testimony
No further resident comments were offered.

Consideration of Resolution 2018-13 Adopting the First Amendment to the Master Methodology Regarding Undeveloped Land in Poinciana CDD
Mr. Eckert stated that the Poinciana West resolution was slightly different because they were basically consenting to the amendment but it does not affect their land. Section 1 sets forth the Board's authority to adopt the resolution. Section 2 makes certain findings based on the steps taken as well as the evidence presented today. Section 3 confirms the authorization of the acquisition, construction, and reconstruction amenity plan as set forth in the Engineer's Report. Section 4 confirms the estimated cost of the amenity improvement plan. Section 5 adopts the first amendment to the Master Methodology and consents the Poinciana CDD's reallocation of the

16

amenity assessments. Section 6 provides the recording of the assessment notice in the public records with Polk County. The remaining sections are administrative in nature.

At 12:23 p.m. the Board decided to take afive minute recess.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Presentations	from	Firms	Regarding
Amenity Real Estate Transaction Legal Services and Retention of Counsel
Mr. Flint explained that the Boards asked him to solicit letters of interest from different qualified law firms to deal with the real estate transaction services associated with the amenity transaction, and he reached out to four firms. He said that the primary qualifications were that the firms were familiar with Community Development Districts and that they had real estate transaction experience, and his second qualification was that there were no conflicts of interest seeing that they did not represent AV Homes or Taylor Morrison in any engagements. One of the firms did have a conflict with working for AV Homes, so they were not able to provide a letter of interest. Mr. Flint noted they did receive letters from Jan Carpenter with Latham, Shuker, Eden, and Beaudine, Scott Steady with Burr Forman, and Brian Jones with Shutts & Bowen. Mr. Flint summarized that at the last meeting, they eliminated Burr Forman and the Board asked that Latham, Shuker, Eden, and Beaudine, and Shutts & Bowen be present at the meeting to make a brief presentation and answer questions from the Board. He then stated that he contacted both Jan and Brian, and they both agreed that while the opposite party was presenting, they would step out of the room so that there is not issue. Mr. Flint then introduced Ms. Carpenter to come forward and present her piece.
Ms. Carpenter introduced herself to the Boards and the audience and shared her background with Community Development Districts and government services. She stated that her firm has answered contested assessment hearings and all kinds of foreclosures and issues that showed up along the way. She also pointed out that they had worked on issues with different entities on both the same side and opposite sides, so she understood what both Districts were going through. She said that their place in this transaction was a very good one because they

17

understood the CDD and the assessments and the issues that they are going through and getting through the process of making a decision. Ms. Carpenter then said the next step in the process would require someone who was experienced in CDDs and have the understanding to be able to close a transaction of this magnitude. She explained that there are a lot of particulars that went along with this transaction because it is very large and it includes inventory counts, receivables, and a number of other things. She pointed out that her other partner, Peter Latham, represented Universal Studios and has practiced for longer than she has and there is another younger attorney that has an expertise in the restaurant industry. So, between the three of them, with  their expertise in complex closings that they have done in the past, they would be a great fit for these Districts. Ms. Carpenter made it known that she would be the lead person on the transaction to make sure the CDD parts were done, and then she would have the real estate division assist with the environmental, the inventory, prorations, and all of the things that go along with that. She then asked if the Boards had any questions for her, and Mr. Land asked if they would expect to see Ms. Carpenter at the Board Meetings going forward since she was the head of  the transaction. Ms. Carpenter responded that she would come to meetings if it was requested by the Counsel or Mr. Flint and based on the agenda. He then asked who it would be that would represent them at the meetings, and Ms. Carpenter clarified that it would be herself and one other attorney that would attend.
Mr. Gecewicz asked if the firm had ever negotiated a deal such as this where the CDD was purchasing amenities, and Ms. Carpenter answered that she had not had one to this extent, but that in every CDD, they purchase amenities from a developer as they build them and construct them, and they had one where there was a golf course acquisition that they are trying to negotiate with the developer. She said it had not gotten to the point of a contract yet because they are in the earlier stages of the negotiation. She also gave examples of several different negotiations where they had been in the same situation.
Another Supervisor asked if she had been involved in the Lake Ashton CDD, and Ms. Carpenter answered that they had represented them in years prior, and that it was for several years that she was involved with both East and West. The Supervisor then asked if her firm had been involved in any CDDs where the residents of the community have been divided on any particular issues, and she responded that there had most always been an issue with budget issues, maintenance, hours of operation, etc. The Supervisor then asked her what type of transactions

18

she had done in the past that were near the magnitude of what they were going through at the moment. Ms. Carpenter told him not that she has not dealt with something like this in the CDD world, but that they had on the private development side. She added that they had recently closed a deal that was larger than that, so their firm routinely handles financing an acquisition for larger clients and entities.
Mr. Lane asked Ms. Carpenter if their firm currently represented, or had represented in the past Taylor Morrison, to which Ms. Carpenter answered no for both questions.
A Supervisor asked when the "clock started" and when they would start paying Ms. Carpenter and her firm. She responded that she estimates that it would be a couple thousand dollars until the bond validation occurred and that they would oversee and bill "very lightly"  with reading minutes or attending meetings until they have made a true decision and the bond validation going forward just to make sure that they were understanding the process and be ready to jump in when they need to. The Supervisor also asked about her availability as far as being able to answer questions, and Ms. Carpenter responded that she and her associate both give out their cell phone numbers so that they can answer questions on nights and weekends also and that they are happy to answer questions at all times.
Mr. Vento asked Ms. Carpenter to compare the complexity of their deal to others that she had dealt with in the past, and she answered that it was a very detail-oriented deal because of the multiple types of assets including the restaurant, different buildings, inventory, but she did not think that it was complex because the bond financing was extremely familiar to them as to the conditions that they need.
A Supervisor asked Ms. Carpenter if she could give the Boards a brief background  on Mr. d' Adesky and Ms. Carpenter explained that he is her finance associate who went to FIU in Florida and got his Master's Degree from UNC in Public Administration. He also worked for a number of years in North Carolina as a manager, similar to Mr. Flint, and then went to Florida for law school. She pointed out that he has a great business background, which has made him invaluable of learning the COD area. She then explained that her other associate, Mike Candiotti would be Ms. Carpenter's real estate choice because he worked for a title company for numerous years before joining her firm. She also pointed out that they also have 3 other paralegals that are there if the assistant is needed.

19

Mr. Ca e thanked Ms. Carpenter for her time, and then asked Mr. Jones to come forward. Ms. Jones thanked e e1yone for taking the time to listen and tben dir ctly p inted out at the beginning that he had just been made aware of an i sue with a  pending  matter  with  Ta lor Moni on, and therefore they would ha e to withdrawal their offer. He als o apologized that the did not catch it earlier. Mr. Case thanked him for the notice.
Mr. Vento informed  the Boards that due to the disqualification from the	hurts & Bowen
fim,, Latham. Shuker, Eden. and Beaudine, LLC  would  be  the  Counsel  that  would  repres  nt them in the amenity transaction.
Poinciana CDD

Poinciana West CDD

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Ratification of Poinciana CDD Thirteenth
Amendment	to	the	Asset	Sale	and Purchase Agreement
Mr. Flint explained that the Board had previously authorized Mr. Zimbardi to execute the extensions to the purchase and sale agreement, extending the inspection period, and the conclusion was that AV Homes and the District agreed to an extension on October 1, 2018. He said that it had been executed by both parties, so it would just be a matter of ratifying that action by Poinciana.
Mr. Stellfox asked Mr. Flint if he thought they would need to extend that time based on the information that was brought up earlier, and Mr. Flint answered that he and Ms. Carpenter would get with AV Homes to talk about the extension prior to this expiring at the end of the

20

month. Mr. Zimbardi decided that both parties had already signed it, so they should just go ahead and ratify it for that point and time.

A. Poinciana CDD

EIGHTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion of Q&A for Current Status of
Amenity Transaction
Mr. Eckert gave a brief summary of the changes, which were updating the litigation status, as well as to make the numbers on the assessments match what was in the mailed notice that was sent out because one of the Q&A questions talked about the amount of the assessments, including "County collection costs" in the number and also the higher number. He explained that they just revised it to show the low number without any discounts and collection costs that the County charges us, and then it shows the high number that would be seen if they went on the tax bill. He also said that there were changes in terms of the outdated examples of when the assessments would kick in, and new examples were put in place. He said that if the Board approves the document, they would replace the one that is on the website with the new one, which will remain up to date through the next several months.
Mr. Brown commented that he thought the use of the term "Solivita Grande" was fixed back in October 2016, but that it appeared on the "Q&A" section, which then in tum would be on the site, and he requested that AV and Taylor Morrison consider a different terminology because the current term implies or makes a comparison to the development across the street by making one development "greater" than the other with the term "grande." There were multiple suggestions to change it to "Solivita North." Mr. Eckert confirmed that when referring to it in the Q&A, it would be called something along the lines of "developable land to the north."
Mr. Brown also suggested that the increase from $85 to $87 for the club dues be reflected on the website and be continuously updated annually so the residents knew what they were paying and why. Mr. Eckert said that he understood.
Mr. Case thanked the staff for putting together the Q&A effectively and asked that the residents to go over the report and be informed of where they are at in the process.

21

A Supervisor asked if there was a possibility that they could ask AV Homes for a 5-year warranty on the work that they have been doing with the raised parking spaces due to the new handicap areas, so that they are somehow covered if those raised spots start to deteriorate over time, and they would in turn be able to claim with them the replacement costs on the pavement.
Ms. Leo mentioned that she remembered a general conversation about the subject, and one of the things that was an issue is that before proceeding, they would have to do  a reinspection of a lot of the facilities around the District.
Mr. Land suggested they educate the audience about how inspections are done and how
they would take over the amenities once inspections are done. Ms. Leo responded and told the audience that they did inspections over a year ago with all of the facility that they talked about acquisition on, as well as an AV Compliance study and there were some issues found and improvements done, but there was no reinspection because the matter was taking a while. She did say that there will have to be another period where they do take another look at the facilities both inside and out to pick up where they left off.
Another Supervisor wanted to note that he came up with about $20 million of deductions from the actual purchase price that are known at this point in time, and he asked  if he was right in assuming that the money that gets deducted drops the price down to $50 million. Mr. Eckert said that he would have to go through and look at each deduction and gave an example that the commitment to pay an O&M assessment would not reduce the purchase price-it would  just  be an additional financial obligation that Avatar would be taking on. The Supervisor countered that he was asking if they were getting money from them in other ways, it will reduce the amount of money that they are giving them in the end. Mr. Eckert said that if he just focused on the purchase price, which is just one paragraph, then he is missing the entire picture of the transactions because there are a lot of financial concessions that the Boards were able to get from Avatar in terms of closing costs and getting the sales and administration building for no cost, and things like that. He said what they are trying to highlight in the Q&A is that there are a lot more moving parts to the transaction than just one item.
Mr. Zimbardi asked Mr. Eckert to make sure that the recommended changes were written
down, and Mr. Eckert asked the Board to approve the updated Q&A and asked Mr. Flint if he could add it.

22

Poinciana CDD

Poinciana West CDD

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration Agreements
of	Maintenance
Poinciana CDD
Aquatic Pond Maintenance Services - Clarke Aquatic Services
Mr. Zimbardi stated that the Board would be dealing with the aquatic pond, midge control, and landscape maintenance for the Poinciana CDD, and asked Mr. Flint to explain the circumstances. Mr. Flint explained that the agreements expire on September 30, 2018 and because they had discussed the potential of not holding the September 19, 2018 meeting, they went ahead and placed them on this agenda. He said that Mr. Eckert has been in the process of reviewing all the existing ponds and that the landscape area is conveyed, and reviewing the exhibits to the agreements to make sure they properly reflect the ponds that they maintain. Mr. Eckert added that he provided the Board with chart that had the status of conveyance, so what they were trying to do is attach that chart to the maintenance contract to make sure the contractor understood who owned which ponds. He also said that there had been an issue the  pond approved to go back to AV Homes because it is surrounded by golf courses and has no utility to the District and made clear that they should only be maintaining the lake banks that are surrounding Pond B3 because the land bridge that was built between it and Lake Polk was still not in place. He pointed out that he wanted to make sure that Avatar was taking care of the water in the lake, but that other than that, there were really no other issues and the contracts seem to be working fine.

23

Aquatic Midge Control Services - Clarke Environmental Services
Mr. Eckert also noted that Mr. Flint had mentioned that at some point in the future, there would be additional ponds added to the budget, and he said that the budget for the aquatic pond maintenance was around about $5,000 over when everything was calculated out, but midge control is $21,000 under budget so it would even out the pond maintenance over flow.

Landscape Maintenance Agreements
Mr. Eckert discussed that the Floralawn Agreement was right on the budget, so there was no variance there.

Mr. Zimbardi asked if anyone had any comments or questions about the  three agreements, and Mr. Land asked how the price for this year compared to last years. Mr. Flint responded that the Pond Maintenance Agreement has gone up by about $500 a month, but that is because there were two additional that were added to the scope, and he noted that the Landscape Maintenance has remained the same.
Mr. Eckert reminded Mr. Flint of the Midge Control Agreement that they were asking to be approved is about $151,000 and their budget was at approximately $172,800, so they were under budget on that contract for about $21,000. Mr. Eckert did not know what the budgeted amount for last year was, but said that it would be located in the financial statements in the agenda packets. Mr. Flint found where it was located and said that it was around $152,800.

24

Mr. Vento interjected and asked if the budget also included the trial of the solar cell with the midges, and Mr. Flint responded that they had come out of the current fiscal year, so they would not be indicated in the next year's budget.
Mr. Gecewicz noted that under general conditions, there is an aquatic midge citizen response hotline and asked if that had been communicated to the community. Mr. Pete Deglomine from Clarke told the audience that the number for the hotline was their 800 number that goes into Clarke's Kissimmee office. Mr. Case said he knew that the number used to be in the publication, but that he was unsure if it was in there now. Mr. Flint said that they could put the number on the website and put in it in the inside of the front cover of Reflections.

Poinciana West COD
Mr. Eckert presented the summary of the two contracts for Poinciana West, and  explained that the reason that there was two instead of three was because their Floralawn Contract was for two years instead of one.

Aquatic Pond Maintenance Services - Clarke Aquatic Services
Mr. Eckert stated the Aquatic Maintenance Contract with Clarke and said that it was for a 3-year term for $57,000 annually. He also said that the budget for it was at $32,430, so that was
$24,570 over what they budgeted for, but that when they were going through the budgeting process, it was before the issue with the Hydrilla, so that had to be added into the cost.

Aquatic Midge Control Services - Clarke Environmental Services
Mr. Eckert summarized that the Aquatic Midge Control Contract was for $21,999 per year, and the budget was for $32,000, so they were under budget by $10,000. He pointed out that midge control is something that they have to look at throughout the year and they might end up adding an additional pond or two, which would result in an increase in price.

25

Mr. Eckert stated that Poinciana West now owned all of the ponds within the CDD with the exception of Ponds 19A and 19B in the northern section of the Poinciana West CDD, but they do anticipate that they will be taking ownership of those ponds in the next twelve months. He said that they would be talking to Avatar in terms of the maintenance costs for those to get them through to the next budget cycle.
Mr. Flint added that the Hydrilla treatment cost was discussed in the previous meeting, but that today, they were just bringing back the formal contract.
Mr. Case asked if anyone had a question about the agreements presented, and a Supervisor asked why Poinciana West was at $611 per pond per month if Poinciana was at $547. Mr. Eckert responded that each contract that is formed is based on acreage of the pond, so a pond that is twice as big as another is going to have a higher cost.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor's Requests

Poinciana CDD
Mr. Stellfox said that everything that they are doing up until this point is just preparing to be able to float the bonds, but if they don't do it at some point in time, they are going to end up being behind.
Mr. Land pointed out that comments have been made about how Taylor Morrison doesn't have a club plan, that they tum their amenities over to the community, and as a possibility Taylor Morrison may come in and give us the amenities at no cost. He said that if you go and look at other Taylor Morrison communities, they are a lot smaller in lots and number of homes than Solivita. The amenities that they have are nowhere near as complex in detail as these amenities. He said that Taylor Morrison has around fifteen communities around Poinciana, and they have a number of other communities around Tampa, Sarasota, and Naples. He explained that their business model is to put communities around urban areas. He said that he would not be comparing Taylor Morrison to Solivita and that it wasn't a necessarily a good or bad thing, but that it was a different business model. He concluded that he wouldn't expect Taylor Morrison to

26

come and hand out free buildings. He also wanted to say that the purchase and sale agreement that they have may not be the best one that they have had, but it is the agreement in place. He said it gives them roughly $11 million to facilitate an addition of new amenities and it may be better than other alternatives.
Mr. Lane said that he takes offense when someone suggests that they are trying to do something that would hurt the resident's way of living, and finds it disrespectful to the entire Board. He said that the Board is there to take care of the residents, not to impede on them, and that the residents came to Poinciana to live that lifestyle. He said that bad-mouthing AV Homes is the wrong thing to do because they have done a lot of good for the community, and they deserve respect for that.

