MINUTES OF MEETING BOTANIKO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Botaniko Community Development District was held on Tuesday, July 7, 2026, at 1:00 p.m. at 2900 Glades Circle, Suite 325, Weston, Florida

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Antonio Fernandez	Chairman
Jai Nandwani	Vice Chairman
Heberto Del Rio	Assistant Secretary

Also present were:

Andrew Gill	District Manager
Paul Winkeljohn	Governmental Management Services (by phone)
Ginger Wald	District Counsel
Michael Miller	Resident
Several residents

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

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval	of	Minutes	of	the
May 5, 2026 Meeting
Mr. Gill: The next item on the agenda is item No. 2, this is approval of the minutes of the May 5, 2026 meeting. Are there any additions, deletions or corrections from the Board?
Mr. Nandwani: I did a quick review and it seems good to me. Mr. Fernandez: Me too.
Mr. Gill: So, if it’s ok I’m looking for a motion to approve those minutes.

On MOTION by Mr. Nandwani seconded by Mr. Fernandez with all in favor, the Minutes of the May 5, 2026 Meeting were approved.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Discussion of:
A. Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Line Items
Mr. Gill: So, let’s jump down to item No. 3, we have four things to discuss here the first of which is the fiscal year 2027 budget line items, and this budget was previously proposed and approved by the Board. There have been no changes since that budget was previously approved, and I’ve provided hard copies of the budget to show each of the various line items. If there are changes that the Board would like to move things around related to the specific line items, we can do that now, or at the next meeting, or outside the meeting but, the Board has approved this set amount, so we can’t increase any of these line items per se but, we can move the numbers around if one line item is too low or too high.
Mr. Nandwani: So sorry, that means we can’t increase the total but, we could increase on specific line items, is that what you said?
Mr. Gill: Correct.
Ms. Wald: Yes, and our public hearing next month, we set it for August 4th I believe. So, what we had discussed last time if memory serves me correctly when you approved the proposed budget is you both wanted to see it one more time after getting some additional information, seeing where we were as to the operating portion of the budget and whether you wanted to make and y changes now before we actually have our public hearing on the budget, that is correct.
Mr. Fernandez: And once that’s approved, let me understand because this will be our first new budget because we were elected in November in the middle of last fiscal year, so this is actually the first budget that we are proposing, voting and approving.
Ms. Wald: Exactly. Mr. Gill: Correct.
Mr. Fernandez: So, in order to understand the process, it would be this budget will provide you guys at GMS the ability to control the expense, right?
Mr. Gill: Correct.
Mr. Fernandez: Month by month over the year. Mr. Gill: Yes.

Mr. Fernandez: I heard at a previous meeting that when a line item is going to go over the budget it doesn’t get paid, or it doesn’t get approved, so could you explain to us how is that process from your side?
Mr. Gill: Yes, so there’s a threshold for budget amendments, and Paul do you know the exact amount if we have to do a budget amendment, I think it’s pretty low.
Mr. Winkeljohn: No, any time you end up spending over a line item, technically it’s appropriate to amend the budget to reflect reality and identify where the funds for that line were being absorbed from. We usually formally do that at least at the end of the year in October, so there’s no set amount.
Mr. Fernandez: Right, but in a regular operational day or in a month, whenever accounting detects a line amount, or a line or a post that budget is going above the approved budget what are the actions that is triggers?
Mr. Gill: So, we do monthly financials which are listed in the budget, so prior to, so if there’s a line item and it starts to go into the red, the accountant will generally reach out to the District manager, and I usually reach out to the chairman, saying hey, you have expenses that are exceeding this amount, we need to sort of carve those back a bit or find a way to reduce spending and here you guys are very light on your administrative budget, so a specific line item for engineering, attorney.
Ms. Wald: To answer your question, yes. So, let’s say for the sake of argument, not that I perceive this happening but, you do have $14,000 for the line item for attorney, and again, in a wild scenario, we have now reached that threshold and there are still a few months left into the fiscal year for 2006-2007, and I submit a bill, my firm submits a bill, the question is does that bill get paid, the answer is no. So, you would come back, and I know this because I understand how it works, so come back to the Board, that information would be provided, come back to the Board and we can do a budget amendment, and obviously have a discussion, do a budget amendment and let’s say for instance, under the engineering that’s $8,000 but only $2,000 has been utilized, and there’s no a perception that’s going to happen, so that amount can be moved from the engineering line item to the attorney line item, and you’re not increasing, you’re not doing anything, you’re moving from one line item to another because it’s all under the same general fund. That in practicality, and I am using it a crazy example but, just to have an example so that’s how that would work.

Mr. Fernandez: Ok but, that’s without increasing?
Ms. Wald: Right, without increasing anything, you’re moving line items.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok, but what happens if overall it gets to the point that we just pass the amount?
Ms. Wald: You don’t make any payments, you don’t have the money. Mr. Fernandez: Ok.
Ms. Wald: That’s why, and again, this is hypothetically, and so I’ve had had this happen, it usually happens during, and Paul can attest, hurricane season with communities and the cities, I have too, that had a large line item and I’ll use CDD for example, landscaping because they have to cut down trees and they had to haul them away and they had to do a bunch of different things but, there was not enough funds period within the budget, that’s why those communities have those reserves, that unassigned fund balance so there is a healthy number that could be utilized for those reasons, those contingencies costs, and so they balance. If not, you can’t do it, you have to wait.
Mr. Fernandez: And does that situation utilization of the reserves requires some process?
Ms. Wald: Yes, so what you would do in that type of scenario as well, and most of the time when it is hurricane season we do have those emergency powers so we already have resolutions in place with those CDDs in which a lot of those things have already been approved which gives the manager with the approval of the chairman to expend those reserve funds for certain circumstances and certain amounts. If it exceeds those amounts then it has to come to the Board.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok, understood.
Ms. Wald: And that’s usually maintenance, this is all administrative so the good news with administrative, and again I’ll use myself as an example, I know and have never utilized the prompt payment act to say, if you don’t pay me within 30 days then you’re now subject to the prompt payment act. None of these, because they are administrative, come under that, so I would just say because we’re the professionals, I would just say no, I just don’t see a practicality of that happening. The hard costs that are in here really are just your insurance which I’m going to go over that legislative memorandum in a little bit

so I have some good news as to that. So, other than the insurance which you get an extra 30 day grace period anyway, everything else is professional.
Mr. Fernandez: Yes, but right now as we speak here today, and I’m talking about 2026, we are running over budget for some of the lines, I mean those are, and engineering is one clearly, attorney is next to but still below the approved budget of
$14,000, so what is GMS doing with engineering in order to stop this expense, I mean why are we in this situation, could you give me an explanation for that?
Mr. Gill: Yes, so with the transition of the Board, I know there was a decent amount of engineering work that went into looking at the lakes and a few other things, having the engineer present so that triggered an increase in engineering that was not accounted for initially. Going forward we’ve spoken to the engineer in person and via phone calls just saying, hey we’ll reach out when we need you, we don’t perceive higher than normal engineering expenses going forward unless the Board requests it.
Mr. Fernandez: Right, and we discussed about the fact of the need of having the engineer at every single meeting because it was not necessary.
Mr. Gill: Correct.
Mr. Nandwani: After the last meeting is there any expectation to involve the engineer in assessing the stormwater drainage?
Mr. Fernandez: I believe so and those are the two points that we have next, and that’s something that we’ll need to address but, going back to the budget. So, I understand the process, so this is play that if any line goes up the budget you will reach out to us and say, hey you’re running over budget?
Mr. Gill: Yes, and we’ll see tracking actuals each month even if we don’t have a meeting you’ll have access to that, and we have access to the monthly financials, the unaudited financials for that month so we’ll see those funds coming in. Addiitionally, because the District is purely administrative, any additional costs that come in generally would need to be approved by the Board, so between meetings there won’t be any surprise costs.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok. Now, I have several recommendations or suggestions in terms of the line amounts that have not been incorporated yet, so I don’t know how to tackle that because we had a small meeting with you and Paul at the beginning of the last meeting 2 months ago.

