07-14-1987 Regular Meeting
e
e
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
July 14, 1987
The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Clermont was
held Tuesday, July 14, 1987, in the City Council Chambers. The
meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Pool with the
following Council Members in attendance: Mayor Pro Tem Turville,
Council Member Dupee, Council Member Huff and Council Member Cole.
Other City Officials present were City Manager Saunders, Finance
Director Van Zile and Deputy City Clerk Brandt.
INVOCATION
The Invocation was offered by Nilsa Whitehead followed by the
repeating of The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag by all present.
MINUTES
The minutes of the Workshop Meeting held June 18, 1987 and the
Regular Meeting held June 23, 1987, were approved as presented.
REPORTS
CITY MANAGER SAUNDERS' REPORT
EMERGENCY SHELTER WORKSHOP
For those interested in attending, it was reported that a Workshop
sponsored by the Clermont Kiwanis Club to instruct individuals in
learning how to manage shelters during disasters would be held on
Tuesday, July 21, 1987, at 1:30 p.m.
LAKE COUNTY POLLUTION CONTROL
The next regular meeting of the Lake County Pollution Control Board
will be held on Monday, July 20, 1987, in the meeting room on the
Fourth Floor of the courthouse.
WORKSHOPS
City Manager Saunders stated that he would like to hold Budget Work-
shops on Thursday at 8:00 p.m. and one the following week. The Council
agreed to the Thursday date and time and scheduled the next Workshop
for Tuesday, July 21, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Conference
Room.
COUNCIL MEMBER DUPEE'S REPORT
EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
Mrs. Dupee reported that she had been appointed to the Finance
Committee and the Regional Awards Committee of the East Central
Florida Regional Planning Council, and that the Regional Compre-
hensive Plan Review Committee had not been disbanded, as of yet.
The Council congratulated Mrs. Dupee on her appointments.
COUNCIL MEMBER HUFF'S REPORT
Council Member Huff stated that several people had called or talked
to him concerning the City's water supply. They had experienced
discolored and/or sulphur smelling water and were concerned if it
was safe to drink. In fact, some people were buying bottled water
because of the discoloration and suspended particles appearing in
the water. Mr. Huff continued by stating that he felt it unfair
for some citizens of Clermont to pay for water they cannot drink
or use to wash clothes.
e
e
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
July 14, 1987
Page -2-
It was further reported he had met with Utility Director Preston
Davis to see if something could be done to correct the problem.
During their discussion, Mr. Huff stated that he learned that the
discoloration and particles were caused by iron deposits breaking
away from old galvanized pipe or the 12" cast iron water mains still
found in the City. Because of the low pH level of the City's water,
it tends to be more acidic, and this causes rust to form. Mr. Huff
continued by stating that he wished to assure those present that the
water was not unhealthy, and that it was continually being tested for
over 100 possible contaminants.
The cause of the problem cannot be pinpointed because of the configur-
ation of the City's water system. Several years ago the water system
was looped, causing the water within the system to flow in different
directions, which in turn caused a scouring effect on the cast iron
mains. Lateral lines run from each of the City's twelve inch cast
iron mains, and rust deposits could break loose anywhere along the
line, depending on the flow of the water and which well pump is
operating at a particular time.
Much discussion ensued, with the following being suggested as possible
solutions to the problem: (1) flush the lines on a monthly basis,
(2) replace all old galvanized lines within the City, (3) add poly-
phosphate to the water to add a protective coating to the pipes,
however, if this were done it would cause the water to yellow, (4)
replace or line the existing cast iron water mains, however, this
would cost more than a million dollars and would be cost prohibitive.
Installing a gate system was also suggested. This would keep the
water flowing in the same direction and eliminate the scouring effect
which causes the rust particles to break loose.
After substantial discussion regarding this problem, it was the con-
sensus of Council to have City Manager Saunders meet with Utility
Director Davis and City Engineer Springstead to see if something could
be done to remedy the situation.
CABLE TELEVISION
It was also reported that numerous complaints had been received
concerning the poor service and reception from the City's cablevision
company.
