MINUTES OF MEETING TURTLE RUN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Turtle Run Community Development District was held on Monday, May 18, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. at the Governmental Management Services, 5385 N. Nob Hill Road, Sunrise, Florida 33351.

Present and constituting a quorum:
Barry Winfree	Chairman (via telecommunications)
Skip Carney	Vice Chairman
Virginia Tropea	Assistant Secretary
Kenneth Murray	Assistant Secretary

Also present were:

Patrick Burgess	District Manager
Pat Szozda	GMS
Jason Gitel	GMS
Michael Pawelczyk	District Counsel
Jonathan Geiger	District Engineer Several residents

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

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Moment of Silence
Mr. Carney led a moment of silence.
THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Pledge of Allegiance
Mr. Carney led the Pledge of Allegiance.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Good News
Mr. Carney: Does anybody have any good news? Ms. Tropea: I have nothing.
Mr. Murray: No sir.

Mr. Carney: Anybody else around the table? Just a little bit of a good news. We had a city ribbon cutting as far as the park was concerned. It went very well. Lack of attendance but it was good. They had booths set up. The other part of good news I am sure Patrick and Pat is happy about mother nature and all the rain. The District is looking good. That is all I have.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of the Minutes of the
April 27, 2026 Meeting
Mr. Carney: Approval of the April 27, 2025 meeting minutes. It is in your iPads or your paperwork. Does anybody have any changes? If not, a motion to approve.

On MOTION by Ms. Tropea seconded by Mr. Murray with all in favor, the Minutes of the April 27, 2026 Meeting were approved.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Resolution
#2026-01 Approving the Proposed Budget and Setting a Public Hearing
Mr. Carney: am going to let Barry take over number 6 which is the consideration of Resolution #2026-01 Approving the Proposed Fiscal Year 2027 Budget and Setting the Public Hearing.
Mr. Winfree: You are probably seeing we sent several versions of the meeting notice out. We are trying to Mr. Winfree was in audible at this time. for the lake restoration project out of our existing funds that are in our budget if it appears that we can do so. What we finally decided was that we are going to propose the budget with a zero increase for 2027 fiscal year and then we will figure it out once we get the final numbers of what it is going to cost whether to use bonds or bridge or whatever we need to do. We can’t wait because it is going to be at least another couple months before we get the actual figures. There is no way to adjust the budget within that time. Any questions?

Mr. Carney: No you spelled it out clearly. The question will be and I guess it is just a statement I will make it is a zero based budget and it will be pretty much the same as last year correct?
Mr. Winfree: Correct. A few line items moved around a little bit. We are trying to make the budget simpler, so it is a little easier to understand. Jennifer and Patrick worked on that last week. They have a little bit more work to do but basically the bottom line stays the same.
Mr. Carney: So we would need a motion to approve.
Mr. Burgess: This is approving the proposed 2027 budget and setting a public hearing. It needs to be at least 60 days from today’s date. I believe our August meeting will be at Coral Bay. We can set it for August 31, 2026 if you guys are ok with that.
Mr. Carney: That is fine.

On MOTION by Mr. Murray seconded by Ms. Tropea with all in favor, Resolution #2026-01 Approving the Proposed Fiscal Year 2027 Budget and Setting the Public Hearing on August 31, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. at the Coral Bay Recreation Center, 3101 South Bay Drive, Margate, Florida was approved.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion	of	Procedures	for
the General Election
Mr. Carney: Discussion for procedures for the general election. Patrick do you want to talk on that?
Mr. Burgess: So you have Seat #3, Seat #2, and Seat #1 are going to expire this November and the qualifying period will commence at noon on June 8,2026 and close at noon on June 12, 2026. On page 53 of your agenda states the information in order to qualify for those seats. Again that is Seat #1, Seat #2 and Seat #3 which would be Ken, Ginny and Rob. I know it is different in county, but I believe they can do this online in Broward County?
Ms. Tropea: Can I? I thought I had to go there.
Mr. Pawelczyk: I would just check with the Supervisor of Elections. Sometimes they are trying to make it easier. Different Supervisors throughout the state have different

