[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:05]
>> ALL RIGHT. WE WILL START IN THREE SECONDS.
THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 16TH, 2022 IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER. IF WE COULD NOW STAND FOR THE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, GOD, WITH HREUB -- LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
IF YOU CAN REMAIN STANDING. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT
[A. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH TO DEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES]
HAPPENED. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH?[B. IDENTIFICATION OF CASES IN COMPLIANCE OR RESCHEDULED]
AT THIS TIME WE DON'T HAVE CASES IN COMPLIANCE ORIE SCHEDULED --[B. 22-2577 CE 211 Avenue A Krazy Fish Heather Debevec]
OR RESCHEDULED SO OUR FIRST CASE IS 22-2577, 211 AVENUE A, KRAZYFISH. >> GOOD MORNING, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. THIS IS CASE NUMBER 22-2577, 211 AVENUE A, KRAZY FISH. IT WAS FOR SECTION 2420, REMOVAL OF NUISANCE AND NUISANCE ON PROPERTY PROHIBITED AND 2421 NUISANCE AS A CONDITION. IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THEY CLEAN THE GREASE OVER FLOW TO UH FLOW SEEPING INTO GROUND WATERS OF THE CITY DRAINAGE. THE CITY REQUESTED IF THE SPECIAL IMAGINE STATION FINDS A VIOLATION EXIST THE VIOLATOR GIVE 10 DAYS TO COMPLY OR A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BE ASSESSED.
I DO HAVE PHOTOS IN WHICH TO SUBMIT.
THEY WERE REVIEWED THIS MORNING. >> DOES THIS DE -- DEPICT THE
VIOLATION AS YOU VIEWED THEM? >> THEY DO.
>> THEY WILL BE COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 1 AS PHOTOGRAPHS.
>> AND YOUR HONOR, I SPOKE WITH MS. JOY THIS MORNING.
ONE OF THE TRAPS DOES APPEAR TO BE CLEANED OFF SUFFICIENTLY.
THE OTHER ONE HAS SOME STAINING AROUND IT FROM THE OVER FLOW, SO I DID EXPLAIN TO HER THAT SHE NEEDS TO GET THE STAIN REMOVER
OR SOMETHING TO REMOVE THAT. >> I AM ADMITTING THESE AS THE CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 1. IS THIS LAST PICTURE -- [INAUDIBLE]. IS THIS THE ONE THAT'S --
>> I CAN'T SEE WHAT YOU ARE HOLDING UP.
>> THAT ONE I WOULD SAY IS GOOD, BUT THE TRAP NEXT TO IT BECAUSE THEY ARE BOTH ON THE SAME CEMENT PAD, THE OTHER ONE YOU CAN STILL SEE SIGNIFICANT MARKING AROUND IT.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE IT? >> YEAH BECAUSE IT PROBABLY WAS THEN. IF SHE REQUEST WE TRY TO DO IT BECAUSE THAT COMPANY WHAT WE PA. IF YOU WANT ME TO DO IT, I WILL
CAN YOU TELL US YOUR NAME AND YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THE
>> AND DO YOU WORK FOR KRAZY FISH.
>> AND SHE HAS HOW LONG TO -- ARE YOU ABLE TO COMPLETE THAT IN HOW MANY DAYS? I CAN'T SEE IT?
>> REQUESTED 10 DAYS, MA'AM. >> CAN YOU HAVE THAT DONE IN 10
>> I AM GOING TO FIND THAT THE VIOLATION DOES EXIST, BUT YOU HAVE 10 DAYS TO FIX IT, AND IF IT IS NOT DONE IN 10 DAYS, THEN THE FINE WOULD THEN START. OKAY?
DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> SPECIAL IMAGINE -- MAGISTRATE, IT IS THE $250 A DAY FINE OR A DIFFERENT AMOUNT?
>> A $250 A DAY, YES, AFTER 10 DAYS.
AND OF COURSE YOU CAN APPEAL IF YOU DECIDE TO.
>> THANK YOU. >> OUR NEXT CASE IS 22-1204, 906
[A. 22-1204 906 N 16th Street Stephanie Eubanks Maurice Davis Peggy Arraiz]
NORTH 16TH STREET, EUBANKS. >> YOU CAN STAND OR SIT, I
[00:05:03]
GUESS. IT'S UP TO YOU.>> HI. >> I APOLOGIZE, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THIS IS CASE 22-1204 OWN BY STEPHANIE EUBANKS AND MAURICE DAVIS.
THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON APRIL 8TH OF THIS YEAR.
IT WAS A REQUEST FOR A RE-HEARING FOR -- I CAN SEE 304.2 PROTECTIVE TREATMENT. SEPTEMBER 21ST SPECIAL MAGISTRATE BE ASKED A FINE BE ASSESSED.
APRIL 8TH CASE WAS INITIATED AND CONTINUE WEIGHINGS GRANTED TO JUNE 27TH. SEPTEMBER 2ND, HEARING NOTICE SENT TO THE OWNER CERTIFIED MAIL.
