Feb 08, 2024 Special Magistrate Hearing

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:23]

AS OF RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE NOT CORRECTED IT . FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WISH ALL YOUR CASES SHORTLY. A COUPLE THINGS TO BE MINDFUL OF, THIS IS BEING RECORDED ON LOCAL CITY OF FT.

PIERCE TELEVISION STATION. BE MINDFUL OF THAT. IF YOU DON'T MIND, PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, AND REMAINED STANDING AFTER THAT SO THAT WE CAN SWEAR YOU IN.

>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

>> MADAM CLERK, WOULD YOU SWEAR THE MAN?

[A. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH TO DEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES]

>> IF YOU WILL BE PROVIDING TESTIMONY, PLEASE RAISE WERE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY

WILL PROVIDE WILL BE THE TRUTH? >> DOES ANYBODY NEED AN

INTERPRETER? OKAY, THANK YOU. >> THE CASES THAT ARE IN

[B. IDENTIFICATION OF CASES IN COMPLIANCE OR RESCHEDULED]

COMPLIANCE OR RESCHEDULED. >> 23-2754 610 NORTH 7TH

[A. 23-1345 2306 Delaware Ave Unit A Surface, Rick & Patty Anthony Jetmore]

[B. 23-1346 2306 Delaware Ave Unit B Surface, Rick & Patty Anthony Jetmore]

>> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE. I HAVE A CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE TO SELL THIS PROPERTY WITH A CLOSING DATE OF FEBRUARY 15TH. THERE IS A LITTLE PROBLEM THOUGH, MY BUYERS TITLE COMPANY OF CONTACTED ME AND SAID THAT THE TITLE IS NOT COMPLETELY CLEAR, AND I TOLD THEM I THOUGHT IT CERTAINLY WAS, BUT THEY ARE REFERRING TO THE TWO BUILDING VIOLATIONS THAT ARE A MATTER OF RECORD WHICH I'M HERE TODAY, AND I HAVE TRIED TO -- AFTER TALKING WITH MISS ELIZABETH BACK, AND MR. JETT MORE , MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THESE BUILDING VIOLATIONS WILL BE DROPPED WHEN I SELL THE PROPERTY, IN OTHER WORDS THOSE CASES WILL BE CLOSED OUT AND NEW CASES WILL BE APPLIED TO THE NEW OWNERS. THE PROBLEM IS, MY OWNERS RE CAUGHT IN BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE NEW BUYERS.

THEY WANT THESE VIOLATIONS TO GO AWAY BEFORE CLOSING. I DON'T KNOW OF ANY WAY TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN UNLESS I CAN CONVINCE THE CITY TO RELEASE THE VIOLATIONS BEFORE , AND IF YOU DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE DOING THAT, PERHAPS WRITE A LETTER TO THE NEW BUYERS THAT IS YOUR PROTOCOL TO DROP THESE VIOLATIONS AND THAT MAY SATISFY THEM. BUT I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THE COURT MIGHT CONSIDER ONE OF THOSE TWO

OPTIONS? >> HAVE YOU SPOKE WITH ANYBODY

FROM THE CITY ABOUT THAT? >> I HAVE SPOKEN WITH MS. ELIZABETH BECK, AND MR. ANTHONY JETMORE . AND THEY SAID THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DECIDED HERE IN COURT TODAY. YEAH, I THINK THAT IS MORE FOR ELIZABETH AND ME. BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW OUR PROCEDURES -- SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, MR. SURFACE, THE CITY IS NOT AT LIBERTY TO DROP THE VIOLATIONS. CERTAINLY ANYTHING CAN BE ON THE RECORD THAT THE NEW BUYERS CAN TAKE COMFORT IN. THE CITY'S POSITION IS WE ARE REQUESTING AN ORDER

[00:05:02]

>> WELL, THE REASON I'M SELLING THE PROPERTIES BECAUSE I DON'T INTEND TO CORRECT THE VIOLATIONS MYSELF BECAUSE OF THE BUYERS ARE BUYING THE PROPERTY AND AS IS CONDITIONS.

THEY HAVE DONE THEIR INSPECTIONS, THEY HAVE ARTIE DONE A SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY, IT'S JUST THAT THERE TITLE COMPANY SAYS THAT I NEED TO RESOLVE THESE VIOLATIONS SOMEHOW IF THE CITY CAN'T CLOSE THOSE CASES OUT SO THAT I COULD HAVE A CLOSING -- MAYBE WRITE ME A LETTER STATING THAT THEY FULLY INTEND TO CLOSE THEM OUT AT THE SALE

OF THE PROPERTY. >> THE CITY WILL NOT BE

PREPARING A LETTER. >> WHAT DO I DO?

>> THEY CAN VIEW THE PUBLIC HEARING AND LISTEN TO WHAT HAS BEEN STATED ON THE RECORD. THAT WAY, IT WILL BE ON THERE TITLE

IN THEIR BANK. >> WE WILL NOT BE PROVIDING A LETTER TO THE TITLE COMPANY. WE ARE ASKING FOR A VIOLATION

FINDING TODAY. >> YOU'RE ASKING FOR WHAT,

AGAIN? >> THE CITY REQUESTS THAT A SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINE VIOLATIONS EXIST THEY GIVE THEM 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED EXPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY HUNDRED AND 80 DAYS UNTIL THE

PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. >> YOU HAVE TESTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE A CLOSING DATE IN ONE WEEK?

>> I DO HAVE A CLOSING DATE THAT IS SCHEDULED ACCORDING TO MY CONTRACTS, AND BY THE WAY, THIS IS NOT THE SAME BUYER THAT I BROUGHT TO YOU A MONTH AGO . THEY BACKED OUT OF THE DEAL, AND THEY HAVE A NEW BUYER AND I HAVE AN COPY OF A NEW

CONTRACT FOR THE CITY. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO LAY SET INTO EVIDENCE SO THE MAGISTRATE CAN LOOK AT IT?

>> DO YOU HAVE A COPY TO LOOK AT YOURSELF, WHILE WE EXAMINE

THAT? >> YES.

>> THIS IS A TWO-SIDED DOCUMENT, AND IS THAT YOUR SIGNATURE ON THIS DOCUMENT? AND THE SIGNATURE OF THE OTHER

OWNER? >> THAT IS CORRECT. I WOULD LIKE TO PLACE THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS RESPONDENT'S

EXHIBIT ONE. >>

>> THE BINDING PORTION OF THE CONTRACT ON ME IS ON PAGE 4.

WOULD YOU LIKE A MOMENT TO EXAMINE IT?

>> YES. >> PAGE 4, SECTION 12, PARAGRAPH C, IS WHAT THEY SAY THE BUYERS NEED TO GIVE THEM A

CLEAR TITLE. >> ALL RIGHT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER? THIS WILL BE ADMITTED AS EXHIBIT 1.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. MAY I ASK HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE TO HAVE A DECISION MADE? ON READING THE CONTRACT, OR SOLVING MY PROBLEM? IS THERE A WAY YOU CAN SATISFY THIS OTHER

THAN CHARGING ME A DAILY FEE? >> UNDER OUR RULING, THE

[00:10:02]

HAPPEN FOR THE NEW BUYERS. >> ONE MORE THING, CAN YOU TELL ME HOW -- YOU SAID I COULD HAVE PROSPECTIVE BUYERS LOOK AT A RECORDING OF THE SESSION. HOW DO I EXPLAIN TO THEM THAT

THEY CAN DO THAT? >> CITY OF FT. PIERCE.COM

MINUTES AND AGENDAS. >> OKAY. THE RECORDING WILL BE AVAILABLE PROBABLY TODAY, OR TOMORROW.