rules. You can call them at any time. It looks like there is a phone number on there. I would just call and ask. I know a lot of them allow you to print out the paperwork ahead of time so you can fill it out before you go down there, which makes it much easier. The other thing I will let you know is you will have to complete your Form 1 Statement of Financial Interest to qualify. You will have to make sure you have that completed. That is part of the qualification process. If you get that done they can look and see that you have completed that. Certainly if you have any other general questions call Scott or myself. The Supervisors would be the place to start.
Mr. Winfree: It is a pretty simple process.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Attorney
Mr. Pawelczyk: I don’t have anything to report at this time. If the Board has any questions let me know. If I can answer them I will.
Engineer – Avana Outfall and Lake Side Slope Repair Plans and Proposal
Mr. Geiger: Just quickly before we get to the proposal, Landshore is still working on the engineering studies that were all approved. They reached out to our office to get any historical permits or plans we might have to ad them. They are working on Phase 1 right now, those two lakes 11 and 12 to come up with a design package for that.
Mr. Burgess: I spoke with Landshore today. They have the field work completed for Phase 1. They are just working on gathering the data to have all the information they found and pulled together. The entire lake banks and everything is digitalized. Now they are just working on the 4:1 requirement what restoration method is going to be suitable for those areas.
Mr. Burgess: And Landshore does the work, they send it to you. Now where does Water Management get involved and approve the process?
Mr. Geiger: Once GMS and KCI receives whatever Landshore, whatever package they are putting together per the proposal which I am assuming is going to include plans, specifications, and cost estimates and hopefully a timeline for construction. I believe at that point considering with the trouble with these two lakes we have been having already that is when we will reach back out to South Florida. I am not sure they are going give anything in writing like an official permit approval, but I am hoping we can get some sort

of verbal this is permittable and we are not going to come out and make you rip it out after constructed and everything. I would prefer the District have something even if it is an email stating that no permit is going to be issued because they don’t issue permits and the method we are proposing is acceptable.
Mr. Carney: We have to get something. Otherwise we do the work and spend all this money, and they come back and say it is not acceptable.
Mr. Geiger: That is why we want to sit down with them prior to any construction being done.
Mr. Carney: Who is your contact over there?
Mr. Geiger: The girl I deal with is Gyna Jamaica and at the last meeting when we were getting into the technical stuff it was actually the gentleman we met out there whose name is Guy something. I forget his last name. He was the one that got more involved when we kept pushing back on some of the technical requirements. I think he has been there longer from what it seems. They are our two primary contacts. They are willing to work with us on everything. I am hoping when Landshore is done they are coming back with a product that they know is going to be able to get approved and is economical for the District.
Mr. Burgess: I think it was multiple options and hopefully the Water Management District can approve all of them and not go back and forth.
Mr. Geiger: We are going to try and get as much in writing approval as we can. South Florida Water Management District has been very pushback on we don’t need to see as-builts, we don’t need to issue permits but after speaking with the Board last time and with Scott and everybody the District wants something in writing.
Mr. Carney: There has been a lot of back and forth and you guys are in the middle. I understand all that. Can we gain any ground by having an in person meeting maybe with Barry and you guys are myself so we can have a better dialogue. Something is missing here. We keep talking about it, but we are not going anywhere.
Mr. Geiger: That is mainly because South Florida has stated this is maintenance work. They don’t review plans for it. They don’t issue permits. They don’t issue approvals for it. It is just considered routine maintenance work, and it is not anything that they will review formally. I don’t think there is miscommunication I just think the first idea we came

in there with, the geo-tube thing they weren’t on board with that and that might not permissible and that is why we had to go back to the drawing board. We can provide a product that they would give a more definite answer on. The answer on the geo-tubes was we understand the reasoning behind and the restrictions with the District finances but that doesn’t meet our criteria. They were willing to work with us.
Mr. Carney: So are they willing to look at it again?
Mr. Geiger: I believe they will meet with us again. They seemed receptive to the teams’ meetings whenever we need to hop on. I don’t know if they are going to come down and meet in an office with us. We have met on site a couple of times when they have been here. I do think Landshore part of the conversation with you all was he wants to be able to run this all by them as well from what I understand.
Mr. Burgess: They told us that they are not going to tell us how to do it, it is up to our team to figure out how to get it to back to the 4:1 slope.
Mr. Geiger: Their whole thing was we will come out and look at it when it is done, and we will tell you that it is ok. They don’t want any involvement, but I know with the District spending this much money we do need something.
Mr. Carney: Can I reach out to legal counsel on that answer?
Mr. Pawelczyk: We have to comply with the 4:1 slope. That is what is in the permit. Mr. Carney: Understood.
Mr. Pawelczyk: We can call Scott and see but I know had talked about this and if you think about you know why they don’t want to touch it. They can’t tell you how to do it because they would have to do it for everybody. It just needs a 4:1 slope. Whatever is a 4:1 slope and satisfied that permit criteria which is what hopefully Landshore will recommend and Jonathan will look at and verify. If it satisfies the 4:1 slope you should be good to go. Then if we have to fight about it at the end, you have two experts telling us yes that satisfies the 4:1 slope.
Mr. Winfree: But the geo-tube process doesn’t, they already said that or they are just saying they won’t approve it or look at it?
Mr. Geiger: They pushed back tremendously in the meeting we had. Landshore said they can’t get the step down anywhere close to where South Florida Water Management said they try to work with us. We spoke with Miguel and he didn’t seem