SEPTEMBER 9TH, NOTICE SENT REGULAR MAIL AND POSTED ON PROPERTY. SEPTEMBER 9TH, THE CARD WAS RETURNED SIGNED. SEPTEMBER 21ST, THE HEARING WAS HELD AND NO ONE UH -- APPEARED AND AN ORDER WAS ISSUED. OCTOBER 25TH, AN EX-- EXTENSIN WAS STKPWRAPBTED TO NOVEMBER 25TH AND OCTOBER 26TH A REQUEST FOR THE RE-HEARING WAS SUBMITTED.
THE CITY IS REQUESTING TO DENY THIS REQUEST AS BOTH PARTIES ARE
I DIDN'T HEAR THE LAST -- YOU SAID YOU ARE REQUESTING THAT IT
BE DENIED -- >> IT WAS DENYING THE REQUEST.
SO IF I CAN CLARIFY BECAUSE THIS ISN'T A NORMAL -- I'M TRYING TO FIND THE RULES OF PROCEDURE TO PULL UP THE EXACT TERMINOLOGY.
DID MS. ARRAIZ HAVE IT PULLED UP? I KNOW YOU WERE THROWN IN LAST MINUTE.
OKAY. SO SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, MS. DEBEVEC, MS. EUBANKS WAS HERE THE DAY OF THE HEARING?
>> I NEVER SAW HER. YOU PARENTALLY SOMEBODY ELSE
DID. >> YOU PERSONALLY DID NOT?
>> SO, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, ONCE I PULL THEM UP AND GIVE YOU THE EXACT TERMINOLOGY, BECAUSE SHE HAS BEEN FOUND IN VIOLATION THERE IS A PROVISION IN THERE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO RECONSIDER THE REQUEST AS LONG AS I BELIEVE IT IS GOOD CAUSE MAY BE THE VERBIAGE, BUT I WANT TO PULL IT UP TO BE COMPLETELY ACCURATE. SO UNDER RULE 11 OF THE RULES OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE WRITTEN ORDER, THE ORDER IS MAILED TO THE RESPAWN DEPARTMENT -- RESPONDENT.
THEY MAY FILE A REQUEST FOR A RE-HEARING AND IT SHALL INCLUDE A DESCRIPTION OF NEW EVIDENCE OR CIRCUMSTANCES NOT PRESENTED OR CONSIDERED AT THE ORIGINAL HEARING.
THE REQUEST SHOULD ALSO STATE WHY ANY SUCH NEW INFORMATION WAS NOT PRESENTED AT THE ORIGINAL HEARING.
THE DEPARTMENT SHALL SCHEDULE THE REQUEST FOR HEARING BY THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE AT THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING WITH NOTICE TO THE RESPONDENT. NO REQUEST THAT WILL STAY THE TERMS OF ANY OTHER EXCEPT PROVIDED FOR IN THESE RULES.
THAT WAS SUB-SECTION A. SUB-SECTION B, THERE IS NO RIGHT TO RECONSIDERATION OF ANY RULING BY THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IF SUCH REQUEST IS NOT TIMELY MADE PURSUANT TO RULE 13A.
BUT AT THE SOLE DISCORRECTION OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IT MAY BE RECONSIDERED AT ANY TIME WITHIN ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE PERIOD FOLLOWED BY 13A ABOVE -- IT SHOULD BE BELOW -- UPON FINDING THERE IS GOOD CAUSE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE TO EXCUSE UNTIMELINESS OF THE REQUEST. IN THE EVENT A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS GRANTED, THE MATTER SHALL BE RESET FOR THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORIGINAL ISSUES. UNDER THEIR TAOEUPB -- UNDER 13A, THE DEPARTMENT MAY WITHIN ITS DISCRETION GIVE A RESPONDENT ADDITIONAL TIME NOT EXCEEDING 90 DAYS TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDER.
SO AT THIS POINT, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, IT IS IN YOUR DISCRETION WHETHER TO ALLOW A NEW HEARING FOR RECONSIDERATION.
DO WE HAVE THE REQUEST THAT SHE PROVIDED WITH THE NEW EVIDENCE?
>> THERE IS PAPERWORK IN HERE WHERE SHE ASKED FOR THE REQUEST.
I DO SEE THAT. DO YOU WISH FOR THAT?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> AND IT WAS TIMELY MADE?
[00:10:01]
>> SHE HAS UP TO A YEAR FOR YOU TO CONSIDER DISCRETIONARY WHETHER TO ALLOW THE HEARING. THE CITY IS OBJECTING TO A NEW HEARING. THE HEARING DATE ORIGINALLY WAS ON SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2022. THIS REQUEST WAS RECEIVED OCTOBER 26TH, 2022, SO A LITTLE OVER A MONTH LATER.
>> DO YOU WISH FOR CURRENT PHOTOS OR NO?