>> YES, IT IS THE CITY'S WEBSITE, AND THERE'S A SECTION CALLED, "MINUTES AND AGENDAS." . I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SCREEN, BUT UNDER THE RECOMMENDATIONS, THEY ARE RECOMMENDING THAT YOU GET 60 DAYS TO GAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED EXPECTIONS FOR AT LEAST 180 DAYS, THAT IS SIX MONTHS, UNTIL THAT HAS BEEN CLOSE. THAT'S UP TO YOU AND THE BUYERS ON HOW YOU WILL CLOSE THE PERMIT. BUT YOU WILL GET A COPY OF THIS ORDER THAT

WILL BE MAILED OR EMAILED. >> YOU SAY THE ORDER WILL GIVE

US 60 DAYS TO RESOLVE. >> IT'S ON THE RECOMMENDATION THAT'S ON YOUR SCREEN THERE AT THE BOTTOM.

>> OKAY, JUDGE. THAT SHOULD GIVE ME ENOUGH TIME TO EITHER SELL IT TO THIS BUYER, OR I HAVE OTHER BUYERS GOING TO BACK THIS IF THEY BACK OUT. I SHOULD BE ABLE TO SOLVE THAT

PROBLEM WITHIN 60 DAYS. >> YOU SAY I'LL GET THAT IN

THE MAIL? >> YES.

>> HOLD ON NOW, DON'T LEAVE. ANYTHING ELSE?

>> NO. >> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE?

ANY CONCERNS? >> NO.

>> OKAY. THEN BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY APPROVED AND PRESENTED I FIND THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS, AT 2306 DELAWARE AVENUE UNIT A, AND UNIT B , BECAUSE THEY ARE

THE SAME RECOMMENDATIONS. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> YOU WILL BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED EXPECTANCE AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS, THAT SIX MONTHS, UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED.

COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND CURE ALL OF THE VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR FIND $100 A DAY BE ASSESSED IN THAT ORDER , AND THAT APPLIES

TO BOATS UNIT ANB. >> THE ORDER WILL TELL YOU, YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS REALLY, TO BRING MY ORDER INTO COMPLIANCE, IF YOU COMPLY, IT'S OVER WITH. AND YOU HAVE 60 DAYS, TOO MUCH TO GET A PERMIT.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY INTENTION MYSELF OF PULLING A PERMIT, BUT I GUESS THAT WOULD BE THE LAST RESOLUTION, I GUESS I COULD DO THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T INTEND TO REPAIR THE PROPERTY.

I WANT TO SELL IT. BUT I THINK I CAN GET IT SOLD, IF NOT TO THIS BUYER, TO ANOTHER BUYER WITHIN 60 DAYS.

>> ALL RIGHT. IF YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEMS JUST GET WITH THE CITY. AND SEE IF THEY CAN GIVE YOU SOME DIRECTION .

>> I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. BUT YOU HAVE TO OBTAIN A PERMIT TO REPAIR AND RETAIN ALL FIRE, ELECTOR, IT WILL REQUIRE SIGNED SEALED PLANS DESIGNED BY A PROFESSIONAL.

THIS ORDER APPLIES TO BOTH UNITS A, AND B.

>> HIS RIGHT TO APPEAL? >> SIR, SINCE TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE TO YOU, WOULD YOU LIKE THE ORDER EMAILED TO YOU, WOULD THAT HELP? LEAVE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS WITH THE KIRK , PLEASE. ED IT WILL BE MAILED REGULAR AND EMAILED AS A

[E. 23-2405 114 S 20th St Cooper, JoAnn Kevin Young]

COURTESY. >> GOOD LUCK.

>> THANK YOU, JUDGE. >> NEXT CASE.

>> THE NEXT CASE IS 23-2405, 114 SOUTH 20TH STREET, JOHN

[00:15:26]

COOPER IS THE OWNER. >> GOOD MORNING.

>> WHEN YOU ARE READY. >> GOOD MORNING. I AM KEVIN YOUNG, CITY OF FT. PIERCE BUILDING INSPECTOR AND INVESTIGATOR. THIS IS 23-2405. VIOLATION IS PERMIT REQUIRED IN MY RECOMMENDATION, A SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FIND VIOLATIONS EXIST AND VIOLATORS BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO ATTAIN A PERMIT, APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS EVERY 100 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSE AND COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER CONDITIONS , OR A FINE OF $100 A DAY BE ASSESSED. THERE'S

BEEN NO PERMIT FOR THIS WORK. >> OKAY.

>> MR. YOUNG, DID YOU VISIT THE PROPERTY AND TAKE

PHOTOGRAPHS? >> THIS IS OUR SECOND SPECIAL

MAGISTRATE . >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO PLACE

THOSE INTO EVIDENCE TODAY? >> THESE PHOTOS ARE NOT DATE AND TIME STAMPED, WHAT WAS THE DATE THEY WERE TAKEN?

>> THAT WOULD BE, AUGUST 21ST , 2023.

>> IS THAT CORRECT? >> ARE YOU THE RESPONDENTS?

ARE YOU MRS. COOPER? >> YES I AM.

>> AND THE GENTLEMAN WITH YOU? >> WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR HIM

TO SPEAK ON MY BEHALF? >> I AM GARY DRYDEN WITH CLASSIC CONSTRUCTION, MRS. COOPER HIRED ME TO HELP RESOLVE THIS. HAVE YOU SEEN THE PHOTOGRAPHS?

>> PLACING THE PHOTOS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIZEN COMPOSITE

EXHIBIT 1. >> IT WILL BE ADMITTED AS SUCH.

>> ANYTHING FURTHER MR. YOUNG? ANY COMMENTS FROM EITHER ONE

OF YOU? >> PRESENT YOUR CASE.

>> GOOD MORNING. >> MRS. COOPER ASKED ME TO HELP HER RESOLVE THIS. I'VE BEEN TO THE PROPERTY, LOOKED AT IT, THOSE PICTURES ARE OF COURSE AT THE TIME OF THE INSPECTION, BUT THEY ARE NOT REFLECTIVE OF WHAT THE ROOF LOOKS LIKE NOW. ALL OF THAT BAD LUMBER THAT YOU SEE IN THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS HAVE BEEN REPLACED. AND THE ROOFING MATERIAL, THE TOP OF THE ROOF IS IN PLACE. THE CONTRACTOR THAT MRS. COOPER HIRED, RHINO ROOFING, APPARENTLY PULLED A PERMIT TO DO THE ROOFING PORTION, BUT THEY'D DID NOT PULL A PERMIT TO DO THE CARPENTRY PORTION. THEY HAVE THE LICENSE TO DO THAT, THE LEAST EXPENSIVE WAY TO RESOLVE IT WAS TO GO BACK TO RHINO ROOFING, WHICH I DID ON MRS. COOPER'S BEHALF. I SPOKE WITH PHIL GRAY , OF RHINO ROOFING, AND THE JOB DEVOLVED INTO MRS. COOPER WAS GIVEN A

[00:20:07]

>> WHEN I SPOKE TO MR. GRAHAM ABOUT THAT, HE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE PROBLEM WAS, A NEW SALESMAN, AND AN MISUNDERSTANDING ON THEIR PART. THE RESULTING WORK GENERATED A BILL OF NOT $4000 IN COLLEGE , BUT $11,000 FOR MRS. COOPER.