Mr. Gill: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: So, how can we do that because I don’t want to send the email again, and then be here.
Mr. Gill: So, if you have specific changes to the various line items I can take those and incorporate them as long as the total doesn’t change.
Mr. Fernandez: And I haven’t discussed this of course with either Heberto or Jai but, what I was saying and I put it in writing, engineering and looking forward to 2027 and I will go line by line because if we’re going to have only 4 meetings during next fiscal year which is the intent.
Mr. Gill: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: Plus some time to prepare the report, I would budget only 10 hours total for the year at $210 per hour, that’s $2,100 for engineering, that was my going position but we can put 3 hours per meeting, and up to 12 hours in the year, or I don’t know but, right now that budget that’s being proposed is way of that, so that’s like 40 hours and that seems to be too much.
Mr. Gill: Ok.
Mr. Del Rio: But didn’t he say that increase was due to the fact that they needed to do something with the sewer or something?
Mr. Gill: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: But that’s this year. Mr. Del Rio: That was 2026.
Mr. Fernandez: Yes.
Mr. Del Rio: So, we’re talking about next year so we’re not foreseeing that since this transition and all of that, they will do something that will require to be not only working for the meeting to meeting thing, but also going into the community is the question.
Mr. Fernandez: No, I agree with you but also with the lakes.
Mr. Del Rio: The thing is that if during this year 2026 we haven’t seen that much from the engineer but, affecting our community, and they are charging that much, the next one is what we should be seeing them doing some stuff right?
Mr. Fernandez: Right, but not putting a higher amount here putting a lower amount you will, that doesn’t mean that we use them in order to do those enhancements or goes

somewhere else. So, what I would suggest to the Board not to do is to put a big amount there so hours are incurred without any results.
Mr. Del Rio: Right, so what you’re saying is to keep it the way it is or lower it? Mr. Fernandez: Lower it.
Mr. Del Rio: But then what happens if they have to do any work? Mr. Fernandz: Then we’ll put it back again.
Mr. Gill: So, right now to balance this budget we removed the amount we had for contingency because this is going to stay, the total amount is going to stay the same, I think what you’re suggesting is that we would move a portion of the engineering down to contingency.
Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Mr. Del Rio: Ok, I see
Mr. Fernandez: And if it needed we would increase it. Mr. Del Rio: Ok.
Mr. Fernandez: So, it’s not that we are approving engineer or any line item. Mr. Del Rio: I understand.
Mr. Nandwani: Yes, that makes sense, ok.
Mr. Fernandez: And going to the point that we are going to discuss right after, I believe that stormwater management and the lakes are things that need to be solved prior to ending this fiscal year, I mean we cannot wait until the next fiscal year, so that’s my case.
Mr. Del Rio: I agree.
Mr. Nandwani: The only concern is where those funds would come from or $5,000 is enough in what’s left for the engineer to budget.
Mr. Fernandez: Right, and it just maybe from the bottom up instead of the top down, so I said, how many hours would I need if we only have four meetings, plus some additional hours, so I was doing the math and said, 10 hours would be enough, 10 hours at $200 is $2,000, so that was the math. I mean we can put twice that amount, or whatever we want.
Mr. Nandwani: I like the idea of bringing contingency because then it’s not automatic.
Mr. Fernandez: We’re not losing that money, I mean we’re just putting it there.

Mr. Nandwani: And we’re not asking the engineers to do things now.
Mr. Fernandez: Or that they are aware of and we are trying to be very cautious in the way that we incur time and expenses, and my specific request to Paul and Andrew was if we don’t anticipate any discussion regarding the engineer we shouldn’t have him come because it’s 1 hour of time coming here, 1 hour during the meeting and then 1 hour going out.
Mr. Nandwani: And it depends on where the meeting is.
Mr. Fernandez: So 3 hours of time just for being at the meeting and we’re not discussion engineering it doesn’t make any sense.
Mr. Nandwani: Right.
Mr. Winkeljohn: And Antonio this is Paul, there’s one more step that fits this altogether is that what the engineer does, and particularly Alvarez Engineering will do in this situation is if we have a task, they will give us a proposed number of hours and rate, and expectation if we give them that task and then as they perform it and they see that it’s taking more time then they would come back to us and it’s a two way relationship and it works really well.
Mr. Fernandez: I like that, I think it’s much better because that provides approval to the Board to approve or not approve, so I like that.
Mr. Winkeljohn: And they understand that and that’s how we’ll proceed. Mr. Fernandez: Alright.
Ms. Wald: And what’s the amount usually, the average, for the annual engineers report?
Mr. Gill:  I’m not sure I have the exact breakdown of the cost for the engineers
report.
Ms. Wald: Yes, I know but I was just curious because that’s what I would put there
because that you know needs to be done.
Mr. Fernandez:	$20,000 was the previous year, so maybe that’s a reasonable amount to put in this year.
Mr. Gill: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: And if something else is needed then we have it.

Ms. Wald: And that’s the only reason that I said that because you know you’re going to incur that, and I don’t know how much it is so, you know that’s definitely something you’re going to have next year, so you don’t want artificially lower it.
Mr. Del Rio: So then next year the excess goes to contingency. Mr. Fernandez: Exactly.
Mr. Del Rio: Ok.
Mr. Fenandez: And the money is there so we if need to incur that we will.
Mr. Gill: Right, and what the accountant generally does is so, the funds that will be there in contingency as they move into a specific line items, at the end of this coming fiscal year the accountant will see, ok this is the amount that was used for these various administrative lines so going into fiscal year 2028 they’ll know, ok you need to budget just a little bit.
Mr. Fernandez: Right, correct.
Mr. Gill: So, I think that’s a good idea.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok, good. So, attorney is already revised down to $14,000 which is the same amount that was approved last year.
Mr. Gill: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: It seems a little irrational for that but, if we’re going with the last budget we can stick to that. The other one was, or there are a few more that are very small that I actually just wanted to understand. The dissemination agent, why was that increased because it was $2,650 now it’s $2,809, why did that increase?
Mr. Gill: Let me check with our accountant Patti and see why this increased like only a couple of hundred dollars.
Mr. Fernandez: And the dissemination agent, what is that?
Ms. Wald: That’s for the bonds, you’re dissemination agent aren’t you? Mr. Gill: Yes.
Ms. Wald: And Paul, can you chime in?
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, it’s a reporting requirement tied to the trust indenture for any of your bonds.
Mr. Fernandez: Then I think the other day we also discussed about the phone, it’s
$100 it’s not a big deal.

