I CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was opened by Mayor Anita T. Cereceda at 1:10 P.M. on Friday, February 16, 1996, with a pledge of allegiance to the flag.

In attendance at the meeting were Mayor and Council Member Anita T. Cereceda; Vice Mayor and Council Member; Ted Fitzsimons; Interim

Town Manager Marsha Segal-George and Council Members Rusty Isler, Ray Murphy and Garr Reynolds. Town Attorney Richard Roosa was also in

attendance.

Mayor Cereceda announced that there would be no public input at this meeting and that it was strictly an educational workshop for the Council.

II PRESENTATIONS

A. Wayne Daltry, Executive Director,

Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council

Outlined by Mr. Daltry were matters that faced the city council in

home rule. Foremost is their need for a comprehensive plan. They have about

a year to designate what is known as a local planning agency. Florida law

requires that the local planning agency have a comprehensive plan by about

three years from the date a town is created. Florida law provides a lot of detail

of what a comprehensive plan is supposed to be but, frankly, Mr. Daltry advised,

it is your vision of yourself for the future. Mr. Daltry described this vision as

being both internal and external. He said that the town already had some

internal vision that enabled them to become its own community. The trick,

however, is to get everybody to reach some consensus of what that looks like on

paper and then adopt it into law.

The comprehensive plan document that describes a town's vision

has several mandatory components, Mr. Daltry advised. There is to be a future

land use map, a future land use element. There is supposed to be a

transportation element, one major road, a parks and recreation element. You

are supposed to have in effect a public services element -- water, sewage, solid

waste, drainage. You are supposed to have a capital improvement element, an

interval coordination element, a conservation element, and a coastal element

because you're a coastal community. A coastal element should address the

subject of hurricane evacuation.

You are a parks and recreation site, Mr. Daltry stated. One-half of the

traffic is non-residents and Fort Myers Beach is their destination. They are here

to recreate. Your recreation is not just for the town but is a regional recreation

source for this county, for other counties in Florida and for a greater part of

northern United States. This is something that is part of your burden and part of

your ambience.

Mr. Roger advised that our public service is our water system. Our water

is not self-sufficient. We definitely need to be concerned how water is managed

elsewhere in order to have a water supply here that we can depend upon for

tomorrow.

Mr. Daltry doesn't think the town has the land to meet the FAS waste

treatment systems of the future and will have to work with that regionally.

There is no incinerator for solid waste and so it must be leaving the

island, Mr. Daltry said, and he indicated that that was an expensive way to take

care of it.

The drainage may go into the bay and the town may be able to improve

the drainage here so that the water quality is good, but the bay isn't in good

quality if the other communities around here don't protect it. So we have a point

of discussion with surrounding communities if we want to have good water

quality in our bay

The plan is our basic document by which we are going to discuss things

with our neighbors and the Lee County Commission for sure, according to

Mr. Daltry. We will find that we have points of discussion probably with Naples,

Cape Coral. With the plan we can find out where this new town fits in the overall

regional and state community of Florida.

Mr. Daltry stated that the town of Fort Myers Beach has a few challenges.

One challenge is that someone else's negligence becomes a burden for the

town. Sanibel, Lee County, will be part of the town's picture. They will be there

no matter what.

The town's comprehensive planning effort, which on the surface may

seem little, can be very good. It may be the best tool to continue to hammer out

community consensus on any of the subjects with which you know you are going

to be faced. An awful lot of communities have been there before you. I think

they cheerily will be willing to help you, Mr. Daltry said.

Rusty Isler asked Mr. Daltry what the concept would be of taking the

county plan or the current plan and modifying it to fit us. Mr. Daltry indicated

that the town is going to need information. When Lee County does a plan they

have to balance things, Mr. Daltry said, and this town is going to have to balance

things also, although in a lot smaller area. You can be self-serving. You don't

have to accept, for example, an evacuation plan of the county. It sounds simple

but the modifications are going to be very difficult. But when you get done with

your modifications, there won't be a lot of resemblance between what you started

with and what you have done.

Ted Fitzsimons said that he assumed then that there is no law protecting

other municipalities' comp plans from potential plagiarism. We can go through

other communities' that we see that have similar geographics and try to see how

they handle particular problems, how they define things. You might check with

copyright, Mr. Daltry told him, but most of them do not copyright. It's not

uncommon. That's how things got started. Mr. Daltry said that he could produce

for us three different plans that started from the same template. You start off

with a basic template, but when you are done you have created something for

your community.