MS. COOPER PAID IN GOOD FAITH, THE 4000 SHE WAS QUOTED, BUT IT DID NOT STAND IN GOOD STEAD WITH THE ROOFER. THEY PLACED A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY. DID THEY NOTIFY MRS. COOPER, THAT WOULD BE HER PRIMARY CONCERN AT THIS POINT, IS THAT SHE HAS NOT ONLY TO CLEAR UP THIS VIOLATION, BUT THAT SHE HAS CLEAR TITLE TO HER PROPERTY. I OFFERED A SOLUTION WHICH BOTH PARTIES ACCEPTED WHICH IS, FOR 3500 ADDITIONAL DOLLARS WHICH RHINO ROOFING SAID WOULD BE THEIR CAUSE, FOR RHINO ROOFING TO GO GET A INDEPENDENT ENGINEER WHO WOULD WRITE A LETTER SAYING THAT THE WORK WAS CORRECT AND APPROPRIATE AND SUBMIT THAT TO MRS. BECK'S DEPARTMENT AT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT WHICH WOULD CLEAR THAT PERMIT, COMPLETE THE ROOFING, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE FINAL ROOFING ON AND HAVE THAT INSPECT IT, AND GIVE MRS. COOPER A NOTARIZED FINAL LIEN RELEASE IN EXCHANGE FOR FULL PAYMENT OF THE ADDITIONAL $3500 WHICH IS A COMPROMISED PRICE. MR. GRAHAM AGREED TO THAT ON THE TELEPHONE WITH ME. MRS. COOPER AGREED TO THAT. BUT, I HAVEN'T HEARD BACK FROM MR. GRAHAM.

I'VE REACHED OUT TO HIM SEVERAL TIMES. IF THEY'VE DECIDED THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANYTHING MORE TO DO WITH THIS PARTICULAR JOB, THEN AS FAR AS THIS VIOLATION IS CONCERNED, I WOULD HAVE TO GO AND HIRE A INDEPENDENT ENGINEER , WHICH IS EASIER SAID THAN DONE, AND THEY ARE BUSY, THIS IS A SMALL JOB . IF I CAN FIND ONE IT'S GOING TO BE A SUBSTANTIAL PRICE FOR MRS. COOPER. ALSO, BECAUSE THE ROOF ISN'T COMPLETED, I HAVE TO HIRE -- NOT JUST A MECHANIC, BUT I HAVE TO GO AND HIRE A ROOFING COMPANY, THEY ARE GOING TO TAKE OFF WHAT'S THERE AND START FROM SCRATCH AGAIN. AND THAT IS GOING TO COST MRS. COOPER, I HAVE A QUOTE, THAT IS GOING TO COST MRS. COOPER AN ADDITIONAL $4500. RHINO ROOFING IT ASKED FOR , ORIGINALLY $11,000 . THERE WAS A PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF $7500, SO OF COURSE, THAT'S A DIFFERENCE OF $3500. ONE POSSIBLE SOLUTION WOULD BE TO OFFER THEM THE ENTIRE $11,000 TO INDUCE THEM TO COME BACK, CLEAR UP THE VIOLATION WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, COMPLETE THE JOB, AND GIVE YOU A LIEN RELEASE SO THAT YOU HAVE CLEAR TITLE TO YOUR PROPERTY. ANYTHING THAT I COULD DO FOR YOU, WILL NOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF YOUR LIEN RELEASE FROM

THEM, ON YOUR PROPERTY. >>

>> THEY SAY THEY HAVE DONE THAT, THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE LOOKED INTO. I CAN GO AND PULL A PERMIT AND GET AN ENGINEER COMING GO BACK OUT THERE AND TAKE THAT ROOF OFF AND FIX IT.

SO THAT IT WOULD PASS INSPECTION AND CHARGE MRS. COOPER ACCORDINGLY. BUT, SHE'S GOING TO BE ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, AT $11,000 MORE. SO, I KNOW MRS. COOPER THROUGH A

[00:25:04]

IT IS CORRECT IT'S NOT COMPLETED, THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE FINAL ROOFING MATERIAL ON TOP OF WHAT THEY HAVE DONE THAT THAT IS THE ONLY THING THAT IS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE JOB SATISFYING THE CITY, OF COURSE THE WORK CAN BE SEEN FROM INSIDE THE BUILDING UNDERNEATH THE ROOF, WHAT THEY DID, IT'S OPEN, YOU CAN SEE IT. I HAD ASKED IF I PULLED A PERMIT, FOR MRS. COOPER, COULD THE CITY REINSPECT THE PROPERTY WITHOUT AN ENGINEER? OF COURSE, UNDER TYPICAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT RULES, WHEN YOU DO WORK LIKE THAT, IT NEEDS TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF A SEAL FROM SOMEONE WITH AN ENGINEERING LICENSE, OR SOMETHING EQUIVALENT THAT SAYS THAT THAT WORK IS WITHIN THE CODE. THE WORK WITH THIS IS IN THE CODE, BUT THERE'S NO SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS FOR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO SAY WE ARE GOING TO GO AND INSPECT WHAT AN ENGINEER HAS SAID NEEDS TO BE DONE, AND IT HAS THE MATCH, THE TWO THINGS HAVE TO MATCH. SO AN ENGINEER AT SOME POINT,

HAS TO BE PROCURED TO DO THAT. >> THAN THE ROOFING MATERIAL ON THE TOP, AS I SAID, THAT JOB HAS TO BE COMPLETED. AND THAT CAN'T BE COMPLETED UNLESS SOMEBODY HAS A ROOFING LICENSE.

I'M A CERTIFIED RESIDENTIAL STATE CONTRACTOR, BUT I'M NOT ALLOWED TO DO ROOFING. I HIRE A ROOFER, AND THE ROOFER COMES AND DOES THE ROOF. IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE THAT SUCH A SMALL BUILDING, SUCH A SMALL MATTER CAN BE SUCH A SHAME. BUT THAT IS THE BACKGROUND OF WHAT HAPPENED, AND WHERE WE ARE AT.

THE PHOTOGRAPHS HE COULD SEE NOW, YOU WOULD SEE IT'S ALL NEW MATERIAL ATTACHED, ETC. THE TOP OF THE ROOF HAS THE UNDERLAYMENT, BUT NOT THE ROOFING MATERIAL. IT IS A FREESTANDING YOU MIGHT SAY, GARAGE, OR SHED. IT IS 22 BY 14 FEET AND HAS FIBERGLASS ON IT. IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE LAUGHTER ] THAT RHINO ROOFING WOULDN'T WANT TO COME BACK AND SETTLE THIS. BUT, I HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THEM. I CAN'T FORCE THEM TO COME AND PERFORM . SO MRS. COOPER WOULD NEED TIME FOR SOME KIND OF RESOLUTION. THE PROPERTY IS NOT IN DANGER, IT IS SECURE. THE ROOF IS SECURED. IT IS AS I HAVE GIVING YOU THE INFORMATION, THAT IS THE STATUS OF IT. BUT SHE IS GOING TO NEED SOME MORE TIME TO DECIDE WHAT COURSE OF ACTION TO TAKE TO RESOLVE THIS.

