Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout1990-02-20 Regular Meeting179 COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 20, 1990 - REGULAR MEETING The regular monthly meeting of the Bal Harbour Village Council was held on Tuesday, February 20, 1990 at 9:30 a.m. in Village Hall. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Estelle Stern and the roll was called. Those present were: Mayor Estelle Stern Asst. Mayor Matthew B. Blank Councilman Sol Taplin Councilman James E. Boggess Councilman Andrew R. Hirschl Also Present: Carole S. Morris, Village Manager Richard J. Weiss, Village Attorney Marilyn P. Kreger, Village Clerk Having a quorum present, Mayor Stern called the first item. Item #2. Approval of Minutes: December 19, 1989 and January 16, 1990. C/M Taplin moved and C/M Boggess seconded a motion to approve the minutes of December 19, 1989. Vote Taken: Voted Aye Asst. Mayor Blank moved to approve the January 16, 1990 minutes, as corrected, seconded by C/M Taplin. C/M Boggess suggested a change in the format of reflecting the departure of a Councilperson by including it in the body of the minutes rather than in the roll call. Vote Taken: All Voted Aye Item #5. Ordinances - Second Reading - An ordinance amending Code Sections 10-11, 12-21, 12-23 and Appendix A. Section 5-12 relating to garbage containers in the residential area, construction and lawn maintenance activities, parking on lawns and real estate open house sales all in the residential area. Richard Weiss, Village Attorney, advised that this is the second reading of an ordinance which was discussed at the January meeting. It includes some minor changes including the specific holidays for noise abatement (Sec. 12-21(c), and language suggested by Mr. Mario Noto relating to establishments in the residential district. Language relating to over night on -street parking was not included because a separate ordinance will be written relating to that subject. Mayor Stern opened the public hearing. 180 Mr. Bruno, resident, stated that he is not objecting to the ordinance itself, but is objecting to the fact that people do not know what the ordinance is about. He has previously asked Council to have letters sent to residents when important issues are discussed so the people will know about the subjects under discussion. Tony Riso, Civic Association President, stated that the Association sent out notices to the people in the single family area that these ordinances are coming before the Council for discussion. The proposed ordinance was available by calling the Association secretary for delivery or pick up of the ordinance. And, he said the Village advertises the ordinances in the newspaper. Mr. Bruno expressed the opinion that letters should be sent out explaining the contents of ordinances rather then the people having to check the newspaper. He said he did not receive the Association mailing. He does not believe the ordinance should be adopted on second reading until the people are made aware of the ordinance. Attorney Weiss stated that the Village complied with the state law on advertising ordinances in the Miami Review. Further, the ordinances are available to the public at any time. It would be up to Council to direct that more be done to inform the public. Mr. Bruno stated that he received several calls from residents that they are very mad about the warning and ticketing procedures for speeding in the Village. He said that 20 miles an hour is too slow. Mr. Bruno also commented on the lack of parking in the public parking lot. The Village Attorney advised that the discussion relating to various concerns of Mr. Bruno do not relate to the ordinance under discussion. Mayor Stern closed the public hearing. C/M Hirschl moved to adopt the ordinance on second reading, seconded by Asst. Mayor Blank. Vote Taken: A11 Vote Aye Ordinance No. 345 Passed Item #6. First Reading - An Ordinance establishing a comprehensive method of Code Enforcement. Attorney Weiss stated that this ordinance provides a mechanism for enforcing the various Village codes. The procedure provides for a code inspector, appointed by the Manager, who would have the responsibility of making sure that the Codes are being enforced. The inspector would have the authority to issue 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 2. 181 tickets which would identify the violation, when it would need to be corrected and a penalty. The choices would be to pay a fine and correct the violation or request a hearing before a special master (arbitrator). The ordinance provides for the hearing procedure followed by the special master and the fines schedule. Mr. Bruno asked if there is a record of how many people are injured on the Village streets. Mr. Weiss stated that this ordinance does not deal with traffic incidents. C/M Taplin moved to approve the ordinance on first reading, seconded by C/M Hirschl. Vote Taken: A11 Voted Aye Carole Morris, Village Manager, stated that she would be working on the fine schedule during the next month, prior to second reading, using the county's schedule as a guide. C/M Taplin clarified Mr. Bruno's concerns that the people would like to be advised of what is going to happen before it happens which he feels