Mr. Huff stated that he felt that the City should receive first-
quality service and maintenance and if Cablevision Industries of
Central Florida did not want to provide quality service, the City
should let someone else come in and do it. He also suggested that
the City have someone knowledgeable concerning cable systems come
in and check the equipment being used and the service provided.
RESOLUTION H558 - ESTHER BROWN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST
City Manager Saunders explained that Mrs. Brown's home, located on
Highway 50 had been damaged by more than 50% by fire, and was non-
conforming regarding lot size and meeting required setbacks. Section
26-40 of the Zoning Ordinance provides that a Conditional Use Permit
may be issued for reconstruction after consideration by the Planning
and Zoning Commission and approval by the City Council if it is
determined that the reconstruction would not be detrimental to the
district in which it is located.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the
request to reconstruct the home. It was pointed out that this
was Mrs. Brown's home, and that she owns the property and has
lived there for many years.
e
e
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
July 14, 1987
Page -3-
Mayor Pool asked Mrs. Brown, who was present in the audience, if
she understood the Conditions on the Conditional Use Permit, and
she stated that she did. He then called for comments from those
present in the audience, and no one spoke in favor of or against
the request.
87-133 After a brief discussion, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER
TURVILLE, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER COLE AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED
BY ROLL CALL VOTE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION #558 AS PRESENTED GRANTING
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO MRS. ESTHER BROWN TO REPAIR A NON-
CONFORMING RESIDENCE DAMAGED BY MORE THAN 50% BY FIRE LOCATED AT
596 WEST HIGHWAY 50. THE RESOLUTION WAS READ BY MAYOR POOL BY
TITLE ONLY.
WILLIAM SEGAL - INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE 187-M REQUEST FOR
REZONING PROPERTY FROM R-3 TO C-l COMMERCIAL
Mr. William Segal appeared before Council to request rezoning of
Lots 12 and 13, Block 9, Sunnyside Unit (located at the southeast
corner of Highway 50 and East Avenue) from R-3 Residential/Pro-
fessional to C-l Commercial. Mr. Segal stated that in order to
justify his investment, he was making the rezoning request in
order to be able to allow light retail sales in the building he
is planning for this location. He further stated that he would
like to be able to have a business, such as an interior decorator
located there.
At their meeting held July 7, 1987, the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended denial of the request, expressing concern
for ingress and egress and questioning whether the property was
a suitable building site for any type of development.
City Manager Saunders stated that theproperty to the east and south
was developed residential and the R-3 Residential/Professional Zone
was a good transition from the Commercial to the Residential District.
Mr. Segal stated that he had the building designed for the small
parcel and that it would contain adequate parking and proper
water retention areas. The maximum square footage for the build-
ing would be two (2) units each containing 750 square feet.
Under Council discussion, Council Member Turville expressed his
concern that the driveway would be located on East Avenue,
thirty-five feet from the intersection of East Avenue and Highway
50, and this could cause serious traffic problems if retail sales
were allowed in the building.
After some discussion, it was the consensus of Council that they
wished the parcel to be developed as professional offices and that
it should retain its R-3 zoning.
~7-133AA MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER DUPEE, SECONDED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER TURVILLE AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO DENY INTRODUCTION OF
ORDINANCE 187-M.
A.E. LANGLEY - VARIANCE REQUESTS
It was explained that Mr. Langley was requesting four (4) variances
to the Subdivision Ordinance for his proposed subdivision located
south of Grand Highway and east of East Avenue. The subdivision
will consist of l7l single family lots. The variances being
re9uested were as follows: (1). Street right-of-way of 50' where
60 is required, (2). Miami type curb for streets with less than
4% grade, (3). Double frontage lots on Grand Highway and (4).
Block length of 1,330' where 1,200' is allowed.
e
e
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
July 14, 1987
Page -4-
Mayor Pool called for comments from those present in the audience.
I TEM III
Charlie True, Engineer for McIntosh and Associates and Mr. Langley's
Subdivision, explained the request for the 50' street right-of-way
where 60' is required.