>> YES, MA'AM. SO WE WILL MOVE HER REQUEST IN AS CITY'S EXHIBIT 1. DO THE PHOTOGRAPHS FAIRLY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE CURRENT CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY STP.
>> YES, MA'AM. >> HAS THERE BEEN ANY CHANGE
FROM THE VIOLATION TO TODAY? >> YES.
>> WE WILL MOVE THE PHOTOS IN AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 2.
>> OKAY. I WILL ADMIT THE APPLICATION AS CITY ACE -- CITY'S 1 AND THE PHOTOS AS CITY'S 2.
>> THE PROPERTY IN COMPLIANCE, ONE OF THE BUILDINGS HAS BEEN PAINTED AND WOULD BE CONSIDERED COMPLIED.
ONE OF THE BUILDINGS STILL NEEDS TO FINISH BE PAINTED.
IT HAS BEEN PRESSURE WASHED AND THE PAINTING WAS STARTED, BUT IT IS NOT COMPLETE. AND SO, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THE WAY THE RULES READ, QUITE FRANKLY SINCE SHE DID NOT APPEAR, IT IS NOT REALLY A SITUATION WHERE NEW EVIDENCE HAS COME TO LIGHT. SHE ABSTAINED FROM THE PROCEEDINGS. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, YOU WILL GRANT HER A RE-HEARING ON THE ORIGINAL FINDING OF VIOLATION. AND SO I THINK IF SHE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT, WE ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT AND WE ARE OBJECTING TO THAT. IT IS UP TO HER AND ULTIMATELY
YOUR DECISION. >> GIVE HER A MINUTE.
>> GO AHEAD, PLEASE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO --
>> YES, MA'AM. IT'S A LITTLE COMPLICATED.
LIKE I WAS EXPLAINING TO HEATHER , ME AND MY BROTHER OWN A PROPERTY THAT WAS PASSED DOWN TO US FROM MY GRAND PARENTS.
I'M IN COMPLIANCE WITH GETTING IT PAINTED.
THE DAY OF THE HEARING -- I WORK OVERNIGHTS AND MY BROTHER SAID HE WOULD COME FOR ME. I DIDN'T GET OFF WORK FROM 8:30 TO 9:00. I WAS HERE, BUT I WAS A FEW MINUTES LATE. THE REASON WHY THE OTHER BUILDING IS NOT PAINTED IS THAT'S HIS SIDE OF THE BUILDING, EVEN THOUGH THE LOT -- BOTH *FT -- BOTH OF THE BUILDINGS ARE ON ONE LOT. ONE I LIVE IN AND STAY IN AND THE OTHER IS HIS SIDE. HE DON'T WANT TO PAINT HIS SIDE BECAUSE HIM AND I ARE GOING THROUGH SOMETHING PERM -- PERSONAL. THE PAINTER STARTED.
HE PRESSURE WASHED IT AND CHANGED THE WOOD AND STARTED PAINTING. HE CAME AND SNATCHED OUT THE PLASTIC FROM THE WINDOW AND TOLD THE PAINTER TO STOP PAINTING BECAUSE HE DIDN'T WANT HIS SIDE PAINTED UNTIL HIM AND I COME TO A PERSONAL AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE OUTSIDE OF HIM.
HE SAID LET THE FEES RACK UP, I DON'T CARE.
THAT'S WHY I MADE THE REQUEST, WHAT CAN I DO? I EVEN HAVE THE PAINTER AT THE HOUSE TO PAINT IT.
HE SAID IF HE PAINTS IT HE WILL PRESSURE WASH IT AND TAKE IT OFF. THAT'S WHERE I'M AT WITH THIS SITUATION. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE, BUT I'M IN CAHOOTS WITH MY BROTHER. I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT --
>> ARE YOU CO-OWNERS OF BOTH, THE ENTIRE PROPERTY?
>> IT IS BOTH ON ONE LOT AND BOTH OUR NAMES ARE ON THE BUILDING. HE RAN THE PAINTER AWAY.
THE PAINTER PRESSURE WASHED IT AND COATED IT WITH THE PAINT AND EVERYTHING AND CHANGED THE WOOD. HE THREATENED THE PAINTER.
I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT LEGALLY WHAT CAN I DO? LIKE I SAID, I GOT A PAINTER THERE WAITING TO PAINT IT.
>> AND SO SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, I DO HAVE QUESTIONS REGARDING -- THE ISSUE WE ARE HERE ON IS WHETHER SHE SHOULD BE GIVEN ANOTHER HEARING FOR RECONSIDERATION.
SO WHAT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT, MS. AOU BANKS IS WHY YOU LEFT -- MS. EUBANKS WHY YOU LEFT CITY HALL THE DAY OF THE HEARING?
>> I WAS LATE. I CAME HERE FROM WORK AND I WAS LATE. THE MEETING WAS OVER.
I DIDN'T COME HERE AND NOT COME IN THE BUILDING.