Mr. Fitzsimons advised that this particular workshop was precipitated

because of a request to have our town attorney draft a modified moratorium

ordinance. Mr. Daltry said that moratorium means you are stopping something

today that you are going to allow later, perhaps with modifications. He set forth

three different concepts of a moratorium and said that each concept has to be

indexed to why you are doing it, how long you are going to do it and what you

want to accomplish by the time it's done. You can't just turn your selections on

and off like a light switch.

Ray Isler said that it was his understanding that the reason for the

suggested moratorium here on Fort Myers Beach was to use it as a planning

tool, a freeze, so that council could work on the comprehensive plan. Would

that be a good reason to effect a moratorium Mr. Isler wanted to know. Speaking

extemporaneously, having not reviewed a particular document, Mr. Daltry said, if

you're freezing your community land use map while you're doing this, you would

be declaring in effect that the county's zoning act will stand until you get around

to changing it, and you won't change it until you have the change in your

comprehensive plan. That is a rezoning moratorium. That's not, I would think,

uncommon for new communities. If I were your planner, I would probably be

asking you to do it. I would not probably be asking you to impose a building

moratorium that was consistent with that land use map's zoning ordinances

unless I had a public service reason: the roads don't work, the water doesn't

work, the sewer doesn't work. The reason why I condition it that way is because

later on I would probably be asking for that kind of moratorium too, but only after

you had reached closure on what you expect it to be. Then we'd be targeting all

sorts of buildings and saying don't build them because we're going to change the

zoning and we'd then be going to court because that's the only way we're going

to be able to do this. A speculative change would be if somebody came in

wanting a rezoning and you give them a reason to expect one.

Mayor Cereceda asked Mr. Daltry if the plan had to be created three

years from the creation of the LPA or from this municipality. He replied that it is

his recollection that it is the municipality. Mrs. Cereceda then quoted him as

saying that this is largely a built-out community, to which Mr. Daltry replied in

effect that it sure looked like it when he was driving through it.

Mayor Cereceda presented other questions to Mr. Daltry, such as,

a. How then does a moratorium help or hinder a largely built-

out community?

b. You said that a moratorium stops things for a while. What

happens to those things when the moratorium is lifted? Do they then have to

conform to the plan or do they just go ahead as they were before the

moratorium?

B. Bruce Rogers, Planning Director, City of Sanibel

Mr. Rogers stated that he is here to say that everything Mr. Daltry

said is correct and that they should feel that they have a tremendously large task

in front of them, because they do. He noted that there are a lot of similarities

between the town of Fort Myers Beach and the city of Sanibel, but they are not

the same and they shouldn't try to be the same. We all have our attributes that

we want to build upon, and that's how you should be looking at the town of Fort

Myers Beach. Mr. Rogers said there are many many things that were good

about our town and that is what we should build upon. Rusty Isler had asked if

you could look at the plans of other barrier islands, but you will find, as Wayne

Daltry indicated, that when you are done your plan is only going to be good for

the town of Fort Myers Beach. You can get ideas from other places, but in the

final analysis this place, like any other place, is unique. So don't think in terms

of we'll do it like Sanibel did, because we're just not the same. There are

tremendous differences between Sanibel Island twenty years ago and Fort

Myers Beach today. Also, the law has changed tremendously in twenty years.

Under today's law you have much less flexibility.

With respect to moratoriums, Mr. Rogers advised that we needed

to take a look at the plan that is in effect today for Fort Myers Beach. It's not like

you don't have a plan, he said. There is a set of zoning regulations in place

today. There is a land development code. There are rules and regulations for

what you have to do to get a permit. All of those are in place today and it is my

understanding that under your local agreement with Lee County they will

continue to issue permits. You do have a plan and it's in place and it's being

implemented. The question you have to ask yourself is do you like that plan.

Some things you may want to keep and others you may want to change.