Poinciana West COD
Mr. Brown started by welcoming Mr. Brunhofer from Taylor Morrison, and said that there had been a lot of concern that they would be getting amenities straight from Taylor Morrison, but he said that the one good thing that has come from it is that they all agree that it's best that they own the amenities. He said that part of the excitement that has come from this issue is that they have two slates of candidates now, and that both of them deserve respect. He added that the other thing that he hoped was put to rest for Brenda Taylor and Michael Luddy's concerns about additional legal costs because it is not giving them any more liability and their fee cannot go up. He said that is the reason that he thinks they should move forward with the bond validation so that if it ever does come to fruition, it goes forward.
Mr. Vento started off by saying that he loves the community and has loved living in it for several years, and that since being on the Board, he had not done any posts until recently. He said that it did not address anything about the Board, but that it did address the fact that they should all just be neighbors and treat each other with respect. He added that they have really gotten out of control after getting a private message from someone in Solivita in response to his post that said, "It's really good you are putting all of your energy into this, because pretty soon you are going to be in a pine box."
He then explained that things are getting out of hand and to say things like "this is the political environment that we live in, so they should get used to it" is not right. He said that we are neighbors and human beings, and that there should be respect given to everyone in the

27

community. He added that he knows that there is not one person in this battle that is all right or that is all wrong, and the agreement may not be perfect but that it is the one that is in place and there is no such thing as perfect. He said that he would also like to thank Mr. Gary Shullaw from AV Home's Corporate Counsel for coming to the meetings and explaining the circumstances because it is very important to clarify things, and he also thanked the Taylor Morrison representatives for their time.
He said that on July 16, 2018, AV Homes put out a document that addressed the misinterpretations of the court cases and the things that are going on with the transaction and sent out emails so that everyone had access to it, and he didn't think that they would  put  the document out there in writing and not let Taylor Morrison know. He said that they are just dealing with process issues that do not add to the cost, and then they can choose to move forward-but if they couldn't, the presentation that Mr. Eckert  gave earlier  would  come  back into play. He then talked about the contract price for the amenities, totaling in $72.9 million, saying that it was 7.6% of the total cost that Taylor Morrison was going to pay AV. Therefore, because of that percentage, the CDD would not be getting the amenities for free. He also said  that the reference to the price was based on 30 years of profit, but that AV Homes' reference was not, so he asked residents to be careful about spreading incorrect information.
Mr. Case thanked the audience for their decency and understanding of the information that was presented.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	General Audience Comments
Ms. Diane Jorio (549 Tapatio Lane) asked if the Board followed Robert' s Rules, and Mr. Eckert replied that they decided they would not when they adopted rules and procedures not requiring Robert's Rules.
Mr. Case added that they try to be more casual in their meetings to make it more comfortable, and Ms. Jorio asked if they still followed the same type of agenda, and they answered yes. Ms. Jorio said that she had been at the August 15, 2018 meeting, they had on the agenda the Supervisor's Requests, then the General Audience Comments came and no  one spoke, so instead of the adjournment, she said that Mr. Stellfox "went on a tirade," and she felt that it was completely out of order because of the amount of contempt that he held at that moment. She asked why the Attorney or the Chairman did not call him out, and that she and

28
other residents were called out of order when she went to complain and there was a threat for the Sheriff to be called. Mr. Eckert responded that they could address her concerns during the staff reports, but she asked Mr. Stellfox to publicly apologize to Lita for treating her the way that he did. Mr. Stellfox said that he would apologize to the residents and that his actions were not that of a tirade, and Mr. Flint interjected by saying that the minutes included in the current agenda were from the previous joint meeting, and not from the one on August 15, 2018. Ms. Jorio stated that she too had been the victim of threatening messages from people in the community, and added that she has remained silent before, but she will not stand for it now and still demanded an apology to Lita. Mr. Stellfox did not give an apology.
Ms. Barbara Ford (417 Treviso Drive) stated that she had submitted several questions to the Board as she was instructed at the last meeting, and two days prior to the current meeting she received a two-pound UPS package from the Board's attorneys in response to her questions. She said that she wanted to present to the Board a few major areas of concerns, such as expenses for maintenance and repair, future interest rates, cost of construction for any future assets or legal matter. She asked if the Board felt that it was prudent to proceed at this time. The resident stated she has asked questions in the past, and she was referred to websites and her questions were not answered.
Ms. Luther gave Solivita praise for being a great community and gave Taylor Morrison her blessing and said that they have a very good rating and high reputation. She asked the Board what protections the residents had if they went against the HOA and complained that their membership prices were too high, and she also asked if they were going to change the amenities as far as the character of a 55 over community. Mr. Eckert answered the second question by saying there was nothing that could be done because of the way the federal government looks at it and the CDD would not jeopardize it by changing it. Mr. Flint commented that they would answer her other question during the staff reports.
A resident commented that Mr. Land took time on that Sunday to come out to his residence to see the conditions that that part of the community was in as far as midges and mosquitos. He said that Mr. Land made a report and shared it with him, but they never heard anything after that about treating the midge and mosquito issue. He also said that he wrote an email asking that one of two solar panels be replaced between his home and his neighbor's home, and he got a response saying that he would check with Mr. Flint to see if it was possible,

29

but he never got any response after that. He asked that his questions be answered during the meeting. Mr. Land said that he would answer those questions during staff reports.
Mr. Bill Young stated that he had the same issue with the delaying of the midge issue, and that Mr. Land had come out and did a report. Mr. Land got back to him saying that they would come out and spray to try and take care of the issue, but nothing followed. Mr. Land responded to Mr. Young and stated that he could not answer on something that the HOA was going to do and that they could do whatever they wanted to the pond from a CDD perspective, but there is no real solution to the midge issue. Mr. Young added that the issue came up a year ago after constantly asking for help, and the budget was approved to take care of the midges, but nothing was done. Mr. Land responded and told him that they could try all they wanted to fix it, but there is not cure.
A resident said that he bought his house 12 years ago in a real estate bubble, and added that around the country and Florida houses have recovered, but his was not one of them because he is down about 15% to 20% in value. He said that the total value of the homes in Solivita is just over $1 billion, and the negative impact of all of the lawsuits and delays is about 10%. He also said that these delays were debilitating the residents' property value, and asked what would happen if the CDD could not make the purchase. He summed up his comment by saying that the CDD should just make the purchase because it was affecting the values of the homes within the CDD.
Mr. Baron stated that his taxes had doubled from a few years ago because he changed
over to a single-family residence, and he asked if the new bonds go through would he be on the hook for 2 ERU for the bond purchase also. Mr. Eckert responded that it would be looked at as one assessment and one amenity.
Mr. Lawrence Kelley (211 Anastasia Drive) asked to confirm that the amenities did not include the golf courses, and the Board said that he was correct. He then asked what was preventing the golf courses from turning into developments. A Supervisor added that if and when the developers did decide to sell lots, they would have to pay the bond fee. Mr. Kelley said that it did not help at all, and the Board Member responded that they had no control over what the developer does.
Mr. Donovan Brown (687 Glendora Drive) made a statement involving his support towards AV Homes and purchasing the amenities from the developer, and said that he strives to

30

make the community better every day by starting an organization called "Solivita United" to improve the atmosphere. He ended by thanking everyone for their efforts.
Mr. Terrance Guay (1319 Bonita Canyon Drive) reflected on his past time at Solivita, saying it was the best decision that he and his wife ever made, but he added that the business deal at stake will impact all of the residents. He said that he did a lot of research and found that a purchase and sale agreement requires the buyers to fully fund and construct new amenities, even though the new amenities will benefit AV Homes as much as it will the CDD. He added that according to his findings, AV Homes should be paying at least half of the cost of new construction, per their involvement in the agreement. He also said that he met with the former lifestyle manager to look over historical amenity's budgets, and he was told that they were not very accurate because the amenities budget had not balanced since the beginning of the Solivita operations. He was also told that AV Homes annually subsidized the budget from the club fees that they had collected as property, and that the most recent budgets have consistently been around $300,000 or more. He added that they would not have the club fees as profit since the club fee will be dedicated to paying for the bond levies on their property. He then said that he has noticed the aging amenities and therefore the cost will presumably keep rising and said that even though it was promised that the cost of amenity-oriented factors would not rise because they said it would go down, he believed that the operations and maintenance fees would continue to rise as a result of the aging of the facilities. He went on to talk about the original contract that included the specification of the sales price set at $73,700,000 and a capped bond funding of $90,000,000, and when he questioned the numbers at the time of the original signing, he was told that there would be adjustments in the numbers because of interest rate fluctuation. He said that once the rates fluctuated, AV Homes did not budge on the price of the $73,700,000, but with the price of the higher bond cap, the deal could still be done. Subsequently, the bond cap was revised to
$202,000,000. He ended by saying that he respected everyone in the deal.
Mr. Gecewicz stated that even though he had not been at the agreement hearing when the contract was signed, he was at every Board Meeting after that to get caught up on it, and said that extensive negotiations had taken place because of all of the Board Members and Mr. Eckert and his team. He added that those negotiations have added more of a positive influence than a negative one, even though people have tended to focus on the negative. Mr. Vento also addressed the issue of the management fee under construction of the new amenities where AV came to one

31

Board Meeting and made a change to that fee. He corrected the fee and said that the change was not a 5.5% fee, but that it was a personnel rental where the estimated cost was $50,000 instead of
$550,000, with $500,000 of that funding available for the new amenities. He added that it was in the Q&A if anyone wanted to refer to it.
Mr. Guay thanked him for the update, and said that he tried to look at the different numbers in the Q&A as Mr. Vento did, but asked if there could be a definitive list made to  clarify those numbers because it would help the residents in seeing what the actual price would be, and said that all of his comments were meant to have total respect to anyone in the room.
Mr. Eckert wanted to clarify that the contract said not to exceed $50,000 for a personnel leasing.
Ms. Denise Blaine (494 Mayfair Drive) stated said that she had a thought while this discussion occurred that when she had sold her house in Miami, she had asked that Board how much her house was worth and she said that they had to negotiate a different price because it did not appraise for what she felt it was worth, ending in her accepting the offer for less than previously expected. She said that she was hoping that there would be some type of negotiation involved in the current purchase from Taylor Morrison. She added that she was for the bond issue, but that she was not for the price that they had to pay, so she asked if the negotiation  aspect was still there to lower the price and bond issue.
Mr. Case said that there are a lot of areas that need to be addressed before closing the deal, but with outstanding litigation, it' s difficult to address those areas. He reiterated that they do have a long way to go before the closing. He also said that people were saying that all the amenities had been defined, and therefore that was the end result, but he corrected that and said that it was not true because they went through only one iteration of what the amenity should be like and it was likely that that would change. He assured the residents that there was a lot to be dealt with and it would be sorted out and it will be a while before everything is finalized.
Another Supervisor added that as Mr. Vento said before, there had been 22 changes to the purchase and sale agreement that netted out several million dollars of changes and that even though it was an ongoing process, it has been mostly successful and they are not done yet.
Mr. Joseph Ewing (812 San Rafael Street) stated that he was in support of the amenity purchase and the work that the Board Members have done. He said that as one of the residents had previously mentioned the Solivita United Club, he was also a member of that organization

32

and they had spent a number of hours at the Farmer's Market in an attempt to educate people about_ the agreement and answer any questions. They also started a petition to see if people supported the purchase or not that got over 1600 signatures of people supporting the deal, so the Board was not alone.
Ms. Cherry Brown (687 Glendora Drive) stated that she also backs the Supervisor's decisions and gave her gratitude for the hard work put in to the amenities purchase. She encouraged the residents to read through the new Q&A because it answered several questions and solidified a lot of the misinformation that was spreading.
Ms. Luther stated that she was for the HOA moving forward with the bond, but that she wanted to encourage the Board to negotiate and possibly get more money put in a reserve for the roads and road replacement because she had belonged to another community where they had to put out $4,000 of their own money to get roads replaced because they had no funding.
Mr. Eckert clarified that the roads are owned by the HOA and the CDD has no control of the roads, and a Supervisor added that there is already reserve funding for the roads within Solivita.
Ms. Patricia Schmid (772 San Rafael Street) thanked the CDD Supervisors, but especially thanked Mr. Vento for bringing up the points he made regarding the net year because it was important for everyone to know that AV Homes is not so hard to deal with. She added that when she and her husband moved to Solivita in 2005, she lost $150,000 in one of the homes that she sold within Solivita because of the recession, but AV Homes kept fighting. She said that the residents should be thankful that they were not like other subdivisions in Central Florida that had to file bankruptcies with other builders and had leans put against their properties. She pointed out that no home in Solivita ever had a lien put against their property because AV Homes held on through that hard time.
Ms. Cindy Clouser (440 Bel Air Way) stated that she thought that putting the information in Reflections was a great idea because there are many residents that didn't know how to get to the websites. She also asked if there was a way that the Board could tell people to look up their tax documents to see if they lived in the Poinciana CDD or Poinciana West CDD because it would help with voting in November. Mr. Gecewicz responded that residents in Phases 1 through 6 are in Poinciana, and Phase 7 and above is Poinciana West, and Mr. Eckert confirmed that was correct.

33

Mr. Neil Riggs (249 Bay Drive) stated that he was one of the people that put on shows in the theatre in Solivita, and he said that he understood that the theatre will only hold 600 seats, and he believed it would be much too small. Mr. Land responded that nothing was set in stone because they first have to see how much money they have, but added that the resident could come to the next iteration and said that it would be a good idea for him to become a part of the resident committee. The resident thanked the Board for doing a great job.
A resident asked why the Board has refused to get a certified appraisal for the amenities so that the residents know the value of the property that they were dealing with, and asked that that answer be put into the Q&A section of the agenda.
A resident said that she asked her AV Homes realtor representative what would happen when AV Homes builds out, and they said that when they are at 90% built out, they would be turned over. The Board Members told her that it was part of the HOA.
Ms. Maureen Clancy (99 Auburn Drive) stated that she had only been at Solivita for a year, and she did not understand they needed another pool when they already had 14 and why they were getting more amenities that they already had. She also asked who picked the people on the Board, to which Mr. Flint answered that the residents voted for them and that he would answer questions under staff reports.

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Other Business

Poinciana CDD
Hearing none, the next item is followed.
Poinciana West CDD
Hearing none, the next item is followed.

THIRTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports

A. Attorney
Mr. Eckert stated that as far as the anticipated timeline, there were two things that would be impediments to issuing bonds, and those two things were going through a bond validation process and the class action. He said that there was a procedural hearing at the end of October to talk about what will be involved in the bond validation trial when it gets scheduled, so he did not

34

think that the bond validation trial will be until after the first of the year when all of the holidays are over. He clarified that nothing would be happening in October and November in terms of the selling of the bonds. He said that even though the Districts are not a party to the class action law suit, some of the issues that are in the class action can affect the District's ability to market the bonds because bond holders want to know that when they invest in a community, that there is no litigation that is pending that could have any impact on their investment. He summed up that nothing dramatic would be happening in the next 60 days. He then added that bond validation does not require them to issue bonds and he also addressed the issue that people had with the price of the agreement by saying that no matter how much they pay, they still have to go through a bond validation procedure to issue the bonds for those amounts. He said that it would not make sense to stop the process at its current point.
Mr. Eckert also addressed the statement that there was a government bond, confirming that it was not a government bond. He explained the process by saying that they would be issuing the bond and it is bought by institutional investors, and added that it is a tax-exempt bond because they can get a lower interest rate from the investors.
He then stated that in terms of the public access issue, the Board has already gone  through a hearing where they set the non-resident user fee, which came out to be $4,000. So, it was already in place. He also said that there is a statistic that shows non-residents do not use amenities even when the price has been lower.
A Supervisor added that there were 60 CDDs across Florida that had lower fees, and  there was only one where there was only with about five or six people come in to use the swimming pool, but that was it.
Mr. Brown added that the resident who was concerned that the government could overturn that. Mr. Eckert said that his opinion was the decision that the Board made with coming up with the $4,000 was not arbitrary and it was well-reasoned, therefore they would not have recommended it if it was not supported by Florida law.
Mr. Eckert also said that there have been a lot of comments about "Nextdoor" and that "Nextdoor" is not run by the Districts and they have no input on it. He added that he has told the Board that social media postings by Board Members is a terrible way of governing because it creates the potential for a Sunshine Law violation and the first member that posts something about the CDD is the only one who gets to post and no one else can respond. He said that it

35

creates a bad dynamic for the Board when one member can take all  of the oxygen out of the room and no one can respond to it, so he recommended not using it for that purpose at all. He stated that social media is the main reason there are so many arguments between Board Members and residents.
Mr. Eckert then talked about the golf course issue, saying that there is a whole process that they have to go through with the County to rezone lands for different uses, and there is a lot of public input. He did add that the CDD bond investors do not like golf courses, so if there was one within the deal there would most likely be a higher interest rate on the bonds and also paying higher assessments.
Mr. Eckert also said that the $102 million that was floating around was part of the bond
validation and is the amount that they are asking the Board if they can issue up to that amount, so it was not a contract amount with AV Homes.
Mr. Gecewicz added that it was done so that they wouldn't have to go through all the expense that of getting another bond issue. Mr. Eckert agreed and said that they sold $95 million in bonds, and 5 years from now, if they wanted to build a new facility, they could go do a $2 million bond issue and would not have to go back to the court.
Mr. Eckert also addressed the concern about the negotiations, saying that they were ongoing and would be with Latham, Shuker, Eden & Beaudine, Jan Carpenter's firm, which is a capable firm that he thought the residents would be pleased with.
Mr. Eckert also addressed the question of who picked the Board, and answered that it is entirely comprised of residents of Solivita. In the beginning of the community, it was comprised of employees from Avatar. He said that that was how the Statute worked; once they  get to 6 years and 250 voters, it started to transition to resident control. He said that the current Board Members were either appointed by other Board Members or they went through the general election process. Mr. Flint added that there were two Boards present with 5 members each, and there are two females that were absent from the Board Meeting, so there are women represented on both Boards. He said that they have to go through similar processes as County officials to qualify to run for the seats. He said that there are 3 seats up for election on the Poinciana Board, and two on the Poinciana West Board, and those are elected just like any other County officials.
A Supervisor stated that he was confused about a comment that one resident mentioned that there were sanctions approved by the court against the people that initiated the class action.

36

Mr. Eckert clarified that in the first validation case, there were multiple attempts by the attorneys for Brenda Taylor and Bill Mann to subpoena and get documents and depositions of Avatar representatives. But the last time that it was requested, the courts had an order saying they could not do that. He said that this led to a dispute involving the attorney for Brenda Taylor and Bill Mann, and Avatar and AV Homes where AV Homes believes that the judge issued sanctions in an amount to be determined later against the legal counsel for Taylor and Mann. He said that Taylor and Mann attorneys say that there were no sanctions ordered, and clarified  that the District is not involved in it and there has not been a final decision in the matter.
Mr. Eckert concluded the Attorney's Report.

Engineer
Ms. Leo said that she did not have anything that would require Board action, but that she might chime in during the Field Manager's Report because of a couple of aspects that would be addressed.
District Manager
Action Items List
Mr. Flint said that they had a full Field Manager Report, but based on the length of the Agenda, they shortened it. He said that he did have Alan Scheerer, Clayton Smith, and Clarke at the meeting because of the issue with midge control. He also said that at the last Board  Meeting it was approved for them to move the middle aerator from the east side of the lake to the west side where they have had most of the issues. He also said that they ordered two additional aerators that will be installed on the North end and in the middle, but that they were still waiting on the delivery of those. He added that they haven't decided on the final location, but that a  Board Member should be appointed to reiterate to the residents the final location of the aerators, and Mr. Brown was asked to be the one to carry that through.
A Supervisor asked if Craig could address what will happen with Massey, and Craig said that Massey would come back with a report on what they are going to do to the homes, starting with pressure-washing and then coming back with a treatment schedule and provide the information to the Board by the end of the week. He also said that AV Homes would like to take care of it, and the Supervisor said that he appreciated that AV was stepping up.

37

One resident asked when the aerators would be coming in, and Mr. Flint said that he would get a tracking number for him and an estimated delivery. He also said that he understood that they have to get the whole pond, but that in the years that he has asked for help the only complaints have come from the end of the street he lives on. He said he didn't understand why, if the midges and spiders were crowding at the South end of the pond, they couldn't take the two aerators and put them where there is a real problem. Mr. Flint said that aerators are not instant relief, and he said that that might be true, but if they brought them over there they could see relief within weeks. Mr. Flint said that Bill would work with him on that.
Mr. Hector Ramirez (316 New River Drive) stated that he couldn't even see out of his backyard because of all the midges, but that it was part of living in Florida. A Supervisor asked him if he had put his complaint into Clarke, and he said that he had not.