He stated that the extra footage gained would be put in the rear
yard of each lot giving the homeowner the extra space needed for a
screen room or a swimming pool. The water, storm and sanitary
sewer lines would be located in the 50' right-of-way and a special
10' easement would be granted to the City which would be located
across the front 10' of the lots for electric, telephone and cable
television lines.
City Manager Saunders expressed his concern that allowing this
request would set a precedent for all future developments within
Clermont. Mr. Saunders then recommended that the Subdivision
Ordinance be changed to reflect the 50' right-of-way, if this
request is granted.
He further stated that to his knowledge, there had been only two
reductions in the required 60' right-of-way in the past few years,
and both were for small subdivisions (Crystal Lake Subdivision and
Winona Harbor) with unique site problems. All major subdivisions
have been required to contruct their streets to the 60' require-
ment, such as Margaree Gardens, Lakeview Hills, and Hazelwood.
Mr. Saunders also pointed out that the reduction of right-of-way
to 50' would place the house five feet closer to the street, and
reduce the area between the sidewalk and street by five feet.
Mr. Saunders concluded by stating that the Council must decide
if it wants to lower the present standard. Clermont has earned
the reputation of being an attractive, quality community and by
reducing the green space between streets and buildings it would
be aesthetically detrimental and would reduce a standard the
City has required for many years.
Richard Langley, Attorney representing Gene Langley, appeared
before Council to discuss the request. Mr. Langley stated that
growth will happen in the Clermont area, some will like it, others
will not, some will profit by it, others will not; but the question
is whether it will be inside or outside of the City. If it occurs
outside the City, then there will be no control over what goes on.
If it is inside the City, you (the Council) can control the setbacks,
the zoning, density, and the development will pay taxes. Growth must
be accepted or the only other alternative would be to build a wall
around the City and keep everyone out, which of course would not be
feasible.
Mr. Langley continued by stating that the Council should encourage
growth in a reasonable fashion and negotiate in good faith with
the developer. As it sits, the site of the proposed development is
an eyesore, but once developed it will become a great asset to the
City.
Mr. Langley also stated that in due respect, he begged to differ
with Mr. Saunders concerning the matter of setting a precedent for
future developments because this is one of the two last major
tracts of land within the city limits to be developed. He then
asked why not allow the 50 foot right-of-way because, in this case,
e
e
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
July 14, 1987
Page -5-
the developer had made several concessions to the City, including
granting the additional right-of-way on Grand Highway. He also
pointed out that there was no real need for the extra footage in
front of the house, and that a homeowner was under no obligation to
maintain the right-of-way, and that he could see no aesthetic
difference if the area was not maintained.
In conclusion, Mr. Langley stated that he believed that there was
no risk involved in granting this request. Hunt street, the main
street through the subdivision, would retain a 60' right-of-way,
with all other streets retaining the 50' right-of-way. He pointed
out that Mr. Gene Langley was not asking for a greater density,
nor was he asking for additional lots, but only the reduced right-
of-way. He then pleaded for reason to prevail in this decision.
At this point, Council Member Turville asked that the four variance
requests be heard in reverse order, beginning with Item H4 to expe-
dite matters.
It was decided to continue with Item HI, and Mayor Pool called for
further comments.
Cecil Smart stated that he favored this request because more living
was done in the rear yard than the front yard, and he thought the
extra five feet to be beneficial in that area.
Council Member Dupee stated that she would like to ask a hypothetical
question, and stated that if the reduced right-of-way request were
approved, what would happen in the zero lot area part of the develop-
ment. She then asked if it were not true that another five feet would
be lost in the front yard. She then stated that type zero lot line
development was already very compact, and if the request was granted it
would become even more so. Mrs. Dupee further stated that she found
larger front yards with green and growing spaces to be more aesthetically
appealing, and that if the reduced right-of-way request was granted, she
believed that the Subdivision Ordinance should be amended to reflect this
change.
