Portofino Isles
	Community Development District	

http://www.portofinoislescdd.com

Juan Azcona, Chairman Frank Wilson, Vice Chairman
Rohn Timm, Assistant Secretary Edward Clark, Assistant Secretary

April 14, 2026

Seat 5: Juan Azcona – (C.)		
Seat 1: Frank Wilson – (V.C.)		
Seat 2: Rohn Timm – (A.S.)		
Seat 3: Open Seat		
Seat 4: Edward Clark – (A.S.)		

Portofino Isles
Community Development District
Updated Agenda

Tuesday	Newport Isles Clubhouse
April 14, 2026	1856 SW Newport Isles Blvd., Port St. Lucie, FL 34953 10:00 a.m.		Join the meeting now
Meeting ID: 252 546 916 427 11 and Passcode: p6GV7SB7
1 872-240-4685 and Phone Conference ID: 815 144 295#

Roll Call

Organizational Matters
Acceptance of Resignation Letter from Mr. Gerald Mirabile – Page 3

Consideration of Appointment of Supervisor(s) to Fill Unexpired Term(s) of Office – Seat #3 (11/2028)

Oath of Office for Elected/Newly Appointed Supervisor(s) – Page 4

Election of Officer(s)
Approval of the Minutes of the February 10, 2026 Meeting – Page 5
Consideration of Resolution #2026-01 Approving the Proposed Fiscal Year 2027 Budget and Setting the Public Hearing – Page 34
Discussion of Procedures for the General Election – Page 47
Staff Reports
Attorney

Engineer

Field Manager – Monthly Report – Page 48

CDD Manager

Financial Reports
Approval of Check Register – Page 52

Approval of Unaudited Financials – Page 56

Supervisors Requests and Audience Comments

Adjournment

Meetings are open to the public and may be continued to a time, date and place certain. For more information regarding this CDD please visit the website: http://www.portofinoislescdd.com

From: Gerald Mirabile <runner149@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2026 4:14:53 PM
To: Paul Winkeljohn <pwinkeljohn@gmssf.com>; Jennifer McConnell <jmcconnell@gmssf.com>; John Jado
<johnjado19 51@yahoo.com>; Frank Wilson <frw@wwconsult.net>; juan azcona <jazcona@xperienceusa.com>
		
Cc: Zita Donnelly <rosita149@gm ail.com>; Gerald Mir abile <runner149@gmail.com>

Subject: Formal Resignation from Supervisor of Portofino CDD
Date: Friday March 20, 2026 Mr. Paul Winklejohn
District Manager
Portofino Isles Community Development District

Dear Mr. Winklejohn and Members of the Board of Supervisors,
Please accept this letter as my formal resignation from my position as Supervisor on the Board of Supervisors of the Portofino Isles Community Development District, effective April 1, 2026.

I began my term in 2022 and have appreciated the opportunity to serve the residents of the district and work with fellow supervisors and district staff. This letter is intended to formally vacate my seat on the Board, and I understand the remaining supervisors may fill the vacancy in accordance with applicable Florida law.

Thank you for the opportunity to serve the community.

Gerald Mirabile
2206 SW Newport Isles Blvd
Port St. Lucie

1

Oath of Office
I, 	 a resident of the State of Florida and citizen of the United States of America, and being a Supervisor of the Portofino Isles Community Development District and a recipient of public funds on behalf of the District, do hereby solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Florida, and will faithfully, honestly and impartially discharge the duties devolving upon me in the office of Supervisor of the Portofino Isles Community Development District, 	, Florida.
Signature 	 Mailing Address 	

County of Residence: 	 Telephone #: 	 E-mail: 	 Date: 	

Sworn	to	(or	affirmed)	before	me	this			day	of		,	by
	 whose signature appears hereinabove.

Notary Public State of Florida

Print Name

My Commission expires Personally known 	 or produced identification 	
Type of identification	

MINUTES OF MEETING PORTOFINO ISLES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Portofino Isles Community Development District was held on Tuesday, February 10, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. at 1856 SW Newport Isles Blvd., Port St. Lucie, Florida 34953

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Juan Azcona	Chairman
Frank Wilson	Vice Chairman
Rohn Timm	Assistant Secretary
Edward (Ted) Clark	Assistant Secretary
Gerald Mirabile	Assistant Secretary Also present were:
Ginger Wald	District Counsel
Paul Winkleljohn	District Manager
John Jado	Field Supervisor
Roberto Cabrera	District Engineer

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS	Roll Call
Mr. Winkeljohn called the roll and stated we have a quorum.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS	Approval of the Minutes of the
November 4, 2025 Meeting
Mr. Winkeljohn: Your minutes from your November 4th meeting were circulated, if those are in order a motion is appreciated.

On Motion by Mr. Wilson seconded by Mr. Azcona with all in favor, the Minutes of the November 4, 2025 Meeting were approved.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS	Staff Reports
Mr. Winkeljohn: Staff reports, that brings us to you Ginger.

Attorney – Discussion and Approval of District Counsel Fee
Ms. Wald: So we have for you, and I think it’s in your packets under our report, every three years we evaluate based upon the CPI, the cost of living indexes that go through as to whether we should make the request to raise our hourly rates, and that’s how we charge you based on those hourly rates. So, what you have in your packet is a letter that we sent to your District manager that we’re requesting the increase of these rates but, not to go into effect until your next fiscal year, and your next fiscal year begins October 1, 2026. The reasoning behind that is so you can take into account any increases that you possibly are going to have for your next fiscal year as you proceed forward with adoption of that proposed budget, so that’s why we do this early because this is crazy early, and you’re saying why so early. Why so early is so really the District manager can take that into consideration in proceeding forward for you folks. I do not see that this is going to cause, and I’ll obviously defer to Paul on this but, I do not believe that this is going to cause any increase, or if an increase is going to be maybe $200 for the next fiscal year. The rates that we have right now are $275 for partners, and $225 for associates, this would be a CPI increase of 5.3%, so it’s still well below what a normal CPI would be. So, in that we are making a request for beginning next fiscal year, October 1, 2026 as stated for $300 per hour for partners, and $250 per hour for associates, and I’ll answer any questions that you may have.
Mr. Azcona: Question, this would be like a 3 year agreement?
Ms. Wald: It’s not an agreement, we work at will, so you can terminate my law firm services at any time.
Mr. Azcona: With no rhyme or reason?
Ms. Wald: Correct, no rhyme or reason, you can terminate for convenience, if you don’t like us, you don’t like the way my hair looks today, or whatever, you can go ahead and terminate. What we always request is if you don’t enjoy the services of one counsel, we have others that can be provided, and we would always make that request if that didn’t work, and again, it’s a request. We don’t ask for these every year, sometimes you see them from your vendors every year, and again, as I said before, we do this well in advance so you can take it into consideration and also again, to make a determination whether it’s

even going to cost any type of increase specifically for your budget for the next fiscal year because we do not meet that much, and I believe most of the bulk of your work is probably going to be this fiscal year with the project that we’re going to be talking about soon, that’s really where the work is going to come into play.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, and another question because you mentioned the CPI on a three year revision, obviously we can cancel at any time so that we can renegotiate at any time but, I would rather do like a yearly revision for CPI because that could quite increase.
Ms. Wald: And we don’t always ask for the CPI, in fact most of the time we don’t, and in this case we haven’t.
Mr. Franklin: Just for clarity, when was the last time your firm raise the rates for partner and associates?
Ms. Wald: 2023, it’s in the letter.
Mr. Winkeljohn: And before that it was even longer, that was a huge span, it was almost 7 years.
Ms. Wald: It was 7 or 8 years at that period of time.
Mr. Winkeljohn: So, I’ve been your manager since you were created and that’s 20 years now, and this is I think the third time you’ve had to discuss a rate increase with our attorney.
Mr. Azcona: And then with the other partners and associates, obviously some work is done by paralegals, is that blended into an equation?
Ms. Wald: We actually do not use paralegals in our practice, my firm does, but in our practice due to the fact that it’s highly specialized, you have to understand government, and so the work that we do, we have secretaries that perform work but, we don’t charge for that, I mean I type my own agreements but, some of the partners do not, but we don’t charge for their time, and so we don’t actually use paralegals. Paralegals are great for research, legal research, this is such a specialized field of law that needs to be done, and if it is done what happens is people come to us to ask us what our opinion is in regard to the interpretation of the law.
Mr. Winkeljohn: And she did open the door for the budget part of it, and there’s a couple of things I can say very profoundly of why the budget will not be affected, one of which is you all have been very consistent on the Board as Board members, so your experience and you’re fluidity and efficiency is really high. Second to that, and this was

the biggest one I was going to add is your HOA stability has been incredibly beneficial to your costs from using an attorney, from my time, all across the board and applause to you all for figuring out that and getting that done, and the fact that Ginger and I both have worked together for this District since the beginning, we’re efficient we don’t use a lot of her time to be honest, it’s unnecessary, so I think you’re in excellent position.
Mr. Azcona: Yes, I know we are in excellent position but, it’s our due diligence to also ask those questions, so it’s the direction of the Board, we’re five people and nobody is above anybody else, I’m just asking those questions. Then also they can have rapidly changing and evolving AI and I’m assuming you guys are also integrating that into your practice.
Ms. Wald: AI is a dangerous thing, you have to set up within your firm the ethical standards for AI, and so that is what we have undertaken now, until that is place, we do not utilize AI. It’s a little different for government as well, so for government, almost everything is a public record, almost, so the documents that we have, and we place directly into an advanced AI system, let’s say to create a contract, that’s fine, we can do that because they’re already public record, it’s not our confidential work product. If there is something confidential, let’s say something like litigation, then that cannot be inputted into AI because then that goes throughout the system, and that’s one of the concerns that we have. Luckily, again, for us, for our practice utilization of AI, it will come across but right now it’s not really something that we need to focus on too much because we are already have these agreements, we already have these contracts, we’ve already put them together over the years and have revised them so they stay directly in comparison with Florida Law. So, it’s plug and play, it’s taking the information that you have when I do like these small project agreements, I already have the format, it’s taking the information and placing it in there. Can I use AI, sure, but I can also have my assistant fill in the blanks.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, so when you guys are doing work with your assistants, you are not billing us any fees for the work performed by those assistants, you’re not billing those as hourly rates?
Ms. Wald: No, the assistants, all our work is billed and you don’t have our billing but you can have all of them if you want but, you will see we’ll have initials, so you’ll see mine as GW, or Scott was here at the last meeting and his are SCC, and to you’ll see our initials as going through, and exactly what we billed, that is all of our time. We review all of our

emails individually as we receive them, we review specifically all actual correspondence that’s sent to us and we prepare all of our agreements, all of our documents, all of our reports. My assistant that I utilize, she basically gets me to where I need to go from point A to point B but, I do all my own work because I can actually type faster than most assistants that I’ve had over the years, except one. It’s all how the attorney wants to utilize their time and their practice, Mike does everything into his little machine, and the assist types it up, I don’t do that. It’s a personal thing, so my time is my time, it might be more, it might be less, but I’ve been practicing law for 30 some odd years, and so I pretty know what I’m doing. If you have a new associate which we do not have for this District, but let’s say you had a new associate, yes you’re going to see more time because it’s going to take them longer to do things but, then we review their time and we cut it because we know if it’s going to take us an hour to prepare something, it took them 3 hours, we’re not going to bill you for the 3 hours, we’re billing you for the hour.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, and this will become effective October of this year? Ms. Wald: Yes, October 1st, your next fiscal year.
Mr. Azcona: Ok.
Ms. Wald: And that to me is the most important one, Mike and I talked about this last year and we were talking about getting it out of the way, let’s wait for the next fiscal year and let’s do it early, let’s get these letters out in February, one, so if you need additional information it can be provided as backup. Two, the input of the District manager in putting together the next budget, that proposed budget that you’ll be adopting sometime in the spring, to look at those things and make sure it makes sense and then if it doesn’t, then obviously it can be adjusted.
Mr. Azcona: Alright, so those were my questions, I have don’t have any other questions.
Ms. Wald: I’m always happy to answer any questions that you have. Mr. Mirabile: I make a motion to approve the fee.

On Motion by Mr. Mirabile seconded by Mr. Wilson with all in favor, accepting the increase to District Counsel fee effective October 1, 2026 was approved.

Mr. Winkeljohn: Very good, any other items for your report?

Ms. Wald: None.

