August 4, 2026 Town Council Meeting — Agenda Breakdown

Workshop discussion: Town Attorney proposal from TG Law

What it is. The Town issued Request for Proposals (RFP) 2026-0522 for legal services on May 22, 2026, with proposals due June 26. The cover sheet states: "One RFP was submitted for consideration." That proposal came from TG Law PLLC of Orlando and West Palm Beach, whose managing partner Gemma Torcivia would serve as primary Town Attorney with Kate Watson as secondary counsel.

TG Law offers two pricing options. Option A, which the firm recommends, is a "Flat Monthly Retainer Fee: $9,800.00 / month" covering Council meetings, workshops, day-to-day inquiries, and routine drafting, with litigation and specialized work billed at $280 per hour for attorneys and $95 per hour for paralegals. Option B is pure hourly at $295 for attorneys. The contract term in the RFP is three years with two one-year renewal options.

The Town Charter, Section 3.03, provides that "There shall be a Town Attorney appointed by the Town Council" by simple majority vote. Charter Section 2.10(c) requires three affirmative votes for any Council action to be valid.

Worth watching. The Town's own purchasing policy sets out how an RFP is supposed to be decided. Section IV.C states that "The vendor selection process is done through an evaluation committee, (Committee), appointed by the user department director and comprised of a member of the user department, together with at least two other members familiar with the goods or services being evaluated," that "Each committee member shall complete a 'Conflict of Interest Statement' upon appointment to the committee and prior to review of submittals," and that "the ranking information will be presented to Town Council by the user department with a request for approval." The RFP itself requires the same machinery: Section 5 provides for proposals to be "evaluated by a Selection Committee appointed by the Town Chief Administrative Officer" against weighted scoring criteria, with the Committee's recommendation "forwarded to the Town Council," and Section 6.7 adds that "All meetings of the Selection Committee are subject to Section 286.011, Florida Statutes." The RFP's own timeline scheduled "Evaluation Committee Review" for June 29 through July 2, 2026.

Neither the workshop packet nor the meeting packet contains a committee appointment, a conflict of interest statement, a score sheet, a ranking, a meeting notice, or minutes. Whether those records exist outside the packet is not something the packet answers.

The RFP also carries internal date conflicts worth noting: the cover page and Section 4.1 set the deadline at 12:00 PM on June 26, while the Section 3 timeline table sets it at 2:00 PM the same day. The same table lists "Recommendation to Town Commission July 07, 2026." Eatonville has a Town Council, not a Commission, and no recommendation appears in the July 7 record.

Workshop discussion: Special Magistrate proposal from Attorney Greg Jackson

What it is. The Town issued a second solicitation, RFP 2026-CE-0526, on May 26, 2026, for Special Magistrate services for code enforcement hearings under Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. Proposals were due June 26. As with the legal services RFP, the cover sheet states: "One RFP was submitted for consideration." That proposal came from Attorney Greg Jackson.

The cover sheet describes the role this way: "The selected Special Magistrate will serve as an independent, quasi-judicial officer to hear and determine code enforcement cases brough [sic] by the town."

Several clerical points in the packet are worth flagging for anyone reading along. The printed workshop agenda lists Items 2 and 3 with identical titles — both read "Discussion of the Request For Proposals (RFP) submitted for General Legal Services for the Town of Eatonville." The cover sheet for Item 3 also carries the General Legal Services title, though its request text and exhibit list are about the Special Magistrate solicitation. The RFP document and Attorney Jackson's proposal, including his resume, appear at pages 65 through 87 of the workshop packet as scanned images. The RFP document itself carries internal drift: its Section 1.3 lists an issue date of June 26, 2026, where its cover says May 26; its Section 5.4 dates the optional pre-proposal conference June 11, 2025 — a year before the RFP existed — while its procurement schedule dates the same conference June 11, 2026; and its fee-proposal instructions tell proposers to mark the envelope "RFP 2025-CE-001," a different solicitation number. (The cover-sheet template carries a stale year of its own: six of the meeting packet's eight cover sheets — and the workshop's scholarship cover sheet — are headed "August 4, 2025.")