is worthwhile. Discussion was held on legal advertising in the Miami Review versus the Miami Herald. Mrs. Morris stated that the Herald Neighbors stopped accepting public notice ads except for display ads which are exorbitantly expensive. Mrs. Morris added that when she first started working for the Village, the advertising was done in the Neighbors and people at that time complained that they didn't see it. Mayor Stern suggested continuation of the advertising in the Miami Review and send out a mailing as well. C/M Boggess stated that the ordinance adopted this morning is simply a clarification of one that has been in effect for many years. There is nothing new, unusual or surprises in the ordinance. Item #3. Presentation: By Merrett Stierheim, President of the Greater Miami Convention & Visitors Bureau. Mayor Stern introduced Mr. Stierheim as the new president. Mr. Stierheim stated that he is in attendance today to pay his respects to the Council and introduce himself to those who may not know him. He previously met with the Mayor, Asst. Mayor, Manager and Resort Tax Committee during the previous week. He stated that he appreciates the support extended by the Village in the Interlocal Agreement. He wants to be available to the Council whenever appropriate. Mr. Stierheim stated that he hopes to be able to curtail expenses and save money for the Bureau. 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 3. 182 Mr. Stierheim will maintain an open door policy for anyone that needs his services and offered to come to the Village whenever appropriate. Item #7. Resolutions. A Resolution supporting proposed Constitutional Amendment No. 3 on the November 1990 ballot limiting unfunded State mandates on cities and counties. Richard Weiss, Village Attorney, stated that there is a State Statute that says that when legislation is passed that imposes a cost on cities and counties, they should pay for it. But the legislature never does provide for the funding as they should. This has been a major plank in the Florida League of Cities legislative agenda every year. This Constitutional Amendment would require the legislature to provide for the funding by the state. This Resolution simply endorses that concept. Mayor Stern stated that the Dade League of Cities has been very involved with this project for a long time. C/M Boggess moved and C/M Taplin seconded a motion to adopt this Resolution. Vote Taken: A11 Voted Aye Resolution No. 403 Passed Item #8. Reports A. Mayor and Council - no reports B. Village Attorney - Satellite Dishes C/M Hirschl stated that this involves him personally; therefore, he will abstain from voting and file the appropriate forms. Mr. Weiss stated that about one year ago the Council passed a satellite dish ordinance. The ordinance is patterned after the Dade County ordinance, Coral Gables and other communities. At the last Council meeting, C/M Hirschl questioned the requirements and enforcement thereof. Mrs. Morris, in getting involved in the enforcement aspect, found it is evident that the ordinance is operating according to the procedures outlined in the ordinance. She met with George Desharnais and Gil Pasterrisa, of Fine, Jacobson, et al who is an engineer and attorney and instrumental in drafting the ordinance. She also held meetings with Richard Weiss and George Desharnais. She felt an objective outsider needed to come in to review the ordinance and check the dishes that have been installed. Mrs. Morris contacted Craig Smith's office to do this. The dishes as they exist, for the most part, are not in accordance with the ordinance. 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 4. 183 Mrs. Morris asked Mr. Desharnais for his file on the subject. Some of the contents of which have been forwarded to Council under cover memo by herself. There are five (5) permitted dishes that come up short, in one way or another, of adhering to the ordinance. Mr. Weiss stated that there are three levels to the issue. The first level is that there are 5 dishes that do not meet the ordinance requirements. Some of the items can be fixed, such as landscaping, or the correct types of bolts. Other problems are height and location. One of the dishes is mounted on the roof which is not easily fixed. Mr. Weiss said the first decision Council should make, from a policy point of view, is whether the dishes are something Council is willing to live with as is. The errors were made and are not terrible. If that is done, he would have to determine how to grandfather in those dishes. The existing ordinance could be repealed and write a new ordinance. The second option to consider is to require the ordinance be enforced including the five (5) dishes. There is liability to the Village in this case. Plans were submitted with permits having been issued in accordance with the plans. The most serious case is one where the dish was mounted on the parapet wall with the whole house being wired with a cost between $5,000 and $10,000. The third point is that the ordinance limits the height of the dish to 15 feet (including the pole and dish). Mr. Desharnais interpreted that to mean the pole was 15 feet. The chart from Craig Smith's office shows that 4 of them are very close to 15 feet. Mrs. Morris