FOURTEENTH  ORDER OF BUSINESS	Next Meeting Date - October 17, 2018
Mr. Flint clarified that there was an understanding that the Boards did intend to cancel the September 19, 2018 meeting.
Mr. Eckert suggested canceling the October meeting if there were no agenda items to discuss. Mr. Zimbardi and Mr. Case agreed.
Poinciana COD

Poinciana West COD

FIFTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment

Poinciana COD

38

Poinciana West CDD

Poinciana CDD

 	
Secretary/Assistant Secretary

Poinciana West COD
Chairman/Vice Chairman

 	
Secretary/Assistant Secretary	Chairman/Vice Chairman

39

SECTION VI
tt Berger, Toombs, Elam,
....o,,	Gaines & Frank
Certified Public Accountants	PL

600 Citrus Avenue
Suite 200
Fort Pierce, Florida 34950
772/461-6120 II 461-1155 FAX: 772/468-9278

August 28, 2018

District Manager
Governmental Management Services, LLC 135 W. Central Blvd., Suite 320
Orlando, FL 32801

The Objective and Scope of the Audit of the Financial Statements

You have requested that we audit the financial statements of Poinciana Community Development District, which comprise governmental activities, each major fund and the budgetary comparison for the General Fund as of and for the year ended September 30, 2018 which collectively comprise the basic financial statements. We are pleased to confirm our acceptance and our understanding of this audit engagement by means of this letter for the year ending September 30, 2018 and thereafter if mutually agreed by Poinciana Community Development District and Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank, Certified Public Accountants PL.

Our audit will be conducted with the objective of our expressing an opinion on the financial statements.

The Responsibilities of the Auditor

We will conduct the audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted  in the United States of America and "Government Auditing Standards" issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor's judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.

Member AICPA
Fort Pierce / Stuart

Member AICPA Division For CPA Firms Private Companies Practice Section

Member FICPA
Berger, Toombs, Elam,
-0,, Gaines & Frank
Cel'llfled PublicACCIOLlll\ilnb Pl

Poinciana Community Development District August 28, 2018
Page 2

Because of the inherent limitations of an audit, together with the inherent limitations of internal control, an unavoidable risk that some material misstatements may not be detected exists, even though the audit is properly planned and performed in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Also, an audit is not designed to detect errors or fraud that are immaterial to the financial statements. The determination of abuse is subjective; therefore, Government Auditing Standards do not expect us to provide reasonable assurance of detecting abuse.

In making our risk assessments, we consider internal control relevant to Poinciana Community Development District's preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity's internal control. However, we will communicate to you in writing concerning any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in internal control relevant to the audit of the financial statements that we have identified during the audit.

We will also communicate to the Board any fraud involving senior management and fraud that causes a material misstatement of the financial statements that becomes known to us during  the audit, and any instances of noncompliance with laws and regulations that we become aware of during the audit.

The funds that you have told us are maintained by Poinciana Community Development District and that are to be included as part of our audit are listed below:

General Fund
Debt Service Fund
ti Berger, Toombs, Elam,
,Q,1 Gaines & Frank
CMiried P'tiblic 10,a:o,.mi..n1i; PL

Poinciana Community Development District August 28, 2018
Page 3

The Responsibilities of Management and Identification of the Applicable Financial Reporting Framework

Our audit will be conducted on the basis that management acknowledges and understands that it has responsibility:

For the preparation and fair presentations of the financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America;

To evaluate subsequent events through the date the financial statements are issued or available to be issued, and to disclose the date through which subsequent events were evaluated in the financial statements. Management also agrees that it will not evaluate subsequent events earlier than the date of the management representation  letter referred to below;

For the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error;

For establishing and maintaining effective internal control Cif financial reporting and for informing us of all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of such controls of which it has knowledge; and

To provide us with:
Access to all information of which management is aware that is relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements such as records, documentation and other matters;
Additional information that we may request from management for the purpose of the audit; and
Unrestricted access to persons within the entity from whom we determine it necessary to obtain audit evidence.

As part of our audit, we will request certain written confirmation concerning representations made to us in connection with the audit including, among other items:

That management has fulfilled its responsibilities as set out in the terms of this letter;  and

That it believes the effects of any uncorrected misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
...o,,
Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank

Poinciana Community Development District August 28, 2018
Page 4

Management is responsible for identifying and ensuring that Poinciana  Community  Development District complies with the laws and regulations applicable to its activities, and for informing us about all known material violations of such laws or regulations. In addition, management is responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to prevent and detect fraud or abuse, and for informing us about all known or suspected fraud or abuse affecting the entity involving management, employees who have significant roles in internal control, and others where the fraud or abuse could have a material effect on  the financial statements or compliance. Management is also responsible for informing us of its knowledge of any allegations of fraud or abuse or suspected fraud or abuse affecting the entity received in communications from employees, former employees, analysts, regulators, short sellers, or others.

The Board is responsible for informing us of its views about the risks of fraud or abuse within the entity, and its knowledge of any fraud or abuse or suspected fraud or abuse affecting the entity.

Poinciana Community Development District agrees that it will not associate us with any public or private securities offering without first obtaining our consent. Therefore, Poinciana Community Development District agrees to contact us before it includes our reports or otherwise makes reference to us, in any public or private securities offering.

Because Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank will rely on Poinciana  Community Development District and its management and Board of Supervisors to discharge the foregoing responsibilities, Poinciana Community Development District holds harmless and  releases Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank, its partners, and employees from all claims, liabilities, losses and costs arising in circumstances  where there has been a known misrepresentation by a member of Poinciana Community Development District's management, which has caused, in any respect, Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank's breach of contract or negligence. This provision shall survive the termination of this arrangement for services.

Poinciana Community Development District's Records and Assistance

If circumstances arise relating to the condition of the Poinciana Community Development District's records, the availability of appropriate audit evidence, or indications of a significant risk of material misstatement of the financial statements because of error, fraudulent financial reporting, or misappropriation of assets, which in our professional judgment, prevent us from completing the audit or forming an opinion, we retain the unilateral right to take any course of action permitted by professional standards, including declining to express an opinion, issuing a report, or withdrawing from the engagement.

During the course of our engagement, we may accumulate records containing data that should be reflected in the Poinciana Community Development District books and records. The District will determine that all such data, if necessary, will be so reflected. Accordingly, the District will not expect us to maintain copies of such records in our possession.
....o,,
Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank

Poinciana Community Development District August 28, 2018
Page 5

Other Relevant Information

In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, a copy of our most recent peer review report has been provided to you, for your information.

Fees, Costs and Access to Workpapers

Our fees for the audit and accounting services described above are based upon the value of the services performed and the time required by the individuals assigned to the engagement, plus direct expenses. Invoices for fees will be submitted in sufficient detail to  demonstrate compliance with the terms of this engagement. Billings are due upon submission.  Our fee for the services described in this letter for the year ending September 30, 2018 will not exceed
$3,590 unless the scope of the engagement is changed, the assistance which Poinciana Community. Development District has agreed to furnish is not provided, or unexpected conditions are encountered, in which case we will discuss the situation with you before proceeding. All other provisions of this letter will survive any fee adjustment. The two annual renewals must be mutually agreed and approved by the Board of Supervisors.

In the event we are requested or authorized by Poinciana Community Development District or are required by government regulation, subpoena, or other legal process to produce our documents or our personnel as witnesses with respect to our engagement for Poinciana Community Development District, Poinciana Community Development  District will, so long as we are not a party to the proceeding in which the information is sought, reimburse us for our professional time and expenses, as well as the fees and expenses of our counsel, incurred in responding to such requests.

The documentation for this engagement is the property of Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines, & Frank. However, you acknowledge and grant your assent that representatives of the cognizant or oversight agency or their designee, other government audit staffs, and the U.S. Government Accountability Office shall have access to the audit documentation upon their request and that we shall maintain the audit documentation for a period of at least three years after the date of the report, or for a longer period if we are requested to do so by the cognizant or oversight agency. Access to requested documentation will be provided under the supervision of Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines, & Frank audit personnel and at a location designated by our Firm.

Reporting

We will issue a written report upon completion of our audit of Poinciana Community Development District's financial statements no later than June 30, 2019. Our report will be addressed to the Board of Poinciana Community Development District. We cannot provide assurance that an unmodified opinion will be expressed. Circumstances may arise in which it is necessary for us to modify our opinion, add an emphasis-of-matter  or  other-matter paragraph(s), or withdraw from the engagement.
rft( Berger, Toombs, Elam,
Co,, Gaines & Frank
,rtified Public Acmun Pl

Poinciana Community Development District August 28, 2018
Page 6

In addition to our report on Poinciana Community Development District's financial statements, we will also issue the following types of reports:
Reports on internal control and compliance with laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements. We will report on any internal control findings and/or noncompliance which could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Management letter pursuant to Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General.
Attestation Report - compliance with Section 218.415, Florida Statutes.
This letter constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of agreement between Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines, & Frank and Poinciana Creeks Community Development District, superseding all proposals, oral or written, and all other communications, with respect to the terms of the engagement between the parties.

Please sign and return the attached copy of this letter to indicate your acknowledgment of, and agreement with, the arrangements for our audit of the financial statements including our respective responsibilities.

Sincerely,
,D..uqt,t vam.W
BERG  R1:LAtiA & FRANK
J. W. Gaines, CPA

Confirmed on behalf of the addressee:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - ' ---

Judson B. Baggett MBA, CPA, CVA, Partner Marci Reutimann
CPA, Partner
ft 6815 Dairy Road Zephyrhills, FL 33542
1  (813) 788-2155
A   (813} 782-8606

System Review Report

To the Directors	November 2, 2016
Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank, CPAs PL
and the Peer Review Committee of the Florida Institute of Certified Public Accountants

We have reviewed the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank, CPAs PL {the firm), in effect for the year ended May 31, 2016. Our peer review was conducted in accordance with the Standards for Performing and Reporting on Peer Reviews established by the Peer Review Board of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. As a part of our peer review, we considered reviews by regulatory entities, if applicable, in determining the nature and extent of our procedures. The firm is responsible for designing a system of quality control and complying with it to provide the firm with reasonable assurance of performing and reporting in conformity with applicable professional standards in all material respects. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the design of the system of quality control, and the firm's compliance therewith based on our review. The nature, objectives, scope, limitations of, and the procedures performed in a System Review are described in the standards at www.aicpa.org/prsummary.

As required by the standards, engagements selected for review included engagements performed under Government Auditing Standards and audits of employee benefit plans.

In our opinion, the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank, CPAs PL in effect for the year ended May 31, 2016 has been suitably designed and complied with to provide the firm with reasonable assurance of performing and reporting in conformity with applicable professional standards in all material respects. Firms can receive a rating of pass, pass with deficiency(ies), or fail. Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank, CPAs PL, has received a peer review rating of pass.

L	c..-­
s ag . R utimann & Associates, CPAs, PA

(BERGER_REPORT16)

-

f/\ember  Arnerican  Institute  of  Certified  Pt1blic Acco1J11lt111t; (AICPA) c111d  Fk 11id  □ Institute  of  Certified  PLiblic Acrnuntcint,  (FICP/1) Notionc,I A:;sociollon r>f Certified Valuofwr, /\noly:;t, (MACVA)
ADDENDUM TO ENGAGEMENT LETTER BETWEEN BERGER, TOOMBS, ELAM, GAINES AND FRANK AND POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
(DATED AUGUST 28, 2018)

Public Records. Auditor shall, pursuant to and in accordance with Section 119.0701, Florida Statutes, comply with the public records laws of the State of Florida, and specifically shall:

Keep and maintain public records required by the District to perform the services or work set forth in this Agreement; and

Upon the request of the District's custodian of public records, provide the District with a copy of the requested records or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable time at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, or as otherwise provided by law; and

Ensure that public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except  as  authorized by law for the duration of the contract term and following completion of the Agreement if the Auditor does not transfer the records to the District; and

Upon completion of the Agreement, transfer, at no cost to the District, all public records in possession of the Auditor or keep and maintain public records required by the District to perform the service or work provided  for in this Agreement. If the Auditor transfers all public records to the District upon completion of the Agreement, the Auditor shall destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public disclosure requirements. If the Auditor keeps and maintains public records upon completion of the Agreement, the Auditor shall meet all applicable requirements for retaining public records. All records stored electronically must be provided to the District, upon request from the District's  custodian of public records, in a format that is compatible with the information technology systems of the District.

Auditor acknowledges that any requests to inspect or copy public records relating to this Agreement must be made directly to the District pursuant to Section 119.0701(3), Florida Statutes. If notified by the District  of a public records request for records not in the possession of the District but in possession of the Auditor, the Auditor shall provide such records to the District or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable time. Auditor acknowledges that should Auditor fail to provide the public records to the District within a reasonable time, Auditor may be subject to penalties pursuant to Section 119.10, Florida Statutes.

IF THE AUDITOR HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO THE AUDITOR'S DUTY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC RECORDS RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT/CONTRACT, THE AUDITOR MAY CONTACT THE CUSTODIAN OF PUBLIC RECORDS FOR THE DISTRICT AT:

GMS-CF,LLC
135 W. CENTRAL BLVD., SUITE 320
ORLANDO, FL 32801
TELEPHONE: 407-841-5524 EMAIL: -	-	-	-	-	-	-	-

Auditor: J.W. Gaines
By:	 			,. Title:  Direct/		
District: Poinciana CDD

By:	 	

Title: --------
Date: September 11, 2018	Date: --------

SECTION VII
RESOLUTION 2019-02

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT APPROVING AN AMENDEDMENT TO THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018 AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2017-20 the Poinciana Community Development District Board of Supervisors (the "Board") adopted a General Fund Budget for Fiscal Year 2018; and

WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend the budgeted revenues and expenditures approved for Fiscal Year 2018.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT:

The General Fund Budget for Fiscal Year 2018 is hereby amended and restated as set forth on the Fiscal Year 2018 Budget attached hereto as "Exhibit A".

This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption and be reflected in the monthly and Fiscal Year End 9/30/2018 Financial Statements and Audit Report of the District.

PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 28th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018.

ATTEST:		BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE POINCIANA	COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

Secretary
By:_ _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _
Its:- - - - - - - - - - -
Poinciana
Community Development District

Fiscal Year 2018
General Fund

Actuals	Adopted	Amended
Thru	Budget	Increase/	Budget
Description	 	9/30/18	FY2018	(Decrease)	 	FY2018	

Revenues					
Special Assessments - Tax Collector	$454,515	$452,500	$0	$452,500	
Special Assessments - Direct Billed	$71,073	$71,073	$0	$71,073	
Special Assessments - Developer	$84,960	$84,960	$0	$84,960	
Interest	$2,031	$3,500	$0	$3,500	
Carry Forward Surplus	$0	$0	$71,626	$71,626	

Total Revenues	 	$612,579	$612,033	$71,626		$683,ssa 1					

Operation  & Maintenance Expenses		$437,855	$436,094		$7,290	$443,384 I Total Expenditures	 	$673,883	$612,033	$71,626       $ss3,ss0 I Excess Revenues/(Expenditures) 			!$61,303)		$0			$0		$0 I

S ECTION VI11
Hopping Green & Sams
Attorneys and Counselors

MEMORANDUM

TO:

FROM: DATE: RE:
Board of Supervisors
Poinciana Community Development District Michael C. Eckert
November 16, 2018

License Agreement for Driving Range

On May 21, 2009, the Poinciana Community Development District  ("District") entered into a License Agreement ("Agreement") with Avatar Properties Inc. See License Agreement, attached. In its basic terms, the Agreement allows for the placement, operation and maintenance  of driving range equipment in a stormwater management pond (Tract P-Cl)  owned  by  the District.

The Agreement is set to automatically renew every ten (10) years unless terminated in accordance with its terms. The Agreement may be terminated in  two ways.  First, either  party  can terminate the Agreement at any time without cause upon providing one hundred eighty (180) days' advance written notice. Second, the Agreement can be terminated by providing at least ninety (90) days' advance written notice before the natural expiration of a ten-year term. The current ten-year term is set to expire on March 16, 2019.

Historically, the Agreement has not been contentious and facilitates a unique community amenity. Staff has no basis upon which to suggest termination of the Agreement.

Attachment

Post Office Box 6526	Tallahassee, Florida 32314	119 S. Monroe Street. Suite 300 (32301)	850.222.7500	850.224.8551 fax	www.hgslaw.com

LICENSE·AGREEMEN'F
.	s. LICENSE  A.OR  E .l, i .:''A»ri:   9J!('l, ;tlll'i7 iYe·.lhc 21'. il .Y  or .. M11,..1 . .ioQ9;.by •!1d
l'IW POINCIANA C'O MUl\ll'i'V i>1£v.ELOl>MENT: DIS CT :! Licensor.") \'111 ,icl IJ 10.
Syciun!)Je ·.!;lt a:t,iu! l4Q; Poincil11na_. Floriijil 34747, 11nd  tbi: AV.h:TAR P.ROPEllTlES  INC, ("LkcnSl:l::"l, i  1:lciriija.
tbqflirillii>n, v,b_ f!lllj)tng .d ,s-i$ 201 hiunbt.it::ircle·, c9ral G?1Jl cs,.Floriila 33134,111 COl)Jll:Qilon with Ll sec's. lit:cnsed wc:of certain pmj)ci1-)I .ana related common area fliciiitii;s (11II hc;cln dr rDfc tcd .en as di!! "Ptcm'lsc_s• •ill/or "l.Jc n:ii:cl Propeity"}, conslsti'!a ora stonn\Y'1er ,etenclon pond, vihich P.ranlscs.shal·l ttei111ore•fility:dcsciiticd In Extilb1t
-A, au111ll11;d h.creto aniff:n);orp OJted bc. rn by refcn:nce. far u_s=. \,y Lii:c-nscc for construction, operation -and m•lntcnani:c of.Lice11see's-aqua ilnving range wiUilh the:'Po(nc:ima ar .(tgc "Use"),	·