confident that system would work for what South Florida was going to be willing to approve in the end.
Mr. Burgess: Landshore can do the step down amount, but they said they can’t go further.
Mr. Geiger: The 9 inches that was proposed originally is as much as Landshore can do and we did in that meeting get a verbal that is not acceptable restored to the 4:1 slope. The point that Mike just made that is the permit criteria we are working off of. That is the only direction they have given us. I think they were willing to work with us a little bit on that if Landshore was willing to demonstrate we were able to minimize that but going forward as long as I think we are providing something that matches the criteria the 4:1 slope I don’t think they are going to have anything to say about it except that meets the permit criteria.
Mr. Pawelczyk: I don’t really know what is going on with the project but that doesn’t mean that once Landshore makes its recommendation, we review it, that we can’t say we are going to enter into a contract to do this work, here are the plans, let us know if you have any objections. You can do that. The problem is they might have objections.
Mr. Burgess: We have to wait to see what they provide us.
Mr. Carney: If they sign the agreement based on a 4:1 slope they have to stand behind it, correct?
Mr. Pawelczyk: That is probably what the geo-tube contract said. Mr. Carney: Yes, but they are out of business.
Mr. Geiger: Essentially in all this we are right now in a pause until we get information back from Landshore. They have been very forthcoming with they are willing to work with us. They are not just going to put a whole package out and say there you go we are done with this now. Hopefully by next meeting if they have the first Phase done we can take a look at that together. Then get a feel for the cost. The solution they are proposing for Avana, which is on their proposal, is much different from what they propose about doing the engineering work upfront. I am hoping that they are going to come back with a different system or a multitude of systems to address areas individually. We are not going to have anything until they said by late July we should have everything. All the engineering studies done. I am hoping we get these as they are getting them done. I can

have a chance to review them, and we can hopefully bring one or two to the meetings before we get the final number on what they are thinking the total cost is going to be.
Mr. Carney: Total cost for Phase 1?
Mr. Geiger: One through six. I know that is what GMS has pushed for in terms of starting the conversation about the financials. Getting the total picture so we know how much we need to validate or borrow upfront to start this work. Like I said they have asked me for some plans and old permit information, so they are currently working on this. They have been keeping Patrick updated on all this.
Mr. Carney: Refresh my memory what is Phase 1 right now? Mr. Geiger: That is the two lakes.
Mr. Carney: The two big lakes.
Mr. Geiger: Phase 2 which we got a jump on is the really big lake that wraps around the Grove, Newport, and Turtle Run Boulevard.
Mr. Carney: Phase 1 and 2 would be the most expensive.
Mr. Geiger: Yes, based on the geo-tubes, site access and the linear footage. That is more than half the project is these two phases. Phases 3 through 6 might just be dirt moving, grading, and some of these areas might now need anything done.
Mr. Carney: The lake behind my house you can just walk right in. There is nothing
there.
Mr. Geiger: Landshore with those lakes it is much cheaper just to pump into
another lake and grade it all down.
Mr. Carney: Most of the lakes it is just excavation.
Mr. Geiger: The smaller ones yes. When we get the stuff back from Landshore if they are proposing some crazy method I am just going to say look guys there is no need to put shore line armor or anything unless there is some sort of situation that raises where they say look we have weak soil here but there should be enough material in that easement to fit all those small lakes without having to import anything.
Mr. Carney: Just from a lake bank standpoint most of those lakes are just a gradual grade in.
Mr. Geiger: I looked at the survey data where survey took points there is some areas that are not 4:1. Grading that out and making that smooth transition.

