Loading...
08/22/2007 MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES CITY OF CLEARWATER August 22, 2007 Present: Douglas J. Williams Chair Jay Keyes Vice-Chair Kelly Wehner Board Member Richard Adelson Board Member Richard Avichouser Board Member Ronald V. Daniels Board Member Absent: David W. Campbell Board Member Also Present: Camilo Soto Assistant City Attorney Andy Salzman Attorney for the Board Mary K. Diana Secretary for the Board Brenda Moses Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The Chair outlined the procedures and stated any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty days of the execution of the order. Florida Statute 286.0107 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case 21-07 – Cont’d. from 6/28/07 Augustine Patel 1104 Carlton & 1405 N. Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. Property Maintenance, Exterior Storage – Collins Staff continued this item to September 26, 2007. B. Case 26-07 Capri Mobile Home Park, Inc. 24195 US Highway 19 Required Inspections – Wright Michael Ferdella, representative, admitted to the violation. Inspector Bill Wright said staff has worked with the property owner to obtain the necessary permits to complete the project. The City recommends permits be obtained by September 21, 2007 and the project completed by December 31, 2007, or a $250 per day per violation fine be imposed. Code Enforcement 2007-08-22 1 Mr. Ferdella said no plans for the 50-year old property indicate what is underground and requested an extension on a month to month basis. He also requested a September 30, 2007, deadline to obtain permits. Board Attorney Salzman said if issues come up, Mr. Ferdella can come back before the Board in November. Staff indicated a sanitary problem has existed onsite since March 2006. Half the property has septic tanks and work has been performed to the sanitary system without the required permits and inspections. Member Daniels moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on August 22, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, and an admission to the violation by Respondent’s Representative, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident work has been performed to the sanitary system without the required permits and/or inspections. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of Chapter 47, Article IV, Sections 47.083 and Article V, Section 47.111 of the City of Clearwater Code as referred in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by obtaining the necessary permits by September 30, 2007, and completing the work by December 31, 2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250 per day per violation for each day the violation continues to exist. If necessary, due to extenuating circumstances in meeting compliance, the Respondent may address the Board. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector William Wright, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to comply within the time specified, a certified copy of the Order imposing the fine may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, and once recorded shall constitute a lien against any real property owned by the Respondent(s), pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board Order resulting from a public hearing. A petition for rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the Board Secretary no later than thirty days after the execution of the Order and prior to the filing of any appeal. Upon receipt of the petition, the Board will consider whether or not to reconsider or rehear the case. The Board will not hear oral argument or evidence in determining whether to grant the petition to reconsider or rehear. Any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the Code Enforcement 2007-08-22 2 execution of the Order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. C. Case 27-07 Home Energy, LLC 415 Island Way Public Nuisance – Brown The Respondent had no representation. Service on the Notice of Hearing was obtained by certified mail. Inspector Shelby Brown provided a PowerPoint presentation. The violation relates to a public nuisance condition. Several hundred yards of unstabilized dirt have been dumped on this vacant lot. The property contains weeds and is overgrown. Dust continues to be a problem for residents at an adjacent apartment complex. The dirt piles are a few stories high. The initial date of inspection was May 22, 2007. The notice of violation was July 9, 2007, with a compliance date of July 21, 2007. Promises were made that the problems would be rectified. However, no progress has been made. The dirt piles need to be removed or at least leveled, dust controlled, and groundcover installed. Staff recommends compliance by September 4, 2007, or a fine of $250 per day. Attorney Soto submitted City composite exhibits. Mr. Hall stated the property is hazardous. In response to a question, Ms. Brown said the dirt piles on this property are not tied to any other work being done in the area. Staff felt the September 4, 2007, date for compliance was reasonable. Member Keyes moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on August 22, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent (the Respondent had no representation), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident a violation exists in that several hundred yards of dirt/sand have been dumped on this vacant lot in an unstabilized condition creating a public nuisance to neighboring properties. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of Section 3-1503.B.1 of the City of Clearwater as referred in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by September 4, 2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within Code Enforcement 2007-08-22 3 the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Shelby Brown, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to comply within the time specified, a certified copy of the Order imposing the fine may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, and once recorded shall constitute a lien against any real property owned by the Respondent(s), pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board Order resulting from a public hearing. A petition for rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the Board Secretary no later than thirty days after the execution of the Order and prior to the filing of any appeal. Upon receipt of the petition, the Board will consider whether or not to reconsider or rehear the case. The Board will not hear oral argument or evidence in determining whether to grant the petition to reconsider or rehear. Any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the execution of the Order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D. Case 28-07 Ocean Breeze LLC 21 Somerset Street Public Nuisance – Brown No one was present to represent the applicant. Service on the Notice of Hearing was obtained by posting the property and by certified mail. Inspector Brown provided a PowerPoint presentation. The violation relates to overgrowth and debris on a vacant lot. The rights-of-way are overgrown and there is an abandoned sign on the site The initial date of inspection was June 27, 2007. The date of the notice of violation was June 29, 2007, with a compliance date of July 9, 2007. In response to a question, Inspector Brown said calls were made to the owner in May and in July and the owner was notified by certified mail, return receipt received. The property owner must clear all overgrowth, debris, etc. from the lot and the public right-of-way and maintain the property on a regular basis. There is no active permit for this property. Member Avichouser moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on August 22, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent (the Respondent had no representation), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident a violation exists in that a vacant parcel is overgrown, has an accumulation of debris, and is not being maintained, creating a public nuisance to the neighboring properties. Code Enforcement 2007-08-22 4 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3- 1503.A, 3-1503.B, and 3-1503.B.7 as referred to in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by September 4, 2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Shelby Brown, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to comply within the time specified, a certified copy of the Order imposing the fine may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, and once recorded shall constitute a lien against any real property owned by the Respondent(s), pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board Order resulting from a public hearing. A petition for rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the Board Secretary no later than thirty days after the execution of the Order and prior to the filing of any appeal. Upon receipt of the petition, the Board will consider whether or not to reconsider or rehear the case. The Board will not hear oral argument or evidence in determining whether to grant the petition to reconsider or rehear. Any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the execution of the Order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceeding. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. E. Case 29-07 Regatta Bay of Clearwater LLC 862 Bayway Boulevard Public Nuisance – Brown No one was present to represent the applicant. Service on the Notice of Hearing was obtained by posting and by certified mail. Inspector Brown provided a PowerPoint presentation. The violation relates to overgrowth and debris on a vacant lot. The public rights-of-way are also overgrown. The initial date of inspection was June 28, 2007. The notice of violation was issued on June 29, 2007 with a compliance date of July 10, 2007. Ms. Brown referred to photos showing fencing blowing away, the sidewalk obstructed with vegetation and debris, and wooden posts sticking out of the ground. The overgrowth and debris must be cleared from the property and the property maintained. Staff recommended compliance by September 4, 2007, or a $250 per day fine be imposed. In response to a question, Ms. Brown said there were structures on the lot a year ago. Attorney Soto submitted City composite exhibits. Code Enforcement 2007-08-22 5 Member Wehner moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on August 22, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent (Respondent had no representation) and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident a violation exists in that a vacant parcel is overgrown, has an accumulation of debris, and is not being maintained, creating a public nuisance for neighboring properties. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3- 1503.A, 3-1503.B, and 3-1503.B.7 as referred in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by September 4, 2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Shelby Brown, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to comply within the time specified, a certified copy of the Order imposing the fine may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, and once recorded shall constitute a lien against any real property owned by the Respondent(s), pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board Order resulting from a public hearing. A petition for rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the Board Secretary no later than thirty days after the execution of the Order and prior to the filing of any appeal. Upon receipt of the petition, the Board will consider whether or not to reconsider or rehear the case. The Board will not hear oral argument or evidence in determining whether to grant the petition to reconsider or rehear. Any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the execution of the Order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. F. Case 30-07 Leeward J. & Catherine K. Bean 1874 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Signage w/o Permit & Vehicle Signs – Weaver Member Avichouser declared a conflict of interest. Leeward Bean, property owner, did not admit