City Manager Saunders then explained Mrs. Dupee's concern by stating
that the next phase of development was to be zero lot line homes, and
would, by virtue of the request for a 20' front yard setback in this
part of the development, when added to the reduced right-of-way require-
ment place the homes 10 feet closer to the pavement.
Mrs. Dupee stated that she was bringing this up now, so the Council
could be thinking about the implications for future requests.
Council Member Huff stated that he did not want to change the ordinance,
but believed that each request must be decided on its own merit. If the
request was not proper, then the Council would not allow it. He also
expressed his concern with the City's 25' rear yard setback requirement,
citing the Hazelwood Subdivision as an example where no one could build
an adequate size screen room without asking for a variance. Mr. Huff
continued by stating that he agreed with the deeper sized lots proposed
for this subdivision.
City Manager Saunders stated that in the past, the problem in Hazelwood
had been homes improperly designed to fit the size of the lot.
Council Member Turville agreed with City Manager Saunders, and stated
that he believed that no matter what the depth of the lot was, the
property owner would still ask for a variance to do more than what
was allowed.
e
e
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
July 14, 1987
Page -6-
City Manager Saunders reiterated that if this request was granted,
then he could see no basis for denial of a similar request in the
future. Mr. Saunders advised the Council to carefully consider the
long range effects of their decision on this request.
Richard Langley stated that he concurred with Mr. Huff, in that each
case should be decided on its own merits, and again pointed out the
concessions his brother had made to the City for this subdivision.
87-134 After some further discussion concerning lot sizes and the spacious
appearance a 60' right-of-way affords, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL
MEMBER DUPEE AND SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER TURVILLE TO DENY THE
REQUEST FOR THE FIFTY FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS MOTION FAILED BY A
THREE TO TWO VOTE, WITH MAYOR POOL AND COUNCIL MEMBERS HUFF AND
COLE VOTING AGAINST DENIAL.
Some further discussion occurred, and it was pointed out th$t Hunt
Street the major through street would retain a 60' right-of-way,
the other collector streets would have the 50' right-of-way.
87-135A MOTION WAS THEN MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER HUFF, SECONDED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER COLE AND CARRIED BY A THREE TO TWO VOTE WITH MAYOR POOL AND
COUNCIL MEMBERS COLE AND HUFF VOTING AYE AND COUNCIL MEMBERS DUPEE
AND TURVILLE VOTING NAY TO GRANT THE FIFTY FOOT RIGHT -OF-WAY REQUEST
FOR THE LOTS AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT PRESENTED.
ITEM H2
The second variance request discussed was for Miami type curb for
all streets with less than a 4% grade. Charlie True again explained
this request, with the major consideration being that Miami type curb
is less expensive to build.
City Manager Saunders then read a letter from City Engineer Springstead,
which is attached and made part of this official record, listing the
the advantages and disadvantages of each type of curb and recommending
the standard type curb for this subdivision.
Some discussion ensued concerning this letter, and Richard Langley
asked if this part of the request could be withdrawn because, at this
point in time, the developer did not know how much of the property
would have a 4% grade.
ITEM H3
The third variance requested was for double frontage lots o~ Grand
Highway. City Manager Saunders explained that this request did not
create a problem as long as a wall would be constructed to prevent
ingress and egress to Grand Highway. Twenty-one potential driveways
could cause a serious traffic problem on the road.
Marion Bell, who was present in the audience, asked if something
could be done concerning the traffic coming west on Grand Highway
to the stop sign. Mrs. Bell's home is located on East Avenue
directly across from the intersection of East Avenue and Grand
Highway, and she stated that it was a regular occurrence to'have
a speeding car run the stop sign and end up in her front yard.
After some discussion concerning this problem, Council Member
Huff pointed out that Disston Avenue in the new subdivision
would take some of the traffic from Grand Highway. It was also
suggested that officers make more routine patrols of the area.
Photographs were presented to each Council Member showing the type
of wall (stucco with a tile border) which would be constructed on
the property.
e
e
Mrs. Smart, who was present in
be landscaping in front of the
it would be landscaped.