WH2R;EAS; (pr opi:I in_ lionsictcril1io!.!l:lf lb,; sum qfT 11n·1111d N,!)/QolJ&-r$ (Sl O.QQ)to'tbe L1,ccnsor in lt'&ndl)llld by the Liccns.ce,·tile rccciptwhcrd f l,·h rc.by a 1ow.! 1 Gilcl'-lbc mutual i:ov¢11111us and ¢onditions coui;iinecl hcreh,; Uccnsor•11nd.ll ccnscc11s rcc·as frlllows:
l.	
L:icens e. hu i allcd i:ca:tain lmpto.vcmcnts ·In 11n area on the: Licensed Pl'ofii:rf3' (the'
"lil)prov. 11:ills"); Tile r.'1!P.J0Veo,liiil-$ cA1\s!s o!variO\Js IU\ li!lred. tlll\ding \alanil gal(gree . chairs, tnbies nnd other
-fai:liltles	Ilic ll'ljUSidriv!ng tang-c. 1111: Licc111t:a shall natffaVQ tlie:rigltt.(9:condilc, !IJtyOllicr wof1' Chj.lBgt ilf any oi11er:ac1lvldes:t,eyond tlac Use lndchutied In this Agrct:mcnt wi6io)il prior written consent tjfLl r. ,v fch hall hot J-xl1,1nre11Soaably,vlthhdd.
13.	Licensee shall provide; 11\'.ilS sole co&l· pn4eie   .nse, all l)_	llrY improvements ass c:Ja\ed wipj
:11ie rmprov.cmcnB necesslU)' for-Lli:cnsei:io use llieLi i:cnscd.Propt:rty in·11cconllinco wiih ihc-.Ose,	·
C.       ' The I:.l cns shall conduc, t. its opcnili!>I\$ 011 th   Pr. m!s    ,vlih 1111 due.cm¢ ap4·1;a1M!on [cir lhems lves  nnd lhc:ir i11Vilec.s  as .well as for ihc protection of th!l ·Pi'ejlll,sc!i, ·l;fcc:n$    fuftlicr .iigfc¢5 ilip.L lf-il11«1 ge   r ei;ts:uQtion  of lltc Premises .resu,lts fi'um  ils opernUons  on ,th-e Pren1lses they.shall. cam_pensate  tltc Licensor 1hr •such ilami e d tructlon un. olijetwi n_)li.Rc *c Cic \ lir v!\'Ol\: fpr ld'd.!UllDJ 9f de5\!'.U1,tiqi1. Np,d'a!\ge.ri>ui; ,or.Q rwls baziii'doils cir regulated :J>factlcc.s or n1at'erla which ma)' COO!l!Jtlinale, itijUni, or' talbJ Jlic'.J'tq1_t1fs¢s,  111,1! be;al,lbw   ·on thcrPn:mises. ' License e: shall be lialilo' for anfand 11n.d11111  gc-s, lcissi:s,·111ill•experii es and \VIII lftdeinnit)' !;!censor agliliist
and  ftpp, any loss !ln'd  exjle:ns rq Qltini frCll!l t e   discovery  by any person.o-r governmental  entity of dangerous,
h11zor OIIS or r gqla1e pJ1i9tlc!l5 or lil tqiio)•. as 11-[cSIII! or.v
l>remi i:s rrce·ofall bush, litter.and rcflllle from Its opetatlons.
-e-;•• e of.th.Ii PremJs . LJCl!!ISCC shall keep.the
p; UJioh the tem:,lplition oft is·,6,grecm nt, Ll itsec sijall .111115 sole c;- t;and expense removi;:11II JlllniOnal properly 11nd any lither llems f\iom, 11\i: Prc:mlscs and remove: the lmproveml:hlS. ,Ll=ns cc .sllali n:lum .Ilic l'r _ni es fo sil s!iw.tlll)ly the,san1ci:0ndiiion u ·.cxt,1cdUP.on commcnccmcni of-tl1c Licensee's USll,

w ha_tsgev. r.
I:..	The eremlsc$ shall ,'be u_scd by Lii:en• J(!lc;ly .for the Us-e
nil for no other ;purpose or l! C
f'.	Licensee s I \ICl:ept th Prcmlsllli.il\ lis •AS,lS-, \"!HER F,1S, WITH AltL·FAULT./>." condition, Lic nsQr shlllJ:li11vi:-no obligation.ti,alter, improve or otherwise prepare the PJ'Clll J:S tor Licensee's use.
o;	bl   -rs c-i ltall non .nak!; liJiY altcra.Uons, J talla\ions ot:improv.eilfeliis ofin)'.kiild wha ,;i:r
to the. cmlscs, wlth0utfirst ol!ralni11-g Licens0r's couscnriri titiih,instanee(Wlti'i/ltci:fM: W111 eanoit!=.d Iii' d&:11ied t_iy· J,.lcC11sot in Lli:enso(s r111150qabl,:. discr tiori). Licensee shall .subniil lo - Licensor plw anil' speclfii:ufions ·ror 1my lilt raUoriS, iiisfij!ll!lfo- iir lniprQlilimcn. o-f ilny·l([n'd for Li oi's 11ppro.val, vhi1,h :approval may be -withheld ln Llcensol's,reasonable discretion.     .	.	, -.	.

H. . .     •t;icc:Ne   hall secure all rcqutn:d  permits and npprgvals necessary for the lmpmvC111cntS,1111d JilY 1ilt11n: illlaratiQn l.f !ltjy, Nc!tb# .Ll As!: npr 'its ·i:Qjl ;fo ct og'.IUJll,{1 . htll c;amni ce. :y cah r,uction or sl JQobilization until It has C0111munieotcli and' cicmonstri c  .to1,..Jceh;S11t !hlilit1ias S\lti ehll)>c:milttit'lg ti;quite!Jjcn•is
.	.  2.	Term of llic.bf Prj!p)ifct, Yi: sh.-11 be entitled to the licc a US!; of.such P,i:=ilses for II ps:r.iod.of
tcnjlO) ycar: 1  s 11b    t tb carly·ltlmi!l'lll  !i.BS-jl\'OYlil,eil hcr;i!,ln,    mmi:11¢til1[Mi rcli l   _Oj}, l'll)ij ti;!1nJll11ilrig  artli 16.
2QIII (h e.r:eil\lil\-lr t eftD'Od to,as1bc "'Term"). TherellRet, tlilN\i,'lil!iiiciil wilhulciin'81icaUy rei(IIW forsucc ssl ten yeu
s	lirtl Uccmor prov.lilcs:wriUcn nolicc·Qf<irs llllcnl	-to  rcni:w 11 IC11$tnrnety (9,0) days prlor to the end oh 1cnn.
tcnn( l!!ilurot:hgn:cment.
A, Ndtw.ltlistiilldin.:g an rig Sdtforth"Jicrcin (!I ll1q l:Qntrary', J;j ll11,&0r• Llc,cnsc:e ay t r nin!,llo 1l1is..,'\gn:cmcrir at:an-y limc-dui'lhg tlicTcmi of this Agreement t.y. providi_ng anl:•.liu_riilr    ·inil eighty< UI-) d     i !lvait¢e 'Wri tten notlcci lo lhc 0th p o'fiis lritcnt to so cmtlnatci 1he Agn:emenL Uccmec: shall vni:atc:lhe P.remis-cs within such.o,nc hu.n!lrcd and elghly'(l8Q) d!I)' period and,s t,iill comply wltl\ 1111 Qtc t nns'l!lt.cl provisions of1hls .A'gn:emcnt;.

.	B.. .  LiceilsDr may. 'in Jts so,lc discretion, le.rinlnii !1_115 ,'\J reem n!·, 1;y pfOVidlllg thirty (:l ) dyils Dd_vancc ivr1llcO noJtce, .In d.1e event t.lc;cnso.r, at Ll cnsoi's reasonablo dlsc(ello1.1, decermlncs, lhitr Lii:'ensco Is Uliih& me Prcni!s]i$ ·11  11!! .bnlp vflll'  tiliiiij\c;i\  i;iili    ,    to _lis)ntcnd il 'piifpojij oi; l!> \l . lt\\e o'f:ibc Licensor, .or. for. faijurr: to. comply witlrany 0(111ir n:nns·n_11d conditio!'ts oflhi Aw.1:1:1111:l!i Qt  Iii\\', Ofillnanci: rule crrtisolllll!iti j!ri;!hJ.b   J!.i 111e ml!l!nl:f ticcnscc Is using.the Rrcndse.s. lf-Ucwee lfpcs not l\tlJyrcctlly the dcl'a11l1 hcreilndcr wlthlrl .such ·1Itfr:ty'( 30) ci ys l),f   ·suc'h l0)1ges' pcrlbcl rcasonnblc necessary,·1111s l.lC CJISC'l h1111:11u10.mil  cally terininani 111. ll'!c•c nd of such !hi,ty (JO).d11y period.		·	·

4.
Thls Agn:ament sh1ill lie iiucmed to creuto 1! IICCl\l!C only 1111d :;h11II 1191 bu. co ll'.U - bc.ii . I •
_ .s ublca    11sslgn1ueti( or any ct.herconycy1111e.11 ofaoy lnlcrtSflit or lo tnc·Pri:mists. Accordingly, lhe parti hcrelO agree
ch 't tlie refationsbijrofth pitrtlCl 1.tnder thls-Asrecm it..shill :not lie1hat of-l'Lanillord 1111.d Tenant• under Flori.dB law,
a1Hi.t h'  p ii:5 lier by 'f!.\i111c:t ap    CHIil l n·thi:,.e.vcin•Lle uigbl 1-0lisc_: or  Y       tbiil'rcipis ei.'pij'es orr s oricr temilnarcd, iMn Licensor mat (without 1lhtiti1ig 1111y·otliet rigtitorremcdy,aVliilitblctvUlicilsor-untlctthl!i A&rccmcril,.at law or in i:quli.y), obtain SllTI)llllllJ' nossessi1m o, f Ute Lli;ensed_ f!rop_el1)'· by means of•'1!,11 lon. or proccc:dlng clsinilng_ un.l1wfi11 dclillncr JS ton !l2,0f; ·r-:n'°'il tit!ltcs} (w li.l?ill' Jl!IY tyiiil_. JJS:provlded in. Ibis. AsreemcntJ, and· L.il:c s hereby waives and coven11111S not 10 ns$Crt ony clnim, defcnK or obj libll lf115l d·11pon Lii:c!ls!)t so 11vnilin!f iisclf 9f!l!Y
wch !l i011 or proceeding.
5,	.QbservatjonofRuh;s BtgulaJiOfis, Resrrii:li!!Dband Lmvs.
;u c:ens   .  llr. iinyoi111 ili,: t:Uy  pr  mdit ly c:,IIP,loyed by any of thcrn, 11n<llll cqµlp{llen  appUSTI . machinery, li1atcrfiili, 1,D ls Bliil ll!rc-lJ!liif!!111c:))rporitf\ll:l,or li$Cil 9MJ1e. P.i :rids ,  Iii,_! be: II) t:9i)iplian \  fth,,•.l!lld,c:p  fQn,n, to: {IL) 11II appiicablc: 111.ws, ordimmtQ, afill j1ulallons 11nd utdt:ts:of l!IIY:,pllblic, q si, bllc or' othct ·$ovi:mmcntal
a11Q_11irfty rc1iJ1'!-l•tal)ls    -cty. o(pe Qns P:lld.thelrprotcctlon ll,l!   sU_ n.{11?t  speciflcal!¥.lnolllli   1 b_ut ln'n oevent·11nuted
to, th• Feilcl'l!I Oci\U.P.allo LSW"c 1JJ1IIJ -Je l!.ll,Ai;t of l97Q.   -am'311ded and aJJ rules and.regull!U.Dlf  nqW pr hereafter In
effect plll"$lllllll ti> sa\d Aci; ll!Jd (l,)-all coilc:s, i;i!l   1:i:cg!ll !i	11.  ii rcq11ii:crQcalS. of'th.  t. (i;cn$ilt an'd ltsJnsuriinc:a carriers·
,rdoth13.thercto.  in the event.of confllcliitg,_rcq1,1lrc:111cnts the more strlagent shall.11ovem.
6.	,govsntng4wand:CpnsrructlbnorAercr;incnt.
,A.	Thi5	IIJenl . and all l!\itleri la1c:d hcreio shall be governed by and cons1mcd In
eoriformity vi1h 1hela"".& of ihfi;;tnic 11f''Floriqa.	·
.B.	lfdd-s A,  cntent conl&lns uny,prov.lsicll5 c:onstrucd ,obcunc1 (orceableOtlll\laWfbl by a court
of compe1¢n1 Jutlsdl lon, the  Dnic s llll ,bnfcc:qu:d  mc,,aitred 'Ip_ c:oijr9i):il 111 Jpplita I 11' , .o'r lf \hi would Qlwie ,an

111:ogical or unreasonable result. such provision shall bestrl k . iroro tJi!s Agn:cmcntwilho affecting the blilding fqtCC
i:I fl'cct gflhe A'grc !!llt or-any t' llii o.tll_llr pr.ovfslons,
C.	Titles or capilons lif KCliuliJ l:dnialn	Ibis. ,&;g ent	fnsc!(Cd oral)' !15 11 m..9Uei .uf
- nvc11j nnd·fQr fei:m:e and in 110. way d ffn.e..Jilriit; Clllc,nd or c1escni>D the1COpeof iliis. A nt oriho h11cnt of:imy
ptovislofi lie11:Pf.,
Q t )m,J1ow9f'PlsP}Dea,11nd Aqorney_'sf e_'15·
A..      ANY Dll?P11f , DJ	CE•1  cµ.fM  Q   Q Ct.A!M  l .ltl'\VEf N .J.JC   §OR AND t.lG ENSEE: RI.!ifNG OUT OP :OR .JM CONNECTION \ Vlffl · 'llflS .A..G RE m-IT WHICH. C NNOT .BE. M!ICAQLY I\E:;Q.LVEP BY "tHE·P1.. TJ_gS :n:l&OUO!:I' 6001) FAITH NBGOTfATIONS'SHAU. BE SUBMI-TTED
lfo TijE. CIR.CUM' C,OUR.T IN 'Al),ICl'..F.OR·Pb t;KCP't!N;rY; f'LQ'ill'OA (C_R IF THe CIKCOIT COURT SliALL NOT HAV°E. lURlSDICTiON OVE THliSUBJEET Mi&'l'TERTl1$RE9F., THBJ'f TO .S UCij QIHl!R·CPI.:IJiT SJrnNG IN
SAJD CO\Jli!TY A:NO }IA:YIN°9 SV.8JE¢T MAT.TEit JU.fUsDICTTO ) FOR TRIAL AND. DETEl\MINAl'iON BY TH, f COUR-TSfIT   O WITHOQl" JUR\•i' . SAID PARm&lU:,l\itS:Y C.ONSBNT tol'ii£ JURiSDJCflON;  ciF SUCH COURT .AND·TO '!'HE    jtWJ  Of '.!' RO.  Q:i;S .OUTSIDE TilE  STATE· QF  Fl,-O lDA'  PU {J'ANT  T()  IBE JU:QUIREMENTB OF SUCH COOR'tiN ANY'MA'ltER so TO B  SUl)MITIEDT-QIT1    D'    THf3'( EXP LY
WA)VL;1'.fl lU(Jl-lT1·0.A·JOttYTru/d .,,
,B,	.Jn y aclion Ill 111,w ot in cijurly•.bcijy,ccij (h palj1" fic, I! OJ: by ii d liii!]t {lereupde,:,'th.;·
prevailing JllITTY shall be erultlcd IO i:Ollecl its '.feos01111ile altOmeys' and paralegals'·	lllld :i)isb.U#Cm t ll..     l!Y ln l(d.
l111:11113i!lli, .bill not liiniiccl 10, wiimss1 fe ;CJ!pert t&s, consullant fees, abornl:).', pa:iileadt and cin:t1ousc and outsf·de1:0Unsel) or
,legiil  islliilJ fc,i;s, costs llljd	c;s' ijoi! llilier  r<i.fi:ssl'!Jinl fe!!s..      .l\lld Cl!IM! -  • w,cl!tllf     l.t       l!&it..t     11u1,,1111a '\lhclhi:r In sculcmcnl. •In ail}' ilcclanililiy l!Clion; i11 any b ktupri:y i;x:i,- 111· I Qi' ori l!PJie*-1 In.!,li'.e irctlori .ftotn lh,e no11•prevailin11 flllflY.   As used ·1ic_l'J[,, . ilio tenn·  11	allln• pony  shali 111,:,an  the·party who recciVes substantially·the rclJcf
sought
8,	.Entire Agrecrocntnnd}Vlliveg.
Respecting ·!he sutiJ t iiuitt_r 'hi:rcof; tli,ls A'gt llll co1jtafnii thq ch!fr ari, ic11t fdic parii •alill 1!11dr n:prc!icnilltlvcs. and ag ts; and l ncorpo.rates-· ail ptlor unacrs111nding$, whe, lller "O@l pr wrltt,en.., No thanga, modif}c;ation or !lfllCndmcnt, por &!!)' "-111 -  lldJons, promise occondilion, nor a,ny waiver, to.ih15 -Aireement shill be
lmll11g !!.ill/!$!!!lw·  rJUng :and slg11cil !ly Ii,'duly)iUlliOi'lted offi -i<i>f d1cpar:ly1o be char;¢d,. 1..lccnsee has nqt   - lnduced
by or r lied upon any lttrorma1la!1,i'cprcacnllition, wa  ts _or_st;\    CI! w  he   f qnll:,or Wn	·	Pr lmpJ.ic:-d, IIIJlaet,y
!,.i ispr-gr any other per,s1111 rcpr    ntlng.or puq,.ol'llngto raprcsentt.ic:cnsor whfth	.notcilJ!ressly set foith'  or.ptovlaed fodli ll!i$° A	111cill, .

Assjgnmcmt.
Th1s. Agrc n\ IU shall lldt !Jg.lliligmbl-c - \ $fc blt-!     l.ll:;CJil Yi\lhli\lt the iirlor wnrtetj 1:.0-!!  -1 0f
Licensor, which .consent Licensor may llll w'llhheld In Its sole, • sollitc .and· 1111fcttet c discretion. An-y i!U\11.0ti d 5i,gn111 11\.by l-lccn wlilu>lit W nsor?s prior written cD11scut shall be void,  Uccnsor rClllins the ripil to,·asslgll allaor.
anyp!)rtlqn Cif,l!iis Agtci:m¢nt'il1anyJ1n,lc, \'.IJ!wutt.1ccnsca'.s·cDl)$CIIL
1O.	!nsurance,
ticclJS'-" s11 1 ol>iain and m11int)lln In1i1U forei: 11ml cff'.ect "urlns tlie Tcrrn of this ,Agrccrnc.nt,
the followln .lnsuram:c::