Engineer
Memorandum – BMAP Draft Project Submittal List St. Lucie and Estuary BMAP
Update on Lake Bank Proposal
Mr. Winkeljohn: Moving on to the engineer, you have the rest of the agenda basically, so go ahead and start.
Mr. Cabrera: Thank you Paul. I’ll start with this BMAP, and update on the BMAP, and I’m going to kind of follow with the format of this report because when I talk about this without this I kind of ramble on from here to there. So, I think right before the last meeting in November FDEP had reached out to us, and this was statewide, actually just so you know a lot of things are changing in terms of water quality statewide for new projects significantly more strict water quality rules, and this is basically the first time I’ve seen something like this where the state is retroactively approaching local governments and communities and counties, and even FDOT asked them to retroactively take measures to improve the water quality that’s coming out of the water. So, we had a few meetings with them, we went back and forth, and frequently described what it is, so they came up with basically an action plan to reduce nitrogenic phosphorous for many basins, the basins we could charge to you is St. Lucie River and Estuary basin and a third basin, and they came up with some goals of total pounds of nitrogen and phosphorous to be removed, then based on the land use of the different contributing entities into it, they prorated that and they assigned us the total nitrogen and phosphorous to be removed. Then they asked us to submit what I would describe as a planning level project list of ways that Portofino Isles would get to its fair share of total nitrogen and total phosphorous to be reduced, and that was due to them on January 16th, so this memo was kind of prepared slightly ahead of that but, you guys know what we were planning on doing. Then within that project list we have the ability to know this is a fully planned project, this is still kind of a wish list, there’s a wide range of options there. On the bullet point #4, the list that we provided is not a set in stone list of projects, we have the ability to go in and revise it, we have the ability to go int here and remove projects from the list and we have the ability to go in there and argue for credits, so that’s something I just wanted to mention. We started that process of maximizing the credits that Portofino Isles is going to get because Portofino Isles is going to get credits. So the first time that nutrient became part of kind of like a statewide rule was

in 2011, this community was permitted significantly before then, so we did get a concession from FDEP during the last month or so where they’ll give us credit for anything, so let’s say we’re required to provide “X” number of acre or feet of volume of lake storage and we provided 25% more than what we were required to, so anything that was incidentally required but gets us to the total removal, they will not give us credit but, anything above and beyond they’ll allow us to claim credit on that. So, those are things that we will kind of argue and do the match and justify to them. I think we talked about, the exact percentages where we’re at and where they want us to be at on page 5 of this memo, I also have total pounds if any of you are interested in that. Bullet point #8, there was a pathway to get an extension on this, we didn’t end up getting the extension, we submitted the list. One of the things about the extension is, and the reason I brought this up is, and this is true for Isles and many other communities, their methodology and how they came up with the total amount of nitrogen and phosphorous, they created a model that doesn’t line up with numbers that we came up with, and we had a lot of discussion back and forth with them, now they’re asking us in some cases to remove more nutrients than what are here, I think was generated by a communities, so this is one of the reasons we brought up possibly getting an extension. The project list that we came up with, we prioritize projects that are not capital cost projects but, maintenance projects, and I’ll just jump right into it. So, one of the big things we got from them is education efforts, we were able to claim education efforts without having to do any additional public outreach ourselves, so we just argued that we can piggyback whatever the county and the city is doing. So, right off the bat we got I think it was about 10% towards our total off of that. The shoreline stabilization, which is the next topic in the agenda, this is something that we said we were taking a look at, planning on doing. Right now based on our last discussion we’re not really looking at the shorelines or anything like that but, it’s for the pilot project but it’s something we might consider down the road. The empty cleanouts this is something that I’m starting to recommend for different communities is going out there and cleaning structures, you can go out there and vacuum structures. A lot of communities do it in response to issues but, if we can come up with like a 5-year ongoing plan of going out there and cleaning structures and vacuuming that debris we can get credit for that.
Mr. Azcona: Structures, what do you mean, the pipes?

Mr. Cabrera: No, the stormwater structures, so wherever there’s a culvert or a manhole, you have a system of pipes that interconnect between all the lakes, so wherever you have one of those, they usually have a sump area at the bottom of the structure, and usually people only go out there and look at them when there’s a blockage of some sort.
Mr. Azcona: So, that’s different from when we clean it with divers? Mr. Winkeljohn: It’s exactly the same.
Mr. Wilson: We have reports and that was probably one of our first target areas.
Mr. Cabrera: You can also vacuum out culverts, the culverts themselves, they get sediment inside of them.
Mr. Mirabile: So, my question was have we ever done it before.
Mr. Cabrera: Not that I’m aware of and it’s something that I’m starting to see in a few communities and it’s kind of what I said in response to issue type of things but, if you wanted to be proactive and do something that benefits us and it’s a maintenance item, you probably should look at it.
Mr. Jado: Can I ask you a question, the debris that would come out of that, is that recycled into the lake?
Mr. Cabrera: No, they specifically do not want it in the lake.
Mr. Wilson: Right because they’re looking at higher levels of nitrogen and phosphate that settled in the sludge, and that’s where we get the credit, if you can take the sludge out.
Mr. Azcona: So you first do an inspection to see.
Mr. Cabrera: Yes, I need to do an inspection so what I’ve done in one or two communities is we come up with a program, so first we identify all the structures that need to be looked at and then do an inspection like you said, and come up with a program of, we need to look at the structure once every 5 years. Then you don’t have to do them all on year 1 but, you kind of space them out.
Mr. Wilson: You could do a comparison, 3 years ago we went after the storm drains, and we did it 2 years in a row so we could understand, we did it once, and then we did it later to see where we had every use of that pipe, and now we’re not going to do it for a while, and that would be the same approach with the interconnections, look again and then determine is 5 years appropriate, and for us maybe it’s 15, if it’s been 25 since we’ve done it, and there’s been no problems. If we had the interconnection pipe, and we’re at

50%, well we probably don’t want to get to 50% again, so something below 25 years is the correct version.
Mr. Cabrera: And these would need to be worked out with the FDEP but, to get credit for them they would want to see it reoccurring.
Mr. Wilson: Right.
Mr. Jado: Can I ask you a question, so if I have a pipe that runs across the road, this one is sitting 2’ above the bottom, the other side is sitting in the mud, do they want us to clean a certain parameter around that area so that we free up that culvert so it’s not sitting in the mud.
Mr. Cabrera: Right now they’re not asking us to do any of this, they asked us to propose things that we may do and then do the math behind it and come up a total nutrient load that we estimate to be removed. So, I mean if we decide that this area is like a big issue or whatever, then maybe we can argue that.
Mr. Wilson: I think at least initially a better way for the CDD to look at it is what activities already occur and what ones do we know that we need to do to fulfill our responsibilities, and with those can we take credit. So, the connection pipes would be an opportunity where we should be able to do it, and there’s a potential to take credit.
Mr. Winkeljohn: All good, yes.
Mr. Cabrera: The next one is storm inlet identification, now a lot of times we have residents that have yard drains, in the back of their yards and they don’t really know they’re there, and they’re not maintained, so this is a minor one that we can get some points for. Next, the baffle boxes, this is kind of low on my list, this is something that is starting to be kind of popular. So, a baffle box kind of streams some of that debris before discharges out into the outfall. There’s a second generation baffle box that’s out there today, that one also removes nutrients. The next program, this is something I think we should look at in conjunction with our HOA partners which is implementing a fertilization program, they have all sorts of documentation on when to fertilize, how often, what type of fertilizers to use during the year. So, if we can partner up, and this is something we can do ourselves but, if we could enlist other members of the community to help with that we could also get credit for that. The next one is something that we’re already doing, this is stormwater harvesting, so this is a matter of making a claim and maybe enhancing what

we do here. This is basically just using the stormwater lakes as irrigation, so we do a version of this, can we do it more, I’m not sure but, this is something we can get credit for.
Mr. Azcona: This is for the pipes that we’re using to irrigate lawns. Mr. Cabrera: Yes.
Mr. Wilson: So, right now, if we looked at it, it would be the water we take at the front lake that does the irrigation of Brigantine. What we would like to do, or what we’ll do going forward is because our permit is combined with the HOA, we would get a head count of the number of homes whose lawn irrigation goes in and sucks it off the ponds, to be able to add that into this credit.
Mr. Cabrera: The argument for the credit, yes.
(At this point several people were talking at one time, and no one conversation could be heard)

Mr. Azcona: I know these things but, I want to make a note about that, and I don’t know if you want me to bring that now.
Mr. Cabrera: Sure.
Mr. Azcona: With regard to the lakes, I mean every single homeowner, or most of them have a lake behind them, they use these types for irrigation, and there are many instances, like right now, the lakes are low, and if it keeps going down it may be an issue, and then we have no control about the amount of water the homeowners are using in many instances. I have two specific cases that I see, and I told the homeowners and they take an endless amount of time to remedy the problem with broken pipes, so it’s just broken pipes, and it’s basically water from the lake going down the gutter. So, I would say it should be done on a case by case basis and we need to proactively send a letter to all the homeowners and put them on notice that they are responsible, or however we want to phrase is but, basically that the water they are using from the lakes, and they have to have some limitations of usage, or they need to make sure that if there are any broken pipes or anything like that, so I don’t know how we want to communicate that.
Ms. Wald: Isn’t that controlled by the HOA?
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, it’s a HOA role but, we could certainly partner on that.
Ms. Wald: In connection with the HOA I think is how it should be done because the HOA can fine.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes.

Mr. Wilson: Right, but is there anything on the books from a legal perspective that says a homeowner that has this installed from the builder from day one, “X” limitations on its use?
Ms. Wald: If it’s CDD we can control it through the rules and regulations. If it’s not, and it’s HOA and it’s through their declaration, you have to look at the declaration to see if there’s limitations.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Look the HOA rules up. Ms. Wald: Yes.
Mr. Azcona: I mean I think it’s our responsibility as the CDD.
Mr. Wilson: I’m just thinking about it, if I’m a homeowner that gets a letter and looks at it, and I just look at my yard.
Mr. Azcona: But you know what we can do as managers of the lakes we can say back to the attorney, we are shutting down your pipe because you’re not doing what we’re telling you that is right.
Ms. Wald: So, for instance, you use all the water in your lakes and you can’t utilize for irrigation because there is a specific purpose for the lakes as a stormwater retention system and you can’t utilize that, and you’re going to have to put a cease and desist on the utilization of the sprinkler system, you advise in advance this has happened to us up north when we had saltwater intrusion, and so we had to stop, we had to inform every homeowner and so they could irrigate their landscaping because that’s their responsibility at least in this other community, they were all different, with city water, and their own sprinkler system, and sometimes it has to happen, and there’s really nothing you can do because that’s not the main purpose for the lakes, it’s a secondary purpose but, I think what is being provided as to credits is having in place from what I’m understanding in reading this now, with the conjunction with the HOA because it is important for the HOA because that’s where the control comes over the utilization of private property, we don’t have it. So, in conjunction with the HOA and the CDD is making sure that those rules and regulations on in place, that provides not only doing what should be done, and the ability to enforce but, also getting the credits that we’re talking about today.
Mr. Azcona: I think for the credits obviously we need to do a count and then determine credits, and I’m ok dealing with the HOA and so forth, but I don’t want to solely rely on the HOA for something that may be affecting the health of the lakes. If the HOA,

obviously, if they have difficulty for whatever reason enforcing it, and they’re noticing themselves, I mean the way it is, I’m not even going to comment the way it is but, as the CDD I don’t want to jeopardize having issues with the lakes because we have to wait for the HOA to do enforcement or send the letters, I think this is something that affects directly the CDD and we actually have enforcement, or maybe I’m wrong, that we could say, if you are using the water of the lakes as a homeowner, you should see that as a privilege, not as a right, and the CDD is giving the option to use this water and if you don’t abide by the regulations that we establish for proper usage we’re just going to shut you down and then you just connect to the city, that’s the way I see it, again I may be wrong.
Mr. Winkeljohn: And hopefully that’s so far down the road we never get to it because we can get to these credits and meet the requirement.
Mr. Wilson: Two different items, the first one is going to happen for the credits. The second one is lack of maintenance resulting in waste of lake water.
Mr. Azcona: Right, that’s the thing, and not having to rely on the HOA to do something that it’s under our jurisdiction, it’s under our responsibility, and we actually have a way of enforcing. So, if the HOA can incorporate and enforce it, fantastic, but I wouldn’t rely on the HOA.
Mr. Mirabile: So, you’re talking about irrigation systems that would be broken in half is basically what you’re talking about, and it’s very difficult to identify that because irrigation is only running an hour, let’s say, and maybe the front is running 20 minutes. I’ve seen it, the only way the HOA can enforce it is if it’s going to be reportable, and the only people that are really going to report it are the people sitting at this table and you know report it to the office but, we have to go through the logistics of this, we have to kind of figure out how the HOA can enforce it.
Mr. Wilson: I think that one request is not to have the HOA enforce it because it doesn’t feel that it’s actually been addressed.
Mr. Mirabile: But I think we’ve been told that it’s pretty much the HOA responsibility because they have fining capacity, so I mean if it doesn’t fall on the HOA and if it’s not reported, then it’s just going to continue.
Mr. Azcona: But in this instance actually the CDD has the power of enforcement because you can just cut their water and what I’m saying is it’s happening and I’m not saying to go around and do a manual inspection of everything, I’m saying it doesn’t cost

much to send a letter and put people on notice as if they are already not abiding, or they’re not repairing their sprinklers that are needed. So, I would say, send a blanket letter and say, listen this is the situation, and if this does not apply to you because you are abiding by the rules, you’re watering your lawn correctly but, if you are turning on the water for “X” amount of hours per day or “X” amount of days, or if your sprinkler is broken be aware that you are on notice, if you don’t repair this and fix this, then a specific action will be taken. So, that way we put everybody on notice that we’ve already given them a warning, rather than finding out and then we have to locate one person, then we have to send them the letter and then work with them, so we’re one step ahead of the game. So, I don’t know if that’s a possibility of the CDD sending that letter to those homeowners draining water from the lake.
Mr. Clark: How would you shut of their water without putting a meter or a valve or something on there that you control?
Mr. Wilson: That’s the question, so does the CDD actually have authority to go on private land and cut the water.
Ms. Wald: I think you have to make the determination first is how it is being provided, whose pipes they are, and how is it being provided, how does the system actually work because until you make that determination, and where, because I know from what Paul has explained to me and Roberto explained to me, it’s different in different places which makes it a little more complicated as to one system. So, you have to make that determination from a practical standpoint, non-legal, I can give you legal but, now I’m just saying practical, from a practical basis how does this actually work.
Mr. Wilson: So, for the majority of single family homeowners on the lakes, they have a pump that is their property, with suction and discharge lines, the pump is located next to their house, with their power supply and they’re controlling it. The suction line is PVC that travels underground, exits underground below normal water level in the lake, and gets a suction on the lake. In my experience when individuals have had issues with their suction piping, it cracks, individuals have spent their money to do it. I would assume based on all of that, that from sprinkler head to bottom of suction pipe is owned by the homeowner.
Ms. Wald: Again, I think we’re guessing a lot of things. I understand what you’re saying, I think again, that determination 100% has to be made, then that could definitely be

