Loading...
2011-09-20 CDBminutes Minutes of the September 20, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board 1 2 3 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE 5 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD 6 September 20, 2011 7 8 9 I. CALL TO ORDER — 6:02pm 10 A. VERIFICATION OF QUORUM. 11 Chairman Chris Lambertson verified presence of a quorum with the attendance of 12 Kelly Elmore, Kirk Hansen, Chris Lambertson (chair), Harley Parkes, Brea Paul, and 13 Patrick Stratton. Blaine Adams was absent. Also in attendance were Building 14 Official Michael Griffin, City Attorney Alan Jensen, and Principal Planner Erika Hall. 15 II. AGENDA ORGANIZATION 16 A. ADOPTION OF MEETING MINUTES — AUGUST 16, 2011 17 Mr. Lambertson called for a motion to approve the minutes of the August 16, 2011 18 meeting. 19 MOTION: Ms. Paul moved to approve and adopt the minutes of the August 16, 20 2011 meeting, as written. Seconded by Mr. Elmore, the motion carried 6 -0. 21 III. EXCEPTIONS — NONE 22 IV. VARIANCES 23 A. DEFERRED ITEMS TO BE HEARD — NONE 24 B. NEW ITEMS TO BE HEARD 25 1. ZVAR -11- 00100054 26 ADDRESS: 66 W 7 Street 27 OWNER: Kenneth D Wise 28 AGENT: Kenneth D Wise 29 REQUEST: Rear Yard Dimensional Variance 30 Ms. Hall introduced the item, stating that Mr. Wise owns one unit of a two - family 31 dwelling located at 66 W 7 Street within the Residential General (RG) Zoning 32 District. She explained that the rear wall of the existing structure is located 33 approximately twenty -four and one -half (24 1/2) feet from the rear property line 34 and that the required rear yard setback within RG is twenty (20) feet. Ms. Hall 35 said that according to his application, Mr. Wise is requesting a five (5) foot Page 1 of 7 Minutes of the September 20, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board 36 reduction of the rear yard setback in order to construct a 12' x 12' addition on the 37 rear of the existing structure; however, by her estimation, such an addition would 38 require a seven -and- one -half (7 '/2) foot reduction. 39 Kenneth Wise (66 W 7 Street) spoke in regards to his request, stating that his 40 family needed additional space for their children. He explained that currently, his 41 teenage son Derek (also present) shared a bedroom with his two year old son, and 42 that due to the age difference, each had very differing needs as far as schedule and 43 work/play space. Mr. Wise said that he would like to construct a small addition so 44 that Derek could have his own bedroom. Derek Wise spoke in support of the 45 request, explaining the difficulty in sharing a bedroom with a toddler. 46 Mr. Lambertson asked if the Wise home was attached to another, and Mr. Wise 47 confirmed that there was a storage area that joined his home to the next. 48 Mr. Elmore asked about the interior configuration of the Wise home along the rear 49 wall, noting that an addition could be configured such that it spanned the entire 50 width of the existing structure, but extended no further than the rear yard setback 51 line, thus eliminating the need for a variance. Mr. Wise responded that the 52 addition was designed so as to most efficiently accommodate a bed, dresser, desk 53 and closet. 54 Mr. Lambertson opened the hearing to public comment and with there being no 55 one to speak for or against the item, closed that portion of the hearing and 56 returned the discussion to the Board. 57 Mr. Elmore noted this is a self - imposed hardship, and that there is sufficient 58 space for an alternative. He then inquired as to the current impervious surface 59 area. Ms. Hall responded that she estimated impervious surface would be 60 approximately fifty -four (54) percent if the requested variance were granted. She 61 noted however, that the City Engineer has the authority to waive up to five (5) 62 percent of that standard. Mr. Lambertson replied that such an addition would not 63 be ideal, and would result in a narrow room. 64 Mr. Stratton asked if there is any reason the addition could not be built on a 65 second story, and both Mr. Parkes and Mr. Lambertson replied that would be cost 66 prohibitive, though in regards to zoning, it would be an acceptable thing to do. 67 MOTION: Mr. Elmore, finding that the request met none of the grounds for 68 approval of a variance, moved that the Community Development Board deny 69 ZVAR -11- 00100054. The motion was seconded by Mr. Parkes and carried by 70 unanimous vote, 6 -0. 