Mr. Carney: Most of that is around the pipes.
Mr. Geiger: Yes, which is hard to get the 4:1 on outfalls anyway, which is part of what I am going to talk about with this proposal. We do have the proposal in here from them for the Avana area they have been working on. I spoke with Miguel this $44,000 price tag replaces the original scope of work which I believe was once we took that outfall work out of the original proposal I believe we were looking at $40,841. 13. This $44,000 should replace that dollar amount for the amended construction contract. It started at around $50,000. We removed some of the work because it turned out that outfall wasn’t that outfall, so they weren’t providing some of the services. Then we got hung up with all the engineering services and having to undercover that pipe and everything. They are proposing to put in a fabric formed concrete mess. They basically pumped this filter fabric how do I describe it. There is a picture on the last page of the plans. They fill that with concrete. It holds the concrete and the concrete cures in place and creates a heavy concrete mat. It is a different system. They are proposing four. They are basically installing this along the shoreline there. That is going to hold that shoreline stable under the water so over time we don’t get the erosion and the sediment basically flowing back in front of the pipe. They have sections on here where they are going to grade underwater. They are going to remove the material they need to. They will install this. That comes right up to on top of the pipe basically. Then there is some rock rip rap installed out in front of that to facilitate not causing any erosion around the outfall as the water comes out. This is what they are proposing based on the their engineering study and the soil calculations and everything they did. Like I said it is about $4,000 over what the original scope of work was just for the grading and some of the other work that was originally proposed. They said they can’t really hit the 4:1 slopes around the outfall without having to extend that pipe out or cut the embankment back but the District doesn’t own a lot of property back there. I wanted to run this by the Board before we are asking them to provide anything else. I know around these outfalls it is typically tricky to comply to 4:1 unless that pipe is sticking out way far into the lake. He did assure me that they would transition back as fast as they could. This is what they brought to the table. I am not sure what the cost would be if we had that 4:1 extending outfall, but he said it would be a

substantial increase. We are at almost $50,000 on this. We have been dealing with this for a year and a half now.
Mr. Burgess: At $65,000 with all the engineering work, etc.
Mr. Geiger: This is what they are proposing. Like I said I have a little bit of concern about them not being able to hold that 4:1. I don’t know where to go from here unless you want to ask them for a proposal where they do keep the 4:1. That might double the cost of this project.
Mr. Carney: If we don’t reach the 4:1 aren’t we going to be Mr. Carney was inaudible at this time.
Mr. Geiger: In the areas of outfalls it is generally there is some leeway when you do have a head wall. If you look at any of the head walls we have in Turtle Run those things just drop straight off.
Mr. Carney: Then you need to find out what the proper way is.
Mr. Geiger: This is something that I did want to run this by everybody before I got ahead of myself there.
Mr. Burgess: Can we present this to the Water Management District? You guys can approve it contingent if the Water Management District approves of this.
Mr. Geiger: That is essentially what I would be looking for. If the Board wanted to approve this contingent on discussions with South Florida and us getting the ok that this is going to be acceptable. That way we don’t have to wait another month to come back.
Mr. Carney: We already approved the lower amount, right? Mr. Geiger: Yes.
Mr. Carney: Do we rescind that or amend the agreement?
Mr. Geiger: I don’t know how Scott has been handling the contract on this. Mr. Pawelczyk: It sounds like we have an agreement for $40,000 or so.
Mr. Geiger: Yes.
Mr. Pawelczyk: We have one for $50,000 and then he replaced it with the one for
$40,000. I would just authorize the execution of contract documents to be prepared by District counsel for the Landshore Enterprises agreement in the amount of $44,078.40 subject to verification with the engineer by South Florida Water Management District. Is that ok?

Mr. Carney: That is fine. Ms. Tropea: So moved.

On MOTION by Ms. Tropea seconded by Mr. Murray with all in favor, a motion to authorize the execution of contract documents to be prepared by District counsel for the Landshore  Enterprises  agreement  in  the  amount  of
$44,078.40 subject to verification with the engineer by South Florida Water Management District was approved.