said measurement taken measurement should another 5-7 feet to there is question on the accuracy of the by Craig Smith's office. The bottom be 18 feet (top of the pole) with perhaps the top of the dish. Mr. Weiss said if Council strictly enforces the ordinance as written (15 feet to top of dish), every dish in the Village is too high and there is major liability on the part of the Village to either lower or remove the poles. The liability is a result of the fact that permits were issued. The Code requires a plan certified by a structural engineer and landscape or cover plan. These requirements were not met in most cases. Mr. Weiss said the biggest problem, in terms of issuing a building permit, is at 122 Bal Bay Drive. The plan showed a roof mounted antenna for which a permit was issued. Mrs. Morris said that the building department personnel said each homeowner was given a copy of the ordinance prior to submitting plans. 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 5. 184 George Desharnais, Building Official, stated that he agrees with the Village Attorney that something needs to be done about this. Adopting an ordinance is fine until someone can't conform to it, which is the position he found himself. In dealing with the contractor's, if the plans come in wrong, he changes them to conform to the ordinance which the contractor proceeds to ignore. The antenna, in C/M Hirschl's case, was installed at 15 feet, but they couldn't pick up the signal, so they raised it up until they could pick up the signal. The building department did not tell the contractor to raise the antenna, he did it on his own. Mr. Desharnais displayed a photograph of C/M Hirschl's house which reflects that the dish is shielded by landscaping. So his point is what difference does it make how high the dish is as long as it is shielded from view. Sometimes, "you have to dance around with an ordinance sometimes ...we have to make them dovetail so that everybody can be happy". When a problem arises, the people go to see him to work it out. If he can't work it out, he goes to the Village Manager. Mrs. Morris suggested that if the Council is going to make a decision on the dishes, they should visit the properties personally. Mayor Stern stated that if a dish is installed and the people cannot receive the signal, the dish is worthless. Mr. Desharnais suggested that a member of the administration, himself or the Village Manager, should inspect each dish to go in to make a determination on whether leeway should be allowed in determining the height of the dish. If it is suggested that the people with dishes apply for a variance, they would be extremely upset. This has been their attitude about landscaping. They already have landscaping and refuse to add any more. None of the dishes have had final inspections. Mr. Desharnais would report if any dishes are even one foot over, but the Manager told him not to go to the houses or to talk to anyone. The gentleman who wrote the ordinance, when he saw the dishes in the R-2 district, didn't have a problem with them. Mr. Desharnais interpreted the 15 foot height as where one takes the signal from. In response to a question by Mayor Stern about the number of dishes in the Village, George Desharnais stated that there are three(3) that have not been addressed by the ordinance and one (1) at the Shops in addition to the five (5) in question. Mr. Desharnais said people have a tendency to carry over into a Zoning Code, the South Florida Building Code. He has to follow the South Florida Building Code, not what is written into the Zoning Code. He has the right, under the law, to not require plans, if the job is insignificant. In some cases, he has been working with the homeowners in that way to not always require 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 185 plans for the term of his employment and it has been working out alright. He said he did make a mistake on 122 Bal Bay Drive by interpreting the language "ground" and "grade" as if it were going to go down to the ground. Discussion was held on whether to change the ordinance as relates to the height of the dishes and using other cities' ordinances as a guide. Mr. Desharnais stated there are a few items in the ordinance that need to be cleaned up, but the Council should keep the intent of the ordinance in mind which is to shield the dishes. C/M Taplin, in commenting feet versus 22 or 23 feet, 15 feet then the ordinance on the height of the dishes from 15 said that if the dish doesn't work at has to be revised. Richard Weiss said that if the dish is placed in the proper position, it will work at 15 feet. The problem that has arisen in the R-1 district is that, for aesthetic reasons, people are putting the dishes on the side of the houses rather than the water side or street side. The ordinance was designed in such a way that if a problem came up, the homeowner could apply for a variance. However, because of the way the matter was handled with the plans, the homeowner didn't know he had a problem. Mr. Weiss said the Council needs to decide as to whether they want to leave the dishes the way they are or enforce the Code in which case he, the manager and building official would have to work out how to