71 2. ZVAR -11- 00100055 72 ADDRESS: 1604 Coquina Place 73 OWNER: Paul Hinder 74 AGENT: Fabio Fasanelli 75 REQUEST: Side Yard Dimensional Variance 76 Ms. Hall introduced the item, stating that Mr. Hinder recently purchased an 77 existing single - family home located at 1604 Coquina Place, within the Residential 78 General, Multi - Family (RG -M) Zoning District, and is in the process of Page 2 of 7 Minutes of the September 20, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board 79 renovating the home. She noted that the house is on an irregularly shaped lot 80 which measures approximately fifty -five (55) feet in width at the front property 81 line, but tapers along the southern boundary such that it measures only about 82 thirty -five (35) feet in width at the rear property line. The existing house is 83 situated on the property such that there is a nearly ten (10) foot side yard running 84 the entire length of the house, on the north side, and a slightly over ten (10) foot 85 side yard which tapers to a just under four (4) foot side yard along the south side 86 of the house. She noted that the southwest corner of the existing house does 87 currently encroach upon the required side yard by about one (1) foot. Ms. Hall 88 also added that it is unknown whether or not a previous variance for the southern 89 side yard exists since the property was platted in 1937, the house was constructed 90 in 1938, and both were located within the City of Jacksonville until Ocean Grove 91 was annexed into the City of Atlantic Beach in 1988. 92 Ms. Hall explained that, according to plans submitted by contractor Fabio 93 Fasanelli, the desire is to extend the northern-most wall of the existing structure 94 approximately four (4) feet such that the northern side yard would then be about 95 5.7', to allow for interior renovations of the existing first floor and an addition to 96 the second floor. 97 Paul Hinder (1604 Coquina Place) confirmed the information presented by Ms. 98 Hall, emphasizing that the southwest corner does encroach upon the side yard, 99 due to the irregular shape of the lot. He explained that the proposed renovation 100 includes the first floor expansion, as described, as well as the addition of a living 101 room and two bedrooms upstairs. 102 Mr. Parkes suggested that Mr. Hinder have his drawings revised, stating that it 103 seemed entirely possible to design the addition such that it would meet setbacks. 104 Mr. Hansen noted that from the front, the setbacks would be met, but as the lot 105 narrows, the ability to do anything is lost. He then added that if the southern lot 106 line was not angled, the lot would be a regular rectangle and there would be a full 107 side yard, as required. 108 Mr. Stratton said that he was not familiar with the property, but it appeared that 109 provision 24- 64(d)(5) regarding "irregular shape of the lot warranting special 110 conditions" was applicable, though he did not know what the impact would be on 111 the neighbors. Mr. Elmore said that he was familiar with the property because he 112 lives nearby, and that he did not foresee any adverse impacts to the neighbors. 113 Mr. Lambertson opened the hearing to public comment and with there being no 114 one to speak for or against the item, closed that portion of the hearing and 115 returned discussion to the Board. 116 Mr. Parkes summarized that the first floor expansion and the second floor addition 117 would be within the northern side yard, and that there was already an 118 encroachment into the southern side yard. Mr. Elmore said that he understood Mr. 119 Parkes' point that they were dealing with a nonconforming structure on a 120 nonconforming lot, and the land development regulations state that a 121 nonconforming structure shall not be made any more nonconforming. He added Page 3 of 7 Minutes of the September 20, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board 122 that he felt the plans could be revised so as to work within the existing footprint 123 and required setbacks. Mr. Parkes agreed the existing plane of the northern wall 124 should be continued to the second story and the addition contained within the 125 existing footprint. 126 MOTION: Mr. Parkes, finding that the existing structure is a nonconforming 127 structure and that according to the intent of Section 24 -85, nonconforming 128 structures may be maintained but their continued survival is not otherwise 129 encouraged, and finding also according to provision 24- 85(c)(1) nonconforming 130 structures shall not be expanded or enlarged unless in compliance with building 131 setbacks or with benefit of a variance, moved that the Community Development 132 Board grant ZVAR -11- 00100055 as a lesser variance than requested in accordance 133 with Section 24- 64(e), reducing the required fifteen (15) foot side yard setbacks 134 to thirteen and one -half (13 ' /2) feet combined, being approximately 3.8' wide on 135 the southern side and 9.7' on the northern side, with the extension of the existing 136 northern plane to the second floor addition. Seconded by Mr. Elmore, the motion 137 carried by unanimous vote, 6 -0. 