I CAME FROM VERO BEACH FROM WORK.
>> KWHU -- WHEN YOU GOT HERE -- >> IT WAS OVER.
>> SO THIS ROOM HAD BEEN CLEARED.
>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, IF I CAN HAVE ONE SECOND.
I WANT TO PULL UP THE VIDEO FROM THAT DAY.
I MAY BE CONFUSING DIFFERENT CASES, BUT I THOUGHT WE ADDRESSED EVEN WHEN WE CALLED THIS CASE --
>> 17TH STREET. NOT 16TH STREET.
>> WERE YOU HERE THE DAY BEFORE AND SPOKE TO CITY STAFF PRIOR TO
THE HEARING? >> I CAME ALL THE TIME.
[00:15:03]
I AM NOT SURE ABOUT THE DATES. >> I WANT TO PULL UP THE VIDEO.
I HAVE A MEMORY OF HAVING A DISCUSSION --
>> I HAVE THE SAME MEMORY. >> IT SHOULD BE
SEPTEMBER 21ST MEETING. >> THE DAY I DID COME I ASKED FOR AN EXTENSION. I MISSED THE MEETING.
>> IT MAY HAVE BEEN THAT WE HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT SHE HAD BEEN HERE OR SPOKEN TO CITY STAFF THE DAY BEFORE AND KNEW --
>> I SPOKE TO SOMEONE, BUT -- >> I CAN'T REMEMBER.
>> I HAVE THE SAME MEMORY YOU HAVE.
OF COURSE OUR NETWORK IS DOWN. >> TRY TO REFRESH.
GO DOWN TO THE BOTTOM. >> I HAVE IT HERE SO LET ME TRY
>> SEPTEMBER 21ST. >> PAUSE THE VIDEO.
>> IS THERE ANYTHING ON YOUR SYSTEM THAT WOULD BE BLOCKING
THE SOUND? >> THAT WAS MUTED DOWN THERE BY
TOO FAR BACK. STEPHANIE EUBANKS AND POUR REECE DAVIS. AND MAURICE DAVIS.
>> IT IS PROBABLY AT THE END. >> DO YOU WANT TO HIT PLAY ONE
[00:21:01]
>> I KNEW THERE WAS SOME SORT OF A DISCUSSION.
SO, MISS EUBANKS, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO SAY?
>> I DID COME TO THE MEETING. HEATHER YOU SAID I WAS DOING EVERYTHING ELSE BESIDES PAINTING THE BUILDING SO IF I COULD FIND
OUT WHAT YOU MEANT BY THAT. >> I WILL OBJECT TO THAT.
WE ARE HERE FOR WHETHER SHE SHOULD BE GIVEN A NEW HEARING NOT TO RETRY THE ORIGINAL HEARING.
>> BECAUSE I WAS EXPLAINING TO YOU, IT IS NOT THAT I DON'T WANT TO PAINT THE BUILDING. MY THING IS I WAS GOING TO START A GROUP HOME THERE. I'M IN NURSING SO I WAS BEGINNING AN LLC THERE TO START TAKING CARE OF THE ELDERLY.
THAT'S WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN.
BY HIM NOT LETTING ME CONTINUE TO WHAT I NEEDED TO DO, I WAS FIXING THE APARTMENT IN THE BACK AND IT WAS SO DAMAGED.
I WAS SHOWING HER THE PICTURES WHERE THE TENANT LIVED AND SHE DAMAGED THE BUILDING WHICH I AM STILL FIXING.
I HAD TO STOP DOING THAT AND COMPLY WITH YOU GUYS TO PAINT THE OUTSIDE. THAT'S WHERE UH -- WHERE A LOT OF MY TIME TOOK UP. THE OUTSIDE WOULD HAVE BEEN FINISHED. AND THEN I CAME INTO THIS INSURANCE DEPARTMENT WITH MY BROTHER AND -- INCIDENT WITH MY BROTHER AND STOPPED HIM. I COULD HAVE BROUGHT HIM AS A WITNESS BECAUSE MY BROTHER THREATENED HIM.
IF I PAINT THE BUILDING HE WILL JUST COME BACK AND TAKE THE PAINT OFF. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WHICH I'M IN COMPLIANCE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH GETTING OUT THERE AND PAINTING MYSELF.
I GOT OUT THERE AND PRESSURE WASHED IT MYSELF.
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO TO SAVE MY GRANDPARENTS' BUILDING THEY BUILT YEARS AGO TO NOT JUST LET IT GO DOWN THE
STREAM FOR A PAINT JOB. >> MIGHT HAVE TO TAKE LEGAL ACTION AND GO TO SMALL CLAIMS. I CAN'T ADVISE YOU ON THAT.
YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> TAKE HIM TO SMALL CLAIMS COURT?
>> YEAH. >> SO YOU CAN'T HOLD HIM? HOLD HIM RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS SIDE NOT BEING IN COMPLIANCE.