>> MAY I ASK, WHEN DID YOU COME INTO THE PICTURE?

>> A MONTH AGO. I CAME TO THE PROPERTY, LOOKED AT THE PROPERTY, CAME TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, SPOKE WITH MRS. BECK, WENT BACK TO THE PROPERTY AND MET WITH MRS. COOPER. WHEN INSIDE OF THE BUILDING, EXAMINED THAT, AND I REACHED OUT TO RHINO ROOFING , AND SPOKE WITH THEM THREE TIMES.

>> AND ALSO I BROUGHT A NEW ROOFING CONTRACTOR TO THE PROPERTY TO HAVE THEM EXAMINED IT AND GET A QUOTE. AND I HAVE REACHED OUT TO SEVERAL ENGINEERS THAT KNOW THAT OF THE KIND HAVE CLIENT TO TAKE ON THE JOB. I WOULD HAVE TO CAST A WIDER NET AND FIND SOME OTHER ENGINEERS THAT WOULD BE

WILLING TO TAKE THE JOB ON. >> YOU'VE BEEN VERY BUSY IN THESE FOUR WEEKS. MASS MRS. COOPER, MRS. COOPER, WHEN DID YOU PAY $4000 TO RHINO ROOFING TO DO THIS JOB?

>> TO THE BEST OF YOUR RECOLLECTION.

>> I'M THINKING MAYBE SEPTEMBER, OR OCTOBER, BUT I'M NOT SURE. BEFORE I CAME HERE THE LAST TIME, I PAID THEM THE

[00:30:06]

>> I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

>> ANYTHING FURTHER? >> NO, MA'AM.

>> MR. YOUNG, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> NO, MA'AM. >> MRS. COOPER, ARE YOU

EMPLOYED? ARE YOU RETIRED? >> I AM RETIRED.

>> 'S PESCHEL MAGISTRATE, THIS WAS CONTINUED AT THE LAST HEARING , SO THE RESPONDENT HAS NOT FOLLOWED OUR PROPER PROCEDURES FOR COULD TENUOUS, BUT HE HAS STATED HIS CASE FOR

TODAY. >> OKAY. ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> WELL, MRS. COOPER AUTHORIZED ME, AND ASSUMING I COULD GET AN ENGINEER TO BE INVOLVED IN IT, IT WOULD TAKE -- YOU HAVE TO GET ON THE SCHEDULE OF OTHER PEOPLE. IT WOULD TAKE THE TIME TO -- AND I'VE ARTIE GOT ANOTHER ROOFING COMPANY SCHEDULED. SO IT IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE RESOLVED IN THE NEXT FOUR OR FIVE WEEKS, AND THAT'S NOT ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE COMPLEXITY OF THE JOB, THAT'S THE SCHEDULE, JUST WAITING FOR THE ROOFING CONTRACTOR TO BE ABLE TO PUT THE JOB ON HIS SCHEDULE.

>> YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING IT ON HIS SCHEDULE TO

COMPLETE THE WORK? >> HOW MUCH TIME IS NEEDED TO

OBTAIN THE PERMIT? >> WE WOULD HAVE TO COME IN AND GET THE PERMIT, AND PRESUPPOSE THE PERMIT WOULD BE

FORTHCOMING. >> AS MUCH TIME AS YOU CAN GIVE MRS. COOPER, OF COURSE IT'S BETTER TO RESOLVE IT TO QUEBEC, AT TAKE THE MATTER OFF YOUR DOCKET AS SETTLED.

>> SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR A VIOLATION, AND 60 DAYS TO GET THE PERMIT. THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE ON THE SCREEN.

>> OKAY. ANYTHING FURTHER? >> SHE MAY BE ABLE TO GET IT DONE IN 60 DAYS, JUST DEPENDS ON THE ENGINEER -- THAT IS THE MOST CRITICAL PART, AND THAT THE CITY PERMITTING.

>> ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU 90 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT. AS YOU CAN SEE, YOU KNOW, YOU ARE PUTTING ME IN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE, TOO. BUT THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON AUGUST 21ST. IT USUALLY TAKES A WHILE, BUT I'M WILLING TO GO OUT ON A LIMB HERE, I WILL GIVE YOU 90 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST 180 DAYS, THAT IS SIX MONTHS AFTER YOU OPEN IT, YOU'VE GOT THAT AMOUNT OF TIME TO TRY AND GET IT DONE.

>> COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OF THE VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER, NOT REQUIRING INDEPENDENT OF THE PERMIT, A FINE OF HUNDRED DOLLARS PER DAY WILL BE ASSESSED. YOU HAVE 90 DAYS TO PULL THE PERMIT, THEN YOU HAVE TO START DOING THE WORK AND SHOW THE CITY WHAT YOU'RE DOING, SO THEY KNOW YOU ARE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH THE PERMIT. YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY OTHER PROBLEMS.

>> THANK YOU, JUDGE. >> IMPLIED IN YOUR RULING IS A

FINDING OF A VIOLATION? >> YES.

>> ALL RIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE? >> GOOD LUCK. 30 DAYS TO

[F. 23-2412 210 N 23rd St Tucker, Kimberly, Jonathan, Tamara & Johnet Miles Keller]

APPEAL. >> 30 DAYS TO APPEAL.

>> OKAY, OUR NEXT CASE IS 5-F , 23-2412 210 N 23RD STREET .

KIMBERLY JONATHAN AND TAMARA JOHNETTE ARE THE OWNERS.

[00:35:03]

>> WHEN YOU ARE READY. >> YOU CAN SIT DOWN IF YOU

WOULD LIKE. >> THANK YOU.

>> CASE NUMBER 23-2412, 210 N 23RD STREET IS THE ADDRESS.

THE OWNER IS KIMBERLY AND JONATHAN JOHNETTE. UNSAFE STRUCTURES, DANGER STRUCTURE ON PREMISES, AND 304.1, 2021, EXTERIOR STRUCTURE GENERAL. UNSAFE CONDITIONS, IPMC3041 .1 ROOFING DRAINAGE . 305.1, GENERAL. UNSAFE CONDITIONS, I PMC, 305.2 2021, STRUCTURAL MEMBERS. I PMC, 306.1 2021, COMPONENT SERVICEABILITY, GENERAL. I PMC, 306.1 2021, UNSAFE CONDITIONS, I PMC 307, GENERAL. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, OBTAIN A PERMIT TO MAKE ALL NECESSARY REPAIRS PROPERTY.

ANY STRUCTURAL REPAIRS WILL REQUIRE SIGNED AND SEALED REPAIRED PLAN DESIGNED BY A REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL.

RECOMMENDATION. THE CITY FINDS THAT IF THE SPECIAL MAGIC VIOLATES THIS, THE BUYERS BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT AND FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY HUNDRED 80 DAYS AFTER THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED , AND COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMITTED CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OF THE VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING PERMIT FOR A FINE OF HUNDRED DOLLARS PER DAY BE ASSESSED.

>> SO FAR, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY PERMITS FOR THIS PROPERTY.

>> OKAY, ANYTHING FURTHER? >> I DO HAVE PICTURES.