Mr. Rogers said that the town should ask itself regarding the

problems it has had with Lee County whether the problems arose out of the way

the county administered the codes of if the problems they had rested in the

codes themselves. You are in charge here, he advised. It is up to you to decide

whether rezonings are going to be granted. It is up to you to decide whether

special exceptions are going to be granted or a variance is to be granted. Is that

enough for you to be satisfied to leave everything else in place? If you feel that

there is some fundamental problem with the code itself ... then you need to exert

more control than what you have set up now. Mr. Rogers gave examples based

on Sanibel's experiences.

Rusty Isler noted that we are very much constrained by our traffic.

The only way to concentrate density is to go up, Mr. Isler said, and asked for Mr.

Rogers' views regarding high risers. Mr. Rogers said that if over three stories is

a high rise, then Sanibel doesn't have that. Even under Lee County zoning that

was in effect for Sanibel Island before it became a city, there was a 35-foot

maximum height restriction. If you want high density, if you're looking for a way

to maximize your density on a per square foot of land, then obviously you go up.

But if you're looking to restrict density, then a very quick way to do that is to

place height restrictions in combination with land coverage restrictions. If you

can't go up and you can't go out, then that obviously restricts you to a much

smaller building envelope and you are going to restrict densities that way. If you

want a mechanism to accommodate those densities, then you will have to permit

people to go up.

I don't think our density matches our road system, and I don't know

how that was allowed to happen with all these plans. We obviously have more

density than our roads can handle and all this planning doesn't seem to protect

us from that, Mr. Isler said.

Mr. Rogers said that one would think it would. You would think it

would have protected Sanibel, but it didn't. There are more dwelling units in

Sanibel than there are population. In that sense our problems are quite similar.

What clogs up the roads are the units that are here. There is nearly 100 percent

occupancy at this time of year, plus, he indicated, when people go to the beach,

Sanibel and Fort Myers Beach is where they go. A lot of the traffic you have out

here at this time of year is not in any way associated with dwellings, but is

caused by people just coming out for the day. Controlling density does not

automatically control traffic.

Ted Fitzsimons wanted to know if Sanibel had restrictions in place

for traffic control purposes, such as when businesses should close or not open.

Mr. Rogers advised that they didn't have regulations of that type.

Do you feel that there is a direct relationship between density, i.e.,

dwelling units, and traffic volume? Mr. Fitzsimons wanted to know. Mr. Rogers

assured him there was a direct relationship. Single family detached dwellings

with multiple cars and drivers generate more trips per day than do hotels and

motels.

If we were planning for our community, we would have to have a

complete inventory of every dwelling unit that existed in the community, is that

right? Mr. Fitzsimons questioned. Mr. Rogers said that that should be an

objective, but it would be very difficult to get that number. Asked about sources

for this information, Mr. Rogers suggested people who provide utilities, but said

a street by street canvas would be the best way to go but it may not be legal. It

may have invasion of privacy implications.

Garr Reynolds asked if Mr. Rogers now feels that the moratorium

that was imposed by Sanibel was a mistake. Mr. Rogers said he thought it was

the right thing for Sanibel to do at the time. It was extraordinarily popular with

the residents although there were some who did not welcome it.

Mr. Reynolds said that our situation is that we have to do

something and want to do something for the visitors and also the permanent

residents on the island but have been threatened with lawsuits. He asked

Mr. Rogers for a figure on how many millions Sanibel paid out in the early years

of their moratorium. Mr. Rogers' reply was that he didn't know how one would

separate out legal fees associated with a moratorium from legal fees just simply

associated with the advice of a new counsel and legal fees associated with

doing the legal background necessary to develop the plan. But he could say

that the legal fees incurred from the day of incorporation through adoption of the

comprehensive plan, which was 19 months following adoption, in today's dollars

amounted to millions and millions of dollars, a substantial expense.

Looking back, would you say that the money you spent protecting

your community was money well spent? Mr. Reynolds wanted to know. Yes, was

Mr. Rogers' reply. Obviously, every time you do something you take chances.

You have to do what you think is best, and then you have to protect it the best

you can. You have to know that you'll be able to afford it.