>> I DON'T SEE HOW -- >> THEY ARE BOTH LISTED AS OWNERS, SO THEY ARE JOINTLY RESPONSIBLE.
>> RIGHT, BUT IF HE -- IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT HE IS DOING IS ACTUALLY VANDALISM. I MEAN, IT IS AGAINST HIS OWN
INTEREST, BUT I CAN'T GO -- >> I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN VANDALIZE YOUR OWN PROPERTY UNDER THE LAW, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO SORT OUT IN A DIFFERENT
EXACTLY. >> SO RAIL -- REALLY, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THE ONLY ISSUE TODAY IS UNDER OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE SHE DOES FALL WITHIN THE TIME FRAME FOR YOU TO -- WITHIN YOUR DISCRETION GRANT A RECONSIDERATION OR A REHEARING OF THE ORIGINAL VIOLATION. IT REQUIRES A FINDING THAT THERE IS GOOD CAUSE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE TO EXCUSE UNTIMELINESS
OF THE REQUEST. >> I'M GOING TO FIND THAT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES SHE HAS GOOD CAUSE AND IT IS IN -- IT IS BEYOND HER -- I MEAN SHE HAS ATTEMPTED IN GOOD FAITH TO DO THE RIGHT THING. I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE RE-HEARING WOULD BE, BUT IF SHE GETS A RE-HEARING SHE NEEDS TO OBVIOUSLY GET SOMETHING ACCOMPLISHED EITHER RESOLVING THIS WITH YOUR BROTHER OR TAKING SOME ACTION.
>> IF I CAN TAKE HIM TO COURT THAT'S WHAT I WILL DO.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS FEASIBLE TO SEPARATE THE PROPERTIES. THAT'S SOMETHING YOU MIGHT WANT
[00:25:02]
IT IS SOMETHING PERSONAL HE GOT GOING OUT ON HIM AND I.>> WELL, I AM GOING TO GRANT THE RE-HEARING.
I CAN'T G IT WILL CHANGE ANYTHING IF YOU DON'T RESOLVE THAT ISSUE. AT LEAST YOU HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT NEW EVIDENCE WHICH I THINK SHE HAD
-- >> LET ME ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION. WHAT IF I PAINT THE HOUSE AND WHAT IF HE COMES BACK AND TAKES THE PAINT OFF?
THAT'S WHAT HE THREATENED TO DO. >> LIKE I SAID, I DON'T KNOW --
>> I WOULD SAY ONCE THE HOUSE IS PAINTED, IMMEDIATELY CALL HEATHER AND HAVE AN INSPECTION DONE.
HOWEVER, FOR THE RE-HEARING, WHAT DO WE HAVE FOR A NEXT
>> YEAH. BECAUSE OF THE HOLIDAY WE HAD TO SHIFT OUR SCHEDULE. JANUARY 11TH WOULD BE THE
NEXT ONE. >> WELL, THAT GIVES YOU PLENTY OF TIME. IF IT IS COMPLIED BEFORE THAT,
THERE WILL BE NO HEARING. >> SO IF YOU CAN GET IT PAINTED AND GIVE THEM THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU HAVE DONE THAT, THEN THAT
[A. 21-0584 CE 1302 Avenue O Adriene D Blakely Peggy Arraiz]
>> OUR NEXT CASE IS 21-584, 1302 AVENUE O, BLAKELY.
>> SHOULD I STAND OR SIT? >> WHICH EVER YOU LIKE.
>> YOU CAN SIT. >> I I WILL BE PRESENTING.
THIS IS 21-584 AND THE ADDRESS IS 1302 AVENUE O OWNED BY ADRIENE D DIS BBLAKELY. IT IS BEFORE YOU FOR A MASSEY HEARING. FINES ARE ACCUMULATED, BUT NO LIEN. THE VIOLATIONS FOR ROOVES AND DRAINAGE, IPMC3402, PROTECTIVE TREATMENT.
ON OCTOBER 22ND, 2021, THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE PELITER FOUND A VIOLATION AND COMPLY OR BE FINED $100 A DAY.
ON DECEMBER 2ND, FOUND THE VIOLATION CONTINUED AND THE FINES WERE INITIATED. ON DECEMBER 29TH, WE DID RECEIVE A MASSEY REQUEST FROM MS. BLAKELY.
THE FINES WERE STOPPED BY THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE ON MARCH 2ND, 2 INJURE -- 2022 TO ALLOW MS. BLAKELY TIME TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES IN VIOLATION. ON SEPTEMBER 9TH, 2022, THE AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE -- WE FOUND THE PROPERTY IN COMPLIANCE AND DRAFTED THE AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE AND CENTS TO THE OWNER -- SENT TO THE OWNER. WE ARE HERE FOR A MASSEY HEARING. THE FINES ACCUMULATED TO A TOTAL OF $9,000. TO COMPLY WITH OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE THREE CRITERIA THAT HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED IS THE GRAVITY OR SERIOUSNESS OF THE VIOLATION AND IT WAS A MAJOR ISSUE. ANY ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE VIOLATOR TO CORRECT THE VIOLATIONS, THEY DID PAINT THE HOME, THE SHED AND THE PILLARS AND PRESSURE WASHED THE DRIVEWAY. AND IT WAS ALL DOWN TO THE ROOF.