Mr. Winfree: One thing I would like to add to this though is when we build the plan for this I would like to see a daily, weekly, I don’t need to see what you do every day but I would like to see a step by step plan to complete this so that six months down the road we are not still looking at like we have been. We need some kind of timing that we can keep track of. Does that make sense?
Mr. Geiger: Yes, understood. I will keep track of that. When we do reach out to South Florida I will make sure Patrick gets you that information. We will get a jump on this hopefully this week.
Mr. Burgess: You can send it to me, and I will send the Board updates as we get
them.
Mr. Winfree: Everybody agree with that?
Mr. Carney: Absolutely. We don’t want to wait months and months for a decision. Mr. Pawelczyk: What we probably need is just an agreement and then replace the
prior one. I don’t know.
Mr. Carney: Patrick, to your knowledge, did we pay Landshore for any of the construction work or just the engineering?
Mr. Burgess: I would have to check.
Mr. Geiger: If we did pay a deposit on the old contract amount I would like Landshore to understand that applicable to this one.
Mr. Burgess: I will take a look.
Mr. Geiger: That is all I have unless anyone has any questions? Mr. Carney: Barry do you have any other questions for Jonathan? Mr. Winfree: No sir.

Field Manager – Annual Maintenance Plan
Mr. Szozda: All the Sylvester trimming is complete. There are currently in the process of cleaning all of the light poles and they are looking great. Those guys are doing a great job. That project should be wrapped up in the next week or so. All the lakes were treated today. The mulch was delivered today, and the place should be completed mulched by the end of tomorrow. Friday in honor of Memorial Day we will be flying all American flags on all the flag poles.
Mr. Carney: Nice, good. I have one thing for you. BrightView’s quality assessment report I haven’t seen one in a while.
Mr. Szozda: Usually it is right after the meetings. I will make sure I get them out to
you.
Mr. Carney: Email them out. Mr. Szozda: No worries.
Mr. Winfree: Since we had cold span have the iguanas abated any?
Mr. Szozda: There is a lot less of them, but they are out there. They are few and
far between. They reproduce quickly.
Mr. Murray: We have seen them in my backyard again. Mr. Szozda: I haven’t talked to them in a while.
Mr. Carney: If you read up on them they double in population every 12 months. They don’t have one. What I have noticed, and I was talking to the iguana guys the ones that were in the preserve died off. The ones that were at the houses lived because they were able to keep warm over there.
Mr. Winfree: Were you guys able to get out and look behind or around the FPL lakes and what we needed to do there?
Mr. Szozda: Me and Skip are working on that. I have taken a look, but we need to basically walk. We haven’t gotten to that and walked the backyards yet. The answer is it is in process.
Mr. Winfree: Ok, just don’t forget. Mr. Szozda: Yes, sir.
Manager – Progress Report
Mr. Burgess: The only update that I have on the progress is I am still waiting on Horsepower with the speed limit light pole that was knocked down at the Estates entrance.

I don’t know why it is taking so long. When we sent the agenda out there was an update that is still the same. They have not returned my response, but I will reach out to them this week. I think that should be installed between this meeting and the next meeting. Everything else is still on track for the light poles in July and there is no additional updates that I have at this time.
Mr. Winfree: FYI, Jill, she has another project and Mr. Winfree was inaudible at this time.
Mr. Burgess: I will check in on them. It is delivered we are just waiting on install. Mr. Carney: Anything else Patrick?

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Financial Reports
Approval of Check Register
Approval of Unaudited Financials
Mr. Carney: Financial reports. Approval of the check register. We need a motion to approve.

On MOTION by Ms. Tropea seconded by Mr. Murray with all in favor, the Check Register and Unaudited Financials were approved.

Mr. Carney: Then we have the approval for the unaudited financials.
Mr. Burgess: I just want to touch on what was approved in the budget is, the goal is to have everything paid out of the general fund. We are going to eliminate your capital project reserve fund. That reserve fund was funded from your general fund. If you look on page 80 of your agenda we anticipate with everything that is being approved with the engineering studies and engineering fees were paid out of that capital reserve schedule we anticipate by next year it will be depleted and then paid from your general fund and your operating reserves. It is basically this is not necessary everything is going to paid through the general fund and be more transparent and easier to understand. Those line items that you see there on page 80 of your agenda will now be reported under your operating and maintenance, so everything is going to be easier to follow.
Mr. Carney: What was the reason for that?

Mr. Burgess: It was an account that was being funded, you were transferring
$50,000 out of your capital transfer per year to pay for your engineering services and some additional projects. Apparently that was brought together when the bond projects ran out of funds. It is just unnecessary. There is really no need for that and in order to make it a little more understandable to the Board members and the community.
Mr. Carney: So we started that when we had the bond.
Mr. Burgess: It made sense to move to the general fund and pay everything through there.
Mr. Winfree: It was $100,000 up until this year. We cut it back to $50,000 because that fund is running out of money. We have to put it in our general fund to track it.
Mr. Burgess: You will see that on there.
TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comments
Mr. Lohman: I have a subject that I want to bring up. I know you guys don’t like questions. I am concerned about the storm drains in the community particularly commercial property storm drains. I know that the residential, I think they are a good portion of them that they go on a five year plan and they have theirs inspected and maintained and down whatever. I know Newport does, Hidden Lake does. I don’t know about the Estates, and I don’t know about Harbor Island or Cypress Point. But I am concerned with the commercial properties with no oversight there. I have two properties that I have been pushing on. I am getting pushback telling me I don’t have the authority, from the Foundation, I am speaking from the Foundation, doesn’t have the authority to ask or mandate that the storm drains be maintained, cleaned, checked or whatever. One property is the one between PetSmart and Walmart. They reluctantly cleaned the lake out. They scooped it. It was 75% full of growth. They cleaned it up and according to them they have no money and they don’t want to do anything but there is a storm drain, catch basin and everything in the southwest corner. The pipe is there but the basin is not accessible. I am sure it is covered up and overgrown. I was looking for them to clean it out. Again I am concerned with being able to tell all of the properties, who or how or whatever they have to maintain their storm drains. I know that the one or two in front of where you go in between Walmart and Lowes they back up all the time. I am sure Pat is called. Other people have called when you see it backed up. I have called and told them

to do it or else the city comes out and does it. This is my opinion. I am of the opinion that it is the CDD’s responsibility as the master District permit holder for them. Again everybody always tells me South Florida told me the same thing the people that do our cleanout in my community, CPI, they say you have a five-year program, but nobody enforces it. I believe that it is the CDD being the master. I know I have seen several places where these permits that are issued for the Target shopping center and I know there is a pleather of permits out there and probably have been cut down a little bit that because every time the owner has changed that doesn’t get updated. There is probably a lot of duplicate stuff on those permits but anyway I know that in the Target Shopping Center Styles Construction was granted an easement to tie into the master system. I am assuming that the CDD is the master, granted permission, and I am wondering if anybody feels the same way I do that it is your responsibility to mandate to them that their systems be checked according to the five-year program.
Mr. Burgess: Does the Board want to answer?
Mr. Geiger: As far as the five-year South Florida Water Management does not have any five year requirements. That is a Broward County permit thing. There are no Broward County permits in Turtle Run from what I can ascertain. We do have 67 applications under our master permit. Me, Barry and Patrick have been working with this, Scott has chimed in as well. As far as we have looked into because the CDD does not have easements we do not have the authority to get onto people’s property and maintain their systems. Other Districts that I work with Patrick all the drainage is owned by the CDD, and it is in an easement, so it gives us the authority to get into people’s backyards and stuff like that. The other issue we have run into is there is a lot of issues with South Florida Water Management’s records where the CDD is listed as the operating entity on the website even though we own no property. We were not a permittee, we were not part of the signature application of record. Part of what me, Barry and Patrick are working on other than on the side of lake slope stuff is also trying to ascertain from South Florida if we can meet with them and clarify some of this because as far as Scott has told us from an attorney standpoint the most we can do is send a letter behooving them to help their community by maintaining their system. The other option is if there is a problem to call South Florida as someone did with our lakeside slopes and have them come tell the

property owner that they need to clean their system out. I have been told time and time again by both GMS and the attorney that if we don’t own or have an easement we are not the responsible entity and we cannot do work.
Mr. Lohman: I am not saying that you are. Again there is a South Broward Mr. Lohman was inaudible at this time. South Florida the guy that came to the meeting, I can’t remember his name but if you go back six months when he was coming to the meeting I had conversations with him several times and he referred me to four or five different people. The end result was that it is the property owner’s responsibility, but somebody has to tell them they have to do it.
Mr. Geiger: That is part of what me and Scott and Barry were working on was an approach to nudge these property owners to please maintain your system because it does cause problems downstream sometimes. It is great benefit to the District the city takes care of everything in the right-of-way.
Mr. Lohman: Again I don’t know if there is any difference between the Turtle Run drainage system and the South Broward but the first thing in the South Broward one is they shall notify the property owner of the requirements of the five year drainage recertification approximately 60 days in advance. So again they are saying that it is the property owners.
Mr. Pawelczyk: That is South Broward. That is a drainage District. Mr. Lohman: What is Turtle Run?
Mr. Pawelczyk: We are a Community Development District. That has the power of maintaining the drainage system.
Mr. Lohman: According to the map you are a drainage district.
Mr. Pawelczyk: I don’t care what the map says we are a Community Development District.
Mr. Lohman: I am talking to the Board. I don’t want to talk to you. Mr. Pawelczyk: Ok, because I am right.
Mr. Geiger: We went through this with Dennis years ago.
Mr. Pawelczyk: We have gone through it many times, Coral Bay the same thing.
Mr. Lohman: Drainage Districts. It says it right here. There is your map and there is Turtle Run Community Development District.