the case and make that determination, and the with that after that has been discovered and documented is what rules and regulations that this CDD needs to put in place for enforcement, I think that’s really what you’re discussing right now.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Which is what we might have to head towards. Mr. Wald: You might have to do a full rules and regulations.
Mr. Wilson: And also, I definitely see there’s some issues, I haven’t seen them all, I haven’t seen a property that had the same issue for years, and I don’t know if you looked at the community around the lakes right now, if we have 400 homes, if we would find 10% of them that had an issue, I would say it’s probably in the 2% or 3% range. So, I’m not saying that it doesn’t happen, I just want to make sure our response is appropriate for the magnitude.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, and I’d like to ask the Board to end here, and let staff get a little bit of legwork on this, we have other considerations, especially the quantity of water that’s being withdrawn, it’s really important to us.
Mr. Cabrera: Alright, so I’ll continue down the list. The next item is the aquatic vegetation harvesting, we do a version of this so this is a credit opportunity. So, anywhere where we mechanically remove dead plants or just invasive plants inside our waters, so if we can quantify that somehow on a yearly basis, there’s an opportunity to claim credit on that.
Mr. Wilson: Ultimately, it’s removing and transporting it from properties, so we have done that numerous times, as a matter of fact almost every year. (inaudible comment)
Mr. Winkeljohn: Like I said at the beginning, we’re way ahead of them.
Mr. Cabrera: And just as a side note of the community that we do, I’m not saying that we worry about Portofino Isles as being able to kind of meet this criteria but, if we still have to go through the exercise of justifying everything we do, and maybe supplementing it with one or two new things that we haven’t done yet. The last item on this list is something that we’ve been doing, control structure modifications around town, and I don’t think this is an issue at Portofino Isles so I have it as a wish list and in a world where we’re seeing really high water, a lot of big rain events, people started to be concerned about the lake levels during the rainy season, we’ve been arguing for successfully getting adjustable control structures so you can go out there and open it in anticipation of a big storm event. The last one we did we were able to argue where we don’t need that, so with the

arguments we’ve been making, it’s kind of dual purpose for this, we could do a control structure where we have that, giving us a little bit extra feet of storage for a big storm but, we can also keep it closed especially when the nutrients are the highest is what we call the first wash, so come April or May when we start getting those first storms and we have the stuff on the roads, that first wash is the most nutrient kind of concentrated water, so if we could have a structure where we don’t allow it to discharge and we increase the time it’s in the lakes and let it settle to the bottom of the ponds, that’s a credit. This would be a cost item, the last one we did of this was about $100,000 for design, permitting and construction, so this is at the bottom of the list, and there are others that we didn’t list.
Mr. Winkeljohn: One of the side benefits that I would recommend that we look into is converting our system onto a GIS capability so that we can electronically have it on our website, see everything, know where it is, collect data on it, and use that in a much more efficient way to handle and manage our program.
Mr. Cabrera: Yes, and I think one of the items that Frank and I were discussing last week, especially as this thing kind of starts rolling out is, and it’s not in this report, but we have another community that is doing this, and speaking to your comment on data is, doing our own water quality testing so if in the event, a year or two down the road we kind of reach a disagreement where they’re talking about this concentration, we have our own data we can choose to kind of release the way that it’s needed.
Mr. Wilson: So, the vision is, so right now, we have very still lakes, (inaudible comment) So, they go to get a sample, and then when we get into the rainy season, and we have that first wash, we ought to grab a sample, and then in the summer when we’re just back to sporadic rain it’s going to rain every day at 1:00 o’clock, grab a sample, so we’ll have the trifecta that should be representative.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, perfect, and we’ve done some testing like that, we can add to our lake contractor to pull some of that.
(At this point several people were talking at one time, and no one conversation could be heard)

range.

Mr. Wilson:	So, order of magnitude, we’re talking about $100,000 or $150,000

Mr. Cabrera: And it’s merely to have data. Mr. Azcona: But it’s getting done now, or not?

Mr. Wilson: No, so we start on that frequency to get some baseline data, so in the future if we’re challenged with this reduction rate based on this suction, we come back with, we believe your suction is flawed based on this data.
Mr. Cabrera: And just to be clear, they’re not asking for this, actually they exclusively told me to now argue that during this project list, it’s too high of a timing level, but down the road it’s something that I think might benefit us to have that in our back pocket.
Mr. Winkeljohn: I totally agree, yes.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, I have one quick question, the control structure, you said that’s in the event of extreme weather events like you raise it, like kind of a levee?
Mr. Wilson: So, it would be variable weir, so you put in a new concrete structure, with a weir that’s adjustable, and ours is fixed right now. The concept would be before the event, you’d drain another foot off the lake so it gives us 70 acre feet more capacity, then you raise it, and if your normal level was what I call zero foot, you raise it up an additional foot, and now we don’t get that additional storm capability but, we can align where it would sit there so we have low time where we have a significant amount of nutrients.
Mr. Azcona: Got it, and what’s the current drainage mechanism for the lakes, do we have any that we can actually, other than the natural drainage?
Mr. Cabrera: No, there’s nothing, it’s a structure that has predetermined elevation per permit and when it reaches that elevation it alerts concern.
Mr. Wilson: So, the lakes are all interconnected, so they lie altogether, and then the lake that goes all the way out to Rosser, the long lake here, on the back end of it is the control structure with a fixed weir and that’s why our entire community, when the water level gets high, that’s what maintains it and not getting higher, that’s the fallout.
Mr. Azcona: And then I see the list, spring weather events, keep reoccurring more often than not, could we have in the event something were to happen that water levels rise tremendously and then there’s one season that we have a lot of storms and we anticipate that it’s going to cause flooding, could we have any kind of emergency contingency plan of big pumps suctioning water out the lakes into the gutter system?
Mr. Wilson: I believe the way our system is designed, so right now we’re at a fixed maximum level, and we drop it, and then I believe in the end, we end up in canal C-23.
Mr. Cabrera: Yes, you do end up in canal C-23, that’s correct.

flood.

Mr. Wilson: So, even in a severe water event our neighborhood is designed not to

Mr. Azcona: Ok.
Mr. Wilson: All you’re looking at is a difference of like this much, so as long as you

don’t flood the canal, they can move water in the canal either to the center of the state, or out to the river.
Mr. Cabrera: And I’ll say this, we do District services for many communities throughout the county, and this last year was a dry rainy season, the year before that was a rainy season, we had and I would have to go back and look but, we probably had three 20-year storms that year, so we were getting calls all around town where the water levels were high, it’s flooding here, it’s flooding there, and I never had a call from Portofino Isles.
Mr. Jado: Isn’t it part of the county cleaning that the county cleans the canals to make sure they don’t overgrow so all the water can flow.
Mr. Cabrera: It’s all part of it, I guess some of the communities had extensive issues, some of them had it just where it was building up, different part of the system are designed to handle different types of storms, and usually actually the road inlets, they’ll only do like a 10 year storm, so before they start holding a little bit of water up to the curb level but, they do want that peace of mind that’s something that can be looked at is an operable control structure, do we need it, I consider it a wish list item.
Mr. Wilson: Well, there are two items, one is where is the modified outfall, or adjustable outfall, and the second would be a pump station.
Mr. Cabrera: Yes, and that would be a more unlikely permit to get from those guys. Mr. Winkeljohn: That’s the harder one by a long shot, and I do them all the time,
like really bad, the design, this one is perfectly designed, you never had a flood, the ones that have had floods, trying to get a pump, they have to model everywhere that water could go.
Mr. Cabrera: Right, you have to show a history of flooding within the community or whatever.
Mr. Wilson: Ok.
Mr. Cabrera: Alright, so that concludes the BMAP update, I just want to say that FDEP confirmed receipt of our submittal and they didn’t have any questions so far.
Mr. Winkeljohn: So, to be updated as their program is put into more focus.

Mr. Cabrera: By the way, their program keeps getting challenged, so I wouldn’t be surprised if it gets challenged in a couple of months again.
Mr. Winkeljohn: This is the new normal I think for a while.
Mr. Cabrera: I’m going to tell you about the lake banks, I got a proposal for Sea & Shoreline, you guys remember I initially requested unit pricing from 5 contractors, and Sea & Shoreline specializes in this type of work, it’s basically the only type of work that they do that I’m aware of. They were among the two lowest bidders, it was them and Environmental Land Development. I met with the Environmental Land Development guy out there this morning, he still wants to send me a proposal but, he wanted to come out and look at it again since it’s been a little while. So, the proposal you’re looking at right now is to do a geoweb, and then I asked him to break it down into lakes, pieces of lake 8, 9, and 10. This again is the priority areas are, so for example you look at the map for lake 8, the worst part of lake 8 is on the east side, but there are no buildings on the east side, so we’re not seeing that as a priority area for now. Lake 9, they walked it this morning, that one is pretty steep all the way around, the north, the west and the east side. Then on lake 10, the worst part of lake 10 is the west bank by far, they’re actually kind of steep in those areas that the color shows but, it’s not as bad as probably lake 8 and 9. Sea & Shoreline, they’re ready to start it within 30 days, they’re timeline for this work would be about 3 weeks for lake 8, 7 weeks for lake 9 and 5 weeks for lake 10, and their work effort comes with a 1 year warranty after they complete the work.
Mr. Azcona: So, you’re saying we have something already scheduled? Mr. Cabrera: No, if you were to authorize it today, this is their timeline.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, I’m going to let Frank comment, he’s the expert on this, the only thing I want to say is that I would like to receive a least a recommendation too, we’ve been talking about the lake banks project for a while, I know it requires due diligence and planning and all of that, but I think this meeting we can draft specific concrete steps to move forward and a timeline.
Mr. Wilson: So right now, we have received 4 out of a requested potential 5. We have identified the target areas we want to address first, we’ve also have 5 widely used options, we’ve identified the repair option in the geoweb. The only question that remains here are, do we wait for the fifth proposal to consider, if we do, we get the fifth, I would lean on our engineer’s opinion of the appropriate contractor versus price.  At the last

meeting we did approved a not to exceed value of $195,000, so just in conversation do we want to wait for the fifth one.
Mr. Azcona: I mean is it going to come in 2 days, or do we have to wait a while?
Mr. Cabrera: It will come by the end of the week is what he told me. Now, I’ll say this about the fifth contractor, he is qualified to do the work, he does a lot of local government work, I don’t know that his specialty is restoration work the way these guys do restoration work. He does more new lakes, I would say probably is their strength compared to Sea & Shoreline.
Mr. Azcona: So, we have 4 solid proposals and just waiting basically that this fifth one it’s not necessarily the best possible option based on their background.
Mr. Cabrera: Well, let me clarify, so at the last meeting we were requested unit pricing from five contractors, the two lowest unit rates were Sea & Shoreline and this other guy, Environmental Land Development. So, Sea & Shoreline sent us a proposal that they’re willing to kind of sign off on, I’m still waiting on a proposal from Environmental Land Development. Now, I was telling Frank when we spoke, in part I will accept responsibility, and I was kind of focusing on the BMAP thing over the last month or two, so kind of dragged my feet a little bit on the lake shorelines. I would like to wait and see just to see where his pricing comes in but, their unit rate pricing was very comparable to Sea & Shoreline, and just based on their specialty and the work that they do, I would probably say, Sea & Shoreline for the pilot work.
Mr. Wilson: So, what I’d like to do is propose a motion is we’ll wait to get the fifth, if the fifth set of unit pricing is within plus or minus 5% of Sea & Shoreline, then with that motion we go forward with the pilot work with Sea & Shoreline and we authorize Alvarez Engineers to go down that path. Now, GMS will be the entity actually signing the contract, right?
Mr. Winkeljohn: No, the Board, the District signs it.
Ms. Wald: Let me help you out, so your prior motion, already provided that not to exceed $195,000, the reason why you did the $195,000 is we didn’t proceed with a competitive bid process right from the get-go. One was you wanted to see what was out there, as was stated before, the type of products that are out there, and really what was going to work for your community, and also a test. If you’re going to exceed, because they’ve given you three different ones here, if you add them altogether it would be in

excess of $195,000, you’re not going to be able to do that, you’re not going to be able to contract with whomever is bringing forward, and we have one in front of us, for that entire amount, you still are going to be at that threshold at the $195,000. So, if you wanted to do more then, I would recommend, and get it done sooner, then I would recommend that you go ahead and you authorize to proceed forward with the competitive bid process now. If not, and you want to stick with what you have with the $195,000, then it’s really, you’re still within the motion that was made before, it’s just pulling the trigger.
Mr. Wilson: And to stay below, it would be option #1 and option #3. Mr. Cabrera: Or you can just do option #2.
Mr. Wilson: True, so we could do lake 8 and 10, which they’re both under the threshold or do lake 9 under the threshold, have the pilot on the product, the services, how to re-coordinate with the different townhome owners, ability to get through the easements and the restoration process and have a pretty good snapshot of it, and that’s the way to move forward.
Mr. Winkeljohn: That’s a good pilot approach.
Mr. Clark: And we’ve already determined that these three lakes are the worst of the
worst.
Mr. Wilson: Yes. Mr. Clark: Ok.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, we have all the lakes charted out.
Mr. Wilson: Because I pulled that directly off the surveyors performance last year. Mr. Mirabile:	Now, just a quick question, will this eliminate the technology that
they’re going to use, will this eliminate future erosion?
Mr. Wilson: Maybe, so all of these systems will fail over time, I would anticipate that this application if done correctly, will provide 15 to 20, potentially 25 years before that specific area needs to be addressed again.
Mr. Mirabile: Ok.
Mr. Cabrera: It’s definitely an approvement over just a simple created lake bank. Mr. Winkeljohn: Right, than the original construction.
Mr. Mirabile: Ok, and that was my question.
Mr. Cabrera: Unfortunately, none of what we’ve seen here, nothing is a part of the
fix.