THE ROOF NEEDED TO BE RE-- REPAIRED.
ANY PREVIOUS VIOLATIONS, -- AND THERE ARE TWO ON THE RECORD, BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THAT MS. BLAKELY HAS IN GENERAL ALWAYS BEEN RESPONSIVE TO CODE ENFORCEMENT WHEN ISSUES ARE RAISED. I ALSO NEED TO ADDRESS THE ADMINISTRATION COSTS THAT WERE INCURRED BY THE CITY.
THE TOTAL COSTS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CASE IS $1,550.73. AGAIN, THE TOTAL BEING -- FINES ACCUMULATED WERE 9,000. OF THIS $1550, $850 IS WHAT WE CONSIDER THE SOFT COSTS. THESE ARE THE COSTS FOR DOING INSPECTIONS, ET CETERA. SO BASED ON THE 850 -- BECAUSE THERE IS A COST FOR PROCESSING IT.
STAFF IT RECOMMENDING REDUCING IT TO A THOUSAND DOLLARS.
>> TOTAL OF A THOUSAND DOLLARS? >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT I WAS ADDRESSING -- WHAT I'M GOING TO ADDRESS BECAUSE I WAS TOTALLY AGREEING WITH HER TO A THOUSAND DOLLARS. WAIT! SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION , IF I MAY, SO THE THOUSAND DOLLARS WOULD THEN DISMISS ALL OF THE OTHER LIENS AND THE MONIES THAT ARE LEVIED AGAINST ME FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
>> THIS PROPERTY, THIS CASE. >> THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
[00:30:04]
>> JUST THIS CASE. THERE ARE FINES OF $9,000.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING REDUCING THAT TO A THOUSAND.
>> OKAY. AND WITH THAT, I DID -- SO AM I UNDERSTANDING THEN THAT THIS FINE, THE THOUSAND DOLLARS, IS FOR WHAT YOU ALL HAVE DONE TOWARD -- AND I THINK IF YOU TAKE IT UP I CAN BE MORE SPECIFIC.
IT'S FOR LIKE THE MAILING, THE PHOTOGRAPH, THE WORK THE CITY
IT IS THE ADMINISTRATION FEES FOR PROCESSING THE CASE.
>> MS. ARRAIZ, THE THOUSAND DOLLARS WIPES OUT ANY FINES.
>> IT WOULD COVER EVERYTHING. >> EVERYTHING IS OVER AFTER THE THOUSAND DOLLARS. YOU KNOW, I'M FINE WITH THAT.
YOU DID LET THE MAGISTRATE KNOW THAT I DID COMPLY WITH THE ROOF.
THE ROOF IS ON AND EVERYTHING IS DONE, BUT IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH THIS THOUSAND DOLLARS IS TAKING CARE OF EVERYTHING LEADING UP T.
>> GREAT. THEN THE AGREED UPON -- THE AMOUNT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY OF $1,000 IS IN AGREEMENT WITH
THE -- >> SO DO I JUST WRITE A CHECK FOR THAT? HOW DOES THAT WORK?
>> THE QUESTION WOULD BE HOW LONG TO PAY?
>> HOW LONG WOULD YOU NEED TO PAY THE THOUSAND DOLLARS?
>> WELL, I JUST NEED TO GET IT DONE.
IF YOU CAN GIVE ME ABOUT FIVE DAYS I WILL TRY TO GET IT DONE.
>> WE CAN GIVE YOU 30 DAYS. >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
>> I'LL GET IT DONE. >> SO THE THOUSAND-DOLLAR AGREED
ON AMOUNT IS PAYABLE IN 30 DAYS. >> YES, MA'AM.
>> AND WE WOULD ASK SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IF IT IS NOT PAID IN THAT TIME FRAME IT WILL REVERT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT.
>> THAT IS A STANDARD REQUEST. THAT IS NOT PERSONAL TO YOU.
WE DO THAT AT ALL OF THEM. >> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, MS. BLAKELY. WE WILL BE IN TOUCH AND I CAN SEE THE EMAIL GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW.
>> ARE YOU GOING TO PAY TODAY? >> I CAN SEND YOU A LINK.
I CAN SEND YOU A LINK TO PAY ONLINE.
I GOT YOU. >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
THANK YOU. >> OUR NEXT CASE IS 22-2059,
[A. 22-2059PK Jaycee Park Hailey Claire Sides Michael Rabenecker]
JAYCEE PARK, HAILEY CLAIRE SIDES.>> GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR. >> GOOD MORNING.
>> THE NEXT CASE BEFORE YOU THIS MORNING IS CASE NUMBER 22-205, A PARKING VIOLATION AT JAYCEE PARK.
THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON JUNE 18TH, 2022.
THIS IS A PARKING CITATION CASE. THE VIOLATOR CAME BACK AS A HAILEY CLAIRE SIDES. THE CITATION NUMBER WRITTEN WAS 18021, A PARKING CITATION OF CODE VIOLATION 34-35L, RESTRICTED PARKING FOR BOAT TRAILERS ONLY.
THE CITY IS ASKING A $50 FINE BE ASSESSED AND A $10 ADMINISTRATION FEE AND A LATE TPAOEU OF $18 FOR A TOTAL OF $78. THE CITY REQUESTS IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR BE ASSESSED THE TOTAL DUE AS ABOVE. FAILURE TO PAY A FINE RESULTS IN THE CITATION BEING FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY COURTS.
I HAVE PHOTOS TO INTRODUCE AS EVIDENCE.
THEY ARE DATE AND TIME STAMPED AND ACCURATELY PORTRAY THE
VIOLATIONS AS I WITNESS IT. >> THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE AS COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 1, THE PHOTOGRAPHS.
I NEED A PAPER CLIP. THANK YOU.
>> PHOTOGRAPHS WILL BE ENTERED AS THE CITY'S COMPOSITE 1.
I FIND THAT THE VIOLATION DOES EXIST AND THAT THE VIOLATOR WILL BE ASSESSED THE AMOUNT OF $50 AS A FINE AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEE OF $10 AND A LATE FEE OF $18 FOR A TOTAL OF $78.
FAILURE TO PAY SUCH FINE -- 14 DAYS?
>> 14 DAYS. >> IF IT IS TO THE PAID WITHIN THAT TIME, THE CITATION WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY COURT
SYSTEM. >> THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
[B. 22-2131PK Jaycee Park Lucas Clyde Barron Anderson Lee Barron Michael Rabenecker]
>> NEXT CASE IS 22-2131, JAYCEE PARK, LUCAS COLLIDE BARRON AND
[00:35:03]
ANDERSON LEE BARRON. >> THE NEXT CASE IS 22-2131 A PARKING VIOLATION AT JAYCEE PARK.
IT WAS JUNE 26TH, 2022. THIS IS A PARKING CITATION HEARING. THE VIOLATORS IN THE CASE CAME BACK AS A LUCAS COLLIDE BARRON AND ANDERSON LEE BARRON.
THE CITATION NUMBER WAS 18043, A PARKING VIOLATION OF CITY CODE 34-35O, PROHIBITED PARKING AT ALL TIMES.
THE CITY IS ASKING THAT A $50 FINE BE ASSESSED, A $10 ADMINISTRATION FEE AND A LATE FEE OF $18 FOR A TOTAL OF $78.
THE CITY REQUESTS THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR BE ASSESSED A TOTAL ABOVE.
FAILURE TO PAY SUCH A FINE WILL RESULT IN THE CITATION BE FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY COURT SYSTEM.
I HAVE PHOTOS HERE TO INTEREST -- INTRODUCE THAT ARE DATE AND TIME STAND -PD AND PORTRAY THE VIOLATION AS I WITNESSED IT AND THERE IS A PAPER CLIP.
>> THE CITY WILL MOVE AS COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 1 THE
PHOTOGRAPHS. >> PHOTOGRAPHS WILL BE ADMITTED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE 1. AND BASED ON THE TESTIMONY AND THE PHOTOGRAPHS I FIND THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND A FINE OF $50 WILL BE PAYABLE AND AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE OF 10 AND LATE FEE OF 18 FOR A TOTAL OF $78 TO BE PAID WITHIN 14 DAYS.
IF IT IS NOT, THEN THE -- IT WILL RESULT IN THE CITATION BEING FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY COURT SYSTEM.
>> THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. >> OUR NEXT CASE IS 22-2189,
[C. 22-2189PK Jaycee Park Jason Andrew Riffey Michael Rabenecker]
JYCEE PARK, JASON AN RIFFEY. >> YOUR HONOR, THE NEXT CASE BEFORE YOU IS 22-2189, A PARKING VIOLATION THAT OCCURRED AT JAYCEE PARK. THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON JULY 3RD, 2022 AND THIS IS A PARKING CITATION HEARING.
THE VIOLATOR CAME BACK AS JASON ANDREW RIFFEY.
THE CITATION NUMBER WAS 18056, A PARKING VIOLATION OF CITY CODE ORDINANCE 34-35O, PROHIBITED PARKING AT ALL TIMES.
THE CITY IS ASKING THAT A $50 FINE BE ASSESSED, ADMINISTRATION FEE OF $10 AND A LATE FEE OF $18 FOR A TOTAL OF $78.