to the violation. Code Enforcement 2007-08-22 6 Sign Inspector Mary Jo Weaver provided a PowerPoint presentation. She said the violations relate to a sign altered without a permit and a prohibited vehicle sign. The initial date of inspection was June 15, 2007. The second notice of violation was July 9, 2007. The only sign permit on file was obtained on January 10, 1994, for a 64 square foot freestanding sign not a 100 square sign as currently exists. Staff recommended compliance by September 21, 2007 or a fine of $250 per day. In response to a question, Mr. Hall stated the Code requires that vehicles with business signage be parked in the least prominent location on the site, whenever possible. Inspector Peggy Franco said the subject vehicle typically was parked on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard during business hours. However, since Inspector Weaver spoke to the owner, the vehicle has been parked in a less conspicuous location to the north side of the property. Mr. Bean provided a PowerPoint presentation. He said his property consists of two separate uniquely shaped parcels. He said when he started negotiations to purchase the property, he met with City staff. He said he was concerned because the property’s signage, parking, rights-of-ways, etc. were out of compliance. He originally told his Realtor he did not wish to purchase the property; however, met again with Planning and Zoning staff, who indicated they wanted the parcels maintained as commercial property. He said he then renegotiated the deal and purchased the property. He said there are three parts to the business; retail T-shirts, Internet marketing of T- shirts and novelty items, and mobile print shops inside the trucks which can go to various locations at various events. He said the truck in question was parked on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard during extensive remodeling of the building. He said he met with staff twice in March and was told, as long as the trucks were moved daily, they could be parked during construction at Gulf- to-Bay Boulevard. He said the vehicles were moved after the construction was completed. Mr. Bean stated on May 30, 2007, he met with Catherine Hess of the City’s Zoning Department. He said he showed her a photo of the original freestanding sign on the property and a rendering of the sign he wanted to put on the site (Defendant Exhibit 1). He said she approved the rendering indicating it was grandfathered in. He then took the image to the sign company and paid $3,000 for the sign to be redone. He said he found out his sign was out of compliance when the previous owner’s daughter called to tell him. He said he again went to the City and spoke to the Planning Director, who told him the sign was not in compliance. He said he has not been offered any compensation due to staff error. He said the previous owner’s sign had been up for years and that he merely refaced it with new lettering. In response to a question, Mr. Bean said he did not receive any documentation from Ms. Hess attesting to the grandfathering. Mr. Bean said Ms. Hess told him he did not need anything, as he was just refacing the sign. Discussion ensued regarding permitting issues and how the square footage of a sign is determined. In response to a question, Mr. Bean stated he was never told he was limited to a 64 square foot sign. Mr. Bean said he has tried to contact Ms. Hess, who has since left City employment. He said, if he had known what he knows now, he would have redone the sign to conform. He said he indicated to staff that he would remove everything else on the sign if he could keep the logo. He said it is important to market the logo as he plans to franchise it. He requested keeping the logo for a year after which time he would redesign the sign. Code Enforcement 2007-08-22 7 Discussion ensued regarding relocating the logo on the sign, and Mr. Bean said the logo is a vinyl transfer and cannot be used again. It would cost $1,600 to have the logo reprinted. It was noted signage cannot be located on the bottom 8 feet of the sign structure. In response to a question, Mr. Hall expressed concern many others would come forward if Mr. Bean was allowed a year to bring his sign into compliance. He said allowing the sign for a year would be counter-productive to the City’s sign amortization program. Board Attorney Salzman said there may be an estoppel issue if a City official gave approval for the sign and requested a recess to consult with staff. The Board recessed from 4:14 to 4:19 p.m. The Board Attorney felt the City needed to determine what Ms. Hess told Mr. Bean with respect to the sign and requested the Board continue the case so that the City could contact her. Member Keyes moved to continue Case 30-07 to September 26, 2007. The motion was duly seconded. Members Keyes, Wehner, Adelson, Daniels, and Chair Williams voted “Aye”; Member Avichouser abstained. Motion carried. In response to a question from Mr. Bean regarding where his business vehicles could be parked, Mr. Hall indicated the north side of the property was the least prominent location. G. Case 31-07 Maira I. Contreras 1422 Thames Lane Vehicle Repair, Hauling Trailer, Grass Parking - Espinosa Bob E. Burgoyne, representative, admitted to the violation. Mr. Hall said the violations relate to vehicle repair, residential grass parking, and a hauling trailer in the right-of-way. He said these violations have been present for some time. He said staff attempted to gain compliance through court action and discussed these issues with the property owner. He said the property currently is in compliance. He requested the Board find that a violation existed and was corrected prior to hearing. Staff is not recommending a fine at this time. However, a fine would be recommended should a repeat violation occur. Member Adelson moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Municipal Code Enforcement Board on August 22, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues to the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT Based on the testimony and evidence received, it is evident the condition existed; however, it is further evident this condition was corrected prior to this hearing. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Code Enforcement 2007-08-22 8 The Respondent(s) was/were in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3- 915-C, 3-1407.A.2.B, and 3-1407.A.4, as referred in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of this Board that no fine will be imposed against the Respondent(s). The Board further orders that if Respondent(s) repeats/repeat the violation referenced herein, the Board may order the Respondent(s) to pay a fine for each day the violation exists after the Respondent(s) is/are notified of the repeat violation. Should the violation reoccur, the Board has the authority to impose the fine at that time without a subsequent hearing. Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board Order resulting from a public hearing. A petition for rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the Board Secretary no later than thirty days after the execution of the Order and prior to the filing of any appeal. Upon receipt of the petition, the Board will consider whether or not to reconsider or rehear the case. The Board will not hear oral argument or evidence in determining whether to grant the petition to reconsider or rehear. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Case 55-06 – Affidavit of Compliance Mary Margaret Jones 1223 Idlewild Drive Grass Parking, Exterior Surfaces – Collins B. Case 74-06 – Affidavit of Compliance Remzi Dalip 2135 Burnice Drive Permits/Inspection - Wilson C. Case 03-07 - Affidavit of Compliance Real Global Investment LLC 2400 Gulf to Bay Boulevard Signs, Exterior Surfaces, Public Nuisance – Franco D. Case 08-07 - Affidavit of Compliance PMLHC Inc 1575 S Ft Harrison Ave. Parking Lot Surfaces - Ruud E. Case 09-07 – Affidavit of Compliance Yield Developments LLC 1749 Drew Street Exterior Storage, Exterior Surfaces, Inoperative Vehicle & Fences – O’Neil Code Enforcement 2007-08-22 9 F. Case16-07 - Affidavit of Compliance Frank P & Betty J Barlow TRE 1326 S Madison Avenue Exterior Storage - Ruud G. Case 25-07 - Affidavit of Compliance Kimble R & Mary L McNeal 310 Coachman Road S Grass Parking, Vehicle Sales - Franco Member Keyes moved to accept the Affidavits of Compliance for Cases 55-06,74-06, 03-07,08-07,09-07,16-07, and 25-07. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 3. OTHER BOARD ACTIONIDISCUSSION A. Case 03-07 - Request to Address Board re Fine Reduction Real Global Investments LLC (Sweetwater's) 2400 Gulf to Bay Boulevard Signs, Exterior Surfaces, Public Nuisance - Franco (Fine - $17,250) Member Daniels moved to hear the fine reduction request on September 26,2007. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4. NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIEN FILINGS Robert F Pettit 1009 Woodlawn Street 22-29-15-07938-004-0010 PNU2007 -00442 $1,351.11 Member Keyes moved to accept the nuisance abatement lien filing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - June 28, 2007 Member Keyes moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of June 28, 2007, as submitted in written summation to each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:28 p.m. lJ~~ ~ .~ Seer n,y me Board Code Enforcement 2007-08-22 10 FORM 8B,- MEMORANPU,M OF VOTING,CONFLI,CT FOR COUNT'l MUNICIPAL AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMI'ITEE t-\ ~""\'-o O.x.. i2... \ Q.. ~ IIQ 0 C Cl D t;: 6'\..7 ~ 0 ~L C. EO 1\.,,\ (-'I\.;r' OJ'\- MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTIiOWTY OR COMMITTEE ON WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: ' ~ITY Q COUNTY Q OTHER LOCAL AGENCY NAME OF POI1TlCAL SUBDIVISION: ~Lt 't\ Q. W "" '"\ E MY POSITION IS: ~ IN ST ~~EDlA) 'F DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED ~ -- 2. 2. -0 &.;j';:" 30....07 COUNTY 7(Nt'Ufi. Q ELECTIVE APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FilE FORM 88 This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed,or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not pro- hibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father- in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, cQOwner of property, or corporate sharl!holder (where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). * * * * * * . * * * * * * * * * ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict.: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * APPOINTED OFFICERS: You must abstain from voting and disclose the conflict in the situations described above and in the manner described for elected offi- cers. In order to participate in these matters, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in Writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: , ' . You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. . A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. · The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. CE FORM 88 . REV, 1/95 PAGE 1 . 1 IF YOU MAKE NO A'l-TEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPI' BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: . . '. . I · You 'must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure befo~ participating. · You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. . DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I,-K..\.ll ~~ \:) f\J \C \,,, M '\J'C () '. hereby disclose that on . '8' - L~. .- C'-' 7 ,19_: (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) ~ inured to my special private gain or loss; ~ inured to the special gain or loss of my busines;J: )Ft>.~ inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, inured to the special gain or loss of whom I am retained; or inured to the special gain or loss of is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: .by , which ?5 - 2.2 - 0-1- Date Filed -4~ NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES ~112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLO- SURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000. CE FORM 8B - REV. 1/95 PAGE 2