Mr. Winkeljohn: And Andrew the final budget, we’ll make those changes we just didn’t bring it to you today from our meeting but yes, they were ancillary charges that we just deleted.
Mr. Gill: Yes, correct.
Ms. Wald: So, which one did you get rid of, the phone? Mr. Gill: Just the telephone.
Mr. Winkeljohn: We’re not allowed to use a phone anymore. Ms. Wald: Ok.
Mr. Fernandez: There’s no charge on that, we’re just simplifying it. The other one was insurance and I don’t know if this is in the agenda, or it’s not in the agenda right now but, maybe you can let me know what the indication is in terms of money.
Ms. Wald: So, it’s officer insurance, it’s to cover you folks mainly that’s your main course that you need in case you’re sued, you have the protection of the insurance company in case you’re individually sued as a Supervisor which can happen, I’m not saying it will happen but, anything is possible. So, that’s your main cost of your insurance, and there’s only a handful of providers that are out there for public liability officer insurance because you’re a public entity. The concern that we had with insurance is the sovereign immunity levels being increased from this past legislative session, the House and the Senate passed a bill but, the Governor vetoed it, so that bill was vetoed and therefore the only way that bill is going to be enacted as law is if the legislature, when they get back together in special session they’re going to have to overcome that veto by two thirds vote of the House and two thirds vote of the Senate which is not an easy thing to do and I’m not sure if they’ll even do it or even attempt to do it, so for now that is dead in the water, that did not become law July 1st.
Mr. Fernandez: In any of those scenarios Ginger, what is the affect in the budget?
Ms. Wald: The affect potentially in the budget is a potential increase of your insurance rates.
Mr. Fernandez: If it’s approved. Ms. Wald: Correct, if it’s approved. Mr. Fernandez: Ok.
Ms. Wald:	And that was the concern across the board where all of my governmental entities, my CDDs, and my cities, and counties, that was the concern.

Mr. Fernandez: Ok.
Ms. Wald: But it was vetoed and I don’t know what the legislature will do but, I truly doubt they’re going to be able to get two thirds of both sides to overcome that veto, I think we’re just going to see another bill next legislation.
Mr. Fernandez: So most likely things will remain the same.
Ms. Wald: Yes, and most likely it’s dead in the water, so the amount that was quoted should be the amount.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok, alright.
Ms. Wald: And I don’t know what was quoted but it should be that amount, and it may be a little less because this didn’t go through, I just don’t know until you get your bill from the insurance company.
Mr. Fernandez: Right.
Ms. Wald: And if it’s not this amount, obviously it will increase in your contingency.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok, so Andrew, $7,016 is the last proposal that we received from the insurance company?
Mr. Gill: Yes, and I can forward you that email, I have an email from our insurance advisor, I asked her specifically for that amount and she said that’s the correct amount and she gave me a breakdown of the liability insurance.
Mr. Fernandez: And you discussed with them, I mean they have increased like 36% in the last 3 or 4 years.
Mr. Gill: Yes.
Ms. Wald: And I’ve seen them, and Paul has probably seen worse but, I’ve seen them double for some of my clients, that own a lot of infrastructure, they went from
$20,000 to $40,000.
Mr. Fernandez: Do we deal with the broker or deal directly with the insurance company?
Mr. Gill: Well, he’s just our broker, right Paul? Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes.
Mr. Gill: So we interact with him directly.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, we use a pool, and the broker that manages the pool.
Mr. Fernandez: Is there a way that we can approach other companies or we don’t have the time for that?

Mr. Winkeljohn: There’s two entities in the State of Florida that you can work with, one is the Florida League of Cities which is a pool base that most municipalities and counties deal with and then there’s a private one which is the one we use which is People’s Trust Insurance Group, and this is the more economical one.
Mr. Fernandez: The one that we are using? Ms. Wald: Yes.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes sir. Mr. Fernandez: Alright, ok.
Ms. Wald: You could go with Florida League but, I’ve seen them about the same. Mr. Fernandez:	Because I went through the numbers and you know Paul and
Andrew I discussed this with you previously but in the last five years, the insurance increases have been a lot, so it was a concern and we’re going in that direction. Alright, then what about legal advertising, why do we need that much money?
Mr. Gill: So we’re required by law to advertise all the meetings that we’ll have, additionally we have to advertise the public hearing, and we have to do it in the antiquated newspaper, we can’t do it digitally, and the newspaper, I believe this is the only newspaper and their primary source of income are these ads generally.
Ms. Wald: It used to be less expensive, we used to have Broward Business Legal Review, and there was one in Dade, and they closed down. Once that happened really the only game in town is for Broward County, the Sun Sentinel. There is by Statute the ability to do perform online through the county’s online website but, we’ve been attempting to do it in Miami-Dade County for awhile now and it still hasn’t been approved by the county commission, they can do theirs, and they do some cities but they haven’t approved our CDDs. As to Broward County, I don’t think anyone has even attempted to do that, you can try and see what the cost would be, and when we look at Miami-Dade County when the law went into effect about 5 years ago, was even more expensive because they have to set that all up.
Mr. Fernandez: I think I didn’t explain myself enough, right now we have $500 incurred, why are projecting four times that amount?
Ms. Wald: You haven’t gotten a bill for the public hearing yet? Mr. Gill: I don’t believe so, no.

Ms. Wald: So, the budget, you have to advertise separately for the public hearing for the budget and I don’t think they’ve gotten that bill yet, that’s probably the most expensive ad.
Mr. Nandwani: But I wondering why it would be a different amount for the advertising, it’s the same thing you’re putting in the newspaper.
Mr. Gill: For a normal ad for our meeting schedule there’s a singular advertisement, for the public hearing there’s two separate advertisements that we do which are two weeks apart.
Mr. Nandwani: Ok.
Ms. Wald: And it might be less, it could be less than this. Mr. Fernandez: But right now actuals through April is $500. Mr. Gill: Yes, and they projected $1,000.
Mr. Fernandez: And why are we budgeting $2,500?
Mr. Gill: Again, if we’re moving it down to contingency I don’t see why we can’t put this as $1,000 and move the $1,500 here.
Mr. Fernandez: Right, that’s my point.
Mr. Nandwani: Well if you have $1,500 I don’t know if those three ads we have enough.
Mr. Gill: Well, he’s saying to put the projected through 9/30/26 as the proposed budget and then move the rest down.
Mr. Nandwani: Ok.
Mr. Gill: Paul, I don’t have an issue with that, do you?
Mr. Winkeljohn: No, we just did our audit so that’s one of the bigger ads that goes in and that’s not needed for the next like 10 years or 8 years or something, so we’re good.
Mr. Gill: Ok.
Ms. Wald: So, what are you going to make it, $1,000? Mr. Gill: Yes, we’ll make it $1,000.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok, other current charges, what is that, and it’s almost twice the amount of last year?
Mr. Del Rio: It says there’s an increase.
Mr. Fernandez: Yes, but the real amount this year.

Mr. Gill: We had projected $1,800.
Mr. Fernandez: Right, so why do we need more?
Mr. Gill: Generally the accountant buffers a little bit for inflation and just increases in costs and again, we can lower this.
Mr. Fernandez: Yes, why don’t we, if we start running out of money, we can go to contingency.
Mr. Gill:	So, I think for the first year we this Board, I think it’s useful to have it down in contingency and then next year you’ll see exactly what you need.
Mr. Fernandez: Right. Mr. Gill: Ok.
Mr. Fernandez: And I think it’s the same with the next one, property taxes, I think we discussed this previously but, honestly I don’t remember the explanation, we have property that we need to pay property taxes?
Mr. Gill: I don’t think we talked about this before but, Paul do you know what the property tax line item is for because we have a projected amount on actuals.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, so every once in a while a piece of property will stay in the District’s name and the county will mistakenly put taxes on it and we pay it until we can get it waived. I don’t know what we’re paying specifically for you all but, we can look at it.
Mr. Gill: I think we know the actual that’s here. Ms. Wald: Right, and we shouldn’t have anything. Mr. Gill: Ok.
Mr. Fernandez: Right.
Mr. Gill: But this $1,200 budget we can move down again. Mr. Fernandez: Right to zero.
Mr. Gill: Yes.
Ms. Wald: And if there was one that came in that should have been contested. Mr. Fernandez: Exactly.
Mr. Nandwani:	And if that’s the case does the Property Appraiser also have something?
Ms. Wald:	Well, that’s different, we’re tax exempt unless we’re using District property for a private purpose and we’re not.
Mr. Nandwani: Ok.

Ms. Wald: So, it should be nothing, sometimes what happens is it’s either an error from the Property Appraiser or when the conveyance happens, it’s just a matter of timing to get to the exemption for the CDD and that amount may have been not changed at the time of conveyance but, I don’t know.
Mr. Fernandez: So what are we doing the Property Appraiser, we’re keeping it at

$400?

Ms. Wald: The Property Appraiser, where is that? Mr. Fernandez: It’s listed above.
Mr. Gill: Yes, it’s $400, it says listing of legal description. Mr. Nandwani: Do they provide a list?
Ms. Wald: That’s what they do as part of the tax roll for the updates. Mr. Fernandez: Ok, so property tax we will put at zero.
Mr. Gill: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok. I think those were the most redline items that I had. Ms. Wald: $175 is what we give to the state every year.
Mr. Fernandez: Alright, so what are the next steps with this Andrew?
Mr. Gill: So, we’ll incorporate all these changes, and I’ll take this and give this to

the accountant, I told her I would have additional changes today. I can send the redline or these changes showing this next to it and you’ll see the contingency bump up and all the other line items will drop down and I’ll circulate that to the Board after this meeting. Then that budget will be provided at the next meeting in August at the public hearing and that budget you all will be able to say, yes we would like to adopt this budget and then we’ll make that the final.
Mr. Nandwani: But we’ll receive it through you before that meeting?
Mr. Gill: Yes, you can get the redline and the clean version later this week. Mr. Fernandez: That’s good.
Mr. Gill: So, I’ll send over these now. Mr. Fernandez: Ok.
Ms. Wald: And you’ll still have time to make revisions at the public hearing.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok, and that meeting will be a regular, not a regular meeting but it will be similar to this one.

Ms. Wald: Exactly, what we’ll do is we’ll open it up for a public hearing in case any members of the public want to speak, if they’re online or they show up you have to listen to them, you have to listen to their comments, and then you will make the decision whether to do any changes after listening to them or yourselves as to the budget that you have and then approve a budget, and that will be your final budget.
Mr. Fernandez: In the communications that are going to be sent out to the public when you talk about the public hearing is it clearly stated that this only to the regular assessments and not to the special assessments.
Ms. Wald: Well, they’re all special assessments but you’re talking about this is related only to the operations and maintenance.
Mr. Fernandez: Yes, that’s what I’m trying to say.
Ms. Wald: So, this is related only to the operations and maintenance.
Mr. Fernandez: And that’s explicitly explained in that communication to the community or to the District people.
Mr. Gill: There’s no increase so we’re not required to disseminate a mail notice saying your assessments are increasing.
Mr. Fernandez: Right, I know.
Ms. Wald: You mean the advertisement in the paper? Mr. Fernandez: Yes, for the public hearing.
Ms. Wald: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: So, you’re going to say that this is just for the regular operational
funds.
Mr. Gill:	Yes, so we send the date, the time and what the O&M are in that
advertisement.
Mr. Fernandez:	But I’m trying to avoid our discussions about to be honest, the special assessment.
Ms. Wald: You’re talking about the debt, the debt number. Mr. Fernandez: Right, yes.
Ms. Wald: No, this is the appropriations just for your operations and maintenance costs, and I don’t have your advertisement, I can’t say what your advertisement says.

Mr. Gill: It will be clear at the meeting, generally if the public is present they’ll ask any questions they’d like and we’ll clarify but, in the notices that are sent, if we have to ever send notices, it states it’s just for the O&M, that’s what is required by law.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok.
Ms. Wald: Yes because that was already completed when we had the public hearing under Chapter 170 on the assessments originally and so that was set, we already had the public hearing with the equalization and those things. So, this public hearing on the budget is for the operations and maintenance.
Mr. Fernandez: Alright.
Mr. Gill: So, just to go through this one last time on the record, the budget line item changes that we just discussed for fiscal year 2027, we have engineering from
$8,000 down to $5,000, we have telephone down to zero, we have legal advertisement down to $1,000, we have other current charges dropping down to $1,800 and we have property taxes dropping down to zero. The changes in each of those line item amounts will be pulled into contingencies.
Mr. Fernandez: Right.
Mr. Gill: Ok, perfect. Any other questions on the budget line items? Mr. Fernandez: No.
Mr. Gill: Ok.

B. Status of District Lakes
Mr. Gill: The next item on the agenda is item No. 3B this is the status of the District lakes which starts on page 29 of your agenda, it shows pictures right there. So my office went to the District to take a few photos of the lakes to see where they stood after that treatment, and Paul there was a singular treatment by Weston?
Mr. Winkeljohn: A couple of months ago at the Board’s requests were additional quality, they added an additional treatment in the spring to get ahead of it, and those pictures show the results of that extra treatment progressing, not as far as they wanted, or we wanted either so they’re continuing the twice a month treatment.
Mr. Gill: Ok.
Mr. Winkeljohn: So, they’re still on board and working hard to get those lakes progressing and I’ll add in that we’re in discussions to set up a meeting to go over the

more aggressive concepts like the mechanical removal and maybe some reshaping of some of them, they haven’t accepted that or set a date yet but, I’m hoping to get that probably in August.
Mr. Fernandez: How is Bonaventure District participating in this Paul? Mr. Winkeljohn: Say that again?
Mr. Fernandez: The Bonaventure Development District how are they participating in this because they are the owners of the lakes, right?
Mr. Winkeljohn: Right but it’s managed by the city engineer, and the city’s public works department so the actual legal entity is really just the city.
Ms. Wald: The actual legal entity is Botaniko Development District is a dependent District, it’s not independent like you, it’s a dependent District of the city so they share city staff.
Mr. Fernandez: But what’s the role of Bonaventure Development District in this? Mr. Winkeljohn: They collect an assessment that the city holds those funds.
Mr. Fernandez: But they are the owners of the lakes themselves. Ms. Wald: That is correct.
Mr. Fernandez: So, my question is what are they doing, I mean how are they involved in this process?
Mr. Gill: So our correspondence is with the City of Weston, which is for all intents and purposes is the Bonaventure Development District, correct?
Mr. Winkeljohn: Correct.
Mr. Gill: So, when we’re speaking to the staff, saying hey, can you go clean up the lakes for us or what have you done, they’re saying just as the City of Weston but, it’s the Bonaventure Development District is the owner of the lakes who is handling it.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Correct.
Mr. Fernandez: I’m sorry I’m confused, can you say that again.
Ms. Wald: It’s the difference between a dependent District and an independent District, you are correct, they are its own legal entity but, because they’re not independent they are dependent upon the City of Weston performing the functions for them. So, when Paul says he’s talking to the city he’s talking to the city with them performing the functions for Bonaventure Development District.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok, on behalf of.

Ms. Wald: On behalf of, that is correct. Mr. Fernandez: Ok.
Ms. Wald: I represent other dependent Districts, and yes we have some of the people that work for the dependent District are its own direct contract but, most are city employees because they try to keep the budget small, and since they’re dependent on the city and the city including their budget and their collection of assessments in the city budget which I’ll be doing Wednesday for another one of my dependent Districts the city does the work for them.
Mr. Del Rio: So, it’s not 3 entities, in reality there are only 2 entities, us and the
city.
Ms. Wald: Yes, exactly, legally there’s 3 but in practicality there’s 2.
Mr. Del Rio:	And originally there were 2, so every time that we have to give
permission to the city to go through the lakes, it’s actually that we’re giving permission to the city but, really it’s to the BDD through the city.
Ms. Wald: They already have the access and their permission, they already have permission to do so, they have easements, so they already have the right to go in.
Mr. Del Rio: But the easements, they are owned by Bonaventure. Mr. Fernandez: Well, good question, who owns the easements?
Ms. Wald: It depends on the easement, we have easements, and they have easements, we both have easements.
Mr. Fernandez: Because the easements interrupt the tracts that are in the perimeter of Botaniko, of the District.
Ms. Wald: The CDD has certain easements, has access and Bonaventure has certain easements as access and I believe, I can’t remember if there is, I’d have to go back and look but, I can’t remember if they’re recorded easements or they’re just easements by plat but, they’re one or the other or maybe both.
Mr. Fernandez: Let me correct my question because I remember we had a discussion in one of the first meetings, and what was said at that time, or what I understood is the body of the lake is Botaniko Development District, us, the CDD, that’s the body of the lake. The water of the lake us owned by Bonaventure Development District, and the perimeter, including all the easements is owned by the CDD and by the

HOA, I never saw nothing in charge or on the property of Bonaventure, Bonaventure doesn’t own any improvements.
Ms. Wald: Who doesn’t?
Mr. Fernandez: Bonaventure Development District, the other Development District. Ms. Wald: Let me see, I’m going to tell you right now.
Mr. Fernandez: I think they don’t own any of the easements.
Ms. Wald: The CDD shall be responsible for the ownership operations maintenance of the following stormwater infrastructure of the boundaries, the primary drainage system, and it is from the plat by the way. The lakes as set forth on the western estates plat recorded plat book 181, page 169, tracts L-1 through L-10, the drainage pipes and associated drainage facilities which connects the lakes within the CDD to the other known as the primary storm system, and then there’s a maintenance map, that’s Bonaventure Development District, BDD. The CDD, is responsible for the ownership maintenance and operations of the following components of the stormwater management system within the boundaries of the CDD, known as the secondary drainage system. The drainage pipes associated drainage facilities which connect the remainder of the stormwater drainage system for the CDD to the lakes and/ or drainage pipes and described as article A-1 in the CDD boundaries also referred to as secondary pipe interconnects.  The catch basins, stormwater manholes, culverts, swales and other associated stormwater control facilities not being under the responsibilities of the BDD which is Bonaventure Development District. Then there is this lovely map which shows it, and I think I have another paper somewhere.
Mr. Fernandez: Thank you and let me add a component here, water management from Broward County, how do they interact with all this because sometimes I heard that they just go in and make their tests in the water, the water management.
Ms. Wald: That’s probably through a permit, that’s probably through the permitting process.
Mr. Fernandez: But triggered by whom, the City of Weston, by Bonaventure?
Ms. Wald: No, by Broward County. Oh, here is my other paper, so this provides the overview and if you can look at those markings down there with the coloring as to who has what.  What I read from was the interlocal agreement

Mr. Gill: Yes, and this is easement, and it’s also on the engineers report. Mr. Fernandez: And this is from Juan?
Mr. Gill: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: It doesn’t seem that Bonaventure owns anything.
Mr. Gill: Right, the ownership looks to be just the CDD, it’s the maintenance responsibilities that are broken up between the HOA and the Bonaventure Development District, so that’s shown in the engineers report, they provided with the chart.
Ms. Wald: What the plat provides it, and that’s what you’re missing. It was conveyed to the CDD but the plat is what provides the ownership for Bonaventure Development District of portions of the stormwater management system, so that is why Bonaventure, a.k.a. the city, is the one that is responsible for the maintenance of the lakes, the CDD has the secondary pipes.
Mr. Fernandez: So any action that we take for the lakes, or we request for the lakes will end in the City of Weston.
Ms. Wald: Yes, it might.
Mr. Fernandez: It will not go to the county, will not go to Bonaventure, it would be with the City of Weston.
Ms. Wald: I would have to double check with the engineer but, if memory serves me, and I’m going way back with my memory but, you could pull the engineers report again but, if memory serves me correctly, it’s really just the permitting process for the actual system itself with Broward County and it was the discharge into the canal system, is that right for this District, so this one was a lot of different moving parts but, I believe for this District that is correct. I don’t think Sunrise has anything to do with this one, I’m sorry I just had a District that was a combo of Sunrise and another city, and I don’t want to get the two confused but, if memory serves me correctly, that was for this CDD, Broward County was only as to the discharge into the canal system, but we can double check with the engineer.
Mr. Fernandez: Yes, and I think that’s something that needs to be very clear.
Mr. Gill: So, just to be clear then the question here is the interaction between the county and the city with respect to the stormwater system?
Mr. Fernandez: Let me tell you what is my concern, and I try to be a very practical person, we want to get the lakes better, and there are several actions that need to be

done like mechanical removal, chemical treatments and so forth. So, moving forward, I would like to have, or I think the Board needs to have a clear view of which entity we’re going to request the permits or request the changes, or the treatments, or the fountains, because there are too many hands in there.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, so Antonio this is a pretty well vetted process and everywhere in Florida there’s all these levels of interaction but, basically it depends on what we’re asking for that’s really the topic and if you want to do something major like reconfigure the lake then you trigger everybody but, if you just want to increase your treatment protocols, it’s already spelled out in the permits. So, it’s a pretty well vetted process and I wouldn’t get caught up in it too much at this point because we don’t know what we’re asking for yet.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok, so what you’re saying is, let’s say that we’re going to continue with chemical treatments, that we might move into mechanical removal.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, and that will be spelled out in the permit what the level of removal you’re allowed to do, usually they stay very vague in their permit language, good quality, words like that, healthy, fitting with the environment, those types of phrases, they don’t put a lot of specifics on it, so it gives you a pretty wide range of capabilities. They’re real specific on the percentage parts per million, chemical treatment per 30 days, that’s the hard line and we’re able to split that treatment into a double dose because they usually treat lighter than the requirement but, it’s the 30 day line that really gives us the headache usually but, we’re still well within that I’m sure.
Mr. Fernandez: And when can we expect to have normal lakes as every other place in Weston?
Mr. Winkeljohn: So, it’s always a moving target when it comes to our lakes, what we’ve done is we did an aggressive spring treatment that would linger into summer, but as soon as summer ends the treatment protocols have to shift again because you have cooler weather, less sunlight, etc. and so what you want to do is you want to die it off, kill it off early in the spring so that it sinks and then the warm water deteriorates it more quickly and that gets your material out without having to spend a lot of money. So, we pull some out carefully, and the season doesn’t care, and it isn’t vital, so I think probably in the late fall you’re going to have your best look in a while, and all these things will come to a head then and you’ll have the right water temperature and stuff.

Mr. Fernandez: Ok, can we construct, along with the City of Weston, a calendar or a schedule that we can officially review every Board meeting here and see where we are.
Mr. Winkeljohn: And I have a records request that they copy us on all lake reports but, they do not do as specific report as most of my clients do or most of the contractors do, but I have that for you and I’ll include in future agendas.
Mr. Fernandez: Please because I would like to include, and let me propose this to the Board, I would like to include at some point installing fountains but, I would like to see the schedule and a bar chart like this will happen in the summer of next year, or in the spring or whatever.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Antonio, that’s a very threatening thing for the city staff is to put themselves on a schedule.
Mr. Fernandez: Well, I agree but we need to do it. Mr. Winkeljohn: But I think you’re totally right.
Mr. Fernandez: Because how do you manage the situation because it could take forever, and we’ve been discussing this for like 6 months now.
Mr. Nandwani: So what is the next step in the process? Mr. Fernandez: Well, that’s a good question, I don’t know. Mr. Winkeljohn: For which topic, the fountains?
Mr. Nandwani: To install fountains.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Fountains are pretty simply once the HOA gets a contractor and wants to go forward they execute the document with the city, the city approves it if it meets their criteria which you just sign their document, so there’s no negotiating there, so it’s pretty simple, it just has to go on an agenda and staff takes care of it for you.
Mr. Nandwani: But the idea here is that the HOA would fund this then. Mr. Winkeljohn: Correct.
Mr. Fernandez: No, I understood that the city funds it.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Anybody could fund it but, the agreement was going to be with the HOA, and probably a tri-party with the District signing off as well.
Mr. Gill: Their question here is whether or not the HOA would have to pay for the fountains or if Weston would have actually cover it?
Mr. Winkeljohn:	The city does not pay for them, they have to come from other
funds.

Mr. Fernandez: I understood from the model of the license agreement that you shared like 1 or 2 meetings ago that the city was funding it for that case but, we can find out but, which is the right moment to install the fountains, that’s something we don’t know. I would like to install it right now but, does it make sense and obviously it will create harm to the lakes so, what’s the right month to install those fountains?
Mr. Winkeljohn: I’ve never seen a problem like fountains interfering with progress and very small algae blooms can be generated from the new fountain aeration because it’s just a bunch of oxygen that wasn’t there before so they will spike a little bit but, very small but, the long term is it doesn’t matter when you put them in, as soon as you put them in you get the visual right away and you start to get the surface water benefit the first 4” to 8” gets some oxygenation.
Mr. Gill: I think also we can, if we have an idea of the types of fountains or a contractor with fountains that you all would like we can also start engaging with Weston to say this is what this District would like to start with and see what they provide us with at this point, right now we’re kind of early in the game.
Ms. Wald: But before we talked about at the last meeting, the HOA, because the District doesn’t have any money.
Mr. Gill: Right.
Ms. Wald: So it didn’t make sense to even get the District involved.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Right, I thought it was a HOA driven project because they had the funds for the maintenance and installation.
Mr. Fernandez: So, let me put to you now, right now the HOA has turned over from a developer controlled to homeowner’s controlled and we’re meeting every single month, by the way we’re meeting here, so that’s the topic we might discuss in the next meeting.
Mr. Nandwani: But would generate a special assessment, right, it sounds like it if the HOA has to fund it.
Mr. Fernandez: If the HOA needs to pay it of course, or include in the next budget. Mr. Nandwani: And then there’s a question of priority over fencing and security cameras, and then we talked at one point about the CDD reserves potentially being used
for projects in the community.
Mr. Fernandez: Sure, we have like $800,000 there

Mr. Nandwani: So we may need to start with defining priorities for the association and then finding how much funding we can get or special assessments would come in and so forth.
Mr. Fernandez: Yes.
Mr. Nandwani: Which would affect obviously the timing because I was confused by, and maybe I didn’t read it well enough but, I also understood that the city as part of the I guess long term or upkeep of the lakes would invest in this.
Mr. Fernandez: Yes, that’s what I read too, that’s my understanding. Ok, so what’s the next step in this, we’re going to try to get a schedule from the City of Weston?
Mr. Gill: Yes, so what we’ll do is I’ll add to ongoing agendas and see if we can get a schedule of treatments from the city.
Mr. Fernandez: And schedule for us to know where we are and what to expect when, otherwise we will go forever in this discussion, I mean in 2 or 3 years we’ll be talking about the same thing without any results.
Mr. Gill: So, the last correspondence that we had with them regarding the treatments, they said these treatments were underway so we can reach back out and figure out if anything has been done or when they expect to have them.
Mr. Fernandez: As to the dates and for when and then we can create the schedule and then on that date we’ll call them, and say you committed to this date, what’s going on.
Mr. Gill: Ok.
Mr. Fernandez: That would be my recommendation. Ms. Wald: You can ask.
Mr. Gill: Yes, we can ask.
Mr. Nandwani: And do we have the criteria for what the fountain needs to look like or what technical specifications it needs to have because it sounds like that needs to be determined by the city to be able for the HOA to even go to a contract.
Ms. Wald: And wasn’t that part of the license agreement that Paul had provided?
Paul, that sample that you had provided at the last meeting, wasn’t that in there?
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, it’s all spelled out. Ms. Wald: I thought so.
Mr. Gill: Ok, I’ll see if I can get that to the Board that again.

Ms. Wald: Yes, I just remember it being in the last meeting. Mr. Fernandez: And we can have that discussion with the HOA. Mr. Nandwani: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: Alright, thank you for the update. Mr. Gill: Ok.

C. Status of Developer Overpayment and Reimbursement
Mr. Gill: So, nothing else for item 3B, so we’re down to item No. 3C, and this is the status of overpayment and reimbursement with the developer. So, we had previously reached out to the developer and detailed the amount that we thought had been overpaid and requested their review and to receive reimbursement. They responded stating that the timing for this was lengthy and they needed additional information from the District regarding the overpayment. I know this Board is very conscientious of costs and spending and so I think how the CDD proceeds with our next steps may incur costs if we were to engage additional attorneys, bond counsel, or any outside parties to determine exactly how much is owed, or how we’re attempting to recover this so I think this opens the Board up to discussion to figure out how you all would like to do.
Mr. Fernandez: So, what’s the response of the developer, it was not clear to me?
Mr. Gill: That they’ve reviewed what we thought was an overpayment, they disagreed and the timing also I think they said it was like 5 or 6 years since they received that amount which I think is maybe immaterial. So Paul, for the next steps, or immediate next steps for this outside of sending maybe a demand letter.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, so you said it just right, in simple terms they said they don’t agree that the funds are owed back to the District they still feel that it was an appropriate funding and that if there was more material evidence that they had to pay it back they wanted to see it. So, what you’re saying is, the Board needs to tell us do you want us to assemble and spend some hours and dollars assemble a more aggressive response to them, see if we can provoke them, or secondly, seek legal correction through Ginger or maybe outside counsel, and again all those are running up the bill.
Mr. Fernandez: What are you thoughts Ginger on that?
Ms. Wald: I still don’t necessarily understand how the overpayment was calculated because I’m not a numbers person but, one of the things that you had asked,

and I can’t recall if it was the last meeting, I went back and read the minutes before this meeting or the meeting before but, it was one of the two. So there was a question of what happens to that money if they pay it back, and I said well let’s see if they pay it back and let me just look at the trust indenture and see what it said, and I’ll bring that back to the next meeting. So, I went ahead and did that, and so I looked at the first supplemental which is where it comes from, in Section 4.01, and because we know that these are the monies from the acquisition and construction account. It says after completion date for all capital improvement plan, which is the finalization, which I still think there’s one little thing still out there that we have to find out from the District engineer whether that has been completed so we can have that certification of completion. So any monies remaining in the Series 2020 Acquisition and Construction account after retaining costs to complete the capital improvement plan shall be transferred to the Series 2020 General Redemption subaccount as directed in writing by the issuer, which is the CDD, or the District manager on behalf of the issuer to the trustee. So, I know that was one of the questions what happens, that money does go back into the acquisition and construction account, and then once that completion is done, then it’s transferred to this general redemption subaccount, so it’s not monies that are just available for property owners to refund back to you.
Mr. Fernandez: When it goes to that account what happens to it? Ms. Wald: Well, that’s what I’m not sure about.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, I would go to the redemption fund basically which is probably the last set of bonds at the final year payment.
Ms. Wald: Potentially.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Reducing the principal at the year 30 or year 29. Mr. Fernandez: Why the end, why not the next year?
Mr. Winkeljohn: That’s how the redemption fund is, they’ll put it in the fund and the redemptions happen to schedule, and they’ll just have enough funds to exhaust them a little bit earlier, that’s how they typically do that.
Mr. Fernandez: Well, of course.
Mr. Winkeljohn: And from a bond person’s standpoint, they’re not going to rewrite my bonds like a refinancing or anything like that, it’s just too cumbersome so that’s how