>> ARE THE PICTURES DATE STAMPED , STAYING WITH THE

DATE YOU TOOK THEM. >> WHAT IS THE DATE? AUGUST

12, 2023. >> COULD YOU IDENTIFY

YOURSELF, PLEASE? >> KIMBERLY TUCKER.

>> MISS TUCKER, DO YOU SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS, DO YOU WANT TO SEE THEM AGAIN? OR MAY I ENTER THEM INTO?

>> SHE DOESN'T NEED TO SEE. >> TODAY FAIRLY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION THAT YOU WITNESSED?

>> I WILL PUT THESE INTO EVIDENCE ETHNICITIES EXHIBIT 1

COMPOSITE EXHIBIT. >> ANYTHING FURTHER. MISS

TUCKER, HOW DO YOU RESPOND? >> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I HAD A CONTRACTOR THAT CAME OUT , AND WE WERE TRYING TO NEGOTIATE A PRICE, AND HE KEPT GOING UP ON THE PRICE EVERY TIME HE COME IN AND SAY HE WOULD FIND SOMETHING ELSE DIFFERENT. SO I HAD ANOTHER CONTRACT COME IN. AND HE SAID HE HAD TO WAIT UNTIL HE GET -- I FORGOT THE GUYS THAT DOES THE AIR CONDITIONING PART IN THE CEILING , IN THE ROOF -- SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ABOUT GETTING SOME MORE TIME, AND ASK IF I COULD HAVE SOME MORE TIME TO GET THIS FIXED.

>> OKAY. >> MISS TUCKER, THE VIOLATION WAS CITED AUGUST 22ND, 2023, CAN YOU GIVE US A CHRONOLOGY OF

[00:40:09]

>> IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR. >> DO YOU HAVE AN AGREEMENT

WITH THESE CONTRACTORS? >> NO. NOT YET, BECAUSE HE KEPT GIVING ME DIFFERENT QUOTES. I'M TRYING TO FIND ANOTHER CONTRACT THAT SOMEBODY CAN REFER ME TO TO GET A BETTER

QUOTE. >> IS THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY AS DEPICTED IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS TODAY THE SAME? DOES IT LOOK TODAY THE SAME, AS IT DOES IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS?

>> HAS ANYTHING BEEN DONE WITH THESE PROPERTIES?

>> NO, NO ONE HAS LIVING IN THE PROPERTY AT THIS TIME. BUT I AM IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING ANOTHER CONTRACTOR TO COME OUT

AND DO THE WORK. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANYTHING FURTHER? >> NO, YOUR HONOR.

>> ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY MISS TUCKER?

>> NO, MA'AM. >> BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY PRESENTED, I FIND A VIOLATION EXISTS AT 210 NORTH 23RD STREET, AND THAT KIMBERLY, JONATHAN, TAMRA AND JOHN IT TUCKER THE PARTIES RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION.

>> I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU 90 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT. THIS PLACES IN PRETTY BAD SHAPE BASED ON PHOTOS.

>> A TREE FELL OVER ON IT. I HAD TO GET THE TREE, HAVE THE CITY TO COME OUT AND CUT THE TREE DOWN. SO I HAD TO GET THAT TAKEN CARE OF, SO I HAVE TAKEN CARE OF THAT PART, NOW I'M IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING ANOTHER CONTRACTOR TO COME OUT.

SO 90 DAYS WOULD BE GREAT. >> ALL RIGHT, I WILL GIVE YOU 90 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL AT LEAST 180 DAYS INTO THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT COMPLYING WILL HAVE A FINE OF $100 PER DAY UNTIL ALL REQUIREMENTS ARE MET. TRY AND GET A CONTRACTOR.

>> HOLD ON, MISS TUCKER. >> HOLD ON, IS THAT THE ONLY

CASE YOU HAVE HERE? >> YES MA'AM . ALL RIGHT.

[H. 23-2584 1714 Miami Court Unit A Singh, Mahadeo & Anatilde Anthony Jetmore]

>> THE NEXT CASE IS 23-2584, 1714 MIAMI COURT, UNIT A, SINGH, MAHADEO, AND ANATILDE . THEY ARE THE OWNERS.

>> HI, I AM ANTHONY JETMORE, I WORK FOR THE CITY OF FT.

PIERCE , CITY AND BUILDING INVESTIGATOR, THIS IS A SECOND TIME FOR THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. THIS IS, 23-2584, 1714 MIAMI COURT, UNIT A, SINGH, MAHADEO, AND ANATILDE.

2706 WEST DANFORTH TERRACE WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA.

UNSAFE STRUCTURE. UNSAFE EQUIPMENT, STRUCTURE UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY, DANGER STRUCTURE OR PREMISES, EXTERIOR STRUCTURE, GENERAL, UNSAFE CONDITIONS, PROTECTIVE TREATMENT, STRUCTURAL MEMBERS, EXTERIOR WALLS, INTERIOR

[00:45:11]

CORRECTIVE ACTION, PERMIT TO MAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS TO REHABILITATE THIS PROPERTY, AND ANY STRUCTURAL REPAIRS WILL REQUIRE SIGNED /SEALED REPAIR PLANS BY A PROFESSIONAL. THE CITY RECOMMENDS THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THAT THE VIOLATIONS EXIST, GIVEN 60 DAYS TO UPTURN THE PERMIT, COMPLY WITH ALL THE PERMITTED CONDITIONS, AND CURE ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING THE PYRAMID OR A FINE OF $100 A DAY BE ASSESSED.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OR EVIDENCE YOU WOULD LIKE TO

SUBMIT? >> I DO.

>> I'LL TAKE A LOOK AT IT FIRST.

>> THESE ARE UNDATED PHOTOGRAPHS, CAN YOU TELL ME THE DATE THE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN TO BE PUT ON RECORD?

>> DECEMBER 14. -- SEPTEMBER 14TH. CAN YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF? HAVE YOU SEEN THE PROTO-GRASS OF THE PROPERTY? DO YOU NEED TO SEE THEM AGAIN? ALL RIGHT, I'D LIKE TO PLACE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE AS THE CITIES EXHIBIT

1. >> ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> SIR, HOW DO YOU RESPOND? WE ARE PULLED ONE PERMIT. FIRST OF ALL, THE DAMAGE OCCURRED BECAUSE THE CAR DROVE THROUGH THE BUILDING. WE HAVE TAMED THE PERMIT FOR THE WALL, THE PERMIT FOR THE ELECTRIC I HAVE A COPY IS BEING SUBMITTED TODAY. AND I THINK, THIS IS ONE PERMIT LEFT TO GET DONE I THINK CALLED UP MECHANICAL PERMIT , AND TRIED TO GET THAT.

THERE WAS A CONDITION IN THE WALL, AND THE JUDGE THAT I HAD TO GET A MECHANICAL TO HAVE THAT RE-FACED.

>> SO THE WORK SHOULD BE STARTED MAYBE 15 DAYS OR SO, SINCE WE ALREADY HAVE ALL OF THE PARTS. HAVE YOU BEEN COMMUNICATING WITH THE BUILDING?

>> REPAIRED AND BACK TO NORMAL. IT'S TAKING US A LITTLE TIME TO GET THAT RESOLVED, BUT THE PERMITS ARE IN PROCESS.

>> I THINK THE FIRST PERMIT WAS APPROVED LAST WEEK . I HAVE THE PERMIT NUMBER IF YOU NEED IT.