The proposal quotes a fee of $250 per hour across hearing preparation, hearing time, and administrative time, with an estimated annual total of $25,500 to $34,500 and no retainer. It states Attorney Jackson has "no disciplinary history, pending complaints, or sanctions on file with The Florida Bar." Its approach narrative cites "My current experience as an active Special Magistrate," while its qualifications section lists "Current Special Magistrate Engagements: Not Applicable at this time." Its reference list includes "Wanda Randolph, TOECRA Board Member" — Councilwoman Randolph, a member of the body that votes on this award — and lists former Apopka Mayor Bryan Nelson with "No direct services," though the RFP requires references be clients for whom services were provided.

Worth watching. Attorney Jackson is General Counsel to the Town of Eatonville Community Redevelopment Agency — a role his own resume in the packet dates to 2014–2020 and 2022 to present. He has also been serving as the Town's Interim Town Attorney — he advised the Council in that capacity on July 7 and July 21, and the August 4 printed agenda still lists an Interim Town Attorney's report. Neither his proposal nor the cover sheet mentions that role; Item 3 on the same agenda would hire TG Law as Town Attorney. A Special Magistrate is a quasi-judicial officer who hears code enforcement cases the Town brings against property owners. In July 2025 the CRA Board adopted CRA-R-2025-28, renaming its Paint, Plant & Pave grant program to the "Code Compliance and Minor Rehab Program" and authorizing the Executive Director to spend budgeted funds "for the purpose of addressing single family owner occupied properties that meet 2025 HUD income guidlines [sic] within the CRA district and properties identified as slum or blighted."

If the Council makes the appointment at Item 4, the same attorney would be advising the agency whose program is organized around code compliance while deciding the Town's code enforcement cases. The proposal itself discloses the CRA role: it states that Attorney Jackson "has represented the TOECRA in a matter adverse to the Town of Eatonville, which has since resolved," and commits that if a "TOECRA-related party appears before him in a code enforcement hearing, he will promptly disclose the relationship and recuse himself if appropriate," deferring "to the Town's direction on recusal." What the packet does not contain is any Town-side analysis of that disclosure — or the evaluation committee review the Special Magistrate RFP itself requires in its Section 7, which also provides that award "is not effective until a fully executed contract is in place." Cheatonville draws no legal conclusion here; it is a question the Council can put on the record before it votes at 7:30.

Workshop discussion: Bruce and Winnie Mount Scholarship results

What it is. The Clerk's office will report results of the Bruce and Winnie Mount Scholarship Program, which awards graduating seniors and first- and second-year college students at 100, 75, and 50 percent of the scholarship amount respectively, for students with a GPA of 2.5 or greater and a record of community service.

The exhibits line reads: "Support Documents will be provided after the July 31st Deadline." No results, applicant counts, or award amounts are in the packet.

Worth watching. If the supporting documents are not distributed before the workshop, the Council will be discussing results it has not seen in writing. The cover sheet lists no dollar figure for the program.

Presentation: HostDime construction update

What it is. A HostDime representative will update the Council on construction status and opening timeline for the data center. The cover sheet lists exhibits as "N/A," though what follows it in the packet, as scanned images, is a printout of a HostDime company blog post dated May 5, 2026 on data-center water usage — presenting the facility's closed-loop, air-cooled design as consuming near-zero water for cooling annually; the post's own fine print limits that figure to the cooling system, not the building's overall water use. The Chief Administrative Officer, Marlin Daniels, requested the presentation.

Worth watching. HostDime is a major new taxable improvement, and because the 1997 Redevelopment Plan makes the CRA boundary and the Town limits one and the same, the timing of its completion affects when its added value starts generating tax increment revenue — the property-tax growth that flows into the CRA trust fund. Any date the representative gives for opening is worth writing down and checking against later statements. The only written backup is the company's own marketing material — the same sourcing pattern noted when a HostDime construction update reached the Council on July 7.