CQlll,n iclal genetql \jlibl!ify .il)SU111fl, Jnclqdlgg, V'IL\toilt llmliati:qn, blanlccl con1tac:tual, broud Corm property dllrna&e 111id prorlui:bicomplctcd opmtluns covcmgo qolnst llabjllt1, for bo ilYJilJllfy (iflt l,!fili!l& death), or pr(lpcif;y d11nJ•& having combined slnjl ilinlt (either direi1 or In ,co111hi11atlon With ,imorclla co"er111te) of not Jcsil thail ·One Ml!Uoit Dalial'5 :(S:1,(100,D0l>f r 'p cµ_qcn - Said {i).sur;ui:tc, l!IJil any lll!Jf.!111 oi!I

llablflty Jnaunmcc maintained by UccJ1Sec.i1te1'i.css of11r.iit addition to·that-r ulred hereunder, shall includ-e·proteciron for, andsh!i,11 n1p1Jc,-    li i!itl911.afi11S11ri;ds, Llci:"5Ql", its.130.iird orSupervi n!l, ollicc,age(iu:end·c111pl1111<cs.115 a.ildillooai Insure. ; 'l!!e;·ctm:  af'wlilcb ,viii insli".il (and·tli    ) in      jjccl·of iny and 'all'!l)SS or lia!;llii:y tes\jltiilg f m  pcrso al inJwy, cl"  th·or pi'opcrty' cfam&gc ari&i"!3or occurring ujionfor in connei!tlo-nwilh Ll  •s.us-·cof llie'Pri!mls .
R,    .	I!  f ncc lh:le,s rcqiJ(rcd' hcrc!IQder s!la)I	n.ctpr  lb!!llfin to,.and tonlaln , verofall
rigiitS of subn:,.,llatlon ln favor- af, -Licensor and shali lid IJS\le4 by liliam:J#!y·,re pansitilii compi\iji itceci l!P­
!l!lthofizod,to do businl!Ss -ln the: slate ofFi0,rida..!,i!:"Clis«s ha-ll dcltver-10·Li1:onsor a.cel1l!Tcateof lnS111'1Ulce.
C.	Ll ec;11clmowiedgelthll U  llas.!iot a11d$ill not m,11!111ii!i•in l!Wlc:e c;QV.  @SefQt llie benefit or£;icC11Set::or·any person or erUity -clalining aqyrights ar interest b)'; tllro11gh or under Lii:cnSe"o; for any personal ljtju{ies, Qr llli'l" go·!o gr diss cdon ofi1111_.J.>(cmlses-oriany ofihc-conlenis1h of.
n.	indemnmcadj:,g.
_	Ji.. .Lii:c   rc.up.lo .'iifd!=ffl-il   ,  h lil harinle. ii,nd  d_ef 11  yceiisor frvm 11rul ,ag11111st  ariy .anil all
ac:tlo,ns or:cases cif"ai:tio11ec:IJftns dcm• cfs. lliiblllt    .,la5S;    _ J!i c:<?J' axpl;r\$:C•.of_wlla  llrier. klli ofhalur includlna_
iitto!l!cy,.S r ,w!JJ h Licensor mil),' $Uffer by reason oflida/lyliitJuiy,Jncludinil ilea_ih, arisinif Utcri&l:im lo·lll'IYper&on or
piirso"'·or y r"5 p/J'orlfamilg 'lb or lrj.ic;tlon pf "11)' pr()Jll!rty inPl!!dln; !hp 19.s5 of - \ltOQf,11l' lna Dl!t..of any
apm Uons oftht Li nscei lls a_gcl\ , lnvltccs Qr nlra tors. cqnlni!l10rcmployccs·or agenis, or tirtY'Jlilr5or'I wli11tsocver t;nlcrfn3ilie·i>remlscs und11r-tht A !!lllCnt.
B.   Llcc;n  aari: - lh11t  nothing con_lah1d  in  tbis   sti:eili nt- shall  cDnstihib: or  be· consl(Ued  os a
Woliver ofLfo ot'.s limitail<II\S on liabllit,y set forth in Section 76'.8.28, F{ond t?tu s,and' a9!er law:
]9oticc.
An_y nofic dcnliind, rcq!lc51, llffcr,. consent:, ·appro'-' I or (o?tmunlcation·to 'be pril dcd uniler th­ls
AB'eemcnl moll bc in ,vrlling- and shall .be cfA:divc on receipt Of rclusiil to accept receipt when sent lil· professional
ovcJnjglit mail orli jid eliveey. Ei(l\cr pli'rt)' may.designate ll; iffi;rent addtc fr;frtecei:vlpg ni;iili:\:S lier iifi ci':by 11otrci:
lo the other. jialtf 111 11(:cordahcc wl1h.t_J1c provisifiilS' of th •pliragrapl\:	·
                         PolnRiaili.CQJM1!lnl -Oevclopmcot Dis_tric:t
61O ytil!TIW tr f;SJ.ilte 140 . Poinciana, F.iotlilil 3,4747 A:ttcntlim: Distrfct t.fQnagcr

WI01 11cop)' to

L ens.
Hi;,pp! s:Gre'o'n &·Sllll1sP.i\:. 123 S. Cal !!u11.Strecl Tallih1Wee;,Fi11rldi1.3.231i4 Attenllon: Mlchuei.C. Eckert
Av.tar Pr6J!llf!l $ fnc. .
201 Ailiambra Clrdlc, 12,11 Floor
Cora'l Oablcs;F.lori'ila33194
,"ttcoli.Qll!Genc:@I Qi	-
(( !I lfc11 llil tu(Jlng, .w,ii" out IJ llil!on; am. cc:h&11lc's Ile.ti-·nn pi a m'at .a i:!1,'. lien), cl ln, ofHJ.n .
.(!ncludln without lhiillalltin, a·.ciaiin ofinci:lt1111ic!s lh:li or ma1erliilmcn's iicn) ·or a,n er tor ihe ,pnymen t 9f ey shaJI: be imposed agai i tt)iS fre1ni$1!S or 411\Y l!l}'icr pro_pcrl)',trea.1·or  rsonal)-owncd &y, Licensor-onaccount.of. win& out 'of or';tri, ton job with Li.     =' s. us  Qf'tlic P.t mjs.g, U          s all,  lihh1 ihl,rly ( QJ1!11-ys *·wnnci, noilce of die'fn1pasilloa or such lien,.claltn;otl>rdcr, cause·t1ae·Pte1nlse 11nd/or sucli:Othct .eroec ,to.bellilwe c!.\here ftorn:by the

.fmY!!IC!\tol'llic obllp®n  ilrbd tlu:fl:11y or by.f'!ii;dshJn& a blind qib)>.opy Qthe, 1:11_c  cid p  r;rl1:1r-p.errul1ct    !;!y law. ih   _lien lsrel .   c   Llt-ensccsliall ,li pon rum_ish t fcciisoi;wi\11 a Wi1Uc)l insfrilijl  1.1 rn:lca,s1i!n (orm fili"r ordin& 'In Ilic oflieo oflhir actk.oflbe Circ11ifCourt, Polk County, Floridi. Slifflcleril'lo establish 1hc rcllllase ofsullh a lien· a
mu er'(ll !f.
ResuJnmrveompjianee.
Li ms Will Mt C' (ilt 1111!.I di. LJ cnsed. Pfl!pcny to bol .hi \ll<1hi1ian ot.or-do Jljng or ptrtlJiL P11ythin• ·lo be doh·o which' will ·sr.bjcct· the LltC11jcc! i' rQp. rty lo any ilil -oblle!ili s ; qbd , any applicllh! c11vkonm1111ial laws 1111d'.rqu l111ian., or 1111)"otlict 11pplfl:lible 1■ ; stlltllte&, atdlhillicos, nil , regllliitloiis, pcmlil-i, ordt:rs, d )i"'tlc'!ns !,I colitt ions Vi.ollcctlvclyl A{!pllcablo Bnvironmcn1al Laws"), 'Licensee will PrDJl!PIJY n!liilY·1h11 Licensor lT! writing or11i!Y \iltlsttll'g. pciiiljnjfor; . Shc·iji:s.t fui!>wr dgc' !lfL.lcc .icc, lli !'ccl i.nv iii•'tlo" p; ihquiey'by a_ny J!OYel'nmcnraf -'au1han-   b1cannectl'on \\llth any Applicalile"'Sin:lronnicntiil L,a.w ;
IS.	MJsccnnijeplis.
Any flillure b,y l:.lcensor'to require.strict compllanco .wlih any provision oflhls Agrcementafutll.
_   not .l;>e coiisltilcd ·as. a.wa_lvcr·pf.suc:h provision, and Lli:  r "1P.Y. ajbseq  lY  1!!1'1"'.!I	lct--,ompli111    a  a11y time, natwith:s1nn ln'g,111iy prior f'3)Ju'nno do so,	·		·

. B.         The: rlgltts 1!11d mnedies. ofLh:fflsor provided r,or undcr this Agr.eemenr are inaddil\on  to any 011l er,nJi11und rc1J1cdlcs p vid !I by l \v,	.

C.	'Nel!lienny.submlsslon ofU,is A cmcnt by unc·pa,ty to the.otlicir .nor1111.}' ca'iVSpondeace or other l!U)'l!l;i.iai\i1111S  beh .tlj  pilmes in cpn  ;iioq   #,lh, is {glendcd  or 11\bll  be ileem !I  IQ  constll\llc  a  CO!IU:Pi:1. Qr mQdjJiC11 Qll of any kind cir .10 crlii!  .811)' ;0bligaU,1>ils   Ceil ,lhil JJl!ttics  unless llrid  u,nlil .one or more dllplic?tes  o( llifs
Apme11t h115 bi.'Cn f\llly i!l:ccwed11nd dtilivcrcd &ctwc'bll thfl partfes.
.   .D   .  Ii is hm:by   i:kil  \Vl.   d.liY Ui;e)J$  nnd U!:cn;sot lhal lhc rpl/!Uanslllp  blllW t1!em  cnt,i il hereby is nlitintcndeih.o,bc atid shall noll n'mtYWII)' beCOIISU'lled 10 bci dialof, ap ership o_tJolnrvcn\111'1!, nor sJllill any.of.tin: provisious·ofih ls cc111Cnt'becOll$tnJed in llllf manncr·11irmaking,Llcensorliablc: rotanyobli iibnsvfLiccnsee.

,U  HIBIT"A"

PRE iS
1)1·1c-t P-(;l1	shQW_1l llJI 1he:P,l;i1.ofS0!1v.ila-P-h 'V rec:ooled in Pla't•8Dok  I/J5,.J'as11 l orlhc
- f'Qbllc'Reccir$-of potk"  QlllilY, Florid ..	·	·

tN W!Tl'!?Ss" WJ:IE{ma'f. tl1 panic-, liaw J:!l t!ils Lj ei e··A	(   )le l{uly' ?.	i	th day IUUI )'tar
set forth !?el Y.

rl·«;d
( ly111lurc)
.$,//61 ·-A-    J-1,1; {A.:z:IT'/2,;.t./ i:J .
(Jli111l Df!I )

.

(tide)

6

S ECTION IX

FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT
TO ASSET SALE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT

This	Fourteenth	Amendment	to	Asset	Sale	and	Purchase	Agreement
("Amendment11       is  entered  into  as  of  September·	2018  (the  "Amendment  Effective
Date"), by and between AVATAR PROPERTIES INC., a Florida corporation ("Seller") and POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, a special purpose unit oflocal govermnent established under Chapter 190, Florida Statutes ("Buyer").

RECITALS

Seller and Buyer entered into that ce1tain Asset Sale and Purchase
Agreement (the "Original  Agreement11      with an Effective Date of December  5, 2016, as
amended by that certain First Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of Febrnary 24, 2017, that certain Second Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of March 15, 2017, that certain Third Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of April 19, 2017, that certain Fourth Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of May 17, 2017, that certain Fifth Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of June 21, 2017, that certain Sixth Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of July 26, 2017, that  certain Seventh Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective· date of September 20, 2017, that certain Eighth Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of October 18, 2017, that certain Ninth Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of January 29, 2018, that certain Tenth Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of March 21, 2018, that certain Eleventh Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of April 29, 2018, that cettain T·welfth Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of June 13, 2018, and that certain Thirteenth Amendment to Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement with an effective date of July 20, 2018 (collectively, the "Agreement"), with respect to the sale of the Purchased Assets, as defined in the Agreement from Seller to Buyer.

Seller and Buyer wish to amend the Agreement as provided in this Amendment.

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the foregoing, the promises and covenants herein contained, and for other good  and valuable  consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are aclmowledged, Seller and Buyer agree as follows:

Inspection Completion Date. The definition of  Inspection  Completion Date in Section 1.l(xlix) of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is inse1ted in lieu thereof:

""Inspection Completion Date" means 5:00 p.m., Eastem time on November 15, 2018."

1376463\1 - # 11105502 vl

Bond Validation Date. Simultaneously with the Amendment  Effective Date, Seller hereby elects to extend the Validation Date to November 15, 2018.

Ratification. Except as modified hereby, all terms and conditions of the Agreement are hereby ratified and confirmed and remain in full force and effect. In the event of any conflict between any term set forth in the Agreement and this Amendment, the te1ms of this Amendment shall control.
Counterparts/ Facsimile. This Amendment may be executed in  one  or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original but all of which shall constitute one and the same document. Execution and  delivery  of this Amendment may  be accomplished via electronic transmission.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Buyer have each caused this Amendment  to be duly executed on their respective behalves by their respective duly authorized officers.

SELLER:

AVATAR PROPERTIES INC.,
a Florida corporation

By	
N me:  =	S:- G,!\<Z( S-../cl	
Title:	.f;;JP (-,,1ZN@:?-!l:t. G:),)-.)½.<.._

[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

\37646311 • 1111105502 vi	2

Attest:
[L	2r:--	
Secr c,:t a1y

BUYER:

POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, a
special purpose unit of local govemment established pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes
.. --?
/   /'
By: IG--L.J-t·
Printed Namee:,...lt:c.·"c• Sli<=	=..!.!=   =
Title:C..,\}.A 1re.ro,r,,

{REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK}

\376463\l -# 1110SS02 vi	3

S ECTION X

LATHAM, SHUKER, EDEN & BEAUDINE, LLP
ATTORNEYS  AT LAW

MICllAllL J. BEAUDINE MICHAEL <J. CJINDrom
JAN A. CARPENlER DANIEL H. COULTOFF ANDREW  C.D' ADESKY
MARJAN!! L DORJUS JENNIFER S. EDEN DoROTHY F. GREEN JOSHUA D. GROSSHANS BRUCED. KNAPP
111 NORTH MAGNOLIA AVENUE, SUITE 1400
ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32801 POST OFFICE BOX 3353 ORLANDO,  FLORIDA 32802
TE LEPHONE : {407) 481-5800
FACSIMILE: (407}481-5801 WWW.LSEBLAW.COM
PBTERG. LATHAM JUSTIN M. LUNA  PATRICIA R.   MCCONNELL
Loru T. Mil.VAIN
R. SCQTI SHUKER JONATl!AN A. STJMLl!R CHRJ "TINA Y. TAYLOR KRISTEN E , TRucco DANIEL A . VELASQUEZ

October 16, 2018

Poinciana CDD Board of Supervisors and Poinciana West CDD Board of Supervisors c/o GMS-CF, LLC
135 West Central Boulevard, Suite 320
Orlando, Florida 32801 Attention: Mr. George Flint

Re:		Limited Engagement of Latham, Shuker, Eden & Beaudine, LLP to Provide Limited Legal Services to Poinciana and Poinciana West Community Development Districts regarding Real Estate Acquisition from Avatar Properties, Inc. (which is to be acquired by Taylor/Morrison Homes)

Dear Supervisors and Mr. Flint:

This letter sets forth the terms and conditions under which Latham, Shuker, Eden & Beaudine, LLP (the "Firm") will serve as special real estate counsel to the Poinciana and Poinciana West Community Development Districts (the "Districts") for the limited purpose of legal representation for that certain real estate and asset acquisition from Taylor/Morison Homes, as successor to Avatar Properties, Inc., regarding the Districts. We thank you for the opportunity
to provide you with these services and look forward to working with you. Unless otherwise specifically indicated in this letter, for purposes of the limited engagement described herein, no person  or  entity  other  than  the  Districts  shall  be  a  client  of  the  Firm  for  any  purpose. The
effective date of this letter, and engagement of the Finn, shall  be the as  of October  1, 2018,  a date prior to the acquisition  of Avatar  Homes  by Taylor  Morrison  (or an affiliate thereof) (the
"Effective Date").

This is a limited engagement and the scope of the services which  the Firm will  provide, the basis upon which it will charge fees therefor, and the other tenns of this engagement  are limited to the following:

Scope of Limited Real Estate Engagement. The Firm will provide the Districts with services to include the following:

Review and advise the Districts with respect to closing that certain executed real estate contract between Poinciana Community Development District and Avatar Properties, Inc., dated December 5, 2016 as amended by fourteen amendments thereto (the "Contract") and assist in any re-negotiation of Contract terms after the Effective Date.

Assist in completion of inspection and due diligence tasks undertaken after the Effective Date. The Firm will rely upon the due diligence performed and reviewed by the Districts' General Counsel, Hopping, Green, Sams ("HGS"), prior to the  Effective  Date (including, but not limited to, title and survey review, building and ADA inspections, survey review, reporting, etc. The Firm will not bear  responsibility for such due diligence  nor for any  due diligence for which the time for comment expired or where we will not have opportunity to update or provide further input.

Perform the closing of the Contract for  Poinciana  Community Development District, as purchaser under the Contract.

In addition to the above, the Firm will be available to consult with Districts' Management and Districts' General Counsel with regard to questions that may arise related to this real estate acquisition of the Districts. Work performed hereunder shall be generally by direction of the Districts' Manager, as the authorized representative of the Districts. The Firm understands that the Contract is entered into with Poinciana Community Development District as the "Buyer;" the Poinciana Community Development District and the Poinciana West Community Development District have entered into an Interlocal Agreement as to the cooperation, ownership, and management of the facilities. The Districts' general counsel shall be responsible for the Interlocal Agreement and all issues relating to the relationship between the two districts. The Districts' General Counsel shall solely represent the Dist1icts in bond validation proceedings, special assessment proceedings and in the sale of its bonds and/or any other financing related to the Contract.

Billing Practices and Fees. Our fees will be based upon the ethical rules governing our practice. The amount of each fee will be the fair value of the services provided, taking into account the time spent, the nature of the services performed, the expertise required, the size and scope of the matter, the results obtained, the emergency nature of any request for services by the Districts and other relevant considerations. For most services rendered by the Firm, a primary determinant of fees will be the internally established hourly rates for each of the Firm's attorneys and paralegals. These hourly rates may be adjusted annually as detennined by the Firm. Currently, the Firm's hourly rates range from $105.00 per hour for our most junior paralegals to
$550.00 per hour for our most experienced, specialized partners. I, along with a junior associate, will  be the attorneys primarily  responsible for providing the services  to the Districts, although we

will avoid performing duplicative services. My current reduced rate for governmental work (or proposed governmental work) is $375.00 per hour. I will be assisted by a junior  associate,  Andrew d'Adesky, whose current rate is $265.00 per hour. The public finance paralegals in our department have a current rate of $105.00 per hour. Real estate partners and associates shall also assist as deemed necessary by the Firm, in its sole discretion. Others within  the  Firm may assist us in the future at their normal hourly rates, if expertise in litigation, real estate,  etc., or  other  legal areas is required.

Costs and Expenses. In providing services to the Districts, the Firm will necessarily incur out of pocket expenses. The Districts will be required to reimburse the Firm for these expenses, which may include, among others, communication costs (i.e., courier, long distance telephone charges, facsimile charges, etc.), document reproduction  charges,  filing  fees, secretarial overtime when required by the matter's timing, and charges  incurred  in connection with computer research facilities. Internal Firm  costs are  invoiced  at rates established  by the Firm from time to time.  A list of the current internal  Finn cost rates is available upon request. It  is Firm policy that any invoice from a third-party vendor incurred  on behalf of the Districts  will be forwarded to you for direct payment by the Districts to the vendor.

The Firm and the Districts expect this engagement to remain in effect for a period of time beginning at the date of the Districts execution of this letter. The Firm will serve under this engagement letter at the pleasure of the Districts and/or the Firm, and the engagement may be terminated by the Districts or by the Finn at any time; notwithstanding the foregoing, this engagement shall terminate at the time of the closing and finalization of the real estate transaction contemplated by the Contract. The Firm shall be paid for all work perfonned through the later of the date of termination.

Retainer. Intentionally Deleted.

Payment of Invoices. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Districts, the Firm renders monthly invoices specifying the services perfonned and expenses incurred. The amount reflected as due in each invoice is payable within thirty (30) days following receipt by the Districts. The Finn attempts to include disbursements in each invoice for the month following which such disbursements are incurred. However, given the nature of disbursements, some may not be immediately available, in which case they will be included within a subsequent invoice. Any questions concerning an invoice rendered by the Firm should be referred to me as the account billing attorney or to the managing partner of the Firm.

Limited Representation. Further, the Districts understand and agree that the representation of the Districts is limited the matters described in Section 1 of this letter. The Districts' General Counsel will handle, and has handled, all litigation and bond validation proceedings, will handie any assessment proceedings and bond closing for the financing of the Contract, and will negotiate and document the relationship between the two Districts; the

Districts agree that the Firm has no responsibility or liability therefore. The Districts have not retained us to provide legal representation or advice in any other area of law unrelated to the specific representation which the Finn hereby undertakes for the limited purpose provided herein (for example, we are not providing general representation of the Districts, real estate development, litigation, bankruptcy validation or bond counsel services at this time). The Districts are being represented by their own, separate general counsel as to all other matters related to the Districts and development therein.