Ray Murphy inquired of Mr. Rogers that if he could have been the

first planner for Sanibel, why would he have wanted to be the first one and why

would he not have wanted to be the first one. The first one, Mr. Rogers said, in

any situation like this is really in an almost no-win situation. As an employee

you are going to be the one that everybody comes to see. You keep office

hours, you get paid, and you're expected to have answers. But so early in the

process you can't possibly give anybody answers. All you can do is speculate

with the person you are talking with, because you have no context in which to

answer questions. The advantage of being the first one is you have a chance to

try out ideas you have always wanted to try but you have never had the chance

to do it because there were always so many rules and regulations in place. You

have to work very closely with your council, much more closely than after you

have rules and regulations in place. Mr. Murphy asked Mr. Rogers if he would

have wanted to be the first planner on Sanibel, and he replied no.

The mayor asked Mr. Rogers if the impact on the infrastructure was

greater commercially or residentially. Mr. Rogers said he wasn't sure if you

could say one or the other had the greatest impact where traffic was concerned.

From a planning perspective, the mayor wanted to know, would you look at them

equally or would you weigh one over the other. You have to look at them

equally, Mr. Rogers advised. You have to ask yourself from what area do you

want your commercial traffic to be drawn. Do you want commercial development

to be such that you are drawing people from other areas, trying to attract that

traffic here with some type of a commercial development, or do you want your

commercial development to serve the residential community?

Attorney Roosa asked which had the greater impact on water

usage, commercial or residential? Mr. Rogers said that goes back to what's the

purpose of the moratorium. Is it to give you a breathing spell to figure out what

kind of community you want it to be, or have you identified an infrastructure

problem, such as inadequacy of water supply, waste water disposal. What is it

that you are trying to hold down and why are you trying to hold that down? He

didn't think one could make a really good distinction -- commercially it would

depend on the kinds of businesses they were talking about. Restaurants and

beauty parlors use more water than business offices, for instance. What you

control is the permit. What you can't control is the traffic that just comes over

here.

Regarding Sanibel's legal challenges, Rusty Isler wanted to know if

they were all the same and if so, what was the basis for the lawsuits against the

moratorium. Mr. Rogers replied that most of the legal challenges were

associated with density reduction. Were you getting sued after the new density

requirements went into effect, Mr. Isler asked, or were those lawsuits specifically

against the moratorium. He was told that some were filed while the moratorium

was in effect and others after the adoption of the comprehensive plan and the

densities were in place.

Ted Fitzsimons wanted to know the breakdown on how many

dollars Sanibel spent on lawsuits associated with people not being able to get

permits and dollars spent because of not being able to get their project started

within 60 days and thereby invalidating an existing permit somebody held.

Mr. Rogers said he couldn't help him with those numbers.

Is it unreasonable, Mr. Fitzsimons asked, to ask those people with

expectations to disclose what they are? Mr. Rogers said it wasn't unreasonable

to ask. You would then have a public record of what the expectations are in the

community.

Garr Reynolds on the subject of Sanibel's lawsuits asked

Mr. Rogers if he felt that Sanibel could have afforded to not do what they did. If

the city council had not done what they did, Sanibel would be a different place

today, Mr. Rogers said. There certainly would have been more condominium-

type development along the beach. There would have been differences and

Mr. Rogers feels that most people would have found those differences less

desirable than what they ended up with. If the moratorium had not been

adopted, Mr. Rogers added, that doesn't mean that there wouldn't have been a

plan adopted. And the plan would have ended up looking much as it does now.

But there would have been considerable development that would have taken

place during the 18 months the plan was being worked on, so there certainly

would have been differences.

In the planning process we will have to weigh and evaluate the

impact of allowing us to be a viable, unstressed community for eight or nine

months of the year and completely over utilized, unaccommodating for three

months of the year, it was noted.

Different zoning categories were discussed and the impact they

would have on traffic.

C. Ken Phafzer, Assistant Planning Director, City of Sanibel

Mr. Phafzer said that Sanibel had a very real goal. Now they want

to put a new plan in place. Their present plan was developed in the mid-70's

when building had stopped. In the 80's there was a condo glut and single-family

homes were a perfect alternative. What they share with Fort Myers Beach is a

demand to be here. He noted that traffic is the only thing that keeps people from

coming to Fort Myers Beach.

D. Michael Reitman, Executive Director,

Lee County Building and Industry Association

Parts of Mr. Reitman's speech are as follows. He expressed his

opinion that the moratorium would hurt the individual who makes his living here.