>> BUT YOU STARTED THE PERMIT FOR THE REMAINING REPAIR

QUESTION MARK >> I HAVE A COPIER, BUT IT'S NOT APPROVED BY THE PERMIT DEPARTMENT YET. I THINKIT WAS

SUBMITTED THIS MORNING. >> IT'S NOT SIGNED BY THE

CITY, OR ANYTHING. >> WHEN DID YOU PULL YOUR FIRST

PERMIT? >> MAYBE 30 DAYS AGO , IT GOT APPROVED, I THINK LAST WEEK. I HAVE THE PERMIT NUMBER IF YOU

NEED IT. >> I TO HAVE A RECORD THAT A PERMIT FOR THE BLOCK WALL WAS PULLED, ABOUT FOUR WEEKS AGO.

NO, THAT IS YOUR TESTIMONY, IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?

>> AND THE ONE FOR THE ELECTOR, IS GOING TO BE SUBMITTED, OR WAS SUBMITTED THIS MORNING. I DO HAVE A COPY

OF IT, I CAN GIVE TO YOU. >> SO BETWEEN THE TIME THE VEHICLE STRUCK THE HOUSE, AND YOU GOT THE VIOLATION NOTICE,

[00:50:09]

>> YES. >> I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHEN I PULLED THE FIRST PERMIT, BECAUSE WE WERE AWAY FOR A MONTH, AND I GOT SICK FOR MONTH, SO IT TOOK TWO MONTHS.

>> BUT IS THAT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT YOU WILL BE EXPEDITIOUSLY PULLING PERMITS WITHIN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS?

>> ABSOLUTELY. AND IF A VIOLATION IS FOUND TODAY, AND YOU'RE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO PAYMENTS, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO DO

THAT? >> YES. I CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT.

>> MAGISTRATE, WE ARE ASKING FOR VIOLATION 60 DAYS.

>> ANYTHING FURTHER? >> , BASED ON EVIDENCE AT THIS , I FIND THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS AT 23-2584, 1714 MIAMI COURT, UNIT A, SINGH, MAHADEO, AND ANATILDE , AND PARTIES ARE

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION. >> I WILL GIVE YOU 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, YOU SAID IT SHOULD BE FILED TODAY.

>> OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY 100 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OF THE VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REPLYING A FINE OF $100 PER

DAY WILL BE ASSESSED. >> THERE'S NO FINE AT THIS

MOMENT I GET. >> YOU NEED TO GET THE PERMIT AND START THE WORK. IT'LL BE IN YOUR WRITTEN ORDER.

>> ALL RIGHT. GOOD LUCK. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

>> NEXT CASE. >> SO WE WILL DO CASE SIX B

[B. 22-1896 1106 N 17th Street Norannie Realty Corp Shaun Coss]

>> ONE, THE GRAVITY OR SERIOUSNESS OF THE VIOLATION IS MODERATE . TO ANY AND ALL ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE VIOLATOR TO CORRECT THE VIOLATIONS WERE THE VIOLATIONS NOT CORRECTED BY THE ORIGINAL VIOLATOR WHEN ACTION WAS TAKEN BY ANY OTHER PROPERTY OWNER OR PARTY WITH INTEREST TO BRING THE VIOLATION INTO COMPLIANCE. THE PERMIT TO COMPLY THIS CASE IS NOW BEEN

INSPECT IN AND CLOSED. >> NUMBER THREE, THE NUMBER OF TIMES A VIOLATOR WAS PREVIOUSLY FOUND IN VIOLATION BY EITHER THE COURT OR SPECIAL MAGISTRATE OR REQUEST BY JUDICIAL PROCESS, OR OTHERWISE SPECIAL PROCEEDING WAS ONE.

>> STAFF IS CALCULATED THE ADMINISTRATIVE COST IN THIS CASE TO BE $1527.26. THE RESPONDENT HAS REQUESTED THAT

THE FINES BE REDUCED. >> $300 IS A REQUEST COMMAND STAFF IS NOT AN AGREEMENT. STAFF HAS A RECOMMENDATION TO REDUCE THE FINE TO THE COST ADMINISTRATIVELY OF $1527.26.

>> ANYTHING FURTHER? >> NOT AT THIS TIME.

>> HOW DO YOU RESPOND? DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, COUNSELOR?

>> I'LL LET MR. COSTCO. >> I HAVE SOMETHING TO SUBMIT

INTO EVIDENCE. >> OF COURSE.

>> WHEN THIS FIRST -- CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT THAT DOCUMENT IS?

[00:55:01]

>> I HAD COME IN FRONT OF THE MAGISTRATE MAYBE EIGHT MONTHS AGO. IT WAS APRIL LESHER, AND I TOLD HER WITHIN 30 DAYS I WAS GOING TO GET IT INSPECTED. I ACTUALLY DID THAT. THE ONLY ISSUE IS, WHEN THAT INSPECTOR CAME OUT, AND HE DID THE INSPECTION, AND I WILL SAY THIS FALLS BACK ON ME, HE APPROVED IT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS, THE CASE WAS DONE, CLOSE, AND APPARENTLY WHAT HAPPENED IS, THE INSPECTION WAS ONLY FOR THE RAFTERS. I HAD NO IDEA THAT I HAD TO DO AN EXPECTION FOR THE SHEET ROCK. AND I HAD NO IDEA I HAD TO DO INSPECTION FOR THE INSULATION. UNDERSTAND SOMETHING. THIS WAS A ROOF THAT WAS DONE. I GOT PERMITS TO DO THE ROOF. IT WAS COMPLETED, IT WAS INSPECTED AND COMPLETED, THIS WAS AN AFTER-THE-FACT SITUATION WHERE THEY TOLD ME I SHOULD'VE GOTTEN A PERMIT FOR THE RAFTERS THAT I HAD REPLACED. SO AT THAT TIME I DID NOT KNOW THAT, SO I CAME AND FOUND THE JUDGE, CHILDREN 30 DAYS I WOULD DO IT. I DID IT WITHIN 30 DAYS, THE ONLY ISSUE IS THAT SIGNED DOCUMENT THAT SHOWS OKAY APPROVED, WAS ONLY THE RAFTERS. I FOUND OUT IN OCTOBER OR NOVEMBER, THAT THE PERMIT IS NOT CLOSE, BECAUSE I SHOULD HAVE DONE AN EXPECTION FOR THE SHEET ROCK, AND I HAD NO IDEA.

ABSOLUTELY NONE. >> SO IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SIGNED AND SAYS THAT EVERYTHING S OKAY? AND YOU DON'T NEED TO DO ANYTHING ELSE?

>> I'M GET A RETAINER ITEM NUMBER SIX OF THIS DOCUMENT CALLED INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS. IT SAYS ADDITIONAL INSPECTIONS OTHER THAN THE ONES MAY STILL BE REQUIRED. BUILDING OFFICIAL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL INSPECTIONS OTHER

THAN THE ONES LISTED. >> DID YOU READ THAT?

>> NO, I LOOKED TO AP APPROVED ON IT, AND I THOUGHT I WAS DONE, BECAUSE IT WAS NO NEED TO COME BEFORE THE JUDGE .