they typically do it is that the guy with the last bond gets his payment, his principal payment a little early.
Ms. Wald: So, that’s possible, there are different redemption schedules at different redemption times. You do have a bond counsel, and that’s one of the other things that I checked, is bond counsel has completed their work when the bonds are issued but, they’re still your bond counsel and since we’re dealing specifically with the bonds, and the allocation of the bonds, then as what I just read to you and the interpretation thereof, in reaching out with bond counsel, who is Robert Gang, I asked him, and we were talking about something else and so I said, I’m going to send you an email just respond back, and don’t charge me, just respond back, and he said I’ll do that for you, and so my question was what would your rate be and he said he would give a reduced hourly rate, so he said he would reduce his current rate to $912 an hour for the CDD matter and that’s high, and he said it could be higher if there’s a tax opinion but, I don’t perceive a tax opinion from what I’ve been told so far. So what I was going to say getting the information that was just provided is, you’re going to have to get bond counsel involved at some point to proceed with this and I wanted to see what that hourly rate would be, or if it would be some flat rate, and he said it would be an hourly rate, so I wanted you to have that information.
Mr. Fernandez: And I appreciate that.
Ms. Wald: So, I wanted you guys to know that and I also would again defer to bond counsel because that’s exactly what we’re talking about here.
Mr. Fernandez: And those were also from the very beginning or that would be at the end part of the discussion because right now it’s for purposes of discussion.
Ms. Wald: Right now it’s between your methodology consultant, which is GMS, which is also your District manager, and specially the developer.
Mr. Fernandez: Right.
Ms. Wald: That’s where we are right now, if we’re going to go to the next level, that’s where we need to get.
Mr. Fernandez: So, we’re talking about $180,000?
Ms. Wald: I think it was $158,000 is what the minutes said. Mr. Fernandez: So, $160,000, right?
Mr. Gill: $158,838.

Mr. Fernandez: Ok, so let’s say $160,000 rounded, so the worst scenario is that we spend part of that money or all in trying to get that money back.
Mr. Nandwani: But we have to spend it from current funds. Ms. Wald: That’s the problem.
Mr. Nandwani: We can’t borrow it against the future funds that we may never get. Mr. Fernandez: Right.
Mr. Nandwani: And they probably know that.
Ms. Wald: That are under bond funds, and that would just go back into that acquisition and construction account.
Mr. Nandwani: So whatever we paid now wouldn’t get reimbursed from this.
Ms. Wald: Exactly, that was my concern. My concern was are you spending “good money” after potentially money at the end, or if you wanted to refinance the bonds and did a redemption, so I’m just saying, is this something that’s even worth considering at this point and I think one of the points being made is the timing and would this even be something that would have to be litigated and I just don’t know, I can’t answer that, I would have to get bond counsel involved to even get to that point.
Mr. Fernandez: And they know that.
Ms. Wald: Well, that’s his 40% discount.
Mr. Fernandez: So, honestly I hate to just drop the ball right now, I mean this is something that is fair to pursue, they have been overpaid, they need to reimburse the District whether the funds go to the end of the bonds, or whatever but that’s a fact.
Mr. Gill: Management had a call with the developer, and I thought that went well initially, I’ve been trying to get another one with them, I’m going to press them to have another call before the next public hearing and at least update you on that. Paul, do you think that’s a premium course here based on what the Board said, at least try to get the developer on the phone again?
Mr. Winkeljohn: If you want to that’s an excellent effort, I don’t know where it’s going to go, I mean I read between the lines and their response which I think is in your package that it’s a no, and you’re going to have to spend the money to push them any further.
Mr. Gill: It’s not in the packet.

Ms. Wald:	I don’t think it’s in the packet because you guys just told me this yesterday.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Ok, we circulated it by separate email. Mr. Fernandez: I haven’t received it.
Mr. Nandwani: I don’t recall seeing it. Ms. Wald: No, I don’t think it was Paul.
Mr. Gill: Ok, I’ll make sure the Board gets a copy of that.
Mr. Nandwani: And this is just probably a ridiculous question but I’m going to ask it anyway, as part of the HOA turnover there’s a review in terms of whether there’s anything to claim from the developer, is there any way that the CDD could assign some kind of interesting way if we could roll this into a claim.
Ms. Wald: No, it’s a great question though but, I don’t see that could be done because we are dealing with monies directly from the bonds, so I can’t see how you could do that.
Mr. Nandwani: I mean this is mutual interest in terms of both organizations.
Ms. Wald: Yes, there are mutual interest but they’re completely separate. I wish I had an easy answer for you but, I don’t. You could do it formal, I mean you could formally you could put it in a “formal letter” from the CDD, and lay everything out as to why you believe as to the calculations, as to the overpayment with being very specific and demanding a response and then going from there and seeing what their, in writing response is, and then if you want to again, I could take that maybe just ask bond counsel for maybe 2 hours of their time for that review, maybe something along those lines.
Mr. Fernandez: I like the idea.
Ms. Wald: That’s why I wanted to get a hold of bond counsel in advance before I say go ahead because I wanted to see what they would say.
Mr. Fernandez: At least we need to leave it in the record. Mr. Nandwani: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: Because just dropping the thing here is not correct.
Ms. Wald: I agree, I think from what you’ve been doing it needs to be formalized, I think it does need to be something exactly formal from the District, on District letterhead to them, and then a response so you do have something in the record and then make the

decision, yes we’re going to spend the funds that you’ve already paid into to make up for an acquisition and construction account which you don’t have access to.
Mr. Gill: So, can I work with the chairman to draft this letter, do I need a motion from the Board because I know you’ve been involved with this quite a bit, so it may be useful to work on the letter, draft it, and bring it back.
Mr. Fernandez: It’s up to you, I’m willing to do that.
Mr. Gill: And then we’ll have a formal letter and then I can also include that into the record once we receive that response because right now we have an informal response from them.
Ms. Wald: Yes.
Mr. Nandwani: But is there any way to demand a response, like what if they just ignore it and say we’re done.
Ms. Wald: Well then I think you have, and you’re putting it on the record that they provided absolutely no response whatsoever.
Mr. Gill: We can also put a date for response in the letter. Mr. Nandwani: Yes.
Ms. Wald:  I think it’s just a little more formalized because you’re going to have
that.
Mr. Fernandez: I think it’s a good idea to have that in the record because that’s
what my understanding was.
Mr. Nandwani: So, there wasn’t an official communication with respect to what should be paid back.
Mr. Gill: There’s emails and a call, and we had a PDF file that detailed these were the requisitions, these are the amounts, this is the amount we thought you were overpaid, and we provided all that information to them but, a formal demand with all the information and the timing, signed on District letterhead and get that sent I’d like to draft that, have the chairman review it with your approval, send that over to them, give them a timeline to respond and then if they don’t have that response we’ll at least have it in the record.
Mr. Del Rio: But for example if you already specified and itemized how it is in your opinion they were overpaid, and they simply say we don’t believe that information that you’re providing is enough to justify, etc., but to me, they’re being very vague because

they are not saying exactly where is the missing information or that there is no information.
Ms. Wald: Or they can dispute it. Mr. Del Rio: Correct.
Ms. Wald: But you don’t have anything in writing, and I think that’s part of the problem is they could say we dispute that, these were our costs, and I’m just making something up now, and these were our costs, these were the hard costs, it was part of the original engineers report and the requisitions were issued as such but you don’t know.
Mr. Del Rio: But they could answer the same way that they already had responded.
Ms. Wald: But at least you have something in writing. Mr. Del Rio: Ok.
Mr. Nandwani: Right.
Mr. Fernandez: So we should expect a response in writing from them, and then we will decide, now we can probably request from them a response which of these items they questioned or dispute.
Ms. Wald: I think that’s really what it’s going to be. Mr. Fernandez: To make them respond line by line.
Ms. Wald: And it’s going to be a dispute and then you go from there and then make a decision after either getting something or not getting something, I think you have to wait to decide whether you want to go to the next step and spend those monies.
Mr. Fernandez: Right, ok.
Mr. Gill: So, do I need a motion to work with the chairman on this or is just direction ok.
Ms. Wald: I think direction is fine, I don’t think you need a motion. Mr. Gill: Ok, perfect. Paul anything else to add on this?
Mr. Winkeljohn: No, good input, thank you. Mr. Gill: Thank you Ginger.