Presentation: Dr. Phillips Charities on the Hungerford property

What it is. Dr. Phillips Charities returns with an update on the Hungerford School property. The cover sheet notes that on September 30, 2025 the Orange County School Board approved transferring the property from Orange County Public Schools to Dr. Phillips Charities, and states that "Dr. Phillips Charities has requested to provide updates during every town council meeting to the town Council on the plans towards redeveloping the Hungerford School property." The item is sponsored by Councilman Mack. Exhibits: none.

Worth watching. This is a recurring presentation slot with no written material attached, on the same agenda as Resolution 2026-41, which expresses support for litigation challenging how that transfer was approved. The Council will hear from the purchaser and then vote on the resolution about the sale in the same sitting.

Presentation: department head staff reports

What it is. Department directors, or their designees, will report out on their respective departments. Councilwoman Randolph is listed as the sponsor and the Chief Administrative Officer asked directors to be prepared. Exhibits: none.

Worth watching. Written department reports would give residents a record they can check against later. Nothing in the packet indicates whether these will be delivered in writing or only spoken.

Resolution 2026-44 — Beautiful Gate mammography event

What it is. Resolution 2026-44 approves a partnership with The Beautiful Gate Cancer Support & Resource Center for its annual 3D mammography mobile screening event. The cover sheet places the event on Saturday, September 12, 2026, "and ongoing on an annual basis at the Denton Johnson Community." — the resolution itself names no date or location. The organization's letter confirms the screenings are free and open to the public, with clinical services provided through the Florida Department of Health's Breast & Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program subject to eligibility.

The cover sheet lists fiscal data as "Anticipated budget line item - Robert Wood Johnson Foundation - 001-0574-574-4901 $1,750.00."

Worth watching. Consent agenda items pass in a single vote without separate discussion unless a member pulls them. The resolution text itself does not mention the $1,750 or say what it pays for, and its title breaks off mid-phrase — "APPROVING PARTNERSHIP with The Beautiful Gate Cancer Support & Resource Center for the Annual ," — with the event name missing before the title resumes with its standard conflicts, severability, and effective-date clauses.

Resolution 2026-41 — Hungerford transparency and support for the SPLC lawsuit

What it is. Resolution 2026-41, amended, would have the Council affirm its commitment to government transparency and express support for the lawsuit filed April 1, 2026 by the Association to Preserve the Eatonville Community, represented by the Southern Poverty Law Center, against the School Board of Orange County. The suit alleges the Board decided the Hungerford sale to Dr. Phillips Charities outside the open-meetings requirements of Chapter 286, Florida Statutes.

Section 2 of the resolution "expresses its full moral and political support for the lawsuit filed by P.E.C. and the SPLC" and "condemns any closed-door negotiations that subvert the open meeting requirements of the Florida Sunshine Law regarding the $14 million sale of the Robert Hungerford property to Dr. Phillips Charities." Section 3 endorses the legal action to the extent it would "invalidate any decisions made in violation of the Florida Sunshine Law."

The cover sheet recounts the history; per the recorded votes, the Council voted down Resolution 2026-37, 2–3, on June 16, 2026, voted down Resolution 2026-38, 2–2, on July 7, 2026, and tabled Resolution 2026-41, 4–1 on the motion to table, on July 21, 2026. Councilwoman Randolph, the sponsor, "contends that the resolution does not state a filing of a lawsuit or join in the lawsuit but for support and transparency."

Worth watching. This is the fourth time in seven weeks a version of this resolution has come before the Council. Charter Section 2.10(c) requires three affirmative votes for any action, so the resolution needs three yes votes to pass regardless of how many members are present. The cover sheet describes the earlier votes as "2/3 unfavorably" and "2/2 unfavorably" — staff characterizations. The recorded tallies, linked above, are 2–3 and 2–2; the July 7 vote was 2–2 on a five-member Council because only four members cast votes that night, with Council Member Mack participating by Zoom without a recorded vote.

Award: TG Law as Town Attorney

What it is. The same TG Law proposal discussed at 6:30 comes back for approval at 7:30. The exhibits line reads only: "Refer to support documents provided in workshop." No contract, engagement letter, or negotiated fee schedule is attached to the meeting packet.