BECAUSE ALL IT TOOK WAS TO CALL THE INSPECTOR BACK AND COME

BACK AND INSPECT. >> SO YOU ARE DIVORCE

DISPUTING THE VIOLATION. >> ARE YOU DISPUTING THE

VIOLATION? >> I'M SAYING TO THE JUDGE THAT WHEN THE INSPECTOR CAME OUT TO SIGN OUT, I HONESTLY FELT THAT THE PERMIT WAS CLOSE. I WAS NOT AWARE THAT I HAD TO DO RESEARCH. THAT'S MY IGNORANCE. BUT TO BE FIND FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS CLOSE, THERE WAS NO NEED FOR ME TO WAIT . SO I'M ASKING THE JUDGE, TO SEE IF SHE COULD BE LENIENT, OR IN THE SEMI-SITUATION OF WHY DID NOT FOLLOW THROUGH WITH WHAT THE CITY SAID SOME TIME. THERE'S NO NEED FOR ME NOT TO DO IT IS WHAT I'M SAYING. I HAVE INSPECTOR COME OUT, HE INSPECTED IT AND SAID OKAY, BUT I MISINTERPRETED THAT DOCUMENT SAYING THAT I NEEDED TO DO TOO

MUCH. I HAD NO IDEA. >> I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THIS

DOCUMENT FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH. >> WHAT YOU LIKE TO SEE IT FOR EXHIBIT NUMBER ONE RESPONDENTS?

>> YOU HAVE A COPY OF THIS? >> WE'RE GOING TO ADMIT THIS

INTO EVIDENCE. >> ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> NO. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE?

>> SHAUN COSS, JUST FOR CLARITY, THERE BEEN SPECIAL PERMITS ISSUED FOR THIS SITE, THE INSPECTION YOU HAVE IS FOR 22 E- 1300 TO REPLACE ROOF COVERING. THE VIOLATION WAS FOR REPLACING ROOF RAFTERS WITHOUT A PERMIT. THAT PERMIT HAS BEEN OBTAINED SINCE THAT TIME, IT HAS BEEN PROPERLY INSPECTED, AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FOR THE RESPONDENT THAT THERE IS ALSO ANOTHER PERMIT THAT IS NOT RELATIVE TO THIS CASE, BUT JUST SO YOU ARE AWARE THAT IS STILL OPEN AND REQUIRES

INSPECTIONS. >> SO WE CAN DISCUSS THAT AFTER

THE HEARING, IF YOU WOULD LIKE. >> THAT LETTER THAT THE JUDGE HAS IN FRONT WAS FOR PERMIT 3144 FOR RAFTERS.

>> STAFF WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT AGAIN.

>> STAFF WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT LETTER IF YOU ARE DONE READING

IT. >> STAFF CAN CONFIRM THAT THE

[01:00:04]

RAFTERS. >> ANYTHING FURTHER

>> NO, MA'AM. >> ANYTHING FURTHER, SIR?

>> NO, THANK YOU. >> WILL IT SAYS HERE THEY SEND YOU A LETTER OF THE CITY SAID TO AN EMAIL EXPLAINING THAT THE ENGINEER REPORT YOU SENT WAS FOR THE RAFTERS ONLY.

>> THAT WAS IN OCTOBER SOMETIME.

>> IT SAYS NOVEMBER 9TH. SO FROM THE TIME THE INSPECTION AND THE FINES WERE ACCUMULATING, BUT I WAS UNAWARE I WAS BEING FIND $100 A DAY. SO I WAS AWARE WHEN I GOT THE LETTER AT THE END OF LAST YEAR.

>> IF I WAS AWARE, THE FINES WERE ACCUMULATING, BELIEVE ME, I WOULD'VE DONE SOMETHING ABOUT IT. BUT I WAS NOT.

>> ALL RIGHT, CITY ARE YOU STILL REQUESTING THE REDUCTION

BE $1527.26? >> YES MA'AM, THAT AMOUNT IS THE CAUSE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE FEES FOR THE CASE.

>> SIR, HOW DO YOU RESPOND? >> IF IT CAN BE REDUCED FURTHER? AT THIS POINT IT'S IN YOUR HANDS, REALLY, I WOULD

THINK. >> I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY, DOES THAT AMOUNT INCLUDE THE LIEN REDUCTION HEARING? THE LIEN REDUCTION DOES NOT APPLY IN THIS CASE.

>> OKAY. ANYTHING FURTHER? ALL RIGHT, SIR. IT IS A FINE REDUCTION REQUEST. I'M GOING TO REDUCE IT TO -- THE FINES STOPPED ON JANUARY 29TH, AND THEY TOLD US $7740. THAT IS A RECORDING FEE, AND THE CITY IS AGAIN TO REDUCE IT TO 1000

$527.26. >> I'M GOING TO AGREE WITH THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION . HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED TO

PAY THAT? >> I CAN PAY WITHIN 30 DAYS. I MEDITATED THIS, IF YOU DON'T PAY THAT AMOUNT -- BECAUSE YOU SEEM TO HAVE A SLIPPERY MEMORY WHEN IT COMES TO PAYING THESE FINES, AND FEES COMMON CAUSE, IF IT'S NOT PAID WITHIN THE 30 DAYS I'M GOING TO REDUCE IT BACK TO THE 7440 DOLLARS.

>> WHERE DO I FADE THIS FINE?

>> FINE WILL BE PAID BY THIS WEEK. AND YOUR HONOR, I DON'T THAT I HAVE A SLIPPERY MEMORY, I BEG TO DIFFER, OR DISAGREE.

>> ALL RIGHT, YOU HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. THANK YOU. GOOD

LUCK. >> OKAY, THE NEXT CASE IS ,

[I. 23-2600 907 N 13th St Love Center Regeneration Ministries & Fellowship, Inc. Shaun Coss]

>> GOOD MORNING. GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> WHEN YOU ARE READY. >> THIS CASE, WAS INITIATED

[01:05:01]

DEPARTMENT. >> MY REPS AND IT IS HERE.

>> SHAUN COSS, ON THE CAD DRAWING, I'M NOT ABLE TO GIVE YOU AN AT ACCURATE UPDATE THIS MOMENT. I CAN GIVE IT TO YOU THIS WEEK. I NEED TO SPEAK WITH THE DRAFTSMAN, BUT I WILL GIVE YOU THE UPDATE, EITHER TOMORROW OR MONDAY, SUMMIT FIRE WILL BE COMING TO YOUR OFFICE TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE MODIFIED SPRINKLER SYSTEM, AND THEY HAVE RECEIVED THAT PERMIT FROM CAPTAIN BOYER AT THE ST. LOUIS COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT. THEY GOT THAT LAST FRIDAY. THEY HAVE ORDERED AND HAVE ON HAND ALL THE MATERIALS TO INSTALL THE MODIFIED SPRINKLER SYSTEM ON THE PROPERTY. ADDITIONALLY, THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM CONTRACTOR WILL CONTINUE FOR HIS PERMIT APPLICATION. HE HAS A SYSTEM READY TO POWER UP FOR INSPECTION. AND THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR SCHEDULED TO COME TO THE JOB NEXT THURSDAY, FEBRUARY THE 15TH , TO POWER THE ALARM CONTROL BOX, AND I'M HOPING THAT HE WILL BETWEEN NOW AND THEN COME IN AND APPLY FOR THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM PERMITS. THE DELAY IN THIS PARTICULAR JOB , AS YOU KNOW, I HAVE RECOUNTED TO YOU THE EXTREME PROBLEM THAT WE RAN INTO IN FINDING A DRAFTSMAN TO TAKE THE ORIGINAL PLANS FROM 2006 , THAT THE BUILDING WAS INSTRUCTED UNDER AND CONVERT THOSE INTO A CAD FILE SO THAT THE COME BACK FOR THE CONTRACTORS WOULD HAVE THE PERMIT DOCUMENT TO SUBMIT TO YOU. IT TOOK ME ALMOST FOUR MONTHS TO SECURE SOMEONE TO DO THAT. I WENT TO NUMEROUS ARCHITECTS, AND NONE OF THEM WOULD TAKE ON THE PROJECT, BECAUSE THEY WERE TOO BUSY. SO, THAT CAD DRAWING CURRENT STATUS, I WILL REACH OUT TO HIM TODAY, AND ASK HIM TO GIVE ME THAT TIMELINE SO I CAN SHARE THAT WITH YOU EITHER TODAY, OR TOMORROW.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THAT AS WELL, WHEN WE MET WITH THE CITY SOME MONTHS AGO, AND WERE TOLD WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO, THE FIRST THING THEY ASKED GARY AND I TO DO, WAS TO SECURE AN ALARM SYSTEM COMPANY, AND SHOW A DEPOSIT PAID UPFRONT, AND WE DID DO THAT. WE DID IT IN TWO WEEKS. WITHIN TWO WEEKS, WE