implement the decision. If the dishes are left, they will be there forever and set a precedent for others. Mr. Weiss said if Council decided to do that, he would recommend that the present dishes be grandfathered in and then repeal the ordinance and start again. Discussion was held as to location of the pole the dish would have to go up to the roof. If it water side, it wouldn't have to go up to the placed on the side which in most cases are very and dish and why is placed on the roof; however if narrow, the dish would have to go up to the roof to pick up the signal. Mrs. Hirschl summarized the situation by stating that there are five (5) dishes that are constructed in such as way that they can't be seen and are not unsightly. But none of them are in accordance with the ordinance. Perhaps then, the ordinance should be modified. This matter didn't come about properly. What should have happened is the residents should have applied for variances. Then the Council could have questioned whether it would be appropriate to change the ordinance. Mrs. Hirschl posed a number of questions regarding aesthetics, should the dishes remain as is. Should the owners be required to 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 7. 186 apply for variances or should the dishes have to come down. There would be a major liability if the Village decides to make people comply with the ordinance after the permits have been issued and dishes installed. C/M Taplin questioned if the dishes are placed on the waterfront side of the house what difference does the height make? He suggests that the five dishes in question be given variances and require the 15 feet height to be on the waterfront side of the property. Asst. Mayor Blank suggested giving the homeowner the choice of where to put the dish and then set the guidelines for installation based on the desired location. Mr. Desharnais stated that Dr. Hirschl's dish is the only one that had a final inspection and it was turned down because of the height limit. The reason why Dr. Hirschl's had a final was because a complaint was received. C/M Boggess recalled that the ordinance was brought up as a result of a request from a homeowner. He feels uncomfortable about this matter, that the Council was deceived in some way. Attorney Weiss stated that if this matter is going to be tabled there are certain actions Council needs to take. First, instruct the Village Manager not to enforce the ordinance or issue any permits which would take the burden off the homeowner. Second, the Council should go into the Village to see the dishes first hand. The Council comments indicate a preference to go see the dishes as a group as part of a meeting. Mrs. Hirschl suggested that the homeowners in question should be notified of any future discussions on the matter. Attorney Weiss suggested that when the ordinance is rewritten, the advice of experts in the industry should be sought in order to prepare the ordinance in a way that everyone could live with. Jack Carr, 130 Bal encounter with the house. His house plant trees of his Cross Drive, stated that the problem neighbors dishes is the appearance from the neighbor's backs up to one with a dish and he has had to own to hide the dish. C/M Hirschl stated that while the ordinance requires the pole be screened up to 10 feet, it is of little value. Several types of palm trees were planted at his house at a distance from the dish to allow it to revolve, yet screen it from every direction. This may be something to include in the next ordinance - to not only screen the pole, but the dish as well. 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 8. 187 Dudley Whitman, resident, stated that he also has a residence in a similar community in Michigan where such dishes have been prohibited completely. This item will be rescheduled for a special meeting during which a field trip of each property in question will take place. Item #8 Reports C. Village Manager 1. Financial Statement - 10/1/89 thru 12/21/89 John walker, Finance Director, stated that the budget is prorated with an expectation of 25% expenditure for each quarter. In a couple of instances there were 100% expenditures within the first quarter; however, they are one time procurement items that were acquired in the first quarter. Otherwise, there is nothing unusual in the report. The Village is in sound, fiscal financial shape which he doesn't expect to change throughout the year. C/M Taplin questioned why the building permit revenues item is only at 6 1/4%. These revenues are an estimate of expectations for the year, which simply have not come in yet. No problem is anticipated, however. Mrs. Morris stated that the liquor license revenue is usually paid either quarterly or semi-annually with one large check to come in. 2. Dock Construction and User Agreement with Florida Princess. Mrs. Morris stated that the dock is completed and ready for use. She has been trying to contact Quayside to schedule them. C/M Taplin said he believes their boat has been abandoned due to excessive costs. Mr. Lambert, President of Florida Princess, is proposing to use the dock twice weekly. Mr. Weiss stated that the current agreement, under Section 1, provides for an exclusive rights clause by