138 3. ZVAR -11- 00100056 139 ADDRESS: 341 12 Street 140 OWNER: Charles Freshwater 141 AGENT: Michael Phillips 142 REQUEST: Rear Yard Dimensional Variance 143 Mr. Lambertson recused himself from consideration of this item, stating that he is 144 the owner of the property directly to the west, and thus has a financial vesting in 145 the development of the property. Mr. Parkes then recused himself from 146 consideration of this item, stating that he was the architect of the proposed plans, 147 and thus had a financial interest in the project. The gavel was passed to Mr. 148 Hansen, senior -most board member, given that a vice -chair has not yet been 149 elected since the resignation of the previous officer. 150 Ms. Hall introduced the item, describing the subject property as one of three lots 151 created from the subdivision of one and one -half lots previously platted as part of 152 Selva Marina Unit 1. She explained that as originally platted in 1951, the Selva 153 Marina lots were much larger than the typical Atlantic Beach lots, and that front 154 building restriction lines in excess of the standard front yard setback were normal 155 throughout Selva Marina. When the property was subdivided and the Selva 156 Verde plat was created in 2006, the old building restriction lines were transferred 157 to the newly created lots. In the case of the subject property (Lot 2) which is a 158 corner lot, the result was a thirty -five (35) foot setback where there would 159 typically be a twenty (20) foot front yard setback, and a thirty (30) foot setback 160 where there would typically be a ten (10) foot street side yard setback. Combined 161 with the standard twenty (20) foot rear yard setback and five (5) foot side yard 162 setback, the buildable area was reduced to just under four thousand (4,000) square 163 feet, as compared to the other two lots created by the subdivision which were 164 impacted by the building restriction lines on only one side, and resulted in slightly 165 over four thousand seven hundred (4,700) square feet of buildable area within Lot 166 1 to the north, and just under six thousand (6,000) square feet of buildable area Page 4 of 7 Minutes of the September 20, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board 167 with Lot 3, to the west. As such, the owner is unable to fit a home of modest 168 footprint completely within the setbacks, and is requesting a variance to reduce 169 the required rear yard setback from twenty (20) feet to six (6) feet to allow the 170 construction of a new single family home. Ms. Hall added that if the requested 171 variance is granted, the portion of the house to be constructed in the setback area 172 would be the garage, which is non - habitable space, and that the total impervious 173 surface area would be approximately forty -three (43) percent of the total lot area, 174 whereas both lots to the north and west were each built to slightly over fifty (50) 175 percent impervious surface coverage. 176 Michael Phillips (1250 Selva Marina Circle), contactor for the property owner, 177 addressed the Board, reiterating that the portion of the structure to be constructed 178 within the setback was an attached garage. He noted that he had completed a 179 couple of jobs recently, constructing detached garages, that are permitted to be as 180 close as five (5) feet from rear and side property lines whenever single story. He 181 explained this was essentially the same thing, because the garage was only 182 attached to the house by means of a covered breezeway. In fact, if the breezeway 183 were not to be covered by a solid roof structure, the garage could be considered 184 detached and placed five (5) feet from the rear property line. 185 Charles Freshwater (3559 Forest Bend Terrace) addressed the Board in regards to 186 apparent opposition of residents of the neighborhood. He stated that it was his 187 desire to respect the building restriction lines and build a house that took 188 advantage of porches opening onto large yards on both street sides. 189 Mr. Hansen opened the hearing to public comment. 190 Campbell Ford (1210 Selva Marina Circle) who owns the property directly to the 191 north, said that he had come to the meeting to speak against the variance, but felt 192 that he did not have all the information to make an informed decision, and thus 193 proposed that the Board defer the item to the next meeting to allow neighbors an 194 opportunity to view the plans and understand what was being proposed. 195 Kevin Bodge (336 12 Street) who lives to the south, across 12 Street, detailed 196 the contentious history of the property, and agreed with Mr. Ford's assessment 197 that there needed to be an opportunity for the Board and potentially impacted 198 neighbors to carefully review the plans and determine precisely what the variance 199 entailed. He agreed that if the footprint did not change with or without the 200 variance — if it were only a matter of a solid roof over a breezeway — then the 201 impact would be negligible. However, he was concerned that the granting of the 202 variance would open the door to something much more adverse in terms of 203 impact, in the future. 