[N.J.S.A 40A:9-22.5d.] The Ethics Law defines “local government officer” as any person “serving on a local government agency which has the authority to enact ordinances, approve development applications or grant zoning variances,” N.J.S.A. 40A:9-22.3g(2), and a “local government agency” as a municipal board which performs functions in other than a purely advisory nature. N.J.S.A. 40A:9-22.3e. The MLUL also expressly prohibits a zoning board member from acting “on any matter in which [the member] has, either directly or indirectly, any personal or financial interest.” N.J.S.A. 40:55D-69. The same prohibition applies to planning board members. N.J.S.A. 40:55D-23b. See Trust Co. of N.J. v. Planning Bd. of Borough of Freehold, 244 N.J.Super. 553, 559-60, 582 A. 2d 1295 (App.Div.1990) (<HOLDING>). At the time of his voluntary recusal, DuPont
holding that defendant did not breach oral agreement because among other things the plaintiff had not established that the term in question was part of the oral contract holding among other things that njsa 4044d23b prohibited board members who were an associate and partner in law firm that represented the bank seeking site plan approval from voting for ordinance declaring that banks were permitted in bl zone holding that government approval of a subcontract terms giving subcontractor a right to a direct appeal to the department of energy board of contract appeals among other things manifested intent holding a court must find among other things clear evidence of the existence of an oral agreement for part performance to remove the contract from the statute of frauds holding that vested rights were not acquired by obtaining approval of the subdivision plan