Mr. Mirabile: Ok.
Mr. Jado: Can I ask a question. Mr. Cabrera: Sure.
Mr. Jado: We built the community in 2005, and we’re at 20 years now, with natural lake, this will go further than 20 years?
Mr. Cabrera: Yes, this will go further than 20 years, yes. Mr. Jado: Ok.
Mr. Cabrera: I think what Frank was saying and I’m sorry, I don’t want to speak for
you.
Mr. Wilson: No, go ahead.
Mr. Cabrera: I think he was saying maybe in addition to the normal lifespan of the
lake bank.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, so what you two recommend?
Mr. Cabrera: Do you want my thoughts Frank, because I just watched it again this morning.
Mr. Wilson: Yes.
Mr. Cabrera: I think if we did lake 9, it has great access, it needs it, it’s got some sharp slopes, and we concentrate our work, instead of kind of managing a piece of 8 and a piece of 10, we just do it all on that one single pilot area.
Mr. Wilson: I’d like to make a motion to the Board, that our path for lake bank restoration, we proceed with Sea & Shoreline’s proposal dated February 9, 2026, to address lake bank restoration on lake 9, which is option #2 in the proposal of 735 linear feet for a total cost of $191,835.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, and then before we vote, just for discussion when would this start?
Mr. Cabrera: He’s ready to start within 30 days, he’s like to do it all during this dry season.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, and how soon can we start with the other two lake banks, I think it’s 8 and 10, even if we start now, how soon could we start the other ones?
Mr. Winkeljohn: After October.
Mr. Wilson: So, we have our decision then to go out for open bid which changes our ceiling. If we chose to go with Sea & Shoreline again, I think we get the lower dollar threshold, October 1, resets the budget year, also we do want to give a period of time to

assess the results and having this work done prior to the rainy season, so if we get it done, and then we can put eyes on it late summer or in September, we set our budget in October, we’re more educated for a decision on how we move forward.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, and then one last question, what happens, is it ok if we wait until October to address those two lakes?
Mr. Cabrera: So again, I was actually out there this morning because they’re really low right now, I’m glad to see that none of those lakes have an aggressive washout type of scenario, they all have good sod still, it’s not like it’s a pressing, this is all a slow gradual thing happening over the life of these things, so can we afford a year or two on any of these lakes, I haven’t walked the other ones in a while, probably at least 8 months since we were out there last time, but I think we can afford a year or two to wait.
Mr. Azcona: So, it will not be a negligent decision for the Board to wait?
Mr. Cabrera: No, and the three that I saw this morning that one was probably the worst, the one in the middle.
Mr. Timm: I have one question, did we, and I assume but, someone could tell me, proper insurance and bonding, are we going to bond these people?
Mr. Cabrera: Yes, there will be a requirement for that, you let me know what it is and we’ll get that.
Ms. Wald: So, we’ll have an agreement, what will happen once you vote, is that we’ll prepare an agreement, it will have to have the requirements for permitting, all requirements that you’ve had as to insurance, and if you want a payment of performance bond we can put one in. This doesn’t require one by law but, if it’s something that you want we can but, understand that it’s going to be an additional cost.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, it’s a lot.
Ms. Wald: It’s not required by law because it is number one, under that threshold where a payment of performance bond is required. Again, it’s your decision to make, to me, it’s a small project and I haven’t seen payment of performance bonds with this small of a project.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Right, and I would manage that through the draw schedule.
Mr. Wilson: And that sort of contract where you have the notice of a sheet payment and what it looks like.

Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, and with good retention and milestones by the engineer, and that prevents the real need for a performance bond, so thank you.
Mr. Mirabile: So as far as resident notification around lake 9 is that something you would do?
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, we’ll do that.
Mr. Azcona: And I would say, let’s make sure we have meetings, and not waiting until October to study this, and let’s see how these things evolve so in September we can have a motion to start going with the other lakes, as soon as we go to the October budget, let’s move on with the next batch.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, precisely.
Mr. Timm: And just a question, what was the duration of lake 9? Mr. Cabrera: He had 7 weeks on that.
Mr. Timm: Ok.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, are we ready to vote?

On Motion by Mr. Wilson seconded by Mr. Mirabile with all in favor, accepting the proposal from Sea & Shoreline dated February 9, 2026 for lake bank restoration on lake 9, option #2 of 735 linear feet for a total amount of $191,835 was approved.

Mr. Wilson: And an additional motion that I missed, so I’d like to make a motion that we authorize the sampling of whatever lake number it is that’s at our outfall.
Mr. Cabrera: Yes, It’s lake 3.
Mr. Wilson: Ok, lake 3, so somewhere between now and the rainy season. Mr. Winkeljohn: We’ve got our threshold, so we can take care of that.
Mr. Wilson: Ok.
Mr. Cabrera: I can give you the documentation on that. Mr. Winkeljohn: We don’t need a motion for that.
Mr. Azcona:	And you would be testing on the different days that Frank has mentioned.
Mr. Cabrera: Yes.
Mr. Winkeljohn: And I have a note on it already.

Mr. Azcona: Ok, and then out of the other recommendations are there any specific recommendations that you would say you strongly recommend that we tackle at this point and is reasonable for the budget?
Mr. Cabrera: Are we talking about the BMAP recommendations? Mr. Azcona: The ones you discussed.
Mr. Wilson: Yes, that’s the BMAP.
Mr. Cabrera: So, right now before we start recurring tasks over the next, and also just kind of waiting to hear back from FDEP, our goal would be to maximize credits, so identify and I think that the feedback that you guys gave on the wells for the residents that are next to the lakes, that’s a great credit opportunity. So, before we start doing anything, I mean what I’d love to do an inspection for all of the structures, that’s probably something we should do, honestly anyways, but do I want to commit to it with that feet, I don’t want to do that.
Mr. Wilson: And we’ll table it for the next meeting, but that is a project I would like to get slated on our books because I do believe we need to get in and look at that interconnection piping and I’d also like to inspect them.
Mr. Cabrera: Ok.
Mr. Wilson: But until the county and the state provides real clarity on the expectations of the basin management plans, we should be just about done spending money.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, that’s a great approach.
Mr. Azcona: So we are ok with the BMAP requirements, we’re not falling behind. Mr. Wilson: No, we’re just waiting to hear back.
Mr. Winkeljohn: I’d jump a little ahead on that, on the interconnection, when we do our drain inspections we could add that in pretty inexpensively to do a peek on those pipes, it’s not bad, that would be a good idea.
Mr. Azcona: Alright, thank you. Mr. Winkeljohn: Alright, thank you.
Field Manager – Monthly Report
Mr. Wilson: Moving on to John, the fountain.
Mr. Jado: Yes, so basically we had to pull a stop on this lake, it should be under warranty once we get notification from the manufacturer, so they pulled the cable and the

fountain out, it’s been shipped about a week and a half ago, it went back to the manufacturer, it’s been replaced within the last 3 weeks, so it should be under warranty but, until they say yes, it’s under warranty, we’re fixing it and sending you a new one, there’s always that caveat but, we’ll probably not going to have to pay anything.
Mr. Winkeljohn: How long before you’ll know?
Mr. Jado: Probably a couple of weeks, it’s been shipped so it takes, they’re slow, it takes about 3 weeks for them to look at it and all of that, and then other the big thing is we had bad check valve out on Brigantine so we had to pull out that whole suction line, the check valve was replaced after numerous times to try to keep it started and primed on a new pump, we were continually having problems and that’s been taken care of, and then Frank Wilson came in and he took over the maintenance website of that from Hydro Wise and Hydro Wise has now hooked up with Frank, hooked up with the Brigantine people with BrightView so that they can now test the water without going crazy. The HOA is the one that takes care of Rosser, and now they’re doing the testing.
Mr. Wilson: (inaudible comment)
Mr. Azcona: Have we done any assessment of damage by the frost or the freezing?
Mr. Jado: We had some frost damage but I think it will all be cut off eventually, and they’ll trim it and get rid of the frost and we’ll wait to see what comes back and replace it and then it will all come back. There were certain areas out there that are dying just from lack of age, it’s just ran it’s course and I was speaking to Frank, and a few other guys about replacing one or two beds to re-enhance, especially that first big island as you come into Gatlin, we have to raise that up, whoever put it in, they put it in too low, it’s getting too much water, it’s getting wet and I replanted cheaply to do some myself, some with another guy, we need to mound that up and have proper drainage on that.
Mr. Winkeljohn: John, get it done.
Mr. Azcona: With regard to that monument on Gatlin, I think there was a discrepancy, or a misunderstanding from the HOA about when to do maintenance, and I forgot what the proper demand for that?
Mr. Winkeljohn: And I’m sort of a little bit in limbo land, I don’t understand.
Mr. Wilson: That last time I remember the issue was some tiles being off, who fixed that, did you fix that John?

Mr. Jado: Tiles on what?
Mr. Winkeljohn: On the big monument, technically the HOA.
Mr. Jado: Oh, no, we didn’t fix it, the HOA is the only one that takes care of that. Mr. Winkeljohn: Right, we can do irrigation in some areas, indirectly.
Mr. Jado: The irrigation doesn’t work, there’s no water feeding to it. Mr. Wilson: It’s ok.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Right, it’s the HOA’s. Mr. Wilson: Ok.
Mr. Azcona: And then whatever landscape is surrounding it, that’s the HOA because we are as the CDD managing Brigantine, or the landscape there, and that’s basically in Brigantine, so I think there is a misconnect, and this is what I heard, and I don’t recall exactly what was disconnected specifically but, it was like uncertainty on whether the CDD does a specific maintenance or these or the HOA, so I think it needs to be clarified so we know exactly who does what.
Mr. Jado: That’s not a private piece of property, that’s not owned by the HOA or the

CDD.

Mr. Winkeljohn: Right, there’s an agreement for the use of that land. Mr. Jado: I mean they could tear it down.
Mr. Azcona:	They can tear it down but, for now, it needs to be maintained by

anybody, it’s just sitting there.
Mr. Winkeljohn: And that would be the HOA, and the District’s line would be where our plan that we upgraded and enhanced, and that’s also a good test is where the irrigation is.
Mr. Azcona: Ok.
Mr. Jado: The other problem is, it’s no longer hooked to the irrigation now, nobody could find out where Walmart’s water is because I think that was feeding it originally, and you would have to run a pipe, tap into our line, and we can do it on a 3 times a week basis to bring the water to the top area of planters and the surrounding planters if the HOA is willing to do that.
Mr. Azcona: That monument and that landscaping is sitting in an area that is from a third party, it’s not CDD and the HOA is fully responsible for that.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Exactly.

Mr. Azcona: Can you actually send an email, could we send an email in writing to state this.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Who would you like me to send it to?
Mr. Azcona: To whoever the property manager is just for the record so there’s no confusion, and they say, oh are you guys doing it, or not doing it.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, and every indication is that the outparcel that owner is not going to demo it, it’s their right to do so far.
Mr. Jado: And I would not bring it up to them. Mr. Winkeljohn: No, I’m not going to.
Mr. Azcona: No, we are not, we decided not to but, this is between the CDD and the HOA to maintain that because we don’t want to let it be looking like that, so it’s settled that the HOA is fully responsible for that.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Totally.
Mr. Jado: Can I say something, we were talking with the HOA and they’re willing to enhance the landscaping there, maybe we could tap into our water, and pay for the irrigation to get there that maintains the landscaping that they put if the Board wants to do it, that’s just a suggestion.
Ms. Wald: Not on private property.
Mr. Winkeljohn: No, we are not irrigating private property. Ms. Wald: That’s the problem.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Right, we’re not in that business. Anything else for John?
Mr. Azcona: One more thing, last time you said that the sidewalks near the lakes, all the trees were our responsibility, what about the lights, and the light poles, that’s not part of the CDD because many of them, they’ve been malfunctioning for months and years, and nothing has been done about it.
Mr. Jado: So, we did the pizzeria place, and across from the pizzeria is controlled by Portofino Isle, we don’t have any electricity to it, our electric stops at that cutoff where you go between the pizzeria and new shopping center, so we have no power, we have nothing going on there, so we have no control over anything.
Mr. Azcona: So who is supposed to maintain those lights? Mr. Jado: I think it’s Portofino Isles but, I’m not 100% positive. Mr. Winkeljohn: You mean Newport Isles.

well?