Adverse Repres entation. The Finn represents other special districts which may become adverse to the Districts, except as limited by the traditional ethical standards imposed by the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, especially Rule 4-1.7, or any provision of the Florida Statutes. As you may know, the Finn also has represented, currently represents, and will in the future represent, numerous other community development districts and state and local governments, as well as other clients in real estate and public finance matters. Such other matters are unrelated to the representation described in this engagement letter. The Firm will represent the Districts collectively; it is agreed upon by both the Districts that no conflict between the Districts exists or is anticipated, and if any arises, the Districts' general counsel will handle all such matters. Districts counsel will handle other general matters for the Districts that do not involve the matters described in Section 1. The Firm does not believe that its representation as noted in Section 1, of such other clients would interfere with its current representation of the Districts as specified herein. However, because of the large number of such other clients, it is important to have a clear understanding which will govern our relationship.

Confidential Information Public Records. The Districts acknowledge that the Districts are government entities and thus subject to certain laws requiring public records and disclosure, including, but not limited to, Article I, Section 23 and 24 of the Constitution of the State of Florida and Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. The Finn shall not be bound to confidentiality with respect to any information which (i) is or shall become part of the public domain by publication, operation of law (including, but not limited to, Article I, Section 23 and 24 of the Constitution of the State of Florida and Chapter 119, Florida Statutes) or otherwise through no fault of the Finn;
is already known to Finn at the time of disclosure and that is free from an obligation of confidentiality; (iii) is obtained without restriction from a source having a bona fide right to use and dis.close the information without restriction as to further use or disclosure; or (iv) is subsequently developed by the Firm through entirely independent efforts. Subject to sunshine law constraints, the Finn is subject to ethical rules which prohibit the disclosure of confidential information obtained in representing the Districts which could be used to the Districts disadvantage in any such other representation, and the Firm will not take a position adverse to the Districts in any litigation or dispute arising directly out of any specific representation of the Districts. The Firm will advise the Districts, and withdraw from representation of the Districts, if representation of the Districts could adversely affect the judgment or quality of services to be rendered by the Finn in its representation of the Districts and/or result in a material, actual or perceived conflict of interest and/or if such representation has violated, violates, will violate or
Pages

threatens to violate, traditional ethical .standards imposed by the Rules Regulating  the  Florida Bar, especially Rule 4-1.7, or violates any provisions of the Florida Statutes.

We apologize for the fonnality of this letter. However we believe it is essential for the protection of botb the Districts and the Finn to clearly specify the terms of  this engag  ent.  If the terms oftbjs letter are acceptable to you, pl sign this letter below and  return tbis letter to my attention via facsimile or email. We look forward to working with you.

Very truly yours,

Date:	-- - °-'I+--	-	-	' 2018

ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO:
POINCIANA WEST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
By: uJ		QJb.r
ameC/itJ k..	/JI , &..se -ar­
Title: {JAg1r/J?(I/J	f'We,,£)[)
Date: {lcirJ/Jer	J/1	, 2018

S ECTION XI

S ECTION A
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

813-273-5014
JOSEPH.COVELLI@ GRAY-ROBINSON.COM	October 29, 2018

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL & OVERNIGHT MAIL
TAMPA,  FLORJDA 33602
TEL 813-273-5000
FAX 813-273-5145
FORT MYERS GAINESVILLE JACKSONVILLE KEY WEST LAKEUND MELBOURNE MIAMI  NAPLES OP.UNDO TALUHASSEE
TAMPA
Poinciana Community Development District Attn: George Flint, District Manager
Vice-President
Governmental Management Services - Central Florida, LLC
135 West Central Blvd, Suite 320
Orlando, Florida 32801 Email: gflint@gmscfl.com
Hopping Green & Sams PA Attn: Michael Eckert
119 South Monroe Street, Suite 300
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Telephone: (850) 222-7500 Email: MichaelE@hgslaw.com

Re:  Asset Sale and Purchase  Agreement dated December 5, 2016, as amended  from time to time (collectively, the "Agreement"), by and between Avatar Properties Inc. ("Seller") and Poinciana Community Development District ("Buyer"), pertaining to the proposed purchase and sale of certain facilities located in Polk County, Florida.
Client-Matter No. 376463-1

Gentlemen:

As you are aware, we are counsel to Seller in connection with the above-referenced Agreement and are authorized to provide this letter on its behalf. All capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the Agreement. Pursuant to that certain Fourteenth Amendment  to  the  Agreement dated September 21, 2018, Seller elected to extend the Validation Date  to November  15, 2018. Unfortunately, as you are aware, given the current status of this matter, it is presently not feasible for the Buyer to obtain the Bond Validation on or before November 15, 2018 and the Seller does not wish to further extend the Validation Date. Accordingly, Seller hereby elects to terminate the Agreement pursuant to Section 4.2(v) of the Agreement. Although we regret that the parties were not able to consummate the transaction contemplated by the Agreement, we do believe Seller's election to terminate the Agreement is in the best interest of the Solivita community at this time and we appreciate all of the time and effort that was put into the transaction.

If you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.

Joseph P. Covelli

cc:		Todd Merrill (via email) Kristy Boss (via email)
Jan Albanese Carpenter, Esq. (via email)

# 11177720 V l

www.gray-robinson.com

SECTION 8
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

Joseph Covelli

813-273-5014
JOSEPH.COVELLI@GRAY-ROBINSON.COM	October 29, 2018

VIA OVERNIGHT MAIL &
ELECTRONIC MAIL

Poinciana Community Development District Attn: George Flint, District Manager
Vice-President
Governmental Management Services - Central Florida, LLC
135 West Central Blvd, Suite 320
Orlando, Florida 32801 Email: gflint@gmscfl.com
TAMPA,  FLORIDA 33602
TEL 813-273-5000
FAX 813-273-5145

Hopping Green & Sams, PA. 119 S. Monroe Street, Suite 300
Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Attn: Michael C. Eckert
Email: MichaelE@hgslaw.com
FORT MYEl!S GAINESVILLE JACKSONVILLE KEY WEST LAKEUND
MELBOURNE MIAMI NAPLES OP.LANDO TALLAHASSEE TAMPA

Re: Bond Financing Team Funding Agreement, as  amended  from  time  to  time ("Agreement") by and between Poinciana Community Development District, a local  unit of special-purpose government established pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes (the "District") and Avatar Properties, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Developer") dated as of April 20, 2016.
Client-Matter No. 376463-1 Dear Mr. Flint and Mr. Eckert:
Our firm represents the above-referenced Developer in connection with the Agreement  and we are authorized to provide this letter on its behalf. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall  have the meaning set forth in the Agreement.

In accordance with Section 2 of the Agreement, Developer hereby provides notice that Developer elects to terminate Developer's obligation to provide funding to the District pursuant to Section 1 of the Agreement. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, other than Developer's  obligation  to provide funding to the District, all other rights and obligations of both Developer and the District pursuant to the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

Should you have any questions, please call.

Sincerely,

Joseph P. Covelli

cc:		Todd Merrill (via email) Kristy Boss (via email)
Jan Albanese Carpenter, Esq. (via email)

\376463\1 -# 11168771 vi

www.gray-robinson.com

SECTl·ON C
RESOLUTION 2019-03

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS  OF THE POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT RESCINDING RESOLUTION 2018-05; DIRECTING DISMISSAL OF THE PENDING BOND VALIDATION CASE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

WHEREAS, Poinciana Community Development District (the "District") is a local unit of special-purpose government created and existing pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, and located entirely within Polk County, Florida; and

WHEREAS, the District is authorized by Chapters 170, 190, and 197, Florida Statutes, to finance, fund, plan, establish, acquire, construct or reconstruct, enlarge or extend, equip, operate, and maintain capital improvements and to impose, levy and collect debt service special assessments to finance such improvements; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the District previously adopted Resolution No. 2018-05 (hereinafter the "Prior Bond Resolution") authorizing the issuance of not­ to-exceed $102,000,000 aggregate principal amount of Poinciana Community Development District Special Assessment Bonds (the "Amenity Bonds"); and

WHEREAS, on October 29, 2018, Avatar Properties Inc. has terminated the Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement dated December 5, 2016 ("Termination"), which formed a material basis for the issuance of the Amenity Bonds and bond validation case; and

WHEREAS, as a result of the Termination, the District now accordingly desires to rescind the Prior Bond Resolution, including exhibits thereto, and to direct staff to file a voluntary dismissal without prejudice of the pending bond validation case, bearing the designation Case No. 2017-CA- 003547.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT:

RESCISSION OF PRIOR BOND RESOLUTION. The District hereby rescinds the Prior Bond Resolution, including exhibits thereto, which, as of the date hereof, shall be of no force and effect.

DISMISSAL OF BOND VALIDATION CASE. District Counsel is  hereby directed to file a notice of dismissal without prejudice of the pending bond validation case, bearing the designation Case No. 2017-CA-003547.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall become effective upon its passage. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
1
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of November, 2018.

ATTEST:		BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

Secretary	Chairperson, Board of Supervisors

2

S ECTION D
RESOLUTION 2019-04

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS  OF THE POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT RESCINDING RESOLUTIONS 2018-02, 2018-03, 2018-07, 2018-
11, 2018-12 & 2018-16; NULLIFYING AND CANCELLING PRIOR AMENITY DEBT SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS; AUTHORIZING AN UPDATE TO THE  IMPROVEMENT LIEN BOOK; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

WHEREAS, Poinciana Community Development District (the "District") is a local unit of special-purpose government created and existing pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, and located entirely within Polk County, Florida; and

WHEREAS, the District is authorized by Chapters 170, 190, and 197, Florida Statutes, to finance, fund, plan, establish, acquire, construct or reconstruct, enlarge or extend,  equip, operate, and maintain capital improvements and to impose, levy and collect debt service special assessments to fmance such improvements; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the District previously adopted Resolution Nos. 2018-02, 2018-03, 2018-07, 2018-11, _2018-12 and 2018-16 (hereinafter the "Prior Amenity Debt Assessment Resolutions") levying and imposing debt service special assessments on benefitted properties within the District to fund the acquisition, construction, and/or reconstruction of certain amenity improvements and facilities (the "Prior Amenity Debt Assessments"); and

WHEREAS, on October 29, 2018, Avatar Properties Inc. has terminated the Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement dated December 5, 2016 ("Termination"), which formed a material part of the basis for the Prior Amenity Debt Assessment Resolutions;

WHEREAS, as a result of the Termination, the District now accordingly desires to rescind the Prior Amenity Debt Assessment Resolutions, including exhibits thereto, and to nullify and cancel the Prior Amenity Debt Assessments.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT:

RESCISSION OF PRIOR AMENITY DEBT ASSESSMENT RESOLUTIONS; NULLIFICATION AND CANCELLATION OF PRIOR AMENITY DEBT ASSESSMENTS. By adoption of this Resolution, the District hereby rescinds the Prior Amenity Debt Assessment Resolutions, including exhibits thereto, which, as of the date hereof, shall be of no force and effect. Accordingly, the Prior Amenity Debt Assessments previously levied by the District are hereby nullified and cancelled. Such cancellation only applies to the Prior Amenity Debt Assessments and not to any other forms of special assessments that may have been previously levied and imposed by the District (e.g., other debt service assessments or operations and maintenance assessments).

1
IMPROVEMENT LIEN BOOK. The District Manager is hereby directed to update the District's improvement lien book to reflect that any Prior Amenity Debt Assessments are hereby nullified and cancelled.

EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall become effective upon its passage.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of November, 2018.

ATTEST:		BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

Secretary	Chairperson, Board of Supervisors

2

S ECTION E
Prepared by and Return to:
Michael C. Eckert
Hopping Green & Sams PA
119 South Monroe Street, Suite 300
Tallahassee, FL 32301

AGREEMENT TERMINATING
AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND POINCIANA WEST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT REGARDING MUTUAL COOPERATION FOR THE FINANCING, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF CERTAIN AMENITIES TO BE ACQUIRED, RECONSTRUCTED AND CONSTRUCTED

THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, a special-purpose unit of local government located in the Polk County, Florida ("PCDD"), and the POINCIANA WEST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT, a special-purpose unit of local government located in Polk County, Florida ("PWCDD") (collectively referred to herein as the "Districts") (this agreement hereinafter referred to as the "Termination Agreement").

RECITALS

WHEREAS, the Districts have previously entered into an  AMENDED  AND RESTATED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND POINCIANA WEST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT REGARDING MUTUAL COOPERATION FOR THE FINANCING, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF CERTAIN AMENITIES TO BE ACQUIRED,
RECONSTRUCTED AND CONSTRUCTED recorded at Polk County Official Record Book 10426, Pages 273-492 ("Interlocal Agreement"); and

WHEREAS, a material basis for the Interlocal Agreement was the ASSET SALE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT between the PCDD and Avatar Properties Inc. dated December 5, 2016, as amended from time to time ("PSA"); and

WHEREAS, on October 29, 2018, Avatar Properties Inc. has terminated the  PSA, thereby frustrating the underlying purpose of the Interlocal Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Districts now desire to terminate the Interlocal Agreement.

SECTION 1. RECITALS AND AUTHORITY. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and by this reference are incorporated as a material part of this Termination Agreement. This Termination Agreement is entered into pursuant to the provision of Florida law, including but not limited to Chapters 163, 189, and 190, Florida Statutes, and the Florida Constitution.
SECTION 2. MUTUAL TERMINATION. The Districts hereby mutually terminate the Interlocal Agreement. District staff is hereby directed to file this Termination Agreement with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Polk County, Florida.

SECTION 3. EXECUTION IN COUNTERPARTS. This Termination Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument.

SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Termination Agreement and the rights conferred herein shall become effective upon filing with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Polk County, Florida, in accordance with the requirements of section 163.01(11), Florida Statutes.

[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

2

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Termination Agreement as of the 28th day of November, 2018.

Witness:	POINCIANA COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

By  :	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Print Name	Chairperson

Witness:	Attest: - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Print Name

Witness:	POINCIANA WEST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

By: -	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Print Name	Chairperson

Witness:	Attest: - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Secretary

Print Name

3

S ECTION F
DRAFT

November_, 2018

Via Regular U.S Mail

Matthew Young, President
Solivita Community Association, Inc. 10401 Deerwood Park Boulevard, Suite 2130
Jacksonville, Florida 32256

Re:	Notice of Termination of Agreement Regarding Gate Access Protocols and Procedures Dear Mr. Young,
On March 15, 2017, the District entered into that Agreement between the District and the Solivita
Community Association, Inc. ("Association") Regarding Gate Access Protocols and Procedures ("Agreement"). Pursuant to Section 12 of the Agreement, the effectiveness of the Agreement was expressly conditioned upon the closing on the purchase of the Amenity Facilities from Avatar Properties Inc. ("Developer") by the District. Furthermore, pursuant to Section 9 of the Agreement, the Agreement would terminate upon termination of that Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement dated December 5, 2016, between the Developer and the District ("ASPA").

On October 29, 2018, the Developer exercised its right to terminate the ASPA by providing the Notice of Termination of ASPA to the District, enclosed herein for your reference. Accordingly, the Agreement is terminated and is of no further force and effect.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our offices at (850) 222-7598.

Sincerely,

Enclosure

S ECTION H

These item s have been separat el y provided by Dist rict Cou nsel

S ECTION I

These it em s have been separat el y provided	by Di st rict Counsel

S ECTION J

FISHKIND
& ASSOCIATES

POINCIANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES PROPOSAL

Scope of Work

Background

The Poinciana Community Development District ("District" or "CDD") is interested in retaining Fishkind & Associates, Inc. ("Fishkind" or "Consultant") to assist with the non-ad valorem assessments securing the repayment of the District's proposed recreation facilities acquisition and associated bond debt ("Bond Debt"). This proposal  outlines  the services we propose to provide to the District related to the revisions to the assessments securing its Bond Debt.

Experience

Fishkind has provided financial consulting services to numerous community development districts and other forms of municipalities over the course of more than $5 billion in new debt issuances and refinancing. Selected financial consulting clients include:

The Boggy Creek, Greeneway, and Myrtle Creek Improvement Districts (part of the "Lake Nona" community) in Orlando

Midtown Miami Community Development District in Miami

The Lakewood Ranch Stewardship District in Manatee and Sarasota Counties

Ave Maria Stewardship Community District in Collier County

Financial Consulting Proposal	Page 1of 5

Services Provided

The Consultant shall provide advice and services, as necessary and requested, to assist the District in the successful creation of the assessments securing its Bond Debt. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the services of the Consultant shall include:

Examination of the District's existing Bond Debt assessment methodologies.

Examination of any revisions to the District's land use plan and/or capital improvement program.

Calculation of revised Bond Debt assessments consistent with the benefit analysis outlined in the District's existing Bond Debt assessment methodologies.

Production and support of one or more assessment methodology reports outlining any advisable revisions to the Bond Debt assessments.

Calculation of revised assessment rolls, outlining the specific properties and assessments that provide security for the repayment of the District's Bond Debt.

Recommendations as to the appropriate  structures  for  the proposed assessment revisions (as requested by the  District's Board of Supervisors and/or District staff).

Assistance in drafting any required mailed and/or published notices necessary for the successful revision of the Bond  Debt assessments.

Attendance at all District Board Meetings and/or public hearings related to the assessments (as requested by the District's Board or District staff).

Financial Consulting Proposal	Page 2 of 5

3.0	Fee Proposal

The professional fee for Fishkind's financial consulting services related to the recreation facilities acquisition assessments securing of the District's Bond Debt is $22,500. This flat fee includes the production of the assessment methodology report and assessment roll, as well as any necessary District Board Meeting attendance in support of the report.

General Provisions

Consultant not to Participate as Underwriter

The Consultant is precluded from serving as an underwriter of any debt obligations issued or refinanced by the District and shall not participate in the marketing or sale of any of the District's debt obligations.

Consultant not to Render Legal Advice

The District acknowledges that the Consultant does not  serve the District as legal counsel and may not render legal  advice  or opinions.  Although the Consultant may participate in accumulating information necessary for documents required by the District to finalize any particular financing, such information shall be verified by the District as to its correctness; provided, however, that the District shall not be required to verify the correctness of any information originated by the Consultant or the correctness of any information originated by the Consultant which the Consultant has used to formulate its opinions and advice given to the District.

Termination of Relationship

Either party hereto shall have the right to terminate the relationship  between the District and the Consultant, at any time and for any reason whatsoever, upon providing the other party with a minimum of thirty (30) days advance written notice of intention to terminate. The notice shall be mailed to the person and address specified for  use in the giving of notice, in Section 4.6, hereof. Should the relationship be terminated, all work product produced by the Consultant, to the date of termination,  shall be  the sole property of the District. The Consultant's fee shall be prorated according  to the amount  of work  completed  as of the  date  of termination

Financial Consulting Proposal	Page 3 of 5

as determined by the District. Finally,  the Consultant  shall  be entitled  to all reasonable expenses not reimbursed as of the notice of termination.

Time of the Essence

The District and the Consultant agree that time is of the essence and that the services of the Consultant shall be performed expeditiously.