[01:10:08]

DO ALL OF THAT. >> I APPRECIATE AND

ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR EFFORTS. >> HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU BELIEVE YOU NEED TO OBTAIN THE PERMITS FOR THE REMAINING WORK?

>> WILL, SUMMIT FIRE, -- I'VE BEEN ABLE TO PROVIDE THEM WITH THE CAD DRAWING THAT THEY NEEDED TO GO FORWARD WITH THE PERMITTING, SO THEY WERE ABLE TO GO FORWARD WITH THE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT PERMITTING. AND NOW THAT THEY ARE ABLE AND HAVE THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO GO WITH THE PERMITTING SUBMITTED TO YOUR OFFICE, SHAUN COSS. JUST TO REVISIT THIS ISSUE OF THE CAD DRAWING, WHAT I HAVE DONE NOW IS I HAVE THE FLOOR PLAN AND THE ELEVATIONS COMPLETED IN CAD. WHAT I AM WAITING ON ARE FOR THE OTHER ASPECTS OF THE BUILDING TO BE COMPLETED IN CAD. THE REASON I HAD HIM DO IT INCREMENTALLY, IS BECAUSE THAT ALLOWED THESE TWO COMPANIES, THE FIRE LINE COMPANIES AND THE FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM COMPANY TO TAKE THOSE PARTIAL CAD DRAWINGS AND TO USE THEM TO CREATE THE DRAWINGS THAT THEY NEED TO CREATE TO MOVE FORWARD -- THE PART OF THE CAD DRAWINGS THAT IS YET TO BE DONE ARE THE DETAILS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE TOTAL PLAN . SO THE FOUNDATION DETAILS, THE ELECTRICAL RISER, THE PLUMBING RISER, THE HVAC DETAILS, AND THE CROSS-SECTIONS, AND ALSO

TRUST PLACEMENT. >> WHERE TO AT 8200 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, WITH CERTIFIED SEALED PLANTS BEING CONVERTED TO ELECTRONIC $4000. SO WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF WORK, A

LOT OF DRAWING. >> IS A $30,000 PROJECT JUST FOR THE PLANTS TO BE CONVERTED FROM PAPER TO ELECTRONIC. SO THERE'S A LOT OF WORK INVOLVED FOR THE ENGINEER.

>> I'M FEELING IT RIGHT HERE.

>> I SAID THAT. WE ALSO JUST HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS CASE HAS BEEN OPEN SINCE SEPTEMBER. THIS IS AN ACTIVE SCHOOL, WITH CHILDREN PRESENT. WE'VE GOT FOUR EVERYBODY'S BEST, WE GOTTA MOVE IT ALONG. DO YOU FEEL THAT 60 DAYS IS SUFFICIENT TO OBTAIN THESE THREE PLAYERS.

>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATES RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE ALLOW THIS PERMIT TO BE ISSUED FOR AN ADDITIONAL 60 DAYS.

>> I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD, WE HAVE RECEIVED THE FULL COOPERATION OF THE CITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT, AND THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT. AND WE KNOWLEDGE THAT. WITHOUT THEIR HELP, AND THEN BENDING OVER BACKWARDS TO ACCOMMODATE US, WE WOULD'VE HAD A DIFFERENT OUTCOME. WE WOULD STILL BE MOVING FORWARD, BUT THE PROPERTY WOULD BE SHUT DOWN. AND UNDERSTAND THIS, THE CITY DID COME TO US. WE WENT TO

THE CITY. >> THE CITY DID NOT FIND US IN VIOLATION WITHIN THE CITY, WE CALLED A MEETING WITH ALL THE OFFICIALS AND SAID HEY, WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO BRING THIS PROPERTY UP TO BECOME A LEGITIMATE CERTIFIED SCHOOL? I

CALLED THAT MEETING. >> YOU BEAT US TO THE PUNCH.

WE DID -- I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THAT. I PICKED UP THE PHONE

AND CALLED PAUL THOMAS. >> YES, YOU DID, SIR. MAY I ASK THE GENTLEMAN IN THE VAST TO STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE

RECORD. >> AND IS THE BUILDING CURRENTLY BEING OPERATED AS A K-12 GOAL?

>> WERE PREPARED. WHATEVER TAKES TO MAKE THIS WHAT IT NEEDS TO BE WHILE CONSTRUCTION IS GOING ON.

>> CAN YOU TELL ME APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY

[01:15:02]

>> 24. >> MR. DRYDEN, I'M SORRY I

WROTE THAT DOWN WRONG. >> IN THE PREVIOUS CASE YOU WERE ABLE TO TESTIFY ABOUT THE STATUS OF THE BUILDING AND HOW SAFE IT WAS. ARE ANY OF THESE VIOLATIONS , SAFETY VIOLATIONS? OR DO YOU FEEL THAT IS SAFE FOR THE STUDENTS WERE THERE?

>> WELL, THE PRIMARY CONCERN FOR ALL OF US INVOLVED THAT IN THE EVENT OF A FIRE, THAT THERE COULD BE A SAFE EVACUATION OF THE BUILDING. THE MOST CRITICAL THING IS THE IMMEDIATE ACTIVATION OF THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM, BECAUSE IT'S A VOICE ACTIVATED SYSTEM. THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT , AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ALLOWED FOR A MODIFIED WATER SPRINKLER SYSTEM TO BE PUT INTO THE BUILDING WHICH IS SUFFICIENT TO SUPPRESS THE FIRE TO ALLOW FOR EGRESS FROM THE BUILDING.

THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM WHICH SHOULD BE READY TO BE TESTED SHORTLY AFTER WE HAVE POWER CONNECTED NEXT THURSDAY. THAT WILL ACTIVATE ALONG WITH THE CITY'S INSPECTION ALONG WITH THE FIRE INSPECTION WILL BE READY TO BE TURNED ON. THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, THEY ARE GOING TO BE SUBMITTING A PERMIT APPLICATION WITH THE CITY EITHER TOMORROW OR FRIDAY, AND AS SOON AS THEY RