02-001119 In Re: Rulemaking To Establish Bellalago Community Development District vs. * Status: Closed Recommended Order on Tuesday, June 11, 2002.

Summary: Petitioner satisfied all statutory criteria for establishing a community development in Osceola County.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

IN RE: RULEMAKING TO )

ESTABLISH BELLALAGO COMMUNITY ) Case No. 02 - 1119

DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. )

_______________________________)

REPORT TO THE FLORIDA LAND AND W ATER

ADJUDICATORY COMMISSION

Pursuant to Section 190.005(1)(d), Florida Statutes,

Donald R. Alexander, Administrative Law Judge, conducted a

public hearing on May 10, 2002, in Kissimmee, Florida, for the

purpose of taking testimon y and public comment and receiving

exhibits on the Petition of Avatar Properties, Inc. to

establish the Bellalago Community Development District.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Julie P. Kendig - Schrader, Esquire

Greenberg Traurig, P.A .

450 South Orange Avenue

Suite 650

Orlando, Florida 32801 - 3383

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue is whether the establishment of the Bellalago

Community Development District meets the applicable criteria

set forth in Chapter 190, Florida Statutes.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

This case began on February 28, 2002, when Petitioner,

Avatar Properties, Inc., requested the Florida Land and Water

Adjudicatory Commission to adopt a rule to establish the

Bellalago Community Development District. The proposed rule

is attached to this Report as Appendix C. The matter was

forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings on March

18, 2002, with a request that an Administrative Law Judge

conduct a pub lic hearing. By Notice of Hearing dated April 2,

2002, a public hearing was scheduled in Kissimmee, Florida, on

May 10, 2002.

Petitioner presented five witnesses and offered into

evidence Petitioner's Exhibits 1 - 19, which were admitted

without objection . The names and addresses of the witnesses

are listed in Appendix A attached to this Report, and the

exhibits are listed in Appendix B. No other persons or entity

presented any witnesses or exhibits. No members of the public

provided any comments.

The T ranscript of the local public hearing was filed with

the Division of Administrative Hearings on May 23, 2002. The

original Transcript and hearing exhibits are transmitted with

this Report.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Based upon all of the evidence, the following f indings of

fact are determined:

A. The Bellalago Community Development District

1. The Bellalago Community Development District (the

Bellalago CDD) is proposed to be a special purpose unit of

local government located in Osceola County (County), Florid a.

It will consist of approximately 1,313 acres, and the

development is proposed to be a mixed use development that

will include an upscale residential component of approximately

2,300 units.

2. As special - purpose local governments, community

development districts (CDDs) such as the Bellalago CDD possess

certain general legal powers similar to cities and counties,

such as the right to enter into contracts, to acquire and

dispose of real and personal property, to adopt rules and

regulations to govern its o perations, and to obtain funds

either by borrowing, issuing bonds, or levying non - ad valorem

assessments and taxes. CDDs also have certain special powers

relating to basic public improvements and community facilities

such as roads, parks, and water manage ment facilities. CDDs

such as the proposed Bellalago CDD do not have other powers

common to cities and counties including land planning, zoning,

and police powers. This is why the proposed Bellalago CDD is

considered a "special - purpose" government.

3. The Bellalago CDD is proposed to finance and

construct limited off - site roadway improvements, an extensive

and interconnected storm water pond system, and sewer and

water lines. It will also be responsible for mitigation

associated with the Bellalago Dev elopment.

B. Contents of the Petition

4. On March 1, 2002, Petitioner, Avatar Properties Inc.

(Petitioner), filed with the Florida Land and Water

Adjudicatory Commission a Petition for Rulemaking to Establish

a Uniform Community Development District (P etition).

Previously, on February 28, 2002, Petitioner had submitted the

Petition with attachments to Osceola County.

5. The Petition proposes the establishment of the

Bellalago CDD. The Petition alleges that the land to be

served by the proposed CDD is located in the County and

consists of approximately 1,313 acres. Exhibit 2 of the

Petition provides the metes and bounds legal description of

the Bellalago CDD. Exhibit 5 of the Petition reveals that the

land to be served by the proposed CDD is a single , contiguous

parcel without enclaves.

6. The Petition alleges that the owner of all of the

land to be included in the proposed CDD has given written

consent to the establishment of the Bellalago CDD. Exhibit 3

of the Petition contains documentation const ituting written

consent of the landowner to the establishment of the CDD.

7. The Petition designates five persons to serve on the

initial Board of Supervisors.

8. Exhibit 4 of the Petition states a proposed timetable

and schedule of estimated costs for the construction of the

proposed facilities. Total costs projected for the

construction period of January 1, 2003, to January 1, 2011,

are $35,096,425 for the master stormwater system, off - site

roadway improvements, utilities infrastructure, and

mitigatio n.

9. Exhibit 5 of the Petition is a designation of the

future general distribution, location, and extent of public

and private uses of land within the CDD.

10. Exhibit 6A of the Petition is the Future Land Use

Map (FLUM) of the Osceola County Comprehens ive Plan. Exhibit

6B to the Petition is the Future Land Use Element and Appendix

2.130 of the adopted Osceola County Comprehensive Plan.

11. Exhibit 7 of the Petition is a Statement of

Estimated Regulatory Costs.

C. Procedural Issues

12. Petitioner pai d $15,000 to the County on

February 28, 2002, as filing fees, pursuant to Section

190.005(1)(b), Florida Statutes.

13. The land to be included within the proposed CDD is

contained wholly within the boundaries of the County. The

land within the extern al boundaries of the proposed CDD is

neither contained within, nor contiguous to, the boundaries of

any municipality or any other County. On May 10, 2002, the

Osceola County Board of County Commissioners (Board) held an

optional local public hearing on th e proposed CDD. The Board

passed a resolution in support of the proposed CDD as it is

specifically proposed in the Petition (that is, financing and

constructing off - site roadway improvements, stormwater

management system, sewer and water lines, and mitiga tion)

although no written resolution was provided at the local

hearing.

14. Petitioner advertised the local public hearing

conducted by the Division of Administrative Hearings in an

appropriate local newspaper in the four weeks immediately

prior to the local public hearing.

D. Summary of Evidence from the Local Public Hearing

15. At the local public hearing on May 10, 2002,

Petitioner presented the testimony of Anthony S. Iorio, Vice

President of Development for Avatar Properties Inc.; Carey

Garland, a n Associate in the firm of Fishkind & Associates;

Larry Walter, President of the consulting civil engineering,

land surveying & planning firm of Hanson, Walter & Associates,

Inc.; John Adams, Planner with the firm of R.J. Whidden &

Associates; and Gary M oyer, Vice President of Severn Trent

Services, Inc.

16. Anthony S. Iorio is the Vice President of

Development for Avatar Properties Inc. Written, direct

testimony of Mr. Iorio was prefiled on May 8, 2002. Mr. Iorio

described Bellalago as a 1,313 - acre mi xed - use development that

is planned for 2,300 residential units. Mr. Iorio confirmed

that the statements in the Petition were true and correct.

17. Mr. Iorio testified that the proposed CDD was the

best available alternative for delivery of proposed serv ices

to the development. He further pointed out that Petitioner

had evaluated several alternative methods for delivering

community services and facilities to the Bellalago Development

– specifically County delivery and private delivery by the

developer or a property owner’s association.

18. Mr. Iorio established that the County, either

directly or through a dependent special district, would not be

the best alternative for the provision of services to the

Bellalago Development. The County has substantia l demands

over a broad geographic area which places a heavy management

load on its staff and any financing by the County, including

through a dependent special district, would count against the

County's bonding capabilities and further limit the County's

ability to provide infrastructure to other portions of the

County.

19. Private means for delivering community development

services and facilities include delivery through a master

neighborhood - type property owners association or by a private

developer, and either can satisfy the demand for focused

service, facilities, and managed delivery. However, neither

can assure a long - term perspective, act as a stable provider

of services and facilities, or qualify as a low - cost source of

financing; a property ow ners association could provide

staffing and decision - making for these services and

facilities, but such associations lack the capability to issue

bonds or other forms of long - term debt. Therefore, neither

the developer nor an association could effectively finance the

necessary infrastructure.

20. Petitioner could provide community development

services and facilities by utilizing long - term financing from

private lenders. However, such financing would be more

expensive than financing through a public ent ity; in addition,

a private developer generally is not a long - term stable entity

which can maintain necessary facilities.

21. Mr. Carey Garland, Associate in the firm of Fishkind

& Associates, was qualified without objection as an expert in

economic ana lysis and forecasting in general and in relation

to community development districts. Written, direct testimony

of Mr. Garland was prefiled on May 8, 2002.

22. Mr. Garland summarized the economic analyses in the

Statement of Regulatory Costs contained in Exhibit 7 to the

Petition (Statement). Mr. Garland drafted the Statement. The

Statement satisfies the requirements of Section 120.541,

Florida Statutes. Mr. Garland opined that the establishment

of the Bellalago CDD will have no adverse cost impact on a ny

affected party, and that the cost impact to the State and

County is minimal and largely offset by the $15,000 filing

fee.

23. Mr. Garland also opined that the establishment of

the Bellalago CDD would result in no negative economic impacts

on future res idents of the CDD or small businesses in the

area.

24. Mr. Garland testified that all of the statements

that he authored in the Petition and the Statement were true

and correct.

25. Larry Walter, President of the consulting civil

engineering, land surv eying, and planning firm of Hanson,

Walter & Associates, Inc., was qualified without objection as

an expert in civil engineering, capable of rendering opinions

on community development districts. Mr. Walter’s written,

direct testimony was prefiled on May 8, 2002.

26. Mr. Walter confirmed that each statement in the

Petition regarding engineering issues is true.

27. Mr. Walter reviewed the applicable portions of

Osceola County’s Comprehensive Plan and concluded that the

proposed CDD is not inconsistent with that plan and the County

Land Development Code. More specifically, he opined that the

Public Facility section of the Osceola County Comprehensive

Plan dealing with potable water, sanitary sewer, and drainage

is applicable to the proposed Bellalago C DD and that the

proposed CDD is not inconsistent with those specific elements.

28. Mr. Walter found that, from an engineering

viewpoint, the proposed CDD is of sufficient size,

sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be

developable as a f unctionally interrelated community.

29. Mr. Walter endorsed the proposed CDD from an

engineering standpoint as the best means of delivering the

community development services and facilities to the land area

within the CDD. Based on his extensive experien ce in the

County, Mr. Walter concluded that there is no alternative

mechanism available to perform the functions proposed to be

performed by the Bellalago CDD, specifically the installation

of the infrastructure for the development. Mr. Walter’s

analysis encompassed home owners and property owners

associations and municipal services taxing units.

30. Mr. Walter further concluded that the proposed CDD

services will be compatible with the capacity and uses of

existing local and regional community developm ent services and

facilities primarily because there are no other service

providers in the area of the district.

31. Finally, Mr. Walter testified that the area to be

included in the proposed district is amenable to a special

district government.

32. Jo hn Adams, Planner with the firm of R. J. Whidden &

Associates, was qualified without objection as an expert

planner with the ability to testify regarding state and local

comprehensive planning and land development regulations,

particularly with respect to CDDs.

33. Mr. Adams adopted the written, direct testimony of

Robert J. Whidden that was prefiled on May 8, 2002, as his

own. Mr. Whidden had a family emergency that precluded him

from testifying at the local hearing. Mr. Adams assisted

Mr. Whidden i n the preparation of the prefiled testimony and

thus was able to affirm as to its accuracy.

34. Mr. Adams also reviewed both the State’s

Comprehensive Plan and Osceola County’s Comprehensive Plan and

concluded that the establishment of the CDD would not b e

inconsistent with either of those plans.

35. The land uses surrounding the proposed Bellalago CDD

are as follows: to the east is the natural boundary of Lake

Tohopekaliga; to the north is Suburban Overlay; to the

north/south is Suburban Overlay; to th e south/west is Suburban

Overlay; to the south and southeast is Rural/Agricultural and

Conservation associated with a large wetland system; and to

the west are the vested land uses of the Poinciana PUD which

includes Medium Density Residential, Low Density Residential,

Commercial, and Office and Industrial uses. Mr. Adams

indicated that the approved land uses surrounding the CDD are

consistent with the establishment of the Bellalago CDD. The

basis for his opinion is that the establishment of the

Bellalago CDD would facilitate infrastructure required for the

development and that the proposed development is essentially

an infill project. Approval of the CDD would be consistent

with the logical pattern of growth in an area where

infrastructural elements are existing or planned and would

direct growth to an urbanizing area rater than leaving a

remnant island of agricultural lands surrounded by urban

areas.

36. Mr. Adams confirmed that all statements contained in

the Petition regarding planning issues were tru e and correct.

37. Mr. Adams also found that the proposed CDD is of

sufficient size, sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently

contiguous to be developable as a functionally interrelated

community. The Bellalago Development is the subject of a

preliminar y development agreement which was issued by the

Department of Community Affairs on January 8, 2002, and a

pending application for development approval as a development

of regional impact.

38. Mr. Adams concluded that the CDD is the best

alternative avail able for the delivery of community

development services to the Bellalago Development.

39. Mr. Adams established that the CDD is amenable to

separate special district government.

40. Gary Moyer, Vice President of Severn Trent Services,

Inc., which is a ma nagement consulting firm representing over

100 CDDs throughout Florida, was qualified without objection

as an expert in the operation and management of community

development districts.

41. Mr. Moyer confirmed that the statements in the

Petition were true and correct.

42. Mr. Moyers opined that the establishment of a CDD is

the best alternative available for providing infrastructure to

the Bellalago Development. The basis for Mr. Moyer’s opinion

is that there are three methods of providing infrastructure

and the continual maintenance of same: (1) general - purpose

local government, (2) the developer and a homeowners

association, and (3) a CDD. General - purpose government is

reluctant to provide and maintain subdivision - type facilities

and to tax the general public for such facilities and

services. Further, general - purpose government does not bring

the focused management oversight to a new community that is

necessary to ensure the property owner/developer that the

infrastructure will be provided timely in acc ordance with the

requirements to meet real estate sales demand. Developers

cannot access the alternate form of financing that is

available to CDDs. The homeowners association, which will

ultimately be utilized for the maintenance of infrastructure,

canno t utilize the uniform method of collecting non - ad valorem

assessments, which is provided to a community development

district. The CDD is the only method to provide focused

management with the ability to access the municipal bond

market and to collect its non - ad valorem assessments on the

County’s real estate tax bills, assuring that the

infrastructure will be properly maintained.

43. Mr. Moyer does not see any problems in administering

or managing the Bellalago CDD. Finally, he concluded that the

land area is amenable to governance by the CDD.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

44. This proceeding is governed by Chapters 120 and 190,

Florida Statutes, and Chapter 42 - 1, Florida Administrative

Code.

45. Petitioner has met the requirements of Section

190.005, Florida Statutes, regarding the submission of the

Petition and satisfaction of filing fee requirements.

46. Petitioner bears the burden of establishing that the

Petition meets the relevant statutory criteria set forth in

Section 190.005(1)(e), Florida Statutes.

47. All portions of the Petition and other submittals

have been completed and filed as required by law.

48. All statements contained in the Petition are true

and correct.

49. The establishment of the CDD is not inconsistent

with any applicable element o r portion of the State

Comprehensive Plan or the effective Osceola County

Comprehensive Plan.

50. The area of land within the proposed CDD is of

sufficient size, is sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently

contiguous to be developable as one functional i nterrelated

community.

51. The proposed CDD is the best alternative available

for delivering community development services and facilities

to the area that will be served by the CDD.

52. The community development services and facilities of

the proposed C DD will not be incompatible with the capacity

and uses of existing local and regional community development

services and facilities.

53. The area to be served by the proposed CDD is

amenable to separate special district government.

REC OMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions

of Law, it is

RECOMMENDED that the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory

Commission, pursuant to Chapters 120 and 190, Florida

Statutes, and Chapter 42 - 1, Florida Administrative Code,

establ ish the Bellalago Community Development District, as

requested by Petitioner, by formal adoption of the proposed

rule attached to this Report as Exhibit C.

DONE AND ENTERED this 11th day of June, 2002, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

_________ __________________________

DONALD R. ALEXANDER

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

(850) 488 - 9675 SUNCOM 278 - 9675

Fax Fil ing (850) 921 - 6847

www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this 11th day of June, 2002.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Julie P. Kendig - Schrader, Esquire

Greenberg Traurig, P.A.

450 South Orange Avenue, Suite 650

Orlando, Florida 32801 - 3383

Charles Canady, General Counsel

Florida Land and Water

Adjudicatory Commission

Office of the Governor

The Capitol, Room 209

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0001

Donna Arduin, Secretary

Florida Land and Water

Adjudicatory Comm ission

Office of the Governor

The Capitol, Room 2105

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0001

Barbara Leighty, Clerk

Growth Management and Strategic Planning

The Capitol, Room 2105

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0001

Appendix A

Petitioner's Witnesses at the Public Hearing

Anthony S. Iorio

Avatar Properties, Inc.

900 Towne Center Drive

Poinciana, Florida 34759

Carey Garland

Fishkind & Associates

11869 High Tech Avenue

Orlando, Florida 32817

Larry Walter

Hanson, Walter & As sociates, Inc.

400 West Emmett Street

Kissimmee, Florida 34744

John Adams

R.J. Whidden and Associates, Inc.

22 West Monument Avenue, Suite 4

Kissimmee, Florida 34741

Gary Moyer

Severn Trent Services, Inc.

610 Sycamore Street, Suite 140

Celebration, Flo rida 34747

APPENDIX B

List of Petitioner's Exhibits

1. Petition with Exhibits

Exhibit 1 - Location of Land Area to be Serviced

Exhibit 2 - Metes and Bound Legal Description

Exhibit 3 - Docu mentation of Consent of 100% of Landowners

to Establishment of District

Exhibit 4 - Documentation of Proposed Timetables for

Construction of District Services and Estimated Cost of

Constructing the Proposed Services

Exhibit 5 - Designation of F uture General Distribution,

Location and Extent of Public and Private Uses of Land Within

the District

Exhibit 6A - Future Land Use Map of the Osceola County

Comprehensive Plan

Exhibit 6B - Future Land Use Element and Appendix 2.130 of

the Osceola County Comprehensive Plan

Exhibit 7 - Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs

(including Appendix A)

2. Letter dated February 28, 2002, constituting proof the

$15,000 filing fee to Osceola County was satisfied.

3. Letter dated March 15, 2002, execu ted by the Florida Land

and Water Adjudicatory Commission.

4. Florida Administrative Weekly Section XII, Volume 28,

Number 17, dated April 26, 2002.

5. Letter dated May 7, 2002, confirming advertisement

publication of the Bellalago Community Developmen t.

6. Letters dated May 7, 2002, and May 9, 2002, confirming

advertisment publication of the Bellalago Community Development

District.

7. Newspaper clipping from the Orlando Sentinel constituting

proof of publication dated April 20, 2002.

8. Newspape r clipping from the Orlando Sentinel constituting

proof of publication dated April 24, 2002.

9. Newspaper clipping from the Orlando Sentinel constituting

proof of publication dated May 1, 2002.

10. Newspaper clipping from the Orlando Sentinel constitut ing

proof of publication dated May 8, 2002.

11. Prefiled testimony of Mr. Anthony S. Iorio.

12. Testimony of Mr. Carey Garland.

13. Resume of Mr. Carey Garland.

14. Prefiled testimony of Mr. Larry Walter.

15. Resume of Mr. Larry Walter.

16. Affi davit of Mr. Robert Whiddon.

17. Prefiled testimony of Mr. Robert Whiddon.

18. Resume of Mr. Robert Whiddon.

19. Prefiled testimony of Mr. Gary Moyer.

APPENDIX C

Text of Proposed Rule

CHA PTER 42____ - 1

BELLALAGO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

42____ - 1.001 Establishment.

42____ - 1.002 Boundary.

42____ - 1.003 Supervisors.

42____ - 1.001 Creation. The Bellalago Community

Development District is hereby est ablished.

Specific Authority 120.53(1), 190.005 FS. Law Implemented

190.005 FS. History - New

42____ - 1.002 Boundary. The boundaries of the District are

as follows:

All of Government Lot 4 and that portion of Government Lot 3

lying south of the O sceola County property as described in Deed

Book 1174, Page 1288, lying above the high water mark of Lake

Tohopekaliga in Section 28, Township 26 South, Range 29 East,

Osceola County, Florida.

and

From the southeast corner of the southwest 1/4 of Section 29,

Township 26 South, Range 29 East, Osceola County, Florida, run

west along the south line of said southwest 1/4, 1545.3 feet to

the point of beginning; run thence north at right angles to

said south line, 500.0 feet; run thence west, parallel to said

s outh line, 347 feet more or less to the east right of way line

of Pleasant Hill Road; run thence southerly along the east

right of way line of said road, to the south line of said

southwest 1/4; run thence east, 441.41 feet more or less to the

point of beg inning.

and

All of the east 1/2, and the northeast 1/4 of the southwest 1/4

of Section 32 Township 26, South Range 29 East.

and

All of the west 1/2, and Government Lots 1 and 2 above the

ordinary high water line of Lake Tohopekaliga, of Section 33,

Towns hip 26 South, Range 29 East.

Less the dipping vat at Edgewater Property being more

particularly described as follows:

Commence at the northwest corner of Section 33, Township 26

South, Range 29 East, Osceola County, Florida; thence run south

67 degrees 8 m inutes 14 seconds east, a distance of 1190.53

feet to the point of beginning; thence run east, a distance of

450.00 feet; thence run south, a distance of 550.00 feet;

thence run west, a distance of 450.00 feet; thence run north, a

distance of 550.00 feet t o the point of beginning.

and

A parcel of land located in Section 29, Township 26 South,

Range 29 East, in Osceola County, Florida; being described as

follows:

Commence at the northwest corner of the northwest 1/4 of

Section 29, Township 26 South, Range 29 East; thence north 89

degrees 43 minutes 56 seconds east along the north line of the

northwest one - quarter of said Section 29, a distance of 110.00

feet to a point on the easterly right of way line of Pleasant

Hill Road (CR - 531); thence depart said north line on a bearing

of south 1 degree 2 minutes one second east along said right of

way line, a distance of 642.58 feet; thence south zero degrees

59 minutes 19 seconds east along said right of way line, a

distance of 646.44 feet; thence south zero degrees 7 minutes 22

seconds east along said right of way line, a distance of 835.64

feet to the point of curvature of a curve concave

northeasterly, said curve having a radius of 2220.00 feet;

thence southeasterly along said curve and said right of way

line, a di stance of 731.56 feet through a central angle of 18

degrees 52 minutes 51 seconds (chord distance 728.26 feet;

chord bearing south 9 degrees 33 minutes 47 seconds east) to

the point of tangency; thence south 19 degrees zero minutes 13

seconds east along sa id right of way line, a distance of 416.25

feet to the point of beginning; thence continue south 19

degrees zero minutes 13 seconds east along said right of way

line, a distance of 400.20 feet; thence depart said right of

way line on a bearing of north 75 degrees 13 minutes 36 seconds

east, a distance of 1000.89 feet; thence north 18 degrees 35

minutes 45 seconds west, a distance of 400.00 feet; thence

south 75 degrees 13 minutes 36 seconds west, a distance of

1005.75 feet to the point of beginning.

and

Tha t portion of the northwest 1/4 and the northwest 1/4 of the

southwest 1/4, Section 32, Township 26 South, Range 29 East,

Osceola County, Florida, lying east of Pleasant Hill Road; less

and except: beginning at the northwest corner of said northwest

1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of Section 32, thence north 89 degrees

59 minutes 51 seconds east, along the north line of said

northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4, a distance of 420.00 feet;

thence south zero degrees 10 minutes 19 seconds east, parallel

with the west li ne of said northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4,

a distance of 420.00 feet; thence south 89 degrees 59 minutes

51 seconds west, parallel with the north line of said northwest

1/4 of the southwest 1/4, a distance of 420.00 feet to the west

line of said northw est 1/4 of the southwest 1/4; thence north

zero degrees 10 minutes 19 seconds west, along said west line,

a distance of 420.00 feet to the point of beginning. Less the

west 60.00 feet thereof for right of way of Pleasant Hill Road.

Also less and except: ( cemetery encroachment area)

Commence at the northwest corner of the northwest 1/4 of the

southwest 1/4 of Section 32, Township 26 South, Range 29 East,

Osceola County, Florida; thence north 89 degrees 59 minutes 51

seconds east, along the north line of sai d northwest 1/4 of the

southwest 1/4, a distance of 420.00 feet to the point of

beginning; thence continue north 89 degrees 59 minutes 51

seconds east, along said north line, 34.16 feet; thence south

zero degrees 6 minutes 59 seconds west, a distance of 43 7.29

feet; thence south 89 degrees 39 minutes 3 seconds west, a

distance of 391.96 feet to the east right of way line of

Pleasant Hill Road; thence north zero degrees 10 minutes 19

seconds west, along said east right of way line 19.66 feet;

thence north 89 degrees 59 minutes 51 seconds east, parallel

with the north line of said northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4,

a distance of 360.00 feet; thence north zero degrees 10 minutes

19 seconds west, parallel with the west line of said northwest

1/4 of the southwes t 1/4, a distance of 420.00 feet to the

point of beginning.

(less property to be deeded to cemetery)

Legal description:

Commence at the northwest corner of the northwest 1/4 of the

southwest 1/4 of Section 32, Township 26 South, Range 29 East,

Osceola Coun ty, Florida; thence north 89 degrees 59 minutes 51

seconds east, along the north line of said northwest 1/4 of the

southwest 1/4, a distance of 454.16 feet to the point of

beginning; thence continue north 89 degrees 59 minutes 51

seconds east, along said n orth line, 80.00 feet; thence south

zero degrees 6 minutes 59 seconds west, a distance of 456.64

feet; thence south 89 degrees 39 minutes 3 seconds west, a

distance of 471.79 feet to the east right of way line of

Pleasant Hill Road; thence north zero degre es 10 minutes 19

seconds west, along said east right of way line, 20.00 feet;

thence north 89 degrees 39 minutes 3 seconds east, a distance

of 391.96 feet; thence north zero degrees 6 minutes 59 seconds

east, a distance of 437.29 feet to the point of begin ning.

Specific Authority 120.53(1), 190.005 FS. Law Implemented

190.004, 190.005 FS. History - New

42____ - 1.003 Supervisors. The following five persons are

designated as the initial members of the Board of Supervisors:

Anthony S. Iorio, Dennis J . Getman, William Cowart, Charles L.

McNairy, and Jeffrey S. Mitchem.

Specific Authority 120.53(1), 190.005 FS. Law Implemented

190.006(1) FS. History - New