MINUTES OF MEETING EDEN HILLS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Eden Hills Community Development District was held on Wednesday, October 8, 2025, at 5:01 p.m. at the Lake Alfred Public Library, 245 N. Seminole Ave., Lake Alfred, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum:

Bobbie Shockley	Chairperson
Jessica Spencer	Vice Chairperson
Kristin Cassidy	Assistant Secretary
Lindsey Roden	Assistant Secretary
Emily Hazelrig	Assistant Secretary Also present were:
Jill Burns	District Manager, GMS
Savannah Hancock	District Counsel, Kilinski Van Wyk
Lauren Gentry	District Counsel, Kilinski Van Wyk
Marshall Tindall	GMS

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call
Ms. Burns called the meeting to order at 5:01 p.m. and called the roll. Five Supervisors were present constituting a quorum.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Public Comment Period
Ms. Burns noted that no members of the public were present.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of Minutes of the July 9, 2025,
Board of Supervisors Meeting
Ms. Burns presented the minutes from the July 9, 2025, Board of Supervisors meeting and asked for any questions, comments, or corrections. The Board had no changes to the minutes.

On MOTION by Ms. Roden, seconded by Ms. Shockley, with all in favor, the Approval of the Minutes of the July 9, 2025, Board of Supervisors Meeting were approved.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Presentation of KVW Memo Regarding
Updated Provisions to Rules of Procedure
Consideration of Resolution 2026-01 Setting a Public Hearing to Adopt Amended Rules of Procedure
Updated Rules of Procedure
Ms. Hancock reviewed the memo outlining updates to the District’s Rules of Procedure and Resolution 2026-01 which would set a public hearing for adoption. She explained that the updates brought the rules into compliance with new legislation effective July 1. She noted that the main change involved extending the notice periods for rulemaking from 28 days apart to 35 and 28 days, which required two notices a week apart. She added that because of the longer timeline the Board would need to schedule the public hearing for December 10 rather than November.

On MOTION by Ms. Shockley, seconded by Ms. Hazelrig, with all in favor, Resolution 2026-01 Setting a Public Hearing to Adopt Amended Rules of Procedure, was approved.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration  of  Resolution  2026-02
Authorizing Spending Limits
Ms. Burns reviewed Resolution 2026-02, which set spending limits for District officers outside of meetings. She added that it allowed the District manager to approve expenses up to
$2,500 per event, the Chair or Vice Chair (if the Chair was unavailable) to approve up to $10,000, and the District manager and Chair together to authorize up to $25,000, typically for emergencies such as storm damage repairs. Ms. Burns noted that the limits were standard.

On MOTION by Ms. Spencer, seconded by Ms. Shockley, with all in favor, Resolution 2026-02 Authorizing Spending Limits, was approved.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Resolution	2026-03
Consenting to the Petition Filed to Amend District Boundaries
Ms. Hancock explained that the developer had requested the removal of about 35 acres of planned commercial property from the District. Resolution 2026-03 authorized moving forward with a boundary amendment petition to remove that area. She noted the resolution and the related budget funding agreement would both be approved in substantial form.

On MOTION by Ms. Shockley, seconded by Ms. Hazelrig, with all in favor, Resolution 2026-03 Consenting to the Petition Filed to Amend District Boundaries, was approved in substantial form.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration of Funding Agreement for
Boundary Amendment
Ms. Burns noted that the boundary amendment costs would not be paid by the District but by Dunphy Development LLC. Ms. Hancock explained that Dunphy had received the District’s standard funding agreement and was reviewing it. She added that the Board had authorized staff and counsel to move forward with negotiating the agreement once Dunphy provided feedback.

On MOTION by Ms. Roden, seconded by Ms. Shockley, with all in favor, the Funding Agreement for Boundary Amendment, was approved.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Ratification of Fiscal Year 2025 Audit
Engagement Letter
Ms. Burns reviewed the Fiscal Year 2025 audit engagement letter, which renewed the previously awarded audit contract. She noted that the agreement had already been executed, and the total amount was not to exceed $3,350.