Entire Agreement

This proposal constitutes the entirety of the terms and conditions of the proposal between the parties for Consultant services.

Notices

All notices, requests, or authorizations which may from time to time be required or expedient shall be in writing and shall be  delivered  or mailed as follows:

District:	Poinciana CDD c/o: Michael Eckert
119 South Monroe Street, Suite 300
Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Consultant:	Fishkind & Associates, Inc.
12051 Corporate Blvd.
Orlando, Florida 32817

Authority to Execute

Each of the parties hereto covenant to the other that it has the lawful authority to enter into this relationship, that the governing or managing body of each party has approved this relationship and has similarly authorized the execution of this proposal.

Financial Consulting Proposal	Page4 of 5

In	witness	whereof,	the	parties	hereto	have	executed	this
agreement, in duplicate, this  		day of  	,2014.

Poinciana Community Development District, Board of Supervisors

Sign _ _
_ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _
_ _ _ _
Chairperson

Print Name - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Fishkind & Associates, Inc.

Sign _ _
_ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _
_ _ _ _
Authorized Signatory

Print Name - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Financial Consulting Proposal	Page 5 of 5

S ECTION XII

S ECTl·ON C

S ECTION 1-

Poinciana
Community Development District

Summary of  Check Register

August 1, 2018 to November 20, 2018

	Fund	Date	CheckNo.'s	Amount	
	General Fund	8/3/18	2679-2683	$	29,194.24	
		8/6/18	2684	$	5,451.29	
		8/9/18	2685-2686	$	5,481.65	
		8/15/18	2687	$	20,172.93	
		8/23/18	2688-2690	$	9,084.87	
		8/30/18	2691-2694	$	12,157.29	
		9/7/18	2695-2696	$	15,183.26	
		9/13/18	2697-2698	$	13,532.78	
		9/14/18	2699	$	11,884.57	
		9/15/18	2700	$	27.59	
		9/20/18	2701-2702	$	14,497.57	
		10/2/18	2703-2706	$	118,204.79	
		10/9/18	2707	$	11,215.47	
		10/16/18	2708-2710	$	3,295.95	
		10/25/18	2711-2713	$	21,374.99	
		10/30/18	2714-2715	$	3,137.75	
		11/2/18	2716	$	11,970.42	
		11/15/18	2717	$	5,183.43	
				$	311,050.84	
	Payroll	August 2018
David Lane	
50036	
$	184.70	
		Lita Epstein	50037	$	184.70	
		Robert Zimbardi	50038	$	184.70	
		William Land	50039	$	184.70	
				$	738.80	

$	311,789.64 1

CHECK  VEND# ••..•INVOICE....• .•.EXPENSED TO...	VENDOR NAME DATE	DATE	INVOICE	YRMO DPT ACCT# SUB SUBCLASS
STATUS	AMOUNT	..••CHECK.•...
AMOUNT	#
8/03/18 00011

8/03/18 00004
8/01/18 6365541	201808 320-53800-47100
MOSQUITO MGMT AUG18
CLARKE ENVIRONMENTAL MOSQUITO
8/01/18 2960	201808 320-53800-46200
LAWN MAINTENANCE AUG18
*	12,583.33
-  -  -  - -  - -  -  -	-12-,58-3.-33-
*	11,970.42

002679

8/03/18 00001

8/03/18 00017
FLORALAWN 2, LLC
7/23/1828	201807 320-53800-48300
RPR SECTIONS PONDS 6A-6B
GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES-CF
8/01/18 2127815	201807 310-51300-31100
INTERIM ENG. SRVCS JUL18
- -  -  - -  -  -  -  -  -  -11-,97-0.-42- 002680
*	1,355.00
-  -  - - -  -  -  -  -  - -1-,3-55.-0-0 002681
*	3,140.24

8/03/18 00005
GAI CONSULTANTS, INC
7/01/18 L060GOII 201806 310-51300-48000 NOTICE OF MEETING 7/9/18
-  -  -  - - - - - - -  -3,-14-0.-24-
*	145.25
002682
THE LEDGER
8/06/18 00001	8/01/1829	201808 310-51300-34000
MANAGEMENT FEES AUG18 8/01/1829	201808 310-51300-35200
INFO TECHNOLOGY AUG18 8/01/1829	201808 310-51300-31300
DISSEMINATION FEE AUG18 8/01/1829	201808 310-51300-51000
OFFICE SUPPLIES
8/01/1829	201808 310-51300-42000
POSTAGE
8/01/1829	201808 310-51300-42500
COPIES
8/01/1829	201808 310-51300-41000
TELEPHONE
8/01/1830	201808 320-53800-12000
FIELD MANAGEMENT AUG18
145.25 002683
-	-
*	3,750.00
*	125.00
*	416.67
*	18.10
*	31.75
*	263.25
*	13.19
*	833.33
GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES-CF
8/09/18 00023	8/06/18 9065167	201808 310-51300-42500
MAIL NOTICE COPIES AUG18 8/06/18 9065167	201808 310-51300-42000
MAIL NOTICE POSTAGE AUG18 8/06/18 9065167	201808 310-51300-51000
MAIL NOTICE ENVELOPE
ACTION MAIL SERVICES INC.
-  -  -  -  -  - - -  -  - -5,-45-1.-29- 002684
*	509.38
*	1,147.27
*	235.00
1,891.65 002685

POIN POIN CDD	TVISCARRA
CHECK  VEND#  •...•INVOICE•..•••••EXPENSED TO...	VENDOR NAME DATE	DATE	INVOICE	YRMO DPT ACCT# SUB SUBCLASS
20896 00 201806 310-51300-32200
FY2017 AUDIT FEE
STATUS

*
AMOUNT	••••CHECK...••
AMOUNT	#
3,590.00
BERGER TOOMBS ELAM GAINES & FRANK
4651607	201808 300-20700-10000
PROP. APPRAISER FEE
4651607	201808 310-51300-49100
PROP. APPRAISER FEE
- - - - - - -  -  -  -  -3-,59-0.-00- 002686
*	15,174.69
*	4,998.24
POLK COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER
3232191 201808 320-53800-47000
AQUATIC SERVICES AUG18
-  -  -  -  -  - -  -  -  - 2-0,-17-2.-93-
*	8,166.66
002687
CLARKE AQUATIC SERVICES, INC.
6-275-65 201808 310-51300-42000
DELIVERY 8/9/18
-  -  - - - -  - - - - -8,-16-6.-6ti-
*	169.21
002688
FEDEX
L060GOIJ 201807 310-51300-48000 NOT.FY19 BUDGET ADOPTION
L060GOIJ 201808 310-51300-48000 NOT.FY19 BUDGET ADOPTION
- - -  -  -  -  - -  -  - - -1-69-.21- 002689
*	374.50
*	374.50
THE LEDGER
2128811	201808 310-51300-31100
INTERIM ENG. SRVCS-AUG18
-  -  -  -  -  - -  -  -  -  - -7-49-.00-
*	1,963.75
002690
GAI CONSULTANTS, INC
102246	201807 310-51300-31500
GENERAL COUNSEL-JUL18
-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -1-,96-3.-75- 002691
*	4,060.38
HOPPING GREEN & SAMS
LH334029 201808 310-51300-48000 NOT.OF SPECIAL ASMT-09/18
LH334029 201808 310-51300-48000 NOT.OF SPECIAL ASMT-09/18
-  -  -  -  -  - - -  -  -  -4-,0-60.-38-
*	2,306.43
*	2,306.43
002692
THE LEDGER
859300	201806 300-13100-10000
CONFLICT OF INT. WAIVER
- - - -  -  -  -  - - - -4,-61-2.-86- 002693
*	1,520.30
RUMBERGER, KIRK & CALDWELL
6365671	201809 320-53800-47100
MOSQUITO MGMT SERV SEP18
CLARKE ENVIRONMENTAL MOSQUITO
- - - - - - - - - - -1-,5-20-.3-0 002694
*	12,583.33
12,583.33 002695

POIN POIN CDD	TVISCARRA
CHECK  VEND# .....INVOICE•...•.•.EXPENSED TO...	VENDOR NAME DATE	DATE	INVOICE	YRMO DPT ACCT# SUB SUBCLASS
STATUS	AMOUNT	....CHECK••...
AMOUNT	#
9/07/18 00001

9/13/18 00010
8/28/1833	201808 320-53800-60000
POND AERATOR RELOCATION 8/28/1834	201808 320-53800-60000
POND AERATOR INSTALL. PH2
GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES-CF
9/04/18 6-297-06 201808 310-51300-42000
DELIVERY 08/29/18
*	802.03
*	1,797.90
-  -  -  -  -  - -  - - -  -2,-59-9.-93-
*	196.10

002696

9/13/18 00002
FEDEX
5/21/18 100362	201804 300-13100-10000
PROJ.CONSTRUCTION APR18 5/21/18 100363	201804 300-13100-10000
SALE-REC.FACILITIES APR18
- -  -  -  - -  - -  -  -  -  -1-96-.1-0 002697
*	4,232.77
*	9,103.91

9/14/18 00001
HOPPING GREEN & SAMS
9/04/1831	201809 310-51300-34000
MANAGEMENT FEES-SEP18 9/04/1831	201809 310-51300-35200
INFORMATION TECH-SEP18 9/04/1831	201809 310-51300-31300
DISSEMINATION FEES-SEP18 9/04/1831	201809 310-51300-51000
OFFICE SUPPLIES
9/04/1831	201809 310-51300-42000
POSTAGE
9/04/1831	201809 310-51300-42500
COPIES
9/04/1832	201809 320-53800-12000
FIELD MANAGEMENT-SEP18 9/04/1832	201809 320-53800-60000
LIVING WATER AERATION SYS
-  -  -  -  -  -  - - - - -13-,3-36-.68-
*	3,750.00
*	125.00
*	416.67
*	34.00
*	37.17
*	268.50
*	833.33
*	6,419.90
002698

9/15/18 00013

9/20/18 00009
GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES-CF
9/15/18 09152018 201809 300-20700-10000
FY18 DEBT SERVICE ASSESS
POINCIANA CDD C/0 USBANK
9/17/18 3232249	201809 320-53800-47000
AQUATIC SERVICES SEP18
- - - - -  -  - -  - -
*	27.59
-  -  -  - -  - - - - -
*	8,166.66
11,884.57 002699

27.59 002700

9/20/18 00002
CLARKE AQUATIC SERVICES, INC.
9/17/18 102652	201808 310-51300-31500
GENERAL COUNSEL - SEP18
-  - - -  -  - - - - -  -8,-16-6.-66-
*	6,330.91
002701
HOPPING GREEN &  SAMS	6,330.91 002702

POIN POIN CDD	TVISCARRA
CHECK  VEND# •....INVOICE.•••••••EXPENSED TO...	VENDOR NAME DATE	DATE	INVOICE	YRMO DPT ACCT# SUB SUBCLASS
10/02/18 00004	9/01/18 3033	201809 320-53800-46200
LAWN MAINTENANCE SEP18 10/01/18 3088	201810 320-53800-46200
LAWN MAINTENANCE OCT18
STATUS

*
*
AMOUNT	••..CHECK•.•..
AMOUNT	#
11,970.42
11,970.42
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
FLORALAWN 2, LLC
- - - - - - - - - -
2-3,-94-0.-84- 002703
10/02/18 00017	7/11/18 2127056 201806 300-13100-10000
FACILITY AQUISITION JUN18
*	1,180.00
8/01/18
8/28/18
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
10/02/18 00002	6/22/18
6/22/18
7/18/18
8/24/18
8/24/18
2127816	201807 300-13100-10000
FACILITY AQUISITION JULlB 2128812	201808 300-13100-10000 FACILITY ACQUISITION AUG
GAI CONSULTANTS, INC
100979	201805 300-13100-10000
PROJ. CONSTRUCTION MAY18 100980	201805 300-13100-10000 SALE-REC.FACILITIES MAY18 101435	201806 300-13100-10000 SALE-REC FACILITIES JUN18 102247	201807 300-13100-10000 PROJECT CONSTRUCT-JUN/JUL 102248	201807 300-13100-10000
SALE-REC.FACILITIES-JUL18
*	295.00
*	147.50
- - -  -  -  -  - - - -  -1-,6-22.-50- 002704
*	98.00
*	19,975.77
*	34,579.96
*	901.50
*	23,275.22
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
10/02/18 00007	9/28/18 57522
FY19 9/28/18 57522
FY19 9/28/18 57522
HOPPING GREEN & SAMS
201810 310-51300-45000
BUSINESS AUTO POLICY 201810 310-51300-45000
GENERAL LIABILITY
201810 310-51300-45000
-  -  - -  -  -  - - -  - 7-8-,83-0.-45-
*	500.00
*	4,500.00
*	2,000.00
002705
FY19 PUBLIC OFFICIAL LIAB
9/28/18 57522
FY19
201810 310-51300-45000
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
*	6,811.00
PUBLIC RISK INSURANCE AGENCY
10/09/18 00001	10/01/1835	201810 310-51300-34000
MANAGEMENT FEES-OCT18 10/01/1835	201810 310-51300-35200
INFORMATION TECH-OCT18 10/01/1835	201810 310-51300-31300
DISSEMINATION SVES-OCT18 10/01/1835	201810 310-51300-51000
OFFICE SUPPLIES
10/01/1835	201810 310-51300-42000
POSTAGE
-  -  -  -  -  -  - - -  - -13-,81-1.-00- 002706
*	3,750.00
*	125.00
*	416.67
*	1.05
*	28.87
POIN POIN CDD	TVISCARRA
CHECK  VEND# .....INVOICE....•.••EXPENSED TO...	VENDOR NAME DATE	DATE	INVOICE	YRMO DPT ACCT# SUB SUBCLASS
10/01/1835	201810 310-51300-42500
COPIES
10/01/1836	201810 320-53800-12000
FIELD MANAGEMENT-OCT18 10/01/1836	201810 310-51300-42000
POSTAGE
10/01/1836	201810 320-53800-60000
PND AERATORS
STATUS	AMOUNT	..••CHECK••.•• AMOUNT	#
*	134.55
*	833.33
*	69.00
*	5,857.00
GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES-CF
10/16/18 00020 10/01/18 2	201810 310-51300-31300
REV.AMORT SCHED 2012A-l
- - -  - - - -  - - -
*	50.00
11,215.47 002707
DISCLOSURE SERVICES, LLC
10/16/18 00017 10/08/18 2130084  201809 300-13100-10000
FACILITY ACQUISITION SEP 10/08/18 2130085 201809 310-51300-31100
INTERIM ENG. SRVCS SEP18
- - - - -	- - - -
*	1,770.00
*	1,138.78
50.00 002708
GAI CONSULTANTS, INC
10/16/18 00005	9/19/18 L060GOIM 201809 310-51300-48000
NOT.OF FY19 MEETING DATES
-  -  - - -  -  - - -  - -2,-90-8.-78-
*	337.17
002709
THE LEDGER
10/25/18 00009	10/15/18 2514	201810 320-53800-47000
AQUATIC SERVICES OCT18

*	8,616.66
337.17 002710
CLARKE AQUATIC SERVICES, INC.	8,616.66 002711
10/25/18 00011	10/15/18 1004603	201810 320-53800-47100
MOSQUITO MGMT SERV OCT18
*	12,583.33
CLARKE ENVIRONMENTAL MOSQUITO
10/25/18 00014	10/01/18 71994	201810 310-51300-54000
FY19 SPECIAL DISTRICT FEE

*	175.00
12,583.33 002712
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
10/30/18 00017	10/29/18 2130859	201809 310-51300-31100	*
INTERIM ENG. SERVS SEPT18
10/29/18 2130859A 201810 310-51300-31100	*
INTERIM ENG. SERVS OCT18

222.50
147.50
175.00 002713
GAI CONSULTANTS, INC
10/30/18 00002 10/25/18 103487	201809 310-51300-31500
GENERAL COUNSEL SEPT18

*	2,767.75
370.00 002714
HOPPING GREEN &   SAMS	2,767.75 002715

POIN POIN COD	TVISCARRA
CHECK  VEND# .•..•INVOICE•.•••.••EXPENSED TO...	VENDOR NAME DATE	DATE	INVOICE	YRMO DPT ACCT# SUB SUBCLASS
11/02/18 00004	11/01/18 3158	201811 320-53800-46200
LAWN MAINTENANCE NOV18
-  - - - - -  -  -  -  - - - - -  - -  -  -  -  -  -  - - - - -  -FL-OR-AL-AW-N-2, LLC
STATUS	AMOUNT	..••CHECK.•.•• AMOUNT	#
*	11,970.42
11,970.42 002716
11/15/18 00001	11/01/18 37	201811 310-51300-34000
MANAGEMENT FEES-NOV18
11/01/18 37	201811 310-51300-35200
INFORMATION TECH-NOV18 11/01/18 37	201811 310-51300-31300
DISSEMINATION-NOV18
11/01/18 37	201811 310-51300-51000
OFFICE SUPPLIES
11/01/18 37	201811 310-51300-42000
POSTAGE
11/01/18 37	201811 310-51300-42500
COPIES
11/01/18 37	201811 310-51300-41000
TELEPHONE
11/01/18 38	201811 320-53800-12000
FIELD MANAGEMENT-NOV18
*	3,750.00
*	125.00
*	416.67
*	.33
*	34.67
*	10.80
*	12.63
*	833.33
GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES-CF	5,183.43 002717

TOTAL FOR BANK A TOTAL FOR REGISTER
311,050.84
311,050.84

POIN POIN CDD	TVISCARRA

S ECTION 2

•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•

••	•
••••••••

Poinciana
Community Development District

Unaudited Financial Reporting
October 31, 2018

Gcr.-..-rnrM:11bl
4 tMfflS4n!ca,

•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•	•

Table of Contents

Balance Sheet

General  Fund Income Statement

Debt Service Income Statement

Month to Month

FY19 Assessment Receipt Schedule

Poinciana
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT BALANCE SHEET
October 31, 2018

 
General	Debt Service
Fund	
Totals
 	2019	

 	 	
Poinciana
COMMUNITY  DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

GENERAL FUND
Statement of Revenues  & Expenditures
For The Period Ending October 31, 2018

	ADOPTED BUDGET	PRORATED BUDGET THRU 10/31/18	ACTUAL THRU 10/31/18	
VARIANCE	
REVEN UES;					
ASSESSMENTS - TAX COLLECTOR	$469,835	$0	$0	$0	
ASSESSMENTS- DIRECT BILLED	$54,201	$0	$0	$0	
ASSESSMENTS - DEVELOPER	$96,6D4	$0	$0	$0	
INTEREST	$3,500	$292	$103	($189)	
TOTAL REVENUES	$624,140	$292	$103	($189)	