Mr. Burgess: Does the Board have any questions?
Mr. Lohman: Again I am just bringing this up. I think it is your responsibility. I would do it if I could. I don’t know what everybody is afraid of doing. I know a couple places over in the Target Shopping Center where the people over there one particular property owner has been dumping grease into the drain for years until we finally got him to stop. The Foundation got him to stop. There is a couple of gigs and gags over there where they actually had to dig a ditch to drain the two basins to get a flow. There is stuff all over there that is not right. The area by the 7 – 11 where there is a retention area there was full of debris and we got them to clean it out. Again there is people that push back. The lake it think it is a simple thing. I located the pipe for them. I went over there and dug around. From the pipe you can see where it has to be the basin. It shows it on the overhead from years ago that it is there. Again he is pushing back saying I don’t have the authority to tell him to clean out his storm drain. It doesn’t say that anywhere in the Foundation documents.
Mr. Murray: What is to say that he is not going to say the same thing to the CDD. You can tell him all you want but if you don’t have the authority to enforce it.
Mr. Lohman: You are the drainage district. South Florida says it is the property owner. Somebody just has to tell them. I am telling you that you have to. I am just telling you somebody should be able to tell them. What is going to happen is we are going to have a big storm for some reason or another and everything backs up and Turtle Run is a mess.
Mr. Carney: We can’t do work on private property.
Mr. Lohman: It is not work. It is matter of just like this sending a letter and saying provide with the certification of when the last time your storm drains were cleaned.
Mr. Carney: We can’t go there and clean their drains. Now to send them a letter to encourage them to do so can we do that?
Mr. Burgess: Yes. We can recommend anything.
Mr. Murray: Sure we can do it but there is nothing to stop them from saying thank you for the letter.
Mr. Carney: I think that is what Clarence is asking for here, a little bit of support.

Mr. Burgess: As Jonathan stated we have discussed this. We are trying to figure out a way, but we have a lot of projects also going on in the District. We are working on this. That is where we are at. Barry can attest to it.
Mr. Winfree: My concern has been that it is almost a separation that I don’t think we can control. I think what we can control and we can push for, I am sure how at this point, that is what we are working on is if the private owners don’t clean out their catch basins and keep their tubes clean we are going to have Avana’s all over the place. That is the biggest thing that happened there. They never cleaned out that catch basin and it was completely blocked. That is why is washed over the basin. We are doing all this work but if they don’t keep the basin open it is all going to be for not and it all going to be washed out again.
Mr. Murray: So what is the harm in the CDD sending out a notice to these property owners stating that they have to keep them clean even though we don’t have the authority to enforce it we can still issue a letter.
Mr. Lohman: They have a permit and somebody issued a permit. Mr. Winfree: They pulled a permit to put all that in.
Mr. Pawelczyk: The CDD did not issue anyone a permit to put in drainage. Mr. Winfree: South Florida did.
Mr. Pawelczyk: My only question is if we have a list of the property owners, if it is Target, Target is the only community I recall were we had an active roll in the development of that, we meaning the CDD. There maybe something in those Target documents that require certain drainage obligations. We would have to review them. I don’t know if it is in there or not, but we need to have a list of property owners to look at. I don’t know if there is a list or not but maybe Scott does. Otherwise there is no harm in sending a letter but if you are going to send a letter you want maybe some teeth to it.
Mr. Burgess: Ok, so what is the direction from the Board?
Mr. Geiger: Me, Patrick and Barry have gone through this. I have a list with every permit, every permittee, who signed it and who the operating entity. I believe at the time we were trying to focus on the work we are doing now, get this done, before sitting down with South Florida with what our recourse is. If we send letters out and nobody does anything. It is just as simple as calling code enforcement. That property is flooding and