Mr. Jado: No, the little community over there, the townhouses. Mr. Winkeljohn: That’s Portofino Court.
Mr. Jado: Yes, Court.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Thank you.
Mr. Azcona:	But not responsible for the ones that come into the community as

Mr. Winkeljohn: To where the bus stop is.
Mr. Azcona: No, I’m talking about this one that come through here. Mr. Jado: No, the HOA.
Mr. Azcona: So, the HOA should be responsible for maintaining and making sure

those are working.
Mr. Jado: Ok.
Mr. Azcona: The ones that are flashing all day long.
(At this point several people were talking at one time, and no one conversation could be heard)

Mr. Wilson: The ones we see right out here, those are inside our gate. Mr. Azcona: Yes, those are HOA.
Mr. Winkeljohn: All HOA, yes. Mr. Wilson: HOA and FPL. Mr. Winkeljohn: Right.
Mr. Azcona: But the HOA should be responsible for coordinating with FPL.
Mr. Jado: Just to be clear too, on that center pole of lights going past the guard gate, those are not working either.
Mr. Azcona: Ok, and that’s HOA. Mr. Jado: It’s all HOA and FPL.
Mr. Azcona: But it’s not CDD responsibility, it’s HOA responsibility.
Mr. Mirabile: I think if we see something we have to report it, put them on a work
order.
Mr. Winkeljohn:  Yes, if you put that light in as a power outage, and you put the
address they’ll come fix it. Very good.
Mr. Wilson: Anything else from the Supervisors? Moving on. Mr. Winkeljohn: Very well.

CDD Manager
Mr. Winkeljohn: I have nothing under manager’s report.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Financial Reports
Approval of Check Register
Acceptance of Unaudited Financials
Mr. Winkeljohn: The next would be, item No. 4, financial reports.
Mr. Wilson:	I did take a look at the check register, everything seems to be appropriate, and we typically do a motion.
Mr. Winkeljohn: Yes, motion to accept the financials, please.

On Motion by Mr. Wilson seconded by Mr. Azcona with all in favor, the Check Register, and the Unaudited Financials were approved.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Supervisors	Requests	and
Audience Comments
Mr. Winkeljohn:	Item No. 5 brings us to Supervisor’s requests and audience comments, does anyone have anything they want to add?

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS	Adjournment
Mr. Winkeljohn: Hearing none, a motion to adjourn would be appropriate.

On Motion by Mr. Azcona seconded by Mr. Wilson with all in favor, the Meeting was adjourned.

Secretary / Assistant Secretary	Chairman/Vice Chairman

RESOLUTION 2026-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE PORTOFINO ISLES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT APPROVING THE DISTRICT’S PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027 AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING THEREON PURSUANT TO FLORIDA LAW
WHEREAS, the District Manager has prepared the proposed budget for the Fiscal Year 2027; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors approves the proposed budget for purpose of submitting said budget to the local governing authorities not less than 60 days prior to the public hearing date in accordance with Chapter 190.008(b), Florida Statutes: and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors desires to set the public hearing date;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE PORTOFINO ISLES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT:
The proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2027 is hereby approved for the purpose of conducting a public hearing to adopt said budget.

A public hearing on said approved budget is hereby declared and set for the following date, hour and place:

Date: 	 Hour: 	 Place: 	

Notice of public hearing shall be published in accordance with Florida Law.

Adopted this 	 day of 	, 202

Chairman/Vice Chairman

Secretary/Assistant Secretary

Portofino Isles
Community Development District

Proposed Budget
FY 2027

Table of Contents

1-2		General Fund	

3	
	Allocation of Reserves Schedule	

4-5	
	Narratives	

6-7	
	Debt Service Fund Series 2005	

8-9	
	Debt Service Fund Series 2013	

10	
	Assessment Schedule	

REVENUES:		
Special Assessments - On Roll	$	135,969	$	125,180	$	10,789	$	135,969	$	135,968	
Direct Assessment - Lerner TH	39,178	-	-	-	39,177	
Interest Income	40,000	24,657	34,520	59,177	40,000	
Stormwater Fees	150,000	-	250,000	250,000	150,000	
Other Income	-	1,226	-	1,226	-	
Carry Forward Surplus	130,917	131,915	-	131,915	129,166	
TOTAL REVENUES	$	496,064	$	282,978	$	295,309	$	578,287	$	494,311	

EXPENDITURES:						
Administrative:						
Engineer Fees	$	30,000	$	12,515	$	17,521	$	30,036	$	30,000	
Attorney	25,000	3,443	6,885	10,328	20,000	
Annual Audit	5,600	5,800	-	5,800	6,000	
Assessment Administration	1,061	1,061	-	1,061	1,124	
Arbitrage Rebate	1,200	600	600	1,200	1,200	
Dissemination Agent	2,922	1,218	1,704	2,922	3,097	
Trustee Fees	3,556	-	3,556	3,556	3,556	
Management Fees	52,837	22,015	30,822	52,837	56,007	
Information Technology	1,169	487	682	1,169	1,239	
Website Administration	1,169	487	682	1,169	1,239	
Telephone	100	-	75	75	100	
Postage & Delivery	500	67	150	217	500	
Rental & Leases	2,400	1,000	1,400	2,400	2,400	
General Liability and Public Officials Insurance	8,552	7,932	-	7,932	8,725	
Printing & Binding	1,000	-	250	250	250	
Legal Advertising	1,500	124	750	874	1,250	
Bank Fees and Other Charges	300	190	380	570	600	
Office Supplies	225	-	50	50	50	
Dues, Licenses & Subscriptions	175	175	-	175	175	
Capital Outlay	300	-	300	300	300	
TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE	$	139,565	$	57,114	$	65,806	$	122,920	$	137,812	

Operations & Maintenance		
Field Operations		
Salaries/Facility Management	$	40,789	$	16,280	$	22,200	$	38,480	$	40,789	
Environmental Services	2,500	-	2,500	2,500	2,500	
Electric	13,000	1,744	3,924	5,668	13,000	
Repairs & Maintenance	24,710	4,387	19,500	23,887	24,710	
Landscape Maintenance	37,840	9,625	19,250	28,875	37,840	
Landscaping - Replacement/Storm Cleanup	40,000	6,525	30,000	36,525	40,000	
Irrigation System	15,000	1,221	12,250	13,471	15,000	
Lake/Fountain Maintenance	21,120	-	20,000	20,000	21,120	
Wetlands Maintenance	19,200	6,500	9,100	15,600	19,200	
Stormwater Maintenance	50,000	-	50,000	50,000	50,000	
Chemicals/Operating Supplies	6,600	1,453	4,500	5,953	6,600	
Contingencies/Fountain Repairs	35,000	11,697	15,000	26,697	35,000	
Dues/Licenses	740	-	740	740	740	
Capital Outlay	-	305	7,500	7,805	-	
Total Field Operations	$	306,499	$	59,737	$	216,464	$	276,201	$	306,499	

Reserves						
Unassigned	$	50,000	$	-	$	50,000	$	50,000	$	50,000	
Total Reserves	$	50,000	$	-	$	50,000	$	50,000	$	50,000	
						
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	$	496,064	$	116,851	$	332,270	$	449,121	$	494,311	
						
EXCESS REVENUES (EXPENDITURES)	$	-	$	166,127	$	(36,961)	$	129,166	$	-	

Gross Assessments	$	186,324
Less: Discounts & Collections 6% 	11,179 
Net Assessments	 $	175,145 

Product

Assessable		Total Gross Units	Assessment

FY25
Gross Per Unit

FY26
Gross Per Unit

Increase/ (Decrease)

Single Family	550	$	96,314.16	$	175.12	$	175.12	$	-	
Multy Family	214	$	37,474.96	$	175.12	$	175.12	$	-	
Townhomes	62	$	10,857.23	$	175.12	$	175.12	$	-	
Total	826	$ 144,646.35				

Allocation of Reserves

	Adopted Budget	Adopted Budget	Adopted Budget	Adopted Budget	Adopted Budget	Adopted Budget	Proposed Budget	Total	
	FY 2021	FY 2022	FY 2023	FY 2024	FY 2025	FY 2026	FY 2027		

Additions:
Wetlands	

$100,000	

$0	

$20,000	

$0	

$0	

$0	

$0	

$120,000	
Brigantine Rd Resurfacing	$50,000	$50,000	$10,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$110,000	
Wall/Perimeter	$50,000	$0	$10,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$60,000	
Drainage	$100,000	$0	$20,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$120,000	
Storm Recovery	$0	$100,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$100,000	
Lake & Bank Erosion	$0	$50,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$50,000	
Fountains/Pumps/Control & Mete	$0	$50,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$50,000	
Other/Misc.	$0	$50,000	$0	$85,004	$126,250	50,000	50,000	$361,254	
	$300,000	$300,000	$60,000	$85,004	$126,250	$50,000	$50,000	$971,254	

Spent:
Wetlands	

$0	

$0	

$0	

$0	

$0	

$0	

$0	

$0	
Brigantine Rd Resurfacing	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	
Wall/Perimeter	$7,064	$0	$1,943	$0	$1,296	$0	$0	$10,302	
Drainage	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	
Storm Recovery	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	
Lake & Bank Erosion	$1,406	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$1,406	
Fountains/Pumps/Control & Mtr	$8,749	$68,844	$215	$0	$18,067	$0	$0	$95,875	
Other/Misc.	$0	$0	$0	$0	$2,200	$0	$0	$2,200	
	$17,219	$68,844	$2,158	$0	$21,562	$0	$0	$109,783	

Available:
Wetlands	

$100,000	

$0	

$20,000	

$0	

$0	

$0	

$0	

$120,000	
Brigantine Rd Resurfacing	$50,000	$50,000	$10,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$110,000	
Wall/Perimeter	$42,936	$0	$8,057	$0	($1,296)	$0	$0	$49,698	
Drainage	$100,000	$0	$20,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$120,000	
Storm Recovery	$0	$100,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$100,000	
Lake & Bank Erosion	($1,406)	$50,000	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$48,594	
Fountains/Pumps/Control & Mtr	($8,749)	($18,844)	($215)	$0	($18,067)	$0	$0	($45,875)	
Other/Misc.	$0	$50,000	$0	$85,004	$124,050	$50,000	$50,000	$359,054	
	$282,781	$231,156	$57,842	$85,004	$104,688	$50,000	$50,000	$861,471	

Total Projected Reserve Funds as of 09/30/27							$861,471	

Total Reserved @ 9/30/2026	
$861,471								
Balance in SBA @ 2/28/2026	1,492,069								

REVENUES

Special Assessments- On Roll
The District will levy a Non-Ad Valorem assessment on all the platted lots within the District to pay all of the operating expenses for the Fiscal Year in accordance with the adopted budget.
Interest Income
The District earns interest on the monthly average collected balance for each of their investment accounts.
Stormwater Rebate
The City of Port St. Lucie assesses the residents of the District for Repairs, Maintenance and Capital Improvements of the Drainage System. The city then remits the storm water fees less an administrative fee to the District since the District provides these services.

Expenditures - Administrative

District Engineering Fees
The District's engineer, Culpepper and Terpening, Inc. will provide general engineering services to the District, i.e. attendance and preparation for monthly board meetings, review invoices, etc.
District Attorney Fees
The District's legal counsel, Billing, Cochran, Lyles, Mauro & Ramsey, PA will be provide general legal services to the District, i.e. attendance and preparation for monthly meetings, review operating & maintenance contracts, etc.
Annual Audit
The District is required annually to conduct an audit of its financial records by an Independent Certified Public Accounting Firm. The District has contracted with Grau and Associates.
Assessment Roll Administration
Expenses incurred for the collection of prepaid assessments, updating the District’s Tax Roll and levying the annual assessment. GMS-SF, LLC serves as the District’s Assessment Roll Administrator.
Arbitrage Rebate
The District is required to have an annual arbitrage rebate calculation on the District’s Bonds. The District has contracted Grau and Associates to perform the calculations.
Dissemination Agent
The District is required by the Security and Exchange Commission to comply with Rule 15(c)(2)-12(b)(5), which relates to additional reporting requirements for un-rated bond issues. GMS-SF, LLC serves as the District’s Dissemination Agent.
Trustee Fees
The District bonds will be held and administered by a Trustee at US Bank. This represents the trustee annual fee.
District Management Fees
The District receives Management, Accounting and Administrative services as part of a Management Agreement with Governmental Management Services – South Florida, LLC. These services are further outlined in Exhibit "A" of the Management Agreement.
Information Technology
The District processes all of its financial activities, i.e. accounts payable, financial statements, etc. on a main frame computer leased by
Governmental Management Services – South Florida, LLC.
Website Maintenance
Per Chapter 2014-22, Laws of Florida, all Districts must have a website to provide detailed information on the CDD as well as links to useful websites regarding Compliance issues. This website will be maintained by GMS-SF, LLC and updated monthly.
Telephone
Telephone and fax machine.
Postage and Delivery
Mailing of agenda packages, overnight deliveries, correspondence, etc.
Rental & Leases
The District will be charged $200 per month for office rent from Governmental Management Services – South Florida, LLC for the
Insurance General Liability
The District's General Liability & Public Officials Liability Insurance policy is with a qualified entity that specializes in providing insurance coverage to governmental agencies. The amount is based upon similar Community Development Districts.
Printing and Binding
Printing and Binding agenda packages for board meetings, printing of computerized checks, stationary, envelopes etc.