EXPENDITURES:					
ADMINISTRATIVE:					
SUPERVISOR FEES	$12,000	$1,000	$0	$1,000	
FICA EXPENSE	$918	$77	$0	$77	
ENGINEERING	$18,000	$1,500	$148	$1,353	
ATTORNEY	$30,000	$2,500	$0	$2,500	
ARBITRAGE	$450	$0	$0	$0	
DISSEMINATION	$5,000	$417	$467	($SO)	
ANNUAL AUDIT	$3,590	$0	$0	$0	
TRUSTEE FEES	$7,000	$7,000	$0	$7,000	
ASSESSMENT ADMINISTRATION	$5,000	$5,000	$0	$5,000	
MANAGEMENT FEES	$45,000	$3,750	$3,750	$0	
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY	$1,500	$125	$125	$0	
TELEPHONE	$100	$8	$0	$8	
POSTAGE	$2,400	$200	$98	$102	
PRINTING & BlNOiNG	$2,700	$225	$135	$90	
INSURANCE	$15,447	$15,447	$13,811	$1,636	
LEGAL ADVERTISING	$3,500	$292	$0	$292	
OTHER CURRENT CHARGES	$100	$8	$0	$8	
OFFICE SUPPLIES	$300	$25	$1	$24	
PROPERTY APPRAISER	$9,628	$0	$0	$0	
DUES, LICENSES & SUBSCRIPTIONS	$175	$175	$175	$0	
EillQ.					
FIELD MANAGEMENT	$10,000	$833	$833	$0	
ELECTRIC	$2,000	$167	$86	$81	
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE	$143,645	$11,970	$11,970	($0)	
AQUATIC CONTROL MAINTENANCE	$98,000	$8,167	$8,617	($450)	
AQUATIC MIDGE MANAGEMENT	$172,800	$14,400	$12,583	$1,817	
R&M DRAINAGE	$3,000	$250	$0	$250	
R&M MULCH	$4,500	$375	$0	$375	
R&M PLANT REPLACEMENT	$4,060	$338	$0	$338	
STORM STRUCTURES REPAIRS	$50,000	$4,167	$0	$4,167	
CONTINGENCY	$10,000	$833	$0	$833	
CAPITAL OUTLAY	$20,000	$1,667	$5,857	($4,190)	
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	$680,813	$80,916	$58,655	$22,260	
					
EXCESS REVENUES (EXPENDITURES)	($56,673)		($58,553)		
					
FUND BALANCE -BEGINNING	$56,673		$304,117		
					
FUND BALANCE - ENDING	$0		$245,565		
	2				

Poinciana
COMMUNITY  DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

SERIES 2012A-1 & A-2 DEBT SERVICE FUND
Statement of Revenues  & Expenditures
For The Period Ending October 31, 2018

	ADOPTED
BUDGET	PRORATED BUDGET
THRU 10/31/18		ACTUAL
THRU 10/31/18	
VARIANCE		
REVENUES:							
ASSESSMENTS· TAX COLLECTOR		$1,426,421		$0	$0	$0	
ASSESSMENTS· DIRECT BILLED		$292,011		$0	$0	$0	
INTEREST		$0		$0	$370	$370	
TOTAL REVENUES		$1,718,432		$0	$370	$370	

EXPENDITURES:							
ADMINISTRATIVE
PROPERTY APPRAISER		
$28,380		
$0	
$0	

$0	
SERIES 2012A-1
INTEREST -11/1		
$209,850		

$0	

$0	

$0	
PRINCIPAL-11/1		$600,000		$0	$0	$0	
INTEREST-05/1		$209,850		$0	$0	$0	
SERIES 2012A-2
INTEREST -11/1		
$160,425		
$0	
$0	
$0	
PRINCIPAL-11/1		$285,000		$0	$0	$0	
INTEREST· 05/1		$160,425		$0	$0	$0	
TOTAL EXPENDITURES		$1,653,930		$0	$0	$0	
							
EXCESS REVENUES (EXPENDITURES)		$64,502			$370		
							
FUND BALANCE· BEGINNING		$612,054			$1,464,125		
							
FUND BALANCE- ENDING		$676,556			$1,464,495		

3

fil'ill!Y§;
Poinciana
Community  Development District

Oct	Nov	Dec	Jan	Fe6	Mar	Apr	Mal	fan	Jul	'""	Sept                Total	
ASSESSMENTS - TAX COLLECTOR	$0	$0	$0	so	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0 ASSESSMENTS· DIRECT BILLED	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	so	$0	$0 ASSESSMENTS - DEVELOPER	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0                           $0                           $0                        $0                           so                           so                         $0                           $0 INTEREST $103 $0 $0 $0 so so so $0 $0 so $0 $0 $103
TOTAL REVENUES	100	so	$0	so	so	$0	so	$0	$0	so	so	$0	$1031

EXPENDITURES·

ADMINISTRATIVE:
SUPERVISOR FEES	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
FICA EXPENSE	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
ENGINEERING	$148	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	S148 ATTORNEY		$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0		$0 ARBITRAGE		$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0                                   $0                                 $0                      $0                            $0                           $0                            $0                                $0
DISSEMINATION	$467	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$467 ANNUAL AUDIT		$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0		$0 TRUSTEE FEES		so	$0	$0	so	so	$0                         $0                         $0                   $0                         so                         so                         so                         so ASSESSMENT ADMINISTRATION                                $0                                so                                so                           so                            so                                so                                so                             $0                      $0                         so                           $0                         $0                               $0 MANAGEMENT FEES                                                   S3,7SO                               $0                                $0                           $0                           so                                $0                                  $0                                $0                        $0                      so                           $0                         $0                     $3,750
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY	$125	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	So	so	$0	$12S
TELEPHONE	so	$0	$0	$0	so	so	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0
POSTAGE	$98	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$98
PRINTING & BINDING	S135	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	S135
INSURANCE	SU , 811	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	so	$0	$0	$0	$13,811
LEGAL ADVERTISING	$0	so	$0	$0	so	$0	so	$0	$0	so	so	$0	$0 OTHER aJRRENT CHARGES	so	so	$0	so	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0 OFFICE SUPPLIES	$1	$0	$0	$0	so	so                   $0                            $0                     so                         $0                           $0                         $0                             $1
PROPERTY APPRA'5ER	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
DUES, LICENSES & SUBSCRIPTIONS	Sl75	$0	so	$0	so	so	so	$0	So	$0	$0	$0	$175
E1IJJl;.
FIELD MANAGEMENT	$833	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	S833
ELECTRIC			S86	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	so	$0		S86 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCf	$11,970	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	Sll,970 AQUATIC CONTROL MAINTENANCE		$8,617	so	so	so	so	$0                            $0                            $0                     $0                         so                           so                         so                        $8,617 AQUATIC MIDGE MANAGEMENT                                  Sll.583                               $0                             $0                           so                            so                                $0                                  $0                             $0                     $0                            so                           so                         $0                     $12,583 R&M DRAINAGE                                                                       $0                               $0                                so                           $0                           $0                                $0                                  $0                            so                     $0                         so                           so                         $0                          so
R&MMULOI	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	So	$0	so R&M Pl.ANT REPLACt:MENT	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	so	$0	so STORM STRUCTURES REPAIRS	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	$0                                       $0                            $0                        $0                         $0                           $0                         $0                            so
CONTINGENCY	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	so	So	$0	so
CAPITAL OUTLAY	SS,857	$0	so	$0	So	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$5,857
TOTAL EXPENDrTURES	5!f S5	so	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	So	$0	SSS,6$S I
EXCESS REVENUES/{EXPENDtTUAES)	m• ,m 1	$0	so	$0	$0	so	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	so	( $58,55311

4

Poinciana
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FY2019 RECEIPTS

MAINTENANCE

GROSS ASSESSMENTS  S
CERTIFIED NET ASSESSMENTS S

499,824.26
469,834.80
100%
CHECK   GROSS ASSESSMENTS	COMMISSIONS	INTEREST	NET ASSESSMENTS	GENERAL
DATE	NO	RECEIVED	DISCOUNTS	PAID	INCOME	RECEIVED	FUND										
i					!		I			
11/14/18	ACH	s	907.08	$	36.30	s	17.42		s	-	s	853.36	$	853.36	
		$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	s	-	$	-			
		$	-	$	-	$	-	s	-	$	-	$	-			
		$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	s	-	$	-			
		$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-			
		$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	s	-	$	-			
		$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-			
		s	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	s	-			
		$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	s	-	s	-			
		$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	s	-	s	-			
		s	-	s	-	s	-		s	-	s	-	s	-	
		s	-	s	-	s	-		s	-	s	-	s	-	
		s	-	s	-	s	-		s	-	s	-	s	-	
		$	-	s	-	s	-		s	-	$	-	s	-	
		s	-	s	-	s	-		s	-	$	-	$	-	
		$	-	s	-	s	-		$	-	$	-	s	-	
		$	-	s	-	s	-		$	-	$	-	s	-	
!										
TOTAL COLLECTED	$	907.08	$	36.30 s	17.42		$	-		$	853.36	$	853.36		
PERCENTAGE COLLECTED								0%		

DEBT SERVICE

GROSS ASSESSMENTS $ CERTIFIED NET ASSESSMENTS $

1,517,469.41
1,426,421.25
100%

DATE	CHECK
NO		GROSS ASSESSMENTS RECEIVED	
DISCOUNTS	COMMISSIONS
PAID	INTEREST
INCOME	NET	ASSESSMENTS
RECEIVED		DEBT SERVICE FUND					
:	i				!		I								
11/14/18	ACH		s	3,004.74	$	120.18	s	57 . 69	$	-	$	2,826.87	s	2,826.87				
			s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	$	-	$	-			
		$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	s	-	$	-							
			s	-	$	-	s	-	$	-	$	-	$	-					
			s	-	$	-	s	-	$	-	$	-	$	-					
			s	-	$	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	$	-			
		$	-	$	-	s	-	$	-	$	-	$	-							
			s	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-						
		$	-	$	-	s	-	$	-	$	-	$	-							
		$	-	s	-	s	-	$	-	$	-	s	-					
			s	-	$	-	$	-	s	-	s	-	$	-				
			s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	
			s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	
			s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	
		$	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-			
			s	-	$	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-		
			s	-	$	-	s	-	s	-	s	-	s	-		
:	I				!										
TOTA L COLLECTED		$	3 ,00 '1.74	$	120.18	$	57.69	$	$	2,826.87		2,826.87							
P RC ENT AGE COLLECTED	Oo/.															

DIRECT BILLED ASSESSMENTS

TAYLOR MORRISON	$372,2  71.37	$58,281.12	$313,990.25

DATE
RECEIVED	DUE DATE	CHECK
NO.	NET
ASSESSED	AMOUNT RECEIVED	GENERAL FUND	DEBT SERVICE	
11/2/18
11/2/18
11/2/18	12/1/18
2/1/19
5/1/19	58234
58234
58234	S  186,13   5 .69
s   93,067  .84
s    93,067.84	s   186,135.69
$      93 ,06 7.84
$ 93,067.84	s	29,140 .56
s	14,570  . 28
s	14,570.28	s	156,995.13
s	78,497.56
$	78,497.56	
			$ 372 271.37	$ 372,271.37	$	58,281 .1 2	$	313990.25	

5

S ECTION D

S ECTION 1
l	•  -•.
.-      -   .  -
. . .
""=I ----.-.-.-=...-=--::::r	-

-,	--        -	-	-	-      I	Poinc ian	a:
Community Development District

=		---	--	-	-	--

Poinciana Community Development District

Field Management Report November 28, 2018

To:		George Flint District Manager
From:	Clayton Smith
Field Services Manager

RE:	Poinciana COD - November 28, 2018
The following is a summary of items related to the field operations and management of the Poinciana Community Development District.

---	-

--	------ - ---	-

'	,~,-

--	-   --	---	-

If.., -··	•. ·
,..	--"  -.	--.. ---.
·	·

----------------- ------------

										
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Venezia	9/5/18	9/5/18	2.5	mi	0.55	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Bella Viana	9/5/18	9/5/18	2	mi	0.43	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Lago Vista	9/5/18	9/5/18	0.4	mi	0.08	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Monte Lena	9/5/18	9/5/18	0.8	mi	0.14	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Rainbow Lakes	9/5/18	9/5/18	0.4	mi	0.11	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Terra/Flora Vista	9/5/18	9/5/18	2.6	mi	0.58	gal		
	PCDDTRUCKULV	Capri	9/5/18	9/5/18	0.8	mi	0.17	gal		
	PCDDTRUCKULV	Portifino	9/5/18	9/5/18	1.2	mi	0.26	gal		
	PCDDATV ULV	ATV-all ponds	9/6/18	9/6/18	8.7	mi	1.26	Qal		
	PCDDTRUCK ULV	Venezia	9/10/18	9/10/18	2.5	mi	0.56	gal		
	PCOD TRUCK ULV	Bella Viana	9/10/18	9/10/18	2	mi	0.45	gal		
	PCDDTRUCK ULV	Lago Vista	9/10/18	9/10/18	0.4	mi	0.08	gal		
	PCDDTRUCK ULV	Monte Lena	9/10/18	9/10/18	0.8	mi	0.17	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Rainbow Lakes	9/10/18	9/10/18	0.4	mi	0.11	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Terra/Flora Vista	9/10/18	9/10/18	2.6	mi	0.58	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Capri	9/10/18	9/10/18	0.8	mi	0.16	gal		
	PCDDTRUCK ULV	Portifino	9/10/18	9/10/18	1.2	mi	0.26	gal		
	PCDDATV ULV	ATV-all ponds	9/13/18	9/13/18	8.8	mi	1.33	aal		
	PCDDTRUCK ULV	Venezia	9/17/18	9/17/18	2.5	mi	0.55	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Bella Viana	9/17/18	9/17/18	2	mi	0.44	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Lago Vista	9/17/18	9/17/18	0.4	mi	0.08	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Monte Lena	9/17/18	9/17/18	0.8	mi	0.16	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Rainbow Lakes	9/17/18	9/17/18	0.4	mi	0.11	gal		
	PCOD TRUCK ULV	Terra/Flora Vista	9/17/18	9/17/18	2.6	mi	0.58	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Caori	9/17/18	9/17/18	0.8	mi	0.16	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Portifino	9/17/18	9/17/18	1.2	mi	0.26	gal		
	PCDDATV ULV	ATV-all conds	9/20/18	9/20/18	8.7	mi	1.32	c al		
	PCDDATV ULV	ATV-all ponds	9/24/18	9/24/18	2.4	mi	0.54	cal		
	PCDDTRUCK ULV	Venezia	9/24/18	9/24/18	2	mi	0.42	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Bella Viana	9/24/18	9/24/18	0.4	mi	0.08	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	La ao Vista	9/24/18	9/24/18	0.8	mi	0.16	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Monte Lena	9/24/18	9/24/18	0.4	mi	0.11	Qal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Rainbow lakes	9/24/18	9/24/18	2.6	mi	0.58	gal		
	PCDD TRUCK ULV	Terra/Flora Vista	9/24/18	9/24/18	0.8	mi	0.16	gal		
	PCDDTRUCK ULV	Capri	9/24/18	9/24/18	1.2	mi	0.26	gal		
	PCDDATV ULV	ATV-all ponds	9/26/18	9/26/18	8.7	mi	1.29	cal		
		Total For The Month	77.60	ml	14.54	p l				

-										

-------- -  -.-	:> - ·.
· ·	Clarke Reports

_.,,..	-	------------

	POND B-5	10/30/18	Alligator Weed		
	POND B-5	10/30/18	Pennywort		
	POND B-5	10/30/18	Primrose		
	POND B-5	10/30/18	Shoreline Grasses		
	B-6	10/30/18	Alligator Weed		
	B-6	10/30/18	Cattail		
	B-6	10/30/18	Pennywort		
	B-6	10/30/18	Primrose		
	B-6	10/30/18	Shoreline Grasses		
	C-1	10/24/18	Clean		
	C-10	10/10/18	Filamentous		
	C-10	10/10/18	Hydrilla		
	C-11	10/10/18	Filamentous		
	C-11	10/10/18	Hydrilla		
	C-12	10/10/18	Filamentous		
	C-12	10/10/18	Hydrilla		
	C-13	10/12/18	Alligator Weed		
	C-13	10/12/18	Pennywort		
	C-13	10/12/18	Primrose		
	C-13	10/12/18	Shoreline Grasses		
	C-14	10/12/18	Alligator Weed		
	C-14	10/12/18	Pennywort		
	C-14	10/12/18	Shoreline Grasses		
	C-15	10/30/18	Clean		
	C-16	10/12/18	Clean		
	C-17	10/10/18	Filamentous		
	C-17	10/10/18	Hydrilla		
	C-18	10/30/18	Clean		
	C-19	10/10/18	Filamentous		
	C-20	10/30/18	Clean		
	C-20	10/30/18	Filamentous		
	C-20	10/30/18	Hydrilla		
	C-3	10/24/18	Clean		
	C-6	10/10/18	Filamentous		
	C-6B	10/10/18	Filamentous		

----	-	-  -   -    -	-   -	-	-	-
r.,. ·	· ·	Conclusion

For any questions or comments regarding the above information, please contact me by phone at 407-913-2960, or by email at csmith@gmscfl.com Thank you.
I

Respectfully, Clayton Smith

S ECTION 2
Customer Complaint Log Poinciana COD

Date	Resident	Address	Pond	Contact	Complaint	Assigned To	Resolution	Date Resolvec	
9/11/18 Steve Mattis	1065 Glendora Road P-D5	863-427-3442	Trash in/around pond	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Trash removed	9/20/18	
9/17/18 Mrs. Burchins	785 Grand Canal Drive P-A 1213	863-852-8371	Debris/trash in lake, covering drain	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Trash removed	9/20/18	
10/3/18 Patricia Towers	316 Acadia Drive	P-C20	772-219-8928	Muck coming onto property from lake	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Sprayed	10/30/18	
10/4/18 Bonnie Lyon	793 Grand Canal Drive	863-852-9005	Cypress tree behind house is dead, wants replaced	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Spoke to homeowner	10/5/18	
10/8/18 Bonnie Lyon	793 Grand Canal Drive P- A 13	863-852-9005	Midge control	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Sprayed		
10/9/18 Mrs. Burchins	785 Grand Canal Drive P-A 1213	863-852-8371	Midge control	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Sprayed		
10/10/18 William Kilroy	120 Amalfi Lane	P-E3	863-439-8329	Would not disclose, requested site visit	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Clayton to meet 10/15	10/11/18	
10/11/18 John Yuska	845 Grand Canal Drive P-A 1213	815-295-0884	Midge control	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Sprayed		
10/12/18 Tom Kettwig	656 Portofino Drive	P-D2	863-852-8759	Algae	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Sprayed		
10/30/18 Sheila Lewis	741 Grand Canal Drive P-A 1213	863-547-4447	Midge control	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Sprayed		
10/30/18 Arabell Tymes	214 Acadia Drive	P-C20	201-452-0684	Algae on pond	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Sprayed		
11/2/18 Gonzalo Gomez	642 Volterra Blvd	G-1	860 681-4678	Low water level	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Clayton responded to homeowner		
11/5/18 Mrs. Burchins 11/16/18 Georgia Leon
11/20/18 Heather Hayes	785 Grand Canal Drive P-A 1213 495 Barcelona Drive	P-D5
364 New River Drive P-Bl6	863-852-8371
Gleon@jud pro.ca 703-282-7753	Midge control Algae on pond
Midge Control	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Sprayed
Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith To be sprayed 11/26/18
Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith Courtesy treatment done (not contracted)	10/30/18	
11/20/18 Richard Torresi	376 Acadia Drive	P-C20	863-727-2148	Algae on pond	Alan Scheerer/Clayton Smith To be sprayed on 11/26/18