they are not maintaining it. Come cite them like you cited the District. There is just a lot of open ends. Then we got sidetracked with the Avana stuff. We are working on this. It is not something that is not getting looked at but we do have a list of property owners. There is a lists of permittees and everything. Whether or not those people still exist and are in the State of Florida is a whole other thing.
Mr. Winfree: Just a question. Do we send out a letter first or do we talk to South Florida Water Management first on what they recommend we do? I think the oversite has to come from them. We can certainly point it out. I don’t know if we have the teeth to force them to clean their catch basins. Do we sit on it, or do we talk to South Florida Water to see what path they recommend?
Mr. Carney: I think that is probably a very good idea. Sending a letter out can’t hurt. People that care will take care of it. Some people don’t even know.
Mr. Winfree: Exactly. They don’t have a clue.
Mr. Burgess: Does the Board want to appoint a Supervisor to work with us on this to keep it going and be the Board representative for the District?
Mr. Winfree: I will volunteer for that.
Mr. Geiger: Barry has been doing it already.
Mr. Burgess: Makes sense. We can add it to the progress report. Mr. Carney: Definitely start with, I would put that letter out.
Mr. Geiger: I agree a letter might be the easiest to start with. I do think that South Florida is going to say that you guys try asking them first. Do anything before we get involved.
Mr. Burgess: Does the Board want to review a letter at the next meeting? Mr. Carney: We could do that.
Mr. Winfree: Get something drafted.
Mr. Carney: And email it to the Board members. Mr. Burgess: Ok.
Mr. Carney: For comments.
Mr. Burgess: We will work on that and keep everyone updated. There is no one from the public online.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisors Requests
Mr. Carney: Supervisors’ requests. Ken? Mr. Murray: No.
Mr. Carney: Ginny. Ms. Tropea: No.
Mr. Carney: I don’t have anything else. Mr. Winfree: No, I will pass.
Mr. Carney: Thank you. Motion to adjourn.

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment

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

Assistant Secretary/Secretary	Chairman/Vice Chairman

Certificate Of Completion

Envelope Id: D56271AC-4CE9-8DB3-82BA-183D35567931	Status: Completed Subject: Turtle Run: Complete with Docusign: 5-18-26 Minutes.pdf
Source Envelope:
Document Pages: 20	Signatures: 2	Envelope Originator:
Certificate Pages: 2	Initials: 0	Ellen Acosta

AutoNav: Enabled
EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled
Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)

1001 Bradford Way
Kingston, TN 37763 eacosta@gmssf.com
IP Address: 162.199.192.217

Record Tracking

Status: Original
6/30/2026 11:32:39 AM

Holder: Ellen Acosta
eacosta@gmssf.com

Location: DocuSign

Signer Events	Signature	Timestamp

Barry W. Winfree bjwinfree@outlook.com Chairman
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)	Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style
Using IP Address: 2600:1700:9072:24cf:106a:bda1:e:12f2

Sent: 6/30/2026 11:33:47 AM Viewed: 6/30/2026 12:39:13 PM Signed: 6/30/2026 12:39:57 PM

Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via Docusign

Patrick Burgess		Sent: 6/30/2026 11:33:48 AM	
pburgess@gmssf.com		Viewed: 6/30/2026 4:00:19 PM	
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None)	

Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style	Signed: 6/30/2026 4:00:28 PM	
	Using IP Address:		
	2601:582:c300:60d0:2d3a:86bb:4c6:270e		
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via Docusign			
In Person Signer Events	Signature	Timestamp	
			
Editor Delivery Events	Status	Timestamp	
			
Agent Delivery Events	Status	Timestamp	
			
Intermediary Delivery Events	Status	Timestamp	
			
Certified Delivery Events	Status	Timestamp	
			
Carbon Copy Events	Status	Timestamp	
			
Witness Events	Signature	Timestamp	
			
Notary Events	Signature	Timestamp	
			
Envelope Summary Events	Status	Timestamps	
Envelope Sent	Hashed/Encrypted	6/30/2026 11:33:48 AM	

Envelope Summary Events	Status	Timestamps	
Certified Delivered	Security Checked	6/30/2026 4:00:19 PM	
Signing Complete	Security Checked	6/30/2026 4:00:28 PM	
Completed	Security Checked	6/30/2026 4:00:28 PM	
Payment Events	Status	Timestamps