the Florida Princess. Mr. Weiss said that Mr. Lambert has agreed to amend the language to provide that another "shopping cruise" business could not use the dock. Mrs. Morris stated that Mr. Lambert feels that in view of his company's investment in advertising, he wouldn't want to make this investment unless a direct competitor was prohibited from using the dock. Other users are not ruled out. She does not have the dollar amount of advertising. The complete cost of the dock was about $22-23,000. At the rate of $425.00 per month dockage fees, the cost would be paid back in five (5) years. There are a number of inquires from water bus companies to use the dock without the Village having done any publicizing. The rate for use is $425.00 for 10 visits in 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 9. 188 addition to $25.00 per additional visit. This fee is not a dockage fee, but more a landing fee. C/M Boggess stated he does not have a problem with the Agreement except for the exclusive clause. He doesn't think the Village should restrict itself. Mr. Lambert stated that they are proposing to bring very affluent shoppers from the Broward/Palm Beach County area with no cost to the Village. In return, they are promoting the Village in advertising at a cost of several hundred thousand dollars per year. There is a residual benefit of publicity on a national scale. He, therefore, thinks it is fair, with the Florida Princess having borne this expense, to have a semi -exclusive basis. Councilmembers did not believe that the advertising done by the Princess would conflict with any other cruise line, nor would it promote any others to justify an exclusive. Mayor Stern stated that there is an insurance indemnification clause. C/M Hirschl stated that there is a severability clause with 60 days written notice. Mr. Lambert feels 60 days is short for his company because of his convention business, being booked 6 months in advance. Mr. Lambert would like a 120 day notice of cancellation. The tentative schedule is to use the dock on Wednesday and Friday from 10 to 4. The boat serves breakfast and hor d'oevres on the return, but not lunch. The boat carries about 250 people on the trip. No change to the cancellation clause was made. Mr. Weiss said after certain changes are made to the agreement and it is signed by both parties, the Village can notify Mr. Lambert of a starting date. Asst. Mayor Blank moved to authorize the Village Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the Village subject to the necessary changes, seconded by C/M Boggess. Vote Taken: A11 Voted Aye Item 8.C.3. Status Updates: a. Trash Transfer Bid Award - This bid is not ready to be awarded as a result of additional requirements imposed by D.E.R.M. which deal with treating the first one inch of rain wash in the event of a rain storm. The bid will be opened March 6th with Council action on March 20th. b. Sunday's Restaurant - Mrs. Morris copied the Council with documentation sent by the County Manager's office. The restaurant has been quiet since the last report. Mrs. Morris has 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 10. not been able to obtain a copy of the lease agreement between the restaurant and the county. C/M Hirschl would like a copy upon receipt. c. Beautification Dinner - Is set for April 6th. Mayor Stern and Committee members met with the Sea View people to finalize the menu and room arrangements. d. Craig A. Smith & Associates - Pump Station Reconstruction - This addendum is for Craig Smith's office to serve as an additional set of eyes, doing additional inspections, in addition to that done by Osvaldo Ojito. They would also provide familiarity and complete review of the station so in the event there is a problem when it goes on line the Village is covered. The cost is not to exceed $7,500.00. The funds would come from the sewer fund. C/M Boggess clarified that Craig Smith would serve as overseer of Osvaldo Ojito, the engineer of record. Mrs. Morris said Bob Wheldon, George Desharnais and herself all agree this is necessary. C/M Taplin moved and C/M Hirschl seconded a motion to approve this addendum. Vote Taken: A11 Voted Aye Item #9. Other Business A. Mrs. Morris stated that her concern in the satellite dish matter, is that when the Code Book was ignored as far as enforcing the ordinance, it might as well have been thrown out. What concerns her is that a precedent was established that the Council passed an ordinance and the administration disobeyed it. Staff is told that if a problem exists with an ordinance, it is to be brought to her attention and that of the Attorney immediately. She is embarrassed about the situation and as the supervisor, she will take every effort to make sure this kind of situation doesn't occur again. She finds it completely unacceptable. B. Mr. Bruno brought to Council's attention the matter of traffic tickets being issued in the Village. He asked the Police Chief how many tickets were issued during the last month. Chief Baquero stated that 29 tickets were issued. The fines are determined by the speed over the limit that the driver is going. The basic fine is $56.00 plus $10.00 for every one mile over the speed limit. Tickets are not being written for