204 Bill Thompson (377 12 Street) who lives several houses west of the subject 205 property, said he also had prepared to speak against the variance, but had just 206 received new information contrary to that originally presented to him. However 207 he still had some concerns about the Board making allowances and setting 208 precedence. Page 5 of 7 Minutes of the September 20, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board 209 William Robichaud (352 12 Street) who lives to the south, across 12 Street, 210 said that it is his understanding that the footprint of the habitable portion of the 211 structure was completely within the prescribed setbacks, and that it was the 212 attached garage that was proposed to encroach the standard rear yard setback. 213 Noting that a detached garage can be placed five (5) feet from rear and side 214 property lines, he suggested that plans be revised such that the solid roof structure 215 over the connecting breezeway be removed or replaced with a pergola -type 216 structure, thus separating the garage from the principal structure. Mr. Robichaud 217 added that already there will be three homes on a property that originally had only 218 one home. He found greater concern in the fact that up to three structures are 219 allowed on a single lot, being the primary residential structure and two accessory 220 structures, such as a detached garage, pool house, or storage shed. If this variance 221 were to be granted, the current or future owner could petition to construct those 222 two additional structures at a later date. If the variance was not granted, and the 223 garage was counted as detached, it would mean one less structure that could be 224 placed on the lot. 225 Mary Ann Lambertson (357 12 Street) who lives directly to the west of the 226 subject property, spoke in opposition to the variance, stating that it would have an 227 adverse impact on the light and air available to adjacent properties. She then 228 deferred the remainder of her time to her attorney, Tim Franklin. 229 Tim Franklin (418 Seagate Avenue) said that the issue at hand, reducing the 230 required rear yard from twenty (20) feet to six (6) feet was not just a matter of 231 maintaining green space and pervious surface. He stated that the crux of the 232 matter before the Board came down to one question: Can the applicant achieve 233 reasonable use of the property without the variance? He stated that he could. Mr. 234 Franklin added that none of the grounds for approval of a variance applied to this 235 request, stating that the land development regulations pre -dated the Selva Verde 236 plat which was executed in 2006. At that time, the current property owner 237 accepted the building restriction lines as they were, and Mr. Freshwater bought 238 the property knowing what the building restriction lines were. Furthermore, he 239 noted his client and residents of the neighborhood were adamantly against any 240 relief from the front building restriction lines, which are private deed restrictions. 241 He suggested if the property owner wished to have an attached garage, that the 242 covered breezeway be removed from the plan and that the garage be moved closer 243 to the house. 244 Mr. Hansen closed the public comment portion of the hearing and opened 245 discussion of the item to the Board. 246 Mr. Stratton stated that he thought the plan was beautiful, and though he did not 247 find any particular relevance in what the neighbors wanted, he found no reason 248 the property owner should not have to abide by the rules. 249 Mr. Elmore also stated that he very much liked the elevations and appreciated the 250 intent of the design, but the property owners knew what they were coming into 251 when they purchased the property, so he could not support the variance. Page 6 of 7 Minutes of the September 20, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board 252 Ms. Paul concurred that she understood the intent of the design and empathized 253 with the owners, but saw the granting of the variance as setting precedence. 254 Mr. Hansen added that he personally felt hyper- sensitive to granting variances 255 from required rear yard setbacks, considering applications the Board had 256 considered over the last few months, and he did not feel that this request met the 257 grounds for approval. 258 MOTION: Mr. Elmore, finding that the requested variances does not sufficiently 259 meet any of the grounds for approval as provided in Section 24 -64(d) of the land 260 development regulations, and that there are alternative solutions available to the 261 property owner, moved that the Community Development Board deny ZVAR -11- 262 00100056. The motion was seconded by Ms. Paul and carried by unanimous 263 vote, 4 -0. 