D. Status of Water Management Project Approval with Developer

Mr. Gill: Ok, so Paul, item No. 3D, status of water management project approval with the developer, I’m not sure, did you add this on here?
Mr. Winkeljohn:	That’s the correspondence with Juan Alvarez’s office that he provided, is it part of the meeting package?
Mr. Gill: It’s not.
Ms. Wald: No, it’s not in there.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Was it sent separately because that should have been part of the package.
Ms. Wald: I didn’t see it, I haven’t seen it.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Alright, we’ll circulate it, that’s what that was, Juan had a pretty thorough update, and there’s no action required but, we’ll just send it for everybody to read.
Mr. Fernandez: Now additional feedback here, the community, on the other side of Bonaventure Boulevard was approved by the City of Weston so that happened like 2 weeks ago, I was out of the city, I was unable to participate, but it was approved. So, the concern now is what is impacting the stormwater management system of the District because they are planning as you said to move the lake.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Right, I know.
Ms. Wald: And that’s a good question to the city, if they approved it, it would have gone through their engineering department for that approval and that is an excellent question for them. Paul, question, when it status of water management project approval with developer, did Juan state if they were close to closing out the permit or not?
Mr. Winkeljohn: I don’t have it memorized but, yes, there’s a couple little snags that they’re still working through but, I think it was in the package so I’m still looking for that so I can read it.
Ms. Wald: That’s ok, so it’s not completed.
Mr. Gill: Right, so it’s not completed so what I’ll do is I will send this to the Board now, I will also include it in the August agenda, it hasn’t been completed or the permits haven’t been closed yet but, I wasn’t sure that it was to be included in this agenda.
Mr. Fernandez: And when do we discuss the effects of the of that if it has any affect?

Ms. Wald: The key is, for the determination of that you’re either going to have to get your District engineer to review those plans but, the city should tell you, I mean to me, those are questions to the city.
Mr. Fernandez: And that goes from the District or from the HOA?
Ms. Wald: It goes from anybody, it could be you as an individual who lives in the District, so anybody.
Mr. Fernandez: Ok, but formally is it the HOA or is it the CDD because this is the stormwater management system, which is part of the CDD, right?
Ms. Wald: Well, part of it but most of it is Bonaventure Development District, so it’s the city, that’s what I’m saying it still goes back to the city, the secondary piping, that part is the CDD.
Mr. Fernandez: Right.
Ms. Wald: How is that going to affect it, I don’t know but Bonaventure should know, hence the city whether there’s an affect because they have the majority.
Mr. Fernandez: So, let’s check with the city and we will table this discussion probably for the next meeting.
Ms. Wald: I think it’s important to know that first.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Mr. Gill: Alright, moving on to staff report, Ginger.

Attorney – Memorandum – 2026 Legislative Update
Ms. Wald: So, my legislative update because I know you have to go, it’s in the packet, and as I said the first one was vetoed by the Governor so we’re not having any increase on sovereign immunity. Everything else has now been executed by the Governor, so it’s for you, before we lose the quorum, it’s for you go ahead and review and read. If anybody has any questions, or wants the entire act I’m more than happy to give it to you. That was really the big one that was directly going to affect the CDD, the one that affects CDDs directly is now there’s a recall petition that can be done for a recall election, CDDs never had that before, so it’s similar to cities and counties. The rest of it are not big ticket items but, again, feel free to review and if there’s something big I would point it out, that’s it.

Mr. Gill: Thank you Ginger.

Engineer
Mr. Gill: So nothing from the engineer.

Manager
Mr. Gill: I don’t have anything for the manager.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, just real quick Andrew, I pulled up that email and I just wanted to say, that was related to the transfer permit with South Florida Water Management District and the city, and they identified a handful or a couple of culverts that were not on the permit that were installed and so they had to go back and get that permit modified to match what the as-builts show. I don’t think any of it is material, it doesn’t affect anything, or they think it had no affect on the amount of water discharge outside the permit and that kind of thing, so it’s a housekeeping item, a little messier than we thought, so that transfer is going slowly.
Mr. Fernandez: So you don’t anticipate the permission at the end for the approval from the city?
Mr. Winkeljohn: Well, that’s two different topics, this is the existing system, your system, when the city installed it and modified for the Botaniko permit there were culverts that were not on that original plans so it’s really just a housekeeping mistake I think. The new community, with the additional houses, that’s a different topic and I don’t know about that.
Mr. Fernandez: No, I was not referring to that. Mr. Gill: Ok.
Ms. Wald: Ok, so it’s a permit revision. Mr. Gill: Ok, thanks Paul.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Financial Reports
Approval of Check Register
Approval of Unaudited Financials
Mr. Gill: Moving to the approval of the check register and the audited financials. Mr. Fernandez: And we have gone over the budget.
Mr. Nandwani: And I review it, I agree with it.

Mr. Gill: Ok, we just need a motion to approve.

On MOTION by Mr. Fernandez seconded by Mr. Nandwani with all in favor, the Check Run Summary and the Unaudited Financials were approved.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisors Requests and
Audience Comments
Mr. Gill: Audience comments and Supervisor’s requests, we do have a few members of the public present on the phone, Michael Miller, do you have anything for the Board? Any questions? Hearing none, there are no members of the public present in person.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment
Mr. Gill: If there are no Supervisor’s requests, I’m just looking for a motion to adjourn.

On MOTION by Mr. Fernandez seconded by Mr. Del Rio with all in favor, the meeting was adjourned.

Secretary /Assistant Secretary

Chairman / Vice Chairman

Certificate Of Completion

Envelope Id: 8DE9D191-2AF1-8D66-83AD-13C63690CBF7	Status: Completed Subject: Botaniko: Complete with Docusign: 7-7-26 Minutes.pdf, Resolution 2026-04.docx, Resolution 2026-05.pd
Source Envelope:
Document Pages: 55	Signatures: 10	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
8/5/2026 1:49:43 PM	Holder: Ellen Acosta
eacosta@gmssf.com	Location: DocuSign	
Signer Events	Signature	Timestamp	
Andrew Gill agill@gmssf.com DISTRICT MANAGER	
	Sent: 8/5/2026 1:56:58 PM Resent: 8/10/2026 7:11:25 AM Viewed: 8/10/2026 7:17:54 AM	

Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)	Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style
Using IP Address: 2600:387:f:a13::5 Signed using mobile

Signed: 8/10/2026 7:18:13 AM

Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via Docusign

Antonio Fernandez afbotanikocdd@gmail.com Chairman

(None)	Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style Using IP Address: 134.56.42.213		
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	8/5/2026 1:56:58 PM	
Certified Delivered	Security Checked	8/5/2026 1:57:50 PM	
Signing Complete	Security Checked	8/5/2026 2:00:39 PM	

Security Level: Email, Account Authentication

Sent: 8/5/2026 1:56:57 PM Viewed: 8/5/2026 1:57:50 PM Signed: 8/5/2026 2:00:39 PM

Envelope Summary Events	Status	Timestamps	
Completed	Security Checked	8/10/2026 7:18:13 AM	
Payment Events	Status	Timestamps