THE CITY REQUESTS IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR BE ASSESSED THE TOTAL DUE AS INDICATED ABOVE. FAILURE TO PAY SUCH A FINE WILL RESULT IN THE CITATION BELONG FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY COURT SYSTEM. I HAVE PHOTOS TO INTRODUCE THAT ARE DATE AND TIME STAND -PD -- STAMPED AND ACCURATELY PORTRAY
THE VIOLATION AS I VIEWED IT. >> WE WILL SUBMIT THE
PHOTOGRAPHS. >> PHOTOGRAPHS SUBMITTED WILL BE ADMITTED AS CITY'S COME -- COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 1.
BASED UPON THE PHOTOS AND THE TESTIMONY I FIND THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE FINE OF $50 AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEE OF $10 AND A LATE FEE OF $18 FOR A TOTAL OF $78 IS PAYABLE WITHIN 14 DAYS. FAILURE TO PAY IT WITHIN 14 DAYS WILL RESULT IN THE CITATION BEING FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY COURT SYSTEM. THERE IS A 30-DAY APPEAL PERIOD.
>> THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. >> OUR LAST CASE TODAY IS
[A. 22-2241 CE 115 N 29th ST Thomas C Barrett Sugey G Barrett Isaac Saucedo]
22-2241, 115 NORTH 29TH STREET, BARRETT.>> GOOD MORNING. >> GOOD MORNING.
>> THIS IS CASE NUMBER 22-2241, 115 NORTH 29TH STREET.
THE CASE WAS INITIATED BY MYSELF ON JULY 14TH AT 2022.
THE OWNERS ARE THOMAS C BARRETT, SUGEY G BARRETT ON SOUTH -- SOUTH CREST CRANBERRY STREET IN SAINT LUIS -- SAINT LUCY, FLORIDA. DEAD OR DECEASED TREE REMOVAL ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. THE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS WERE TO REMOVE OAK TREES INFESTED WITH TER -- TERMITES THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY. THE CITY REQUEST IF THE SPEBL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS A FINE OF $150 A DAY BE ASSESSED. I DO HAVE PHOTOS HERE TO SHOW --
>> PAPER CLIP, PLEASE. AND WHAT IS THE INFESTATION IN
>> AND YOU OBSERVED THEM YOURSELF?
>> YOU CAN SEE THE TREE IS IN PRETTY BAD SHAPE.
I MEAN, THE ACTUAL TERMITE -- >> YOU DIDN'T SEE THE ACTUAL TERMITE? BUT YOU CAN SEE THE TERMITE
DAMAGE TO THE TREE? >> CORRECT.
>> AND THE TREE IN SPEAKING WITH OUR URBAN TREE FORESTER, IS THAT
[00:40:06]
>> THE URBAN FORESTER, DOES THE TREE NEED TO BE REMOVED.
>> YES. >> AND THE PHOTOS FAIRLY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT?
>> YES. >> AT THIS TIME THE CITY MOVES INTO EVIDENCE COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 1 THE PHOTOGRAPHS.
>> PHOTOS WILL BE ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE
EXHIBIT 1. >> HAVE YOU HAD ANY DISCUSSIONS
WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER? >> I HAVE NOT.
>> THAT WAS MY QUESTION. >> I CAN SAY THAT AFTER THE FIRST PHOTOS WHEN I WENT OUT, THOSE NO TRESPASSING SIGNS WERE POSTED ON THE TREES. WE DID GET A SIGNED GREEN CARD BACK, BUT I HAVE HAD NO COMMUNICATION WITH THEM
WHATSOEVER. >> SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE AWARE IF THE NO TRESPASSING WENT UP. YES, MA'AM.
>> AND THEN HERE OBVIOUSLY. I FIND THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THAT THEY HAVE 10 DAYS TO COME IN COMPLIANCE.
IF THEY ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITHIN 10 DAYS THEN A $150 FINE WILL BEGIN PER DAY AT THAT POINT AND THEY HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL.
>> NO OTHER BUSINESS TO BE HEARD?
>> JUST NOTICES. >> FOR CASES REQUIRING A HEARING PER STATE STATUTE 162.2 A NOTICING HEARING WAS SEPTEMBER TO THE VIOLATEY -- SENT CERTIFIED MAIL.
IF THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED SIGNED IT IS PLACED IN THE FILE.
IF THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED UNSIGNED OR UNCLAIMED A MAILING WITH A NOTICE OF THE VIOLATOR REGULAR MAIL 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING A HEARING IS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD IN CITY HALL. NOTICING HEARING IS POSTED AT THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WITH AN UPDATED PO*TSING.
IF THE GREEN CARD IS NOT RETURNED TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING, THE POSTING IS COMPLETED IN THE SAME MANNER AS IF THE CARD WAS RETURNED UNCLAIMED. FOR CASES NOT MANDATED BY STAT STATUTE CASES ARE HANDLED IN THE SAME MANNER.
IF THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED UNSIGNED, UNCLAIMED OR NOT RETURNED WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE HEARING, A NOTICE OF HEARING IS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD IN CITY HALL.
>> THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.