264 V. WAIVERS — NONE 265 VI. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS — NONE 266 VII. ZONING AMENDMENTS — NONE 267 VIII. MINOR MODIFICATIONS & APPEALS — NONE 268 IX. ORDINANCES — NONE 269 X. OLD BUSINESS — NONE 270 XI. NEW BUSINESS — NONE 271 XII. INFORMATION 272 A. "FLORIDA PLANNING OFFICIALS HANDBOOK" 273 Ms. Hall passed out copies of the updated publication to Board Members prior to the 274 meeting. There was no discussion of the materials. 275 XIII. ADJOURNMENT — 7:35pm 276 AO# 277 278 279 Chris Lambertson, Chairman 280 281 282 283 giatr-kkeldie--2 284 Attest Page 7 of 7 FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY MUNICIPAL AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LPSST NA FIRST NAM MIDDLE Nt4ME � i D NAM BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE Lk ! J4 ,0 V Yk ArD O'C APJ sT MAIL �� � � ADDRESS g THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON 7 WH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: CITY , n D/iP� ` COUNTY �" " ' 0 COUNTY ❑OTHER LOCAL AGENCY L/1 DU vm NAMF.� OFrry UBDI ISION: DATE ON WHICH VO OCCURRED /AOSFT ' / b (1 MY POSITION IS: ❑ ELECTIVE APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of govemment 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 Toss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea- sure 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 Toss 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 prohibited 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, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (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 min- utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, 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. (Continued on other side) APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) • 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. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before 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, 6.A11 C nI p.QJ j o, , hereby disclose that on P t 4/ 20 20 / / : (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) I nured to my special private gain or loss; inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, • inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, inured to the special gain or loss of by whom I am retained; or inured to the special gain or Toss of , which 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: ?4 Date Filed Signature NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE 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 - EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 2 FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LMT NAME -FIRST NAME- IDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE Ale > J 6 G • d TL.n' i<, o�44 60A s, ILA ., btv `■ MAILING ADDRESS _ THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON �jpd�7 i SS M ls..�b•, F.Vet,C WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: CITY COUNTY CITY ❑ COUNTY DOTHER LOCAL AGENCY L-41Yh5 \ % (./ ` G 1a \ ` v ) �1 1U J E OF PO ITICAL SUBDIVISIO DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED "' � (2»h �G �T� � � / O t 1 MY POSITION IS: ( ❑ ELECTIVE APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B 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 COMPUANCE 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 mea- sure which inures to the special gain or Toss 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 prohibited 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, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). ♦ * ♦ • w w w w w w w w • w w 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 min- utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. w • w w • • w w • w • • w w w w APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, 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. (Continued on other side) APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) • 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. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before 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. � �o DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST 1, 1 }� , \N� �- �St , hereby disclose that on n. 2 - , 20 t t (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 business associate, inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, • inured to the special gain or loss of , by whom I am retained; or inured to the special gain or loss of , which 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: 2 i � 'S t�l� � S 2(4'`I c is 11111■11m 111 Date Filed Signature NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE 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 - EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 2