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
July 14, 1987
Page -7-
/
the audience~ asked if there
wall, and Mr. Langley stated
would
that
87-136 After some further discussion, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER
DUPEE, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER COLE AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO
GRANT THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR DOUBLE FRONTAGE LOTS ON GRAND HIGHWAY.
ITEM H4
City Manager Saunders explained that the additional block length
of 1,330' where 1,200 is the maximum allowable length for a city
block was needed in order to join Hunt Street (Avenue A) on the
plat to Disston Avenue, and would not create any apparent safety
or traffic flow problems.
87-137After a brief discussion, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER
HUFF, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER COLE AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED
TO GRANT THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE l,330' BLOCK LENGTH.
87-138There being no further discussion or questions concerning the
four requests, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER HUFF, SECONDED
BY COUNCIL MEMBER COLE AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO GRANT THE VARIANCES
AS REQUESTED, WITH ITEM 12 BEING WITHDRAWN. '
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
FINAL READING OF ORDINANCE 185-M
Mayor Pool explained that this ordinance was introduced at the June
9th Council Meeting and would place a fee for redemption of shopping
carts picked up by the City.
City Manager Saunders then reported that he had met with representatives
of K Mart, Publix, Winn Dixie and the Market Basket, and the group had
agreed that abandoned carts were a problem, as well as an eyesore; and
that they wished to be allowed to hire a person who would pick up the
carts on a daily basis and return them to the owners.
Mr. Saunders then recommended that the Council table the adoption of
this ordinance for thirty days to see if the merchant's proposal would
work.
Council Member Cole expressed his concern for the safety of those
playing with the cart and the liability involved.
Nilsa Whitehead stated that she had been working with the merchants
and favored giving them a chance to remedy the problem before passage
of the ordinance.
John Stout of K Mart, Chuck Mears of Winn Dixie and Bob Duncan of
the Market Basket all expressed willingness to work with the City
to solve the problem. Mr. Duncan stated that a man had been hired
to collect the shopping carts on a daily basis, and that he knew
he would do a good job.
A brief discussion ensued concerning past problems with shopping
carts and the lack of cooperation in working to solve the problem.
It was the consensus of Council that this was the first positive
87-139steps taken to rememdy the problem, AND A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL
MEMBER DUPEE, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER COLE AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED
TO TABLE ADOPTION OF THIS ORDINANCE UNTIL THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.
e
e
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
July 14, 1987
Page -8-
NEW BUSINESS
INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE 252-C AMENDING THE CITY OF CLERMONT
ZONING ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR AND SET MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR ZERO
LOT LINE DEVELOPMENT
City Manager Saunders explained that this ordinance would amend
the current zoning ordinance to make provisions for and set minimum
standards for zero lot line development.
The zero lot line concept provides a single family detached home at
a more affordable price by building on smaller lots, with a typical
lot being 45' or 50' wide and 100' deep. The ordinance proposes that
zero lot line development be allowed in zones allowing multi-family
development and only as a conditional use.
At the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting held July 7, 1987,
the Commission discussed this ordinance and recommended that the
rear yard setback be changed to 20' in Item H3, in Item H7 that
no windows or vents be constructed along the zero lot line, and
asked for clarification of the zero lot line.
Considerable discussion was devoted to whether windows or vents
should be allowed along the zero lot line. Mr. Langley pointed
out that already established developments of this type do allow
windows and vents along this wall of the building. Also discussed
was where the zero lot line would be measured from, and it was
determined that most were measured from the wall, not the overhang.
It was also determined that architectual projections such as window
sills and eaves may extend into the easement.
Some discussion also ensued concerning the minimum square footage
requirements for this type of development. City Manager Saunders
pointed out that the minimum standards were set for the person
who did not want to build under a Planned Unit Development.
87-140 A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER DUPEE, SECONDED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER HUFF AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO INTRODUCE ORDINANCE 252-C.