At the recommended retainer of $9,800 per month, the annual cost is $117,600 before any litigation or specialized hourly work. The Town's purchasing policy provides that "All purchases of goods and services, where the total ANNUAL cost of the purchases or contract will exceed $25,000, must be approved by the Town Council," so a Council vote is the right step. The policy also provides that for an RFP, "once the Committee has ranked the qualified responses, the ranking information will be presented to Town Council by the user department with a request for approval along with a request for the proper Town officials to be authorized to negotiate and execute the contract."

Worth watching. The item as written asks the Council to "approve the Request For Proposal (RFP) submitted By TG Law." A proposal is not a contract. Unless the motion also authorizes specific officials to negotiate and execute an agreement on stated terms, it is not clear from the packet what the Town would be bound to or what it would pay. Cheatonville will report which motion the Council actually adopts.

Award: Attorney Greg Jackson as Special Magistrate

What it is. The Special Magistrate proposal likewise returns for a vote the same night it is discussed. The exhibits line again reads: "Refer to support documents provided in workshop." No agreement appears in the meeting packet, and the cover sheet lists fiscal data as "N/A" — though the proposal in the workshop packet quotes $250 per hour and estimates $25,500 to $34,500 annually.

Worth watching. Chapter 162, Florida Statutes, allows a local government to use a special magistrate in place of a code enforcement board, with the magistrate holding quasi-judicial authority to find violations and impose fines and liens. The independence of that officer is the point of the structure. The conflict question flagged under the workshop item above — the same attorney serving as CRA General Counsel — does not resolve itself between the 6:30 discussion and the 7:30 vote.

Resolution 2026-45 — Eatonville Heritage Tourism District

What it is. Resolution 2026-45 would establish an Eatonville Heritage Tourism District, define its boundaries, list twelve purposes and sixteen priority catalyst projects, and direct staff to prepare a set of plans. It is sponsored by "Administration/Michael Johnson" — the CRA Executive Director — and comes to the Town Council rather than the CRA Board.

Section 3 lists the properties in the District, including "Club Eaton," "Eaton Walk Food Hall," "Zora Square Park," "Town Hall/CRA facilities," "Historic Downtown," and "The Hungerford/OCPS Property." Section 4 sets general boundaries and authorizes the CAO or designee to prepare a legal description and GIS map "for incorporation into the Comprehensive Plan, CRA Plan, and future land development documents."

Section 8 states that "Within 180 days staff shall prepare" a Heritage Tourism Master Plan, Streetscape Master Plan, Wayfinding Plan, Branding Strategy, Historic Interpretation Plan, Capital Improvement Program, Parking Strategy, and Tourism Marketing Strategy. The cover sheet lists fiscal data as "N/A."

A recital states that "the Town of Eatonville CRA has submitted funding requests to Orange County through the Tourist Development Tax Program for implementation of these projects." The backup at pages 28 through 34 shows what that means: the CRA's Orange County TDT "Funding Interest Indicator," signed by Executive Director Michael Johnson on July 15, 2026, seeking $22,500,000 in county tourist-tax funding toward a stated $30,000,000 total project cost — with anticipated requests of $7.5 million in 2027, $10 million in 2028, and $5 million in 2029 — and projecting 75,000 annual visitors and a Spring 2029 opening. The application's funding-history section checks "No" on whether the organization has previously received TDT funding, then lists a $300,000 award in 2026 for the Club Eaton property acquisition.

Worth watching. Eight professional plans in 180 days is a substantial body of consultant work, and for that planning work the packet identifies no funding source, no procurement path, and no cost estimate — the cover sheet lists fiscal data as "N/A" even as the attached application describes a $30 million project. Section 9 authorizes "The Town Manager, CRA Executive Director, Planning Department, and consultants" to pursue grants and partnerships; the Charter, Section 3.04, establishes a Chief Administrative Officer and the Town has no position titled Town Manager.

The District also folds CRA facilities and CRA-initiated projects into a Town Council designation while the CRA's own plan and trust fund remain governed by Chapter 163, Part III, Florida Statutes. Where a project sits determines which board approves it and which fund pays for it. The resolution does not address that division.