a 25 mile/hour driver. After 29 miles/hr the officer makes the determination. Chief Baquero presented the police department point of view regarding the radar in the Village. He has had only 2 complaints 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 11. about the radar in the Village. The fines are set by the state and collected by the county with a portion coming back to the Village as revenue. Mr. Bruno would like the police officers to handle the situations in a different manner. Warnings should be issued, letters should be sent to the residents and should be told what the tickets would cost. C/M Boggess stated that a number of people have commented to him about the ticketing in the residential area. However, when he found out the older residents were ticketed doing 55 miles/hr on residential streets, they should get ticketed. The people have ignored all the traffic regulations for years and the Village is lucky that there haven't been any accidents. C/M Boggess believes the 20 mile/hr limit is slow. In most areas, the residential limit is 25-30 miles/hr. Chief Baquero stated that several years ago he did a survey of how long it took to get through the Village going at different speeds beginning with 20 miles/hr up to 40 miles/hr. He started at the Bal Bay Drive gate driving all through the Village. The difference between 20 miles/hr and 35 miles/hr was about 5.6 seconds. So it was determined to leave the limit at 20 mph for the safety of the residents who might be in the street. Tony Riso, Civic Association President, commended the Police Department on the job they're doing. He doesn't believe an accident or fatality should occur before the speed limit is enforced. He doesn't believe anyone has been cited for under than 30 miles/hr which is 50% more than the speed limit which is more than fair. It isn't the age of the driver that kills a pedestrian, it would be the speed the driver is doing. The police department has taken a lot of abuse. The police officer is just doing a job. C/M Taplin suggested that an item is placed in the next Newsletter that speeding over 20 miles/hr is being enforced for the welfare of the community. Item #10. Adjourn There being no further business, C/M Taplin moved and C/M Hirschl seconded a motion to adjourn at 11:35 A.M. sf- Ma Stern ,ham ore le Cl 41 Village erk 2-20-90 Reg. Council Mtg. 11. /u-(` ' - 5///a )yam. FORM 4 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT LAST NAME- FIRST NAME -MIDDLE NAME HIBgCVT ANDIRP.W u ULING ADDRESS 176 Bal Bay Drive CITY Bal Harbour COUNTY Dade THE BOARD, COUNCIL,COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE ON WHICH 1 SERVE IS A UNIT OF: 1'ACITY O COUNTY ❑ OTHER LOCAL AGENCY O STATE DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED February 20, 1990 NAME. OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE Bal Harbour Village Council NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OR STATE AGENCY Bal Harbour Village WHO MUST FILE FORM 4 This form is for use by any person serving on either an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee, whether state or local, and it applies equally to members of advisory and non -advisory bodies who are faced with a voting conflict of interest. As the voting conflict requirements for public officers at the local level differ from the requirements for state officers, this form is divided into two parts: PART A is for use by persons serving on local boards (municipal, county, special tax districts, etc.), while PART B is prescribed for all other boards, i.e., those at the state level. PART C of the form contains instructions as to when and where this form must be filed. PART A VOTING CONFLICT DISCLOSURE FOR LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS [Required by Section 112.3143(3), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1984).] The Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees PROHIBITS each municipal, county, and other local public officer FROM VOTING in an official capacity upon any measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting in his official capacity upon any measure which inures to the special gain of any principal (other than a government agency as defined in Section 112.312(2), Florida Statutes) by whom he is retained. In any such case a local public officer must disclose the conflict: (a) PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of his interest in the matter on which he is abstaining from voting; and (b) WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by describing the nature of his interest as a public record in this part below. NOTE: Commissioners of a Community Redevelopment Agency created or designated pursuant to Section 163.356 or Section 163.357, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1984), or officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one -acre, one -vote basis are not prohibited from voting. In such cases, however, the oral and written disclosure of this part must be made. I, the undersigned local public officer, hereby disclose that on FEBRUARY 20 . 19 90 ,) I abstained from voting on a matter which (check one): inurcd to my special private gain; or inured to the special gain of by whom 1 am retained.