Expenditures - Administrative

Legal Advertising
The District is required to advertise various notices for monthly Board meetings and other public hearings etc. in a newspaper of general circulation.
Bank Fees and Other Charges
This includes monthly bank charges and any other miscellaneous expenses that incur during the year.
Office Supplies
Miscellaneous office supplies.
Due, Licenses & Subscriptions
The District is required to pay an annual fee to FloridaCommerce for $175. This is the only expense under this category for the
Capital Outlay
Represents any minor capital expenditures the District may need to make during the Fiscal Year such as a file cabinet for District files.

Expenditures - Field Operations

Salaries/Facility Management
Cost of on-site employee for day-to-day oversight.
Environmental Services
Semi-annual mitigation monitoring as required by South Florida Water Management District.
Electric
Represents the costs associated with powering the irrigation pumps, service to be provided by Florida Power & Light.
Repairs & Maintenance
Represents costs associated with basic maintenance and repairs in the District.
Landscape Maintenance
The District has entered into a contract with Brightview Landscape Services for Lawn Maintenance of the Median Island and Entry Side from Gatlin Blvd to Entry. The contract is $1925.00/month.
Landscaping - Replacement
The cost of replacing landscaping of the Median Island and Entry Side from Gatlin Blvd to Entry.
Irrigation System
The District operates several pumping and control systems which require immediate repair and replacement for the protection and survival of landscape responsibilities.
Lake/Fountain Maintenance
The District has entered into a contract with The Lake Doctors for Lake Maintenance. The services include aquatic weed, border grasses and algae control for 10 lakes and maintenance of the fountains.
Wetlands Maintenance
The District has entered into a contract with Lake and Preserve Management for Wetlands Maintenance. The services include exotic and invasive weed control for approximately 15 acres of planted buffer area. Contract also includes monthly inspections of wetland area. The contract is $1,300.00 per month.
Stormwater Maintenance
The cost of drain cleaning and inspection.

Expenditures – Field Operations (continued)

Chemicals/Operating Supplies
Chemicals for operations of the District.
Contingencies
Any unforeseen expenses related to the field operations of the District.

Expenditures – Reserves

Reserves
Funds allocated to future expenditures by Area.

Proposed Budget
Debt Service Series 2005 Special Assessment Bonds

	Adopted Budget	Proposed Budget	
Description	FY2026	FY 2027	

REVENUES:		
Special Assessments-On Roll	$	91,115	$	91,115	
SPE Funding	450,000	450,000	
Carry Forward Surplus (1)	355,485	443,425	
TOTAL REVENUES	$	896,600	$	984,540	

EXPENDITURES:		
Interest 11/1	$	100,800	$	93,940	
Principal 5/1	245,000	260,000	
Interest 5/1	100,800	93,940	
Other Debt Service Costs (2)	450,000	450,000	
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	$	896,600	$	897,880	

Other Sources/(Uses)		
Interfund transfer In/(Out)	$	-	$	-	
TOTAL OTHER SOURCES/(USES)	$	-	$	-	
		
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	$	896,600	$	897,880	
		
EXCESS REVENUES (EXPENDITURES)	$	86,660	

(1) Carry Forward is Net of Reserve Requirement	Interest Due 11/1/27	$
(2) Represents: Lerner, Property Appraiser and other bond expenditures	$
(3) Bonds are in default

86,660
86,660

Gross Assessments	$	96,931	
Less: Discounts & Collections 6%		5,816 	
Net Assessments	 $	91,115 	

Product

Assessable Units

Total Gross Assessment

FY25

FY26

Gross Per Unit	Gross Per Unit

Increase/ (Decrease)

Townhomes	62	$	96,930.80	$	1,563.40	$	1,563.40	$	-	
Total	62	$	96,930.80					

AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE
Debt Service Series 2005 Special Assessment Bonds

Period	Outstanding Balance	Coupons	Principal		Interest	Annual Debt Service	

05/01/25	
$	
3,830,000	
5.600%	
$	
230,000	
$	
107,240	
$	
-	
11/01/25	3,600,000	5.600%		-	100,800	438,040	
05/01/26	3,600,000	5.600%	245,000	100,800		
11/01/26	3,355,000	5.600%		-	93,940	439,740	
05/01/27	3,355,000	5.600%	260,000	93,940		
11/01/27	3,095,000	5.600%		-	86,660	440,600	
05/01/28	3,095,000	5.600%	270,000	86,660		
11/01/28	2,825,000	5.600%		-	79,100	435,760	
05/01/29	2,825,000	5.600%	290,000	79,100		
11/01/29	2,535,000	5.600%		-	70,980	440,080	
05/01/30	2,535,000	5.600%	305,000	70,980		
11/01/30	2,230,000	5.600%		-	62,440	438,420	
05/01/31	2,230,000	5.600%	320,000	62,440		
11/01/31	1,910,000	5.600%		-	53,480	435,920	
05/01/32	1,910,000	5.600%	340,000	53,480		
11/01/32	1,570,000	5.600%		-	43,960	437,440	
05/01/33	1,570,000	5.600%	360,000	43,960		
11/01/33	1,210,000	5.600%		-	33,880	437,840	
05/01/34	1,210,000	5.600%	380,000	33,880		
11/01/34	830,000	5.600%		-	23,240	437,120	
05/01/35	830,000	5.600%	405,000	23,240		
11/01/35	425,000	5.600%		-	11,900	440,140	
05/01/36	425,000	5.600%	425,000	11,900	436,900	
Total			$	3,830,000	$	1,428,000	$	5,258,000	

Proposed Budget
Debt Service Series 2013 Special Assessment Revenue Refunding Bonds

Adopted Budget
FY2026

Actuals Thru	Projected Next  Projected Thru
2/28/26

Description

	7 Months	

9/30/26

Proposed Budget
FY 2027

REVENUES:

Special Assessments-On Roll	$	430,939	$	398,200	$	32,739	$	430,939	$	430,939	
Prepayments	-	-	-	-	-	
Interest Earnings	-	8,059	350	8,409	-	
Carry Forward Surplus (1)	305,528	241,374	-	241,374	234,900	
TOTAL REVENUES	$	736,467	$	647,633	$	33,089	$	680,722	$	665,839	

EXPENDITURES:						
Interest 11/1	$	67,450	$	67,450	$	-	$	67,450	$	60,325	
Special Call 5/1	-	5,000	-	5,000	-	
Principal 5/1	300,000	-	300,000	300,000	315,000	
Interest 5/1	67,450	-	67,450	67,450	60,325	
Other Debt Service Costs (2)	5,922	5,922	-	5,922	5,922	
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	$	440,822	$	78,372	$	367,450	$	445,822	$	441,572	

Other Sources/(Uses)						

Interfund transfer In/(Out)	
$	-	
$	
-	
$	-	
$	-	
$	-	
TOTAL OTHER SOURCES/(USES)	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	
						
TOTAL EXPENDITURES	$	440,822	$	78,372	$	367,450	$	445,822	$	441,572	
						
EXCESS REVENUES (EXPENDITURES)	$	295,645	$	569,261	$  (334,361)	$	234,900	$	224,267	

(1) Carry Forward is Net of Reserve Requirement	
Interest Due 11/1/27	
$	52,844	
(2) Represents: Property Appraiser		$	52,844	

Gross Assessments	$	458,446
Less: Discounts & Collections 6% 	27,507 
Net Assessments	 $	430,939 

Product

Assessable Units

Total Gross Assessment

FY25
Gross Per Unit

FY26
Gross Per Unit

Increase/ (Decrease)

Single Family	544	$	337,443.20	$	620.30	$	620.30	$	-	
Multy Family	209	$	121,002.64	$	578.96	$	578.96	$	-	
Townhomes	0	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	
Total	753	$  458,445.84				

AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE
Debt Service Series 2013 Special Assessment Revenue Refunding Bonds

Period	Outstanding Balance	Coupons	Principal		Interest	Annual Debt Service	

05/01/26	
2,840,000	
4.750%	
300,000		
67,450		
11/01/26	2,540,000	4.750%	-		60,325	427,775	
05/01/27	2,540,000	4.750%	315,000		60,325		
11/01/27	2,225,000	4.750%	-		52,844	428,169	
05/01/28	2,225,000	4.750%	330,000		52,844		
11/01/28	1,895,000	4.750%	-		45,006	427,850	
05/01/29	1,895,000	4.750%	345,000		45,006	390,006	
11/01/29	1,550,000	4.750%	-		36,813	36,813	
05/01/30	1,550,000	4.750%	360,000		36,813		
11/01/30	1,190,000	4.750%	-		28,263	425,075	
05/01/31	1,190,000	4.750%	380,000		28,263		
11/01/31	810,000	4.750%	-		19,238	427,500	
05/01/32	810,000	4.750%	395,000		19,238		
11/01/32	415,000	4.750%	-		9,856	424,094	
05/01/33	415,000	4.750%	415,000		9,856	424,856	
Total		$	2,840,000	$	572,138	$	3,412,138	

**Updated 11/1/2025							

Portofino Isles
Community Development District
Non-Ad Valorem Assessments Comparison 2026-2027

Neighbor hood	O&M Units	Bonds 2005
Units	Bonds 2013
Units	
Annual Maintenance Assessments	
Annual Debt Assessments	
Total Assessed Per Unit	
	
FY 2027	
FY2026	Increase/ (decrease)	
FY 2027	
FY2026	Increase/ (decrease)	
FY 2027	
FY2026	Increase/ (decrease)	
							Series 2005	Series 2013	Series 2005	Series 2013		Series 2005	Series 2013	Series 2005	Series 2013		
On Roll																	
Single Family	550	0	544	$175.12	$175.12	$0.00	$0.00	$620.30	$0.00	$620.30	$0.00	$175.12	$795.42	$175.12	$795.42	$0.00	
Multy Family	214	0	209	$175.12	$175.12	$0.00	$0.00	$578.96	$0.00	$578.96	$0.00	$175.12	$754.08	$175.12	$754.08	$0.00	
Townhomes	62	62	0	$175.12	$175.12	$0.00	$1,563.40	$0.00	$1,563.40	$0.00	$0.00	$1,738.52	$175.12	$1,738.52	$175.12	$0.00	

Direct																	
Townhomes	238	0	0	$175.12	$175.12	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$175.12	$175.12	$175.12	$175.12	$0.00	
Total	1064		753												

NOTICE OF QUALIFYING PERIOD FOR CANDIDATES FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE PORTOFINO ISLES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the qualifying period for candidates for the office of Supervisor of the Portofino Isles Community Development District ("District") will commence at noon on June 8, 2026, and close at noon on June 12, 2026. As provided in Section 99.061(8), Florida Statutes, qualifying papers may be submitted beginning May 25, 2026, to be processed and filed during the qualifying period. Candidates must qualify for the office of Supervisors of the District with the St. Lucie County Supervisor of Elections, at one of the following locations (theSupervisor of Elections recommends that qualifying papers filed during the June 8-12 qualifying period be submitted to the Fort Pierce office):

St. Lucie West South County Annex 250 NE Country Club Drive
Port St. Lucie, Florida 34986-2408 Telephone: (772) 462-1500

Renaissance Business Park 4132 Okeechobee Road Fort Pierce, Florida 34947 Telephone: (772) 462-1500

Dorothy J. Conrad County Admin. Annex 1664 S.E. Walton Road
Port St. Lucie, Florida 34952
Telephone: (772) 462-1500

Tradition Tax Collector's Office 10264 SW Village Parkway Port St. Lucie, Florida 34987 (772) 462-1500

All candidates shall qualify for individual seats in accordance with Section 99.061, Florida Statutes, and must also be qualified electors of the District. A qualified elector is any person at least 18 years of age who also is a citizen of the United States, a legal resident of the State of Florida and of the District, and who is registered to vote with the St. Lucie County Supervisor of Elections. Campaigns shall be conducted in accordance with Chapter 106, Florida Statues.
The District has two seats up for election, specifically Seat #1, and Seat #4. Each seat carries a four-year term of office. Elections are nonpartisan and will be held at the same time as the general election on November 3, 2026, in the manner prescribed by law for general elections.
For additional information, please contact the St. Lucie County Supervisor of Elections.

DISTRICT
Paul Winkeljohn, District Manager PORTOFINO ISLES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

PORTOFINO ISLES CDD
FIELD REPORT

APRIL 14, 2026
Governmental Management Services-South Florida, LLC 5385 N. Nob Hill Road Sunrise, FL 33351

PORTOFINO ISLES CDD

MAINTENANCE

YTA Landscaping trimmed all oak trees along the north end of Rosser. Branches that were overhanging the sidewalk and extending into the street have been properly cut back (see photos).

Palm trees and invasive vegetation pushing against the fence at the northeast corner of the Rosser entry have been removed.
The Rosser entry field area has been cleared, including approximately 2 acres of waist-high grass. Non-native and undesirable vegetation has also been trimmed back.

Along the Marshfield fence line (approximately 2,000 feet), vegetation has been cut back 8 feet from the fence (see photos).

The perimeter wall/fence area behind Jamesport (approximately 3,000 feet) has been cleared 8 feet back. Trees and vegetation that were pressing against the structure and could potentially cause damage have been removed (see photos).

All sewer grates throughout the neighborhood have been cleaned.

The lake contractor serviced the fountains and lighting, including cleaning and resetting light timers and fountain start times.
Wetland areas received scheduled sectional cleaning and removal of undesirable vegetation.
Met with BrightView Landscaping (Abbey) to assess storm-damaged foliage and determine the number of plants requiring replacement.
General cleanup has been completed at all entrances and along lake banks.