These are not just the builders but bankers, appraisers, automobile dealers, and

real estate agents. He feels that the harsh reality of a moratorium means

higher property taxes, lower wages and salaries, fewer jobs, and in the long run

more expensive housing. Fort Myers Beach's economy is dependent mainly on

tourism, real estate, and to a certain extent retirement. A moratorium can take

three years and you can become known to the banking community and any kind

of investment community as not being a good place to invest money. The

moratorium will greatly devalue undeveloped property without vested rights. A

moratorium can be politically popular in the short run, but they typically create

larger problems as economic costs mount. Let's work together, Mr. Reitman said,

to resolve whatever the real problems or the perceived problems are. I urge you to

carefully consider the repercussions of the imposition of a building moratorium.

The impending reaction by individuals denied the use of their property could be

devastating to this community. As I heard today, you cannot arbitrarily

differentiate between commercial and residential. Some further observations of

Mr. Reitman are the following:

1. The building industry and all related industries oppose any kind of

moratorium. We cannot understand why the town council would even

contemplate imposing a moratorium.

2. There currently is in place a comprehensive plan in Lee County

covering Fort Myers Beach. Can this not be utilized until you, the town, adopts

its own plan? At one time Lee County's plan was designated as one of the best

in the state.

3. The proposed moratorium is discriminatory and is arbitrary

because it includes only commercial and not residential.

In the question and answer segment, Ted Fitzsimons asked

Mr. Reitman what constitutes a depressed area. Mr. Reitman responded that

when a town imposes a moratorium, the perception in the investment community

is that the area is a no-growth one. Individuals will not be able to sell their land

and their property will decrease in value.

If we have a waterfront community and they are not making any

more waterfront land available for development, Mr. Fitzsimons asked, why

wouldn't the basic attraction for waterfront property and dwelling units and

commercial property be maintained regardless of whether there was a

moratorium or not? If you restrict the supply, does the demand go away? Mr.

Reitman responded that in normal circumstances, when you restrict demand

there is an increase in supply, but that has not been the case when it comes to

moratoriums. When you restrict supply and the demand stays the same what

happens, Mr. Fitzsimons asked. The price just goes up, right? Mr. Reitman

responded that was correct.

Mr. Reitman was challenged on his statement that a moratorium

would cause an area to become depressed. He was told that the draft of the

moratorium ordinance shows that improvements would be allowed. Nor does it

specifically rule out commercial but only asks for limitations. It also mentions

both residential and business density and intensity. We are not being

discriminatory.

III DRAFT MORATORIUM ORDINANCE

Marsha Segal-George feels that having the town manager decide what to

do with the LPA's findings is inappropriate. That should come back to the

council, she feels, and the town manager should not be in a position of making

judgments on what the LPA says or doesn't do. Mr. Roosa said that he thought

it would depend on how much time the council wanted to spend on what he

considers an administrative function. Ms. Segal-George said that being in a

position of rejecting a recommendation of the LPA creates a difficult problem

perceptually for a town manager. She doesn't think the community wants the

town manager in that kind of position and she doesn't think the town council

does either. Mr. Roosa said he would see what he could come up with as an

alternative. Mayor Cereceda said that the town manager is our facilitator and

her position should remain as neutral as possible. She should have no decision-

making capability whatsoever in solving problems for the community.

Mr. Roosa said it seems to him that there needs to be a finding in the

early part of the ordinance that commercial establishments have a greater

impact on traffic than do residential establishments. What we have here on the

island is unique, in that the residences attract their owners, occupants and

relatives, but the commercial establishments attract off-island people.

Other observations are the following:

We have to look at things in terms of what is best for the entire community

and not just for individuals.

I think that the growth that we've had in the last five years has been

reasonable and good.

If people's expectations for the use of their land is greater than what we

feel is required to provide for the future of the community, it is conceivable that

that particular conflict would cause litigative efforts.

It sounded pretty clear to me that to effect a moratorium, you really should

have a reason. Now the reason that came up today was sewer, or water or

traffic. When traffic came up I saw light bulbs go off and everybody jumped on

the traffic. I want to know if that is justification for a moratorium or is the reason

for the moratorium still, as proposed in this draft, that the changes in land use

will limit the town's ability to plan effectively. Is that still reason number one for a

moratorium, that traffic is used as a justification for that moratorium, or are we

going to use the traffic issue as the reason for the moratorium. A response was

that it wasn't thought that the fundamental objective and justification for the draft

ordinance had been changed. What we have to plan for of course is how we're

going to accommodate the present and expanding use of our infrastructure,

including, naturally, the roads which is the traffic problem.

If the objective of incorporation was to control the rate of growth, already

you potentially have litigative problems. Or if they take issue with our new

comprehensive land use plan which attempts to deliver that which is going to

control and get us to the twenty years from now that we want to be, if they don't

like that and they want to do it some other way they are entitled to go to court.

It seems to me that we are going to get sued by all the people who have

slid through in this last rush. Those are the people who are going to be

dramatically impacted. I want to know what is going to happen to those people

when this moratorium is lifted.

When the moratorium is lifted, it is presumed that all of the elements or

certain elements of the comprehensive land use plan would be installed.

Everybody would have to comply with that. And if they don't like that, they'll sue.

Is it the Lee County Comprehensive Plan that we are challenging or is it

the administration, It seems to me that if it is the administration, then we as the

new administrators have solved that problem already.

The Lee County Comprehensive Plan is a good plan. There has not been

very much enforcement. But it is not something that we can arbitrarily adopt.

The assumption that traffic is a justification for this moratorium is

stretching your imagination a bit. I don't think that anyone has said that this

moratorium has anything to do with traffic. It certainly will not change the traffic

pattern in any way. Also, I don't think that a lot of lawsuits will prevail. I think

there may be some, but then I think there are some in litigation right now. I

doubt that a whole lot will change on that because it is allowing for exceptions.

As long as we take a fair approach to this for the benefit of the community, I

think the community will prevail. This moratorium is simply for breathing time. It

is a time for allowing some planning for responsible growth.

IV COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION

During this segment of the meeting the council members discussed

among themselves subjects related to the comprehensive plan and the effect it

would have on the community. Mr. Roosa suggested they needed a planner.

The mayor advised she would not be here on the 26th and hoped that

nothing requiring her vote would be scheduled on that date. It was decided to

reschedule the CRA portion of the meeting to March 4. It was advised that

Marsha should continue to schedule meetings with the knowledge that perhaps

one or two of them may not be able to make a meeting. It was announced that

they could schedule a workshop where they are not allowed to vote followed by

a special meeting where they can vote.

Mr. Roosa passed out copies of a letter from the county attorney that

responded to Mr. Roosa's letter asking the county attorney to reconsider his

position. The county attorney's position has not changed. Mr. Roosa advised

that there is a procedure that they could file prior to filing litigation to have this

issue resolved. Mr. Roosa has talked to the county attorney about this and has

the feeling that his position would be that he would waive that procedure if it is

waivable, or in the alternative, he would meet with the county commissioners

and they would waive it if it is waivable so that we could get early hearings for a

declaratory judgment on the issue of statutory construction of the ordinances to

see if they apply to the town. There is another alternative and this is the

alternative that the county attorney favors, and that is for the county commission

to adopt an ordinance which would make the county ordinances apply to the

Beach. It is my position that they already apply, but it certainly wouldn't hurt

anything if they adopted it for that same reason so that they would be satisfied.

Their concern is that they might be enforcing invalid ordinances. And if they felt

comfortable and if they felt that procedure would protect them, Mr. Roosa said

he would have no problem with it. The only concern he would have is how they

drafted the ordinance and if they were to shift some of this responsibility over to

the town. These are county ordinances and they should be the responsibility of

county to enforce. That has been our position all along. The county attorney

has informed Mr. Roosa that he believes the county commission would without

hesitation adopt those ordinances and apply them to our town. He said the other

municipalities expressly requested to be left out and that's why they were left

out. The mayor added that the other municipalities also had sheriff departments.

Those are our options, Mr. Roosa continued. One would be to pursue the

method to the court and have the judge judicially determine whether or not the

ordinance would apply, and that would protect the county and that would protect

us. The problem however is that that's expensive. The county apparently are

willing to enforce ... their concern is liability. So it would protect the county if

they were to adopt an ordinance just for our town. However, they won't do it

unless we request it. So that's the issue there. I would need you to think about

that and decide whether you want to request that. I haven't seen the ordinance,

Mr. Roosa admitted.

V ADJOURNMENT

Mayor Cereceda adjourned the meeting at 5:00 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Lorraine Calhoun

Recording Secretary