MINUTES OF MEETING LAKE ASHTON
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Lake Ashton Community Development District was held on Monday, May 6, 2024 at 9:00 a.m. at the Lake Ashton Clubhouse Ballroom, 4141 Ashton Club Drive, Lake Wales, FL.
Present and constituting a quorum were:

Lloyd Howison by Zoom	Chairman
Brenda VanSickle	Vice Chairman
Steve Realmuto	Assistant Secretary
Debbie Landgrebe	Assistant Secretary
Mike Costello	Assistant Secretary Also present were:
Jill Burns	District Manager, GMS
Jan Carpenter	Latham Luna, District Counsel
Garret Posten	District Engineer, Rayl Engineering
Alan Rayl by Zoom	District Engineer, Rayl Engineering
Kristofer Fornieri	Security, Securitas
Matt Fisher	Operations Manager
Christine Wells	Community Director
Pete Wittman	Yellowstone Landscaping

The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the May 6, 2024 Lake Ashton Community Development District Board of Supervisors meeting.

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance
Ms. Burns called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m., called roll, and the pledge of allegiance was recited. Four Supervisors were present in person with one attending via Zoom constituting a quorum.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Meeting Agenda
Ms. Burns asked for any comments on the agenda.

On MOTION by Ms. Landgrebe, seconded by Mr. Realmuto, with all in favor, the Meeting Agenda, was approved 5-0.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comments on Specific Items
on the Agenda (the District Manager will read any questions or comments received from members of the public in advance of the meeting)
Ms. Burns opened the public comment period.
A resident commented concerns about the streetlights running when the sun is still shining. Ms. VanSickle asked that if anybody sees a problem with a light pole or the light staying on to copy down the number on the pole and send it to Ms. Wells. She also note that they would do better. The resident thanked the Board.
Resident Greg Ulrich (3076 Dunmore) commented on the proposed assessment increases for Fiscal Year 2025. He urged the Board to use funds in a fiscally responsible manner and to find a way to keep LA beautiful without having to continually go to the pockets of the residents.
Resident Brenda Jackson (4167 Muirfield) commented concerns of CDD property being neglected. She asked the Board to be more fiscally conservative in giving the residents what they need, not what they want.
Ms. Burns read resident Sharon Carl’s (3006 Ashton Palms Drive) comments regarding pet park expenses. She noted concerns with the approval of the pet park pavers. She stated there was limited feedback to meet the needs of all pet park users. She questioned expenses approved with minimal feedback or specific cost analysis to support the need instead of desire. She asked what the current process was to determine validity of resident requests and justification measures before requesting funds to improve or enhance the amenity.
A resident commented about their concerns regarding the CDD Board allocating
$13,550 for improvements to the clubhouse pet play park. The resident also noted that it appeared that Directors were determined to spend more funds than annually collected,

which will result in spending reserves or significantly increasing their annual fee. The resident added that this was due to the short sightedness of previous Boards who chose not to include a small annual increase to build their reserves for future needs. She noted they were an aging community with many expenditures needed to just maintain what they have. It was also noted that this should be the primary focus of the Board. The resident also pointed out that they were pleased to see work beginning on the landscaping and broken irrigation system inside the fence along Thompson Nursery Road. The resident asked the Board to always remember that many residents were on fixed incomes and some depending on Social Security alone. The resident added that this income does not increase to keep up with inflation and the rising CDD fees. It was noted that excessive increases will lead to residents being priced out of their homes. The resident pointed out a time when Lake Ashton groups, organizations and individual residents would freely offer their expertise to assist with projects and organize fundraisers. This resident noted that perhaps a small annual registration fee for pet owners is in order and the money collected will be used for upkeep of the pet parks.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Minutes from the
April 15, 2024 Board of Supervisors Meeting
Ms. VanSickle presented the April 15, 2024 Board of Supervisors meeting minutes. She asked for any comments or changes. Ms. Burns noted a couple of comments Mr. Realmuto sent to incorporate, but nothing substantial. Ms. Landgrebe noted a correction to Mr. Realmuto’s name from miss to mister.

On MOTION by Mr. Realmuto, seconded by Ms. Landgrebe, with all in favor, the Minutes from the April 15, 2024 Board of Supervisors Meeting, were approved 5-0 as amended.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Engineering Report
Mr. Posten presented the Engineering Report to the Board. He stated the cart path repairs were completed. They did have to come back out and make a couple of corrections, which have been done. The 4173 Limerick surface depression is scheduled for May 14th and 15th with AAA. He stated they have been looking into Hole #4 fairway,

the cart path in proximity to the pond. He explained that they were comfortable with getting 3 feet minimum away from the cart path and then four to one transition back to the bottom of the pond. He noted anything greater than that, they would want to do volume calculations and survey the pond to make sure they are not violating the SWFWMD permit. He stated they think that work would be within the erosion budget that the CDD has set forth. The last item Mr. Posten reviewed was the surface depressions scattered throughout the community that they discussed at the previous meeting. He noted that they documented about eight of those that they think could have a relationship to the underground sanitary water. He stated they reached out to the City of Lake Wales to get that process started of them evaluating their lines. He noted that if it is their issue, they will take care of it. After discussion, Mr. Posten noted they intend to have them send the video when they go down and do lines.

Consideration of Proposal from S&S Contracting for Wash Out Repair at Bridge #7
Mr. Posten explained that the Board approved a not to exceed of $3,500 at the previous meeting for Hole #4. He further explained that the quotes unfortunately came in higher than that. The quote that was originally included in the packet was for $7,000, but they went back to S&S and discussed an alternative repair method, and they got it down to $4,925. That new quote was provided to the Board for review.

On MOTION by Mr. Realmuto, seconded by Ms. Landgrebe, with all in favor, the Quote from S&S for $4,925, was approved 5-0.

Turnberry Lane Stormwater Drainage Inlet Assessment Report from Rayl Engineering
Mr. Posten stated they were asked to review the inlets along Turnberry and make sure there were no unforeseen costs they were not accounting for in the budget. They did that. He provided the report in this agenda packet. They do not think that any of those repairs would substantially increase the cost of the Turnberry project.
Mr. Posten addressed the parking lot seal coat as well stating they looked around the parking lot and they don’t see any substantial structural damage. Mr. Posten and his

team think the seal coat would be a good option. He pointed out that it’s typical maintenance practice to seal coat periodically and it would help get the most life out of the parking lot.
Ms. Landgrebe asked regarding Turnberry how long after paving would they suggest they start a sealing process for longevity of the road. Mr. Posten responded that the standard guideline is every two to three years for seal coating. Board discussion ensued on seal coating. The Board invited resident John DeWinkler (4632 Turnberry Lane) up to address their question on the observation on pavement that is seal coated every two to three years versus that which is not.
Resident John DeWinkler (4632 Turnberry Lane) noted he was very opinionated about seal coat. He explained that seal coating makes things look pretty, but it doesn’t last any length of time. He stated the seal coat will seal cracks, but it doesn’t add any structural qualities to the road.
Mr. Rayl also addressed the Board’s question on the observation on pavement that is seal coated every two to three years versus that which is not. He explained they were not gaining a structural benefit from a seal coat. He further explained that they get adhesion of the surface aggregate, but wheel turning movements tend to break up that surface aggregate and they will see raveling develop. It’s application of liquid asphalt to the existing pavement section that is in place, and it doesn’t do anything to give it extra strength as far as live loads. The strength is all below in the base and subgrade of the pavement section. The benefits they see from seal coating is that it does bind the surface aggregate and there is an aesthetic component to the seal coat application that makes it look prettier and refreshed. Ms. Landgrebe asked Mr. Rayl if the seal coat would extend the life of the pavement. Mr. Rayl responded that he didn’t know how well that can be quantified. He explained that it does provide a benefit where it binds the surface aggregate. He further explained that it does add supplements to what they have, so empirically, yes, it would extend the life. In saying that, he couldn’t say how much that could be quantified and it would completely be dependent upon use. He explained that it does provide a surficial benefit where that seal coat comes in contact with the surface aggregate of the existing asphalt section, but no structural benefit.

The Board discussed the advice provided by the professionals and found the advice to be consistent. The Board decided to utilize their limited financial resources in other areas.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Old Business
Update Regarding Security (requested by Supervisor Costello)
Mr. Costello noted concerns regarding security and the things that have been gone over for the last three or four months that haven’t happened. He explained that they need to move forward. He asked. Mr. Fornieri for an update as to where they are this week. Mr. Fornieri responded that he understood the frustration. He explained that it hasn’t gone as smooth as he hoped. He further explained that the database was completed on Friday, and they have some punch list items that he has been working on with Ms. Wells such as the wire mold and the wire coming down the wall. Mr. Costello pointed out that they have not got an accurate timeframe of what’s happening. Mr. Fornieri stated they will have someone there tomorrow to go through the printer and will get as much done from the punch list as they can. Mr. Costello noted his concerns of specific punch list items that haven’t been addressed in months. Mr. Fornieri responded that they do have it now, but it did take much longer than they hoped. He explained that it was more detailed than it seemed and with technology side of things, they don’t want to push these items through because it would be worse. Mr. Costello responded that they want it done right. Ms. VanSickle stated they were paying for a service that they expected to be a lot more professionally done than what they have seen. She asked if there should be a project manager handling this from beginning to end seamlessly. Mr. Fornieri responded that there should have been, but he is no longer with Securitas. He explained that he was very confident with credentials assigned that by the end of May they can be using the system. He further explained that there is a process to this, but they will be happy with it when it’s done. He apologized that the Board didn’t feel it was professional. He pointed out that he did see some of the installation and it will be changed. He noted their big goal is to have this working and working right. He is going to get with Ms. Well after the meeting to further discuss this, but he assured the Board that they will be happy and satisfied with the system. Ms. Wells explained their reasons for providing the end of May timeframe for the system being ready to go, but she explained the detailed process that has to take place

and didn’t want residents to think that the end of May they can come in and get it. She noted she would rather under promise than over deliver. Ms. Landgrebe asked for clarification that by the end of May it will be ready to go, and the testing will be taking place and then they will see. Ms. Wells agreed and stated she didn’t want residents to think the end of May they should be getting a call to come in and get their stuff. It was advised for residents to not mark their calendars yet. The educational part of the system for residents was discussed. Ms. VanSickle noted that she didn’t want Ms. Wells to feel rushed by saying the end of May. She would rather do this right and advised Ms. Wells to take her time. Mr. Realmuto agreed with Ms. VanSickle on taking the time to do it right rather than rushing it. Ms. Wells explained that they would give residents plenty of notice before the date. If residents don’t have computer access or internet access, they can come in. Ms. Wells noted her plan was to put a couple of printed copies in the media center so people can pick them up. Mr. Fornieri concluded his update regarding security. The Board thanked Mr. Fornieri.

Discussion Regarding Reconsidering Irrigation Meter Along Thompson Nursery Road (requested by Supervisor Landgrebe)
Ms. VanSickle opened the discussion regarding reconsidering the irrigation meter along Thompson Nursery Road. Ms. Landgrebe suggested that the Board should reconsider having the meter turned on or at least have discussion on it because the whole area does not look like the rest of Lake Ashton. Ms. Wells stated it is $73 for the base meter charge and they require a $650 deposit. Mr. Realmuto noted it was the houses back to Thompson Nursery on Aberdeen. Ms. Wells stated it was covering a large number of homes. The Board discussed the irrigation, the meter, the dead plants, and turf. The Board also briefly discussed the sand getting blown onto the properties and into the homes. After discussion, it was decided to have Mr. Fisher look at this and bring back options and costs to the next meeting. Mr. Howison suggested looking at some drought tolerant planting that they could put in that would improve things for residents without incurring a huge amount of costs.

Ratification of Addendum to the Natural Gas Service Agreement with Florida Public Utilities
Mr. Realmuto noted he expressed concern with regard to what their liability might be if the restaurant should pull out of the agreement and he didn’t see a response to that. He asked if they can be assured that if the restaurant, for some reason, pulls out of their agreement with the gas company, they will not be liable for any additional charges. Ms. Wells responded that the only agreement they signed is their contract, they have nothing to do with the third-party contract. Ms. Wells stated she did talk to Florida Public Utilities about that. She stated they mentioned there is no term for either one of them. She added that both of the contracts have been signed, one for the restaurant and one for here. She noted they said they could pull out at any moment, or the restaurant could and there is no liability on one or the other. She will be sure to get that in writing. She pointed out that they were advised that if the restaurant were to pull out once they’ve started, they were still going forward with it and there’s no liability for the District as far as additional cost. The cost benefit analysis was discussed. Ms. Wells stated the only thing that was left of the cost benefit analysis was the deposit that’s required, which is a little over $2,000. Mr. Realmuto noted that the amount listed for conversion of propane to natural gas is
$33,693. Ms. Wells stated that was correct. She met with another person to get quotes on the restaurant equipment, and he was a little bit higher, so she is going to meet with a third person because its going to take some time to bring he lines in there. She explained that they will make that amount back in probably two years. She estimated that they would be saving about $1,700 a month going from propane to natural gas. Discussion ensued and it was noted for clarification that Ms. Wells has direction that they were going to convert the spa heater at the pool, replace the gas heater at the pool, convert all the hot water heaters from electric to tankless gas hot water heaters and replacing all restaurant equipment to new natural gas equipment. Mr. Fisher noted they were getting a new natural gas heater anyways. He suggested that they could keep the gas heater they have for the pool as a backup and just convert it because it still has three or four years of life left on it. After discussion, it was decided to have Mr. Fisher bring back the numbers on what the conversion cost would be.

On MOTION by Mr. Costello, seconded by Ms. Landgrebe, with all in favor, the Addendum to the Natural Gas Service Agreement with Florida Public Utilities, was ratified 5-0.

Discussion Regarding Assessments and Capital Projects Fund History (all items requested by Supervisor Realmuto)
Cumulative Assessments Chart (document provided by Supervisor Realmuto)
Mr. Realmuto presented materials for the Board to review. He explained that it shows the cumulative increases at 50% and a total amount of $855 since their Fiscal Year 2019 year.

Capital Project Fund History Chart (document provided by Supervisor Realmuto)
Mr. Realmuto stated this was a ten-year history of the capital project fund. He explained that this shows what the reserve contributions have been over this ten-year history. He pointed out that their contributions to the capital project fund has actually gone up fairly significantly in the last several years from historical average. He stated in the 2023 budget, they contributed almost $456,000 to the capital projects fund. He explained that amount when added to the $309,000 balance means they essentially started this Fiscal Year 2024 with $909,000 in the capital projects fund. He further explaining that as of their last financial report, it was around $730,000 and they have spent money since then. He noted their budgeted contribution going into Fiscal Year 2025 from the Fiscal Year 2025 budget is $466,000. In saying that, they have increased expenditures to try to be sure that they are available. He reviewed the expenditures. He noted that spending has gone up and it’s more than the contributions to the reserve funds. Mr. Costello agreed with Mr. Realmuto but added that inflation has totally killed them. Mr. Howison also noted that their contributions were up 50%, according to Mr. Realmuto’s numbers, which is level with inflation.

Fiscal Year 2024 Reserve Study Projects and Strategic Planning Projects Combined Listing
Mr. Realmuto presented this item to the Board

Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Projects & Contingencies List
Mr. Realmuto presented this item to the Board.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	New Business
Items Relating to the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Adoption
Consideration of Resolution 2024-05 Approving the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget (Suggested Date: July 15, 2024), Declaring Special Assessments, and Setting the Public Hearings on the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget and Imposition of Operations and Maintenance Assessments
Ms. Burns stated this resolution does not approve a budget. It approves a preliminary budget and sets a public hearing. She noted they would send notice to the city or county at least 60 days prior to that public hearing date. She explained that today they were trying to set their cap at which they will send their mailed notice. She pointed out that the assessment can’t go beyond the mailed notice amount without an additional mailed notice. They will notify residents of a public hearing date that this resolution will set, and they will give members of the public an opportunity to come and provide comment on the proposed budget and the assessment increase. She added that it could go down from there, but it cannot go above the amount listed in the notice. Mr. Realmuto asked why the proposed date was moved to July instead of August. Ms. Burns explained the reason was because she will not be at the August meeting. Mr. Realmuto discussed the budget and proposed they reduce the number for capital projects to $131,157.