Portofino Isles
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

Fiscal Year 2026
Check Register

Date	check #'s	Amount		

1/1-1/31	
2412-2420		
$87,512.63	
2/1-2/28	2421-2436		$335,989.23	
	TOTAL		$423,501.86	

AP300R	YEAR-TO-DATE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PREPAID/COMPUTER CHECK REGISTER	RUN	4/02/26	PAGE	1
*** CHECK DATES 01/01/2026 - 02/28/2026 ***	PORTOFINO ISLES - GENERAL FUND
BANK A GENERAL FUND

DATE	DATE	INVOICE	YRMO	DPT ACCT# SUB	SUBCLASS		AMOUNT	#	
1/21/26 00026	12/31/25	196800	202512 310-51300-31500	*	500.00			
	DEC 25 - GENERAL COUNSEL
BILLING COCHRAN, P.A.								500.00	002412	
- - - - - - - -	- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -	-	- -	- -	-	-	-	- - - - -	- - - - -	- - -	
1/21/26 00051	12/01/25 9586787	202512 320-53800-46200		*					1,925.00			
	DEC 25 - LANDSCAPE MAINT										
	BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE SERVICES, INC.								1,925.00	002413	
- - - - - - - -	- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -	-	- -	- -	-	-	-	- - - - -	- - - - -	- - -	
1/21/26 00084	1/16/26 10777	202601 320-53800-46500		*					1,120.96			
	IRRIGATION REPAIRS										

CHECK	VEND#	.....INVOICE..... ...EXPENSED TO...	VENDOR NAME	STATUS	AMOUNT	....CHECK.....

FLORIDA IRRIGATION SERVICES	1,120.96 002414

1/01/26	372
JAN	
1/01/26	372	
	JAN	
1/01/26	372	
	JAN	
1/01/26	372	
	JAN	
1/01/26	372	
	JAN	
1/01/26	372	
	JAN	

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1/21/26 00020

202601 310-51300-34000	*	4,403.08
26 - MGMT FEES
202601 310-51300-44000	*	200.00
26 - RENT
202601 310-51300-35100	*	97.42
26 - COMPUTER TIME
202601 310-51300-31300	*	243.50
26 - DISSEMINATION
202601 310-51300-49500	*	97.42
26 - WEBSITE ADMIN
202601 310-51300-42000	*	6.66
26 - POSTAGE

GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES -	5,048.08 002415
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1/21/26 00072	1/01/26 337024B	202601 320-53800-49000	*	1,958.67 FOUNTAIN SERVICE QTRLY
THE LAKE DOCTORS, INC.	1,958.67 002416
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1/21/26 00078	1/01/26 J010126- 202601 320-53800-46400	*	1,300.00 JAN 26 - PRESERVE MAINT
LAKE AND PRESERVE MANAGEMENT	1,300.00 002417
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1/21/26 00012	1/21/26 2005	202601 300-20700-10100	*	57,989.62
TRANS TAX RECEIPTS 2005
PORTOFINO ISLES CDD	57,989.62 002418
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1/21/26 00014	1/21/26 2013	202601 300-20700-10100	*	17,633.92
TRANS TAX RECEIPTS 2013
PORTOFINO ISLES CDD	17,633.92 002419
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1/21/26 00081	1/02/26 5929	202512 320-53800-52000	*	36.38
DEC 25 - CREDIT CARD
WELLS FARGO	36.38 002420
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
PORT -PORT ISLES--	PPOWERS

AP300R	YEAR-TO-DATE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PREPAID/COMPUTER CHECK REGISTER	RUN	4/02/26	PAGE	2
*** CHECK DATES 01/01/2026 - 02/28/2026 ***	PORTOFINO ISLES - GENERAL FUND
BANK A GENERAL FUND
CHECK	VEND#	.....INVOICE..... ...EXPENSED TO...		VENDOR NAME	STATUS	AMOUNT	....CHECK..... DATE			DATE	INVOICE	YRMO	DPT ACCT# SUB	SUBCLASS				AMOUNT	#
2/18/26 00026	1/31/26 197075	202601 310-51300-31500	*	907.50
JAN 26 - GENERAL COUNSEL
BILLING COCHRAN, P.A.	907.50 002421
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/18/26 00051	1/01/26 9620447	202601 320-53800-46200	*	1,925.00
JAN 26 - LANDSCAPE MAINT
1/23/26 9645554	202601 320-53800-46000	*	200.00
REPAIRS FOUND @ INSPECTIO
2/01/26 9650917	202602 320-53800-46200	*	1,925.00
FEB 26 - LANDSCAPE MAINT

- -	-	-	-	-	-	- - - - -	
*						4,440.25	

BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE SERVICES, INC.	4,050.00 002422

1/28/26	375
JAN	
2/01/26	374	
	FEB	
2/01/26	374	
	FEB	
2/01/26	374	
	FEB	
2/01/26	374	
	FEB	
2/01/26	374	
	FEB	
2/01/26	374	
	FEB	

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -	- - - - - - - -

2/18/26 00020

202601 320-53800-12000
26 - FIELD MGMT
202602 310-51300-34000	*	4,403.08
26 - MGMT FEES
202602 310-51300-44000	*	200.00
26 - RENT
202602 310-51300-35100	*	97.42
26 - COMPUTER TIME
202602 310-51300-31300	*	243.50
26 - DISSEMINATION
202602 310-51300-49500	*	97.42
26 - WEBSITE ADMIN
202602 310-51300-42000	*	5.18
26 - POSTAGE

GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES -	9,486.85 002423
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/18/26 00021	1/26/26 28531	202601 310-51300-31200	*	600.00
ARBITRAGE SR2005 9/30/25
2/02/26 28649	202602 310-51300-32200	*	5,800.00
AUDIT FYE 9/30/25
GRAU AND ASSOCIATES	6,400.00 002424
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/18/26 00072	2/01/26 344728B	202602 320-53800-49000	*	1,958.67 FOUNTAIN SERVICE QTRLY
THE LAKE DOCTORS, INC.	1,958.67 002425
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/18/26 00078	2/01/26 J020126- 202602 320-53800-46400	*	1,300.00 FEB 26 - PRESERVE MAINT
LAKE AND PRESERVE MANAGEMENT	1,300.00 002426
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/18/26 00012	2/18/26 2005	202602 300-20700-10100	*	16,179.33
TRANS TAX RECEIPTS 2005
PORTOFINO ISLES CDD	16,179.33 002427
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
PORT -PORT ISLES--	PPOWERS

AP300R	YEAR-TO-DATE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PREPAID/COMPUTER CHECK REGISTER	RUN	4/02/26	PAGE	3
*** CHECK DATES 01/01/2026 - 02/28/2026 ***	PORTOFINO ISLES - GENERAL FUND
BANK A GENERAL FUND

CHECK	VEND#	.....INVOICE..... ...EXPENSED TO...	VENDOR NAME	STATUS	AMOUNT	....CHECK.....	
DATE	DATE	INVOICE	YRMO	DPT ACCT# SUB	SUBCLASS	AMOUNT	#	
2/18/26	00014	2/18/26	2013	202602 300-20700-10100	*	284,249.30	
TRANS	TAX RECEIPTS 2013	PORTOFINO ISLES CDD	284,249.30	002428	
- - - - - - - -	- - - - - - -	-	- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	- -	-	-	-	-	-	-	- - - - - - - - -	- - -	
2/18/26	00081	2/03/26	5929	202601 320-53800-52000	*	43.12	
JAN	26 - CREDIT CARD	
WELLS FARGO	43.12	002429	
- - - - - - - -	- - - - - - -	- -	- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	- -	-	-	-	-	-	-	- - - -	-	- - - -	- - -	
2/27/26	00051	2/26/26	9699963	202602 320-53800-46000	*	142.00	
REPAIRS	FOUND @ INSPECTIO	
BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE	SERVICES,	INC.	142.00	002430	
- - - - - - - -	- - - - - - - - -	- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -	- -	- - -	- - -	-	- -	-	-	-	-	-	-	- - - -	-	- - - -	- - -	
2/27/26	00095	2/09/26	173197	202602 320-53800-49000	*	1,997.00	

GRASSHOPPER CONTROL

COASTAL PEST CONTROL	1,997.00 002431

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/27/26 00013	2/26/26 103106	202601 310-51300-31100	*	6,260.00
JAN 26 - ENGINEERING SVCS
CULPEPPER TERPENING, INC.	6,260.00 002432
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/27/26 00009	2/03/26 9-163-61 202601 310-51300-42000	*	45.27
DELIVERIES THRU 1/23/26
FEDEX	45.27 002433
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/27/26 00089	2/16/26 2026-349 202602 320-53800-60600	*	305.00
RPL BRKN FENCE POST NIHOA
FENCES BY CASH, LLC	305.00 002434
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/27/26 00012	2/27/26 2005	202602 300-20700-10100	*	1,501.49
TRANS TAX RECEIPTS 2005
PORTOFINO ISLES CDD	1,501.49 002435
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/27/26 00014	2/27/26 2013	202602 300-20700-10100	*	1,163.70
TRANS TAX RECEIPTS 2013
PORTOFINO ISLES CDD	1,163.70 002436
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TOTAL FOR BANK A	423,501.86
TOTAL FOR REGISTER	423,501.86

PORT -PORT ISLES--	PPOWERS

Portofino Isles
Community Development District

Unaudited Financial Reporting
February 28, 2026

Table of Contents

1		Balance Sheet	

2-3	
	General Fund	

4	
	Debt Service Fund Series 2005	

5	
	Debt Service Fund Series 2013	

6	
	Capital Project Fund Series 2005	

7	
	Capital Project Fund Series 2013	

8-9	
	Month to Month	

10	
	Long Term Debt Report	

11	
	Assessment Receipt Schedule	

Combined Balance Sheet February 28, 2026

General
Fund

Debt Service
Fund

Capital Project
Fund

Totals
Governmental Funds

Assets:
Cash:
Operating Account

$	51,355	$	-	$	-	$

51,355

Allowance for Doubtfull Accounts	(61,091)	(541,192)	-	(602,283)	
Assessments Receivable	61,091	541,193	-	602,284	
Due from General Fund	-	1,754	-	1,754	
Due fron Debt Service	-	-	-	-	
Due from POA	8,219	-	-	8,219	
Investments:
State Board of Administration (SBA)	1,492,069	

-	

-	

1,492,069	
Series 2005
Reserve	-	

966	

-	

966	
Revenue	-	181,820	-	181,820	
Deferred Cost	-	45,385	-	45,385	
Construction	-	-	161	161	
Series 2013
Reserve	-	

250,682	

-	

250,682	
Interest	-	-	-	-	
Revenue	-	624,206	-	624,206	
Prepayment	-	129	-	129	
Cost of Issuance	-	-	1,480	1,480	
Prepaid Expenses	-	-	-	-	
Total Assets	$	1,551,644	$	1,104,942	$	1,641	$	2,658,227	

Liabilities:
Accounts Payable	
$	
3,060	
$	
-	$	
-	$	
3,060	
Due to Debt Service		1,754		-	-	1,754	
Due to Bondholders		-		7,071,320	-	7,071,320	
Total Liabilites	$	4,814	$	7,071,320	$	-	$	7,076,134	

Fund Balance:
Nonspendable: Prepaid Items	

$	

-	

$	

-	

$	

-	

$	-	
Restricted for: Debt Service	
-	
(5,966,378)	
-	
(5,966,378)	
Capital Project			1,641	1,641	
Unassigned	1,546,830	-	-	1,546,830	
Total Fund Balances	$	1,546,830	$	(5,966,378)	$	1,641	$	(4,417,907)	
					
Total Liabilities & Fund Balance	$	1,551,644	$	1,104,942	$	1,641	$	2,658,227	

	Adopted	Prorated Budget	Actual		
	Budget	Thru 02/28/26	Thru 02/28/26		Variance	

Revenues:						
Special Assessments - Tax Roll	$	135,969	$	125,180	$	125,180	$	-	
Direct Assessment - Lerner TH	39,178	-	-	-	
Interest Income	40,000	16,667	24,657	7,990	
Stormwater Rebate	150,000	62,500	-	(62,500)	
Other Income	-	-	1,226	1,226	
Total Revenues	$	365,147	$	204,347	$	151,063	$	(53,284)	

Expenditures:					
General & Administrative:					
Engineering	$	30,000	$	12,500	$	12,515	$	(15)	
Attorney	25,000	10,417	3,443	6,974	
Annual Audit	5,600	5,600	5,800	(200)	
Assessment Administration	1,061	1,061	1,061	-	
Arbitrage Rebate	1,200	600	600	-	
Dissemination Agent	2,922	1,217	1,218	(0)	
Trustee Fees	3,556	-	-	-	
Management Fees	52,837	22,015	22,015	0	
Information Technology	1,169	487	487	(0)	
Website Maintenance	1,169	487	487	(0)	
Telephone	100	42	-	42	
Postage & Delivery	500	208	67	141	
Insurance General Liability	8,552	8,552	7,932	620	
Printing & Binding	1,000	417	-	417	
Rental & Leases	2,400	1,000	1,000	-	
Legal Advertising	1,500	625	124	501	
Other Current Charges	300	125	190	(65)	
Office Supplies	225	94	-	94	
Dues, Licenses & Subscriptions	175	175	175	-	
Capital Outlay	300	300	-	300	
Total General & Administrative	$	139,565	$	65,922	$	57,114	$	8,808	

	Adopted	Prorated Budget	Actual		
	Budget	Thru 02/28/26	Thru 02/28/26	Variance	

Operations & Maintenance					
Field Expenditures
Salaries/Facility Management	

$	40,789	

$	16,995	

$	16,280	

$	715	
Environmental Services	2,500	1,042	-	1,042	
Electric	13,000	5,417	1,744	3,673	
Repairs & Maintenance	24,710	10,296	4,387	5,909	
Landscaping Maintenance	37,840	15,767	9,625	6,142	
Landscaping - Replacement	40,000	16,667	6,525	10,142	
Irrigation System	15,000	6,250	1,221	5,029	
Lake/Fountain Maintenance	21,120	8,800	-	8,800	
Wetlands Maintenance	19,200	8,000	6,500	1,500	
Stormwater Maintenance	50,000	20,833	-	20,833	
Chemicals/Operating Supplies	6,600	2,750	1,453	1,297	
Contingencies	35,000	14,583	11,697	2,887	
Capital Outlay - Gates	-	-	305	(305)	
Subtotal Field Expenditures	$	306,499	$	127,708	$	59,736	$	67,972	

Reserve Expenditures
Unassigned	

$	50,000	

$	20,833	

$	-	

$	20,833	
Subtotal Reserve Expenditures	$	50,000	$	20,833	$	-	$	20,833	
					
Total Operations & Maintenance	$	356,499	$	148,541	$	59,736	$	88,805	
					
Total Expenditures	$	496,063	$	214,463	$	116,849	$	97,614	
					
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues over Expenditures	$	(130,917)	$	(10,116)	$	34,213	$	44,330	
					
Net Change in Fund Balance	$	(130,917)	$	(10,116)	$	34,213	$	44,330	
					
Fund Balance - Beginning	$	130,917		$	1,512,616		
					
Fund Balance - Ending	$	0		$	1,546,830		

Adopted	Prorated Budget	Actual	
Budget	Thru 02/28/26	Thru 02/28/26	Variance	

Revenues:		
Special Assessments - Tax Roll	$	91,115	$	80,083	$	80,083	$	-	
SPE Funding	450,000	426,649	426,649	-	
Interest Income	-	-	2,800	2,800	
Total Revenues	$	541,115	$	506,732	$	509,532	$	2,800	

Expenditures:					
(1) Interest Expense - 11/1	$	100,800	$	-	$	-	$	-	
(1) Interest Expense - 05/1	100,800	-	-	-	
(1)Principal Expense - 05/1	245,000	-	-	-	
Other Debt Service Costs	450,000	-	439,245	(439,245)	
Other Debt Service Costs - Lerner	-	-	15,275	(15,275)	
Total Expenditures	$	896,600	$	-	$	454,520	$	(454,520)	
					
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues over Expenditures	$	(355,485)	$	506,732	$	55,012	$	(451,720)	

Other Financing Sources/(Uses):					
Contributions - Other Sources	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	
Total Other Financing Sources/(Uses)	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	
					
Net Change in Fund Balance	$	(355,485)	$	506,732	$	55,012	$	(451,720)	
					
Fund Balance - Beginning	$	355,485		$	(6,898,160)		
					
Fund Balance - Ending	$	0		$	(6,843,148)		

(1) Principal and Interest payments accrued, not paid.					

Revenues:					
Special Assessments - Tax Roll	$	430,939	$	398,200	$	398,200	$	-	
Interest Income	-	-	8,059	8,059	
Total Revenues	$	430,939	$	398,200	$	406,258	$	8,059	

Expenditures:					
Interest Expense - 11/1	$	67,450	$	67,450	67,450	$	-	
Interest Expense - 05/1	67,450	-	-	-	
Principal Expense - 5/1	300,000	-	5,000	(5,000)	
Other Debt Service Costs	5,922	-	5,922	(5,922)	
Total Expenditures	$	440,822	$	67,450	$	78,372	$	(10,922)	
					
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues over Expenditures	$	(9,883)	$	330,750	$	327,886	$	(2,864)	
					
Net Change in Fund Balance	$	(9,883)	$	330,750	$	327,886	$	(2,864)	
					
Fund Balance - Beginning	$	303,528		$	548,885		
					
Fund Balance - Ending	$	293,645		$	876,771		

Revenues		
Developer Contributions Interest Income	$	-	$
-	-	$	3
-	-	$	3
-	
Total Revenues	$	-	$	-	$	3	$	3	

Expenditures:					
Capital Outlay	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	
Total Expenditures	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	
					
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues over Expenditures	$	-	$	-	$	3	$	3	
					
Net Change in Fund Balance	$	-	$	3		
					
Fund Balance - Beginning	$	-	$	159		
					
Fund Balance - Ending	$	-	$	161		

Revenues					
Developer Contributions Interest Income	$	-	$
-	-	$	22
-	-	$	22
-	
Total Revenues	$	-	$	-	$	22	$	22	

Expenditures:					
Capital Outlay	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	
Total Expenditures	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	
					
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues over Expenditures	$	-	$	-	$	22	$	22	
					
Net Change in Fund Balance	$	-	$	22		
					
Fund Balance - Beginning	$	-	$	1,458		
					
Fund Balance - Ending	$	-	$	1,480		

Oct	Nov	Dec	Jan	Feb	March	April	May	June	July	Aug	Sept	Total

Revenues:

Special Assessments - Tax Roll	$	-	$	-	$	111,501	$	11,478	$	2,201	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	125,180	
Direct Assessment - Lerner TH	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Interest Income	5,367	5,020	5,002	4,891	4,377	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	24,657	
Stormwater Rebate	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Other Income	1,226	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1,226	
Total Revenues	$	6,593	$	5,020	$	116,503	$	16,369	$	6,578	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	151,063	

Expenditures:							
General & Administrative:							
Engineering	$	-	$	6,255	$	-	$	6,260	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	12,515	
Attorney	688	1,348	500	908	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3,443	
Annual Audit	-	-	-	5,800	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	5,800	
Assessment Administration	1,061	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1,061	
Arbitrage Rebate	-	-	-	600	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	600	
Dissemination Agent	244	244	244	244	244	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1,218	
Trustee Fees	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Management Fees	4,403	4,403	4,403	4,403	4,403	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	22,015	
Information Technology	97	97	97	97	97	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	487	
Website Maintenance	97	97	97	97	97	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	487	
Telephone	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Postage & Delivery	4	4	2	57	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	67	
Insurance General Liability	7,932	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7,932	
Printing & Binding	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Rental & Leases	200	200	200	200	200	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1,000	
Legal Advertising	-	124	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	124	
Other Current Charges	69	70	51	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	190	
Office Supplies	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Dues, Licenses & Subscriptions	175	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	175	
Total General & Administrative	$	14,971	$	12,841	$	5,594	$	18,666	$	5,041	$	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	57,114	

Operations & Maintenance							
Field Expenditures
Salaries/Facility Management	

$	2,960	

$	2,960	

$	2,960	

$	4,440	

$	2,960	

$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	16,280	
Environmental Services	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Electric	391	31	908	414	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1,744	
Repairs & Maintenance	-	-	4,045	200	142	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	4,387	
Landscaping Maintenance	1,925	1,925	1,925	1,925	1,925	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	9,625	
Landscaping - Replacement	3,125	3,400	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	6,525	
Irrigation System	-	-	-	1,121	100	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1,221	
Lake/Fountain Maintenance	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Wetlands Maintenance	1,300	1,300	1,300	1,300	1,300	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	6,500	
Stormwater Maintenance	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Chemicals/Operating Supplies	-	653	756	43	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1,453	
Contingencies	1,865	1,959	1,959	1,959	3,956	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	11,697	
Dues & Licenses	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Rosser Entrance	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	
Capital Outlay - Gates	-	-	-	-	305	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	305	
Subtotal Field Expenditures	$	11,566	$	12,228	$	13,852	$	11,402	$	10,688	$	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	59,736	

Oct	Nov	Dec	Jan	Feb	March	April	May	June	July	Aug	Sept	Total

Reserve Expenditures
Unassigned	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-

Net Change in Fund Balance	$	(19,944) $	(20,049) $	97,057  $	(13,699) $	(9,151) $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	34,213

Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues over Expenditures	$	(19,944)  $	(20,049)  $	97,057  $	(13,699)  $	(9,151)  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	34,213

Total Expenditures	$	26,537  $	25,069  $	19,446  $	30,068  $	15,729  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	116,849

Total Operations & Maintenance	$	11,566  $	12,228  $	13,852  $	11,402  $	10,688  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	59,736

Subtotal Reserve Expenditures	$	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-  $	-

Portofino Isles
Community Development District Long Term Debt Report

	Series 2005, Special Assessment Bonds (Court Project)		

Original Issue Amount:	
$6,375,000		
Interest Rate:	5.600%		
Maturity Date:	5/1/2036		
Reserve Fund Definition	Lesser of:		
	(i) Max Annual Debt Service for Bonds Outstanding		
	(ii) 125% of Average Debt Service for Bonds Outstanding		
	(iii) 10% of Original proceeds		
Reserve Fund Requirement	$440,880  (Default)		
Reserve Fund Balance	$966		
Bonds Outstanding		$6,375,000	
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/07		($85,000)	
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/08		($90,000)	
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/09		($95,000)	
Current Bonds Outstanding		$6,105,000	

Series 2013, Special Assessment Revenue Refunding Bonds

Original Issue Amount:	$5,730,000
Interest Rate:	3.500% - 4.750%
Maturity Date:	5/1/2033
50% of Max Annual Debt Service Requirements @ date of issuance
Reserve Fund Definition
Reserve Fund Requirement	$216,325
Reserve Fund Balance	$250,682

Bonds Outstanding	$5,730,000
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/14	($205,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/15	($210,000)
Less: Special Call 11/1/15	($5,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/16	($215,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/17	($220,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/18	($225,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/19	($230,000)
Less: Special Call 11/1/21	($5,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/20	($235,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/21	($245,000)
Less: Special Call 5/1/21	($5,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/22	($255,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/23	($260,000)
Less: Special Call 11/1/23	($5,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/24	($275,000)
Less: Principal Payment - 5/1/25	($290,000)	
Current Bonds Outstanding	$2,845,000	

Portofino Isles
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

	Gross Assessments  $	144,649.12	$	96,930.80	$	458,445.84	$	700,025.76	
	Net Assessments	$	135,970.17	$	91,114.95	$	430,939.09	$	658,024.21	
ON ROLL ASSESSMENTS	
allocation in %	20.66%	
13.85%	
65.49%	
100.00%	

Special Assessment Receipts - St. Lucie County Fiscal Year 2026

Date	
Gross Amount	Discoumt/ (Penalty)	
Commission	
Interest	
Net Receipts	
O&M Portion	2005		Debt Service	2013		Debt Service	
Total	

11/10/25	
$	8,734.05	
$	370.47	
$	167.27	
$	-	
$	8,196.31	
$	1,851.62	
$	-	
$	6,344.69	
$	8,196.31	
11/17/25	24,640.34	985.68	473.10	-	23,181.56	5,032.18	1,470.85	16,678.54	23,181.56	
11/21/25	26,374.72	1,055.03	506.38	-	24,813.31	5,400.80	1,470.85	17,941.66	24,813.31	
12/02/25	19,812.58	792.55	380.41	-	18,639.62	4,210.85	-	14,428.77	18,639.62	
12/08/25	19,123.72	764.94	367.17	-	17,991.61	1,812.28	16,179.33	-	17,991.61	
12/08/25	381,547.86	15,262.57	7,325.71	-	358,959.58	81,092.14	-	277,867.44	358,959.58	
12/12/25	47,675.94	1,907.16	915.37	-	44,853.41	9,928.04	1,470.85	33,454.53	44,853.41	
12/19/25	6,239.34	242.04	119.95	-	5,877.35	1,327.75	-	4,549.60	5,877.35	
12/31/25	3,935.76	76.36	118.06	-	3,741.34	845.20	-	2,896.14	3,741.34	
01/06/26	2,386.26	71.58	46.29	-	2,268.39	512.45	-	1,755.94	2,268.39	
01/09/26	-	-	-	363.54	363.54	78.06	29.23	256.26	363.54	
01/09/26	3,075.97	92.30	59.67	-	2,924.00	660.56	-	2,263.44	2,924.00	
01/09/26	74,203.75	-	-	-	74,203.75	8,695.13	57,960.39	7,548.23	74,203.75	
01/16/26	$3,764.31	-	$0.00	$0.00	3,764.31	850.39	-	2,913.92	3,764.31	
01/26/26	$1,549.50	30.99	30.37	$0.00	1,488.14	336.18	-	1,151.96	1,488.14	
01/30/26	$1,590.84	31.82	31.18	$0.00	1,527.84	345.15	-	1,182.69	1,527.84	
02/06/26	$3,853.08	77.06	75.52	$0.00	3,700.50	835.98	-	2,864.52	3,700.50	
02/13/26	$1,590.84	31.82	31.18	$0.00	1,527.84	345.15	-	1,182.69	1,527.84	
02/23/26	$3,288.02	49.57	65.45	$0.00	3,173.00	507.80	1,501.49	1,163.71	3,173.00	
02/27/26	$2,344.92	31.41	46.27	$0.00	2,267.24	512.19	-	1,755.05	2,267.24	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
					-	-	-	-	-	
	$	635,731.80	$	21,873.35	$	10,759.35	$	363.54	$	603,462.64	$	125,179.89	$	80,082.98	$	398,199.76	$	603,462.64