On MOTION by Ms. Spencer, seconded by Ms. Hazelrig, with all in favor, the Fiscal Year 2025 Audit Engagement Letter NTE $3,500, was ratified.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Consideration	of	Dewberry	Work
Authorization	for	Fiscal	Year	2026 Engineering Services
Ms. Burns stated that the Board had reviewed the updated Dewberry work authorization for Fiscal Year 2026, which included new engineering rates effective October 1.

On MOTION by Ms. Roden, seconded by Ms. Spencer, with all in favor, the Dewberry Work Authorization for Fiscal Year 2026 Engineering Services, was approved.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Attorney
Ms. Hancock reminded everyone to complete their ethics training by the end of the year and offered to resend the memo link if needed.
Engineer
Mr. Arrington said there was nothing else to report besides the work authorization.

Field Manager’s Report
Consideration of Proposal(s) for Entry Lighting
Mr. Tindall stated that the facilities were in good shape overall. He said the pool and clubhouse were clean, and that the pool furniture would be reslung during the off-season by a local vendor for about $105 per chair. Kids in the community had peeled off two restroom ADA signs under the lanai. Their parents were contacted, and they agreed to replace them. Temporary signs were put up in the meantime. Mr. Tindall noted that the landscaping looked good, with mowing and detailing up to standard. He said that a few trees in Phase 2B had died and were being monitored for replacement. The ponds were doing well overall, though the northwest pond showed some shoreline erosion that would be reviewed during the next budget cycle.
Mr. Tindall added that routine maintenance included cleaning the fences, mailbox area, and dock, with the dock also sealed and some loose boards resecured. Ongoing work included drain cleanouts, sidewalk grinding and replacement, and entrance sign cleaning before the holidays. Mr. Tindall stated that the landscape vendor requested a 3% increase, which had already been budgeted, bringing the monthly cost to $3,480.

On MOTION by Ms. Spencer, seconded by Ms. Hazelrig, with all in favor, the Proposal for Pool Vender Increase, was approved.

Ms. Burns discussed resident requests for better lighting at the Phase 2 entrances. Phase 1 already had wired lighting at its two monuments, but Phase 2’s three monuments did not have power access. Mr. Tindall explained that running electric service would be costly, as it would require boring under the road and assigning addresses to the parcels, with an estimated cost of at least $10,000 per sign based on past projects. As an alternative, Mr. Tindall proposed installing solar lights instead. The setup would include one solar panel on top of each monument with two downward-facing lights to illuminate both sides, at a total cost of $1,115. While solar lights wouldn’t be as bright as wired ones, they would still improve visibility and more could be added later if needed. The Board agreed that the cost could be covered by contingency funds, since it wasn’t a specifically budgeted item, and supported moving forward with the solar lighting option.

On MOTION by Ms. Spencer, seconded by Ms. Roden, with all in favor, the Entry Lighting, was approved.

District Manager’s Report
Approval of the Check Register
Ms. Burns presented the check register. She offered to take questions on any of the invoices.

On MOTION by Ms. Shockley, seconded by Ms. Spencer, with all in favor, the Check Register, was approved.

Balance and Income Statement
Ms. Burns noted that the financial statements were included in the package for review, for informational purposes. She asked if there were any questions; she would be happy to answer. No action is necessary from the Board.

Approval of Amenity Policy Clarification Regarding Access Card Issuance
Ms. Burns noted that the Board had approved a minor clarification to the amenity policy. The policy was updated to state that residents must register for access upon closing before receiving their access cards so that management can verify their status as residents or renters.

On MOTION by Ms. Shockley, seconded by Ms. Spencer, with all in favor, the Approval of Amenity Policy Clarification Regarding Access Card Issuance, was approved.

Consideration of Resident Request for Little Library
Ms. Burns stated that a resident had requested permission to install a Little Library on a small CDD tract near their corner lot by the entrance. The Board had reviewed the request and noted that, as done in other communities, the District attorney could prepare a simple license agreement allowing the installation while making the resident responsible for all costs, maintenance, and stocking. She added that the agreement would also let the District revoke permission or have it removed if needed.

On MOTION by Ms. Spencer, seconded by Ms. Roden, with all in favor, Authorizing District Counsel to Prepare a License Agreement for a Little Library, was approved.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Other Business
There being no comments, the next item followed.

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisors' Requests and Audience
Comments
Resident spoke during public comment and brought up two issues. It was first clarified that the unlit entrances are serviced by Tampa Electric, not Duke, and noted that the parcels already have District-owned addresses listed on the county property appraiser’s site. The resident had asked the Board to reconsider adding electricity to those monuments so that Phase 1 and Phase 2 are treated fairly, saying it was probably a developer oversight that power wasn’t included. They also talked about erosion and herbicide damage behind their property. The resident stated that the District's spraying had killed vegetation up to two feet into their yard, damaging plants and causing erosion that was now exposing their property line. They were worried that their fence might

eventually slide down the hill and said the issue had been going on for months without being fixed. They asked the Board to stop spraying on private property and to address the erosion before it worsened.
Ms. Burns clarified that the approval for HOA monument lighting applied to all phases, not just Phase 1. She noted that any HOA could add solar lights, wreaths, or decorations to their entrances. They also revisited the earlier concern about fence-line spraying, noting the Board had already discussed it with the landscaper. Ms. Burns added that the mowers avoid getting too close to private fences, and the vendor sprays those areas. They had given a price to switch to string-trimming instead, but the Board decided not to add that cost. The District engineer had inspected the area for erosion, and the Board was still waiting on their report.
The resident commented that they understood the concern about damaging fences or CDD property but said the issue could be handled differently. They explained that properly permitted fences must sit within the property line, meaning the strip of land on both sides belongs to the homeowner. They added that, because of that, trimming should be the homeowner’s responsibility, not the District’s. The resident suggested that the CDD stop spraying along fences and that the HOA enforce its existing rule requiring homeowners to maintain both sides of their fences. Ms. Burns agreed that enforcement would fall under the HOA, and the resident noted that the rule is already in place.
Ms. Burns continued discussing the ongoing fence line maintenance and erosion issues. The District’s landscaper was still spraying along fence lines to prevent mower damage since mechanical trimming had previously caused broken fence panels. Ms. Burns noted that if the spraying stopped, about six inches of vegetation would quickly grow along the fences. It was also clarified that fence line spraying was not part of the landscaper’s base contract, and the cost would be about $10 per fence line per month. Because new fences were being installed regularly, the total number and cost would continue to rise. Ms. Burns stated that the Board members had discussed access problems, as most residents have solid fences with no gates, making it difficult for them to maintain the back sides of their fences. Ms. Burns noted that they had agreed that enforcing HOA rules and CDD policies were separate challenges. Mr. Arrington was already reviewing several erosion areas, including spots where homeowners’ gutters and downspouts were discharging water onto CDD property. Ms. Burns said that recommendations should be ready for the next meeting,

possibly including re-sodding or contacting homeowners to redirect runoff. Once the report was received, Prince & Sons could provide proposals for sod work in the affected areas.
The Board discussed about how laying sod might help for a while during the rainy season, but it would die off without irrigation. Everyone agreed that running new irrigation or wells would be too expensive. Ms. Burns noted that the pond banks don’t have irrigation except for the drip lines that go to the trees. The resident said that only a few homes have steep slopes that are causing problems and asked that spraying stop because it’s killing grass on their property and worsening erosion. They also mentioned that some homeowners’ gutters might be sending water where they shouldn’t, which is against HOA rules. The Board decided to wait for the engineer’s report before taking any further action.

THIRTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment
Ms. Burns asked for a motion to adjourn.

On MOTION by Ms. Shockley, seconded by Ms. Hazelrig, with all in favor, the meeting was adjourned.

Secretary/Assistant Secretary	Chairman/Vice Chairman