RESOLUTION H599 - REQUESTING PROHIBITION OF VEHICLE PARKING ON
THE US 27 SERVICE ROAD
It was explained that the City had requested that the Department
of Transportation place "No Parking" signs along the US 27 service
road from Hook Street to Highway 50 because of numerous complaints
concerning poor visibility caused by tractor trailers parking along
the road.
The DOT concurred that a problem does exist and has requested the
adoption of Resolution H599 before the signs can be installed.
87-141 After a brief discussion, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER DUPEE,
SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER COLE AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED BY ROLL CALL
VOTE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1599. THE RESOLUTION WAS READ BY MAYOR POOL
BY TITLE ONLY.
e
e
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
July 14, 1987
Page -9-
PUBLIC COMMENTS
JOINT PLANNING AREA
Cecil Smart stated that he had been reading about a joint planning
agreement between various cities and Lake County but Clermont had
not been mentioned. He then asked of the status of Clermont's
agreement.
City Manager Saunders stated that agreements have not been made
with Leesburg or Tavares, and the County was late getting the
maps revised for our area. However, the agreement will be placed
on an upcoming agenda. .
There being no further business or discussion, the meeting adjourned
at 10:20 p.m.
~~-
Ro ert A. Poo , Mayor
Attest:
~Err-#
'E': Van i e,
City Clerk
FORM 88 MEMORANDUM. OF VOTING 'CONFlICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL 'PUBLIC OFFICERS
LAST N..\ME-FIRST NAME-~lIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITrEE
Dupee '. Ann
MAILING ADDRESS
P.O. Box 868
Clermont City Council .
THE BOARD. COUNCil,. COMMISSION, AUTHORI1"\'. OR COMMITIEE ON
WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF:
x; CITY :.~ COUNTY i : OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
CITY
COUNTY
Clermont, FL 32711
, D,",TE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED
June 23, 1987
Lake
NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION:
,..City of C1er~ont
MY POSITION IS:
:x ELECTIVE
... APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST IFILIE FORM 81
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. The requirements of this law are mandatory; although
the use of this particular form is not 'required by law, you are encouraged to use it in making the disclosure required by law.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with 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 th~ form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
ELECTED OFFICERS:
A person holding elective county. municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures
to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special
gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained.
In either case, you should 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 IS DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this fqrm with the person responsible for recording
the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
A person holdirig appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the
special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom' he is retained.
A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest" but must
disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision by oral or written communication, whether
made by the officer or at his direction.
- ,
IF YOU INTEND T9 MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH
THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: '
"
o You should ,complete and file this form (before ma~iqg any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for
recording the minutes of the meeting, who will !nco~p~rate the "form in the minutes.
o A copy of the form should be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
... The form should be read publicly at the meeting prior to consideration of the matter in which you have a conflict of interest.
.... I II tl\ I ~II HI.Mf, PACiE I
. -. ~._.
.. '. , ~
IF YO!1 ~A~E NO'ATTErvtPT TO"I~.FLl}~~C'ET~E DECIS'I~N EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION OR VOTE AT THE MEETING:
. ' .".", ~ .' , ..... . p ". . .. '..
o You.'should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
o You should complete the form and file it within IS days after the vote occurs with the person respo,psible for recording the minutes
of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
IDISCLOSlUl!!f! OIF StAilE OfPIFICf!l!!'S INTlEl!!lESi
I,
,Ann Dupee
, hereby disclose that on
June 23,
,19~:
-
"(a) A measu're came or will come before my agency which (check one)
....x.:.... inured to my special private gain; or
...~.
_ i;Ured to ,the special gain of
, by whom I am retained.
(b) The measure before my.agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows:
I abstained from voting on the matter concerning funding for advertising of
the Chamber of Commerce Labor Day celebration due to the nature of the business
I am involved" in, The South Lake Press.
-r.~~~
:~
:~.
July 8, 1987
Date Filed
Signal~NI) ~ ~
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES ~1I2.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED
DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAYBE 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 $5,000.
PAGE:
CE FOR'" 88 - 10-86