On MOTION by Ms. Landgrebe, seconded by Mr. Costello, with Ms. Landgrebe, Ms. VanSickle, Mr. Costello, Mr. Howison in favor and Mr. Realmuto opposed, Resolution 2024-05 the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget (Suggested Date: July 15, 2024), Declaring Special Assessments, and Setting the Public Hearings on the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget and Imposition of Operations and Maintenance Assessments, was approved 4-1.

Consideration of Easement Agreement (to be provided under separate cover)
Ms. Carpenter stated this was a draft reciprocal easement that they received many years ago from developer’s council when this issue first came up. She explained that they

took their draft, put the changes that they would need and sent it over to the developer so they could start looking at it for the boat dock so they can do the repairs. She noted that she just received an email negotiating the actual pathways to make sure they cover all the pathways that they need access to in the area they need access to and that will be surveyed once they agree on the actual locations. She explained that they wanted to get this out so they can start looking at it. Ms. Burns reminded Ms. Carpenter that they city gave a very short extension. Ms. Carpenter stated she would like to get this done as quickly as possible so the developer can get his dock compliance remedied so the District doesn’t have to pay to remove, clean up, or do something else to deal with the code violation. After Board discussion, Mr. Realmuto asked for an update on who owns what and who is responsible for what. Ms. Burns responded that she spoke with code enforcement and the boat dock is not on CDD property. She referred to map to show the Board the wooden walkway area that extends into the CDD property, which is the area they said is in disrepair and that the CDD is liable for. Ms. Burns explained that this matter needs to be discussed because they were granted an extension until May 19, and she doesn’t know if they will get an extension beyond that. She stated they needed to show that they are making some sort of progress to get this situation take care of; otherwise, it’s going to go to a magistrate hearing, and they could be subject to fines. Ms. Carpenter clarified that this is a reciprocal easement, including the golf cart path. Mr. Realmuto responded that as written, it doesn’t included access to the cart path. He understands that the intent is to include it. He wants to be sure they don’t approve any agreement until they ensure they are getting that access. Ms. Carpenter stated it includes the paths, which they will survey legals for as soon as they get those from the developer. She explained they just need to negotiate because they need to make sure they get the entire pathways that they need. After discussion, Ms. Carpenter noted their suggestion is to delegate to the Chairman and Vice Chairman the ability to firm up the agreement once they find out exactly what the developer’s intent is. Discussion ensued on the Easement Agreement. Mr. Realmuto opposed delegating authority to it because he thinks a set of five eyes is better than a set of one pair of eyes. He also stated that he believes it needs to come back to the Board, so they should take whatever action necessary so that the final document is approved by the Board. He made it clear again that he is opposed to it. Mr.

Howison supports delegating to the Chairman or Vice Chairman and moving forward with this. Mr. Costello supports delegating to the Chairman or Vice Chairman. Ms. Landgrebe opposed delegating authority to the Chairman or Vice Chairman. Ms. VanSickle supports delegating to the Chairman or Vice Chairman.

On MOTION by Mr. Costello, seconded by Ms. VanSickle, with Mr. Costello, Ms. VanSickle and Mr. Howison in favor and Ms. Landgrebe and Mr. Realmuto opposed, Delegating Authority to have Vice Chairman to Work with Staff to Negotiate the Easement Agreement with the Developer and Not Execute Unless Not Granted an Extension, was approved 3-2.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Monthly Reports
Attorney
Ms. Carpenter stated they did a number of agreements and follow up during the month. She pointed out that one of the issues that came up in the conversations was the widening of Thompson Nursery Road and the County still does not have their construction plans done, so there is still no firm plan for when that is going to happen. In saying that, she noted they do check with them every few months. She is going to keep the Board posted on that item.

Lake Ashton Community Director
Ms. Wells presented the Community Director Report. She reviewed the cost saving analysis. She stated they received a credit of $8,283.73 for sales tax credits. She noted they received a $9,596.70 check that was deposited on April 24th for lead adjustment credits. She provided updates on some action items. One was they replaced the broken scale in the fitness room. The new scale was installed, and she asked the Board to surplus the broken scale.

On MOTION by Mr. Realmuto, seconded by Ms. Landgrebe, with all in favor, Surplussing the Broken Scale, was approved 5-0.

Ms. Wells reviewed the estimate for the projector screen. She noted the sign they redid to be installed at the front entry gate was there for Ms. Burns and Ms. Carpenter to

review and make sure the verbiage is correct. The signage says, “Please be prepared to stop and have your driver’s license scanned.” Ms. Burns responded that Ms. Carpenter and herself confirmed that the sign verbiage is ok. Mr. Realmuto circled back to the projector screen and wanted to make it clear that the report said that the screen needs to be replaced because of the relay that lowers it to the motor isn’t working and also because it's no longer compatible. He explained that the aspect ratio is different than the native aspect ratio of the projector, but it doesn’t mean the projector doesn’t work with that screen.
Ms. Wells continued reviewing her report stating the estimate and agreement for installation of the pavers of the clubhouse pet play park was approved and executed by the Vice Chairman and C&C Outdoor, which is the company the Board agreed to. She noted pavers will be installed in four to six weeks. She stated staff met with RTC Outdoor, who provided the quote that was presented as part of the budget workshop for the boat dock and pier. RTC Outdoors is going to look at the area and put together a plan free of charge for the Board review. She added in regard to that, they have been working on options to purchase memorial swings and other seating options for the reflection garden and RTC Outdoor is going to include that in the plan as well to present to the Board. Ms. Wells provided a TECO follow up as well as options for the Board. Ms. Landgrebe highlighted the Juneteenth Freedom Day in Ms. Wells report stating it may open doors and opportunities for the community to really support this event and support Black Heritage Group. Mr. Realmuto circled back to streetlights, which was further discussed by Board and staff. Ms. Wells presented the project tracking list, which was provided for the Boards review.

Consideration of Quotes to Replace Ballroom Project Screen
Ms. Wells presented proposals for the replacement of the ballroom project screen. She noted that she spoke with John DeWinkler and he is going to write the CDD a check for $1,500 towards the cost of what they have already spent for the projector. She explained that from the amounts that she put in her report of what they spent, they now have an extra $1,500 from what was in the project list. The Board thanked Mr. DeWinkler.

On MOTION by Ms. Landgrebe, seconded by Ms. VanSickle, with Ms. Landgrebe, Ms. VanSickle and Mr. Costello in favor and Mr. Realmuto and Mr. Howison opposed, the Proposal to Replace Ballroom Project Screen by SoundWaves for $5,500, was approved 3-2.

Operations Manager
Landscape Update
Mr. Fisher and Mr. Wittman provided a landscape update. Mr. Wittman pointed out that they are in a heavy drought season. He stated irrigation is supplemental to mother nature and they are monitoring it, doing inspections to it and are making adjustments to it, but they are limited at the amount they can run the irrigation systems. He reassured the Board that they were monitoring it, but they would see a couple of hot spots. He stated they found the monument’s bottlebrush trees and are hoping to have them installed in the next two weeks.

Consideration of Quotes to Replace Sod and Additional Irrigation to the Clubhouse Pet Play Park
Mr. Fisher presented quotes to the Board to replace sod at the clubhouse pet play park as well as the additional irrigation. The different sod types were discussed. Irrigation was discussed. Mr. Wittman recommended holding on the irrigation component. It was noted that with Bahia, they can cut back on the number of heads for irrigation. After discussion, Mr. Realmuto moved to not do any sod or irrigation at the dog park currently and not accept the quotes. Ms. Landgrebe seconded for the discussion. After further discussion, Mr. Realmuto withdrew his motion.

District Manager’s Report
Presentation of Number of Registered Voters – 1,392
Ms. Burns stated the number of registered voters as of April 15th is 1,392.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comments
There being no comments, the next item followed.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisor	Requests/Supervisor
Open Discussion
Mr. Costello noted he and John DeWinkler went out and examined the roads. He stated next month he would like to bring something forward to the Board. He pointed out that it was not as bad as he thought it was going to be. Ms. VanSickle thanked Mr. Costello and Mr. DeWinkler for doing that.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned.

On MOTION by Ms. Landgrebe, seconded by Mr. Costello, with all in favor, the meeting was adjourned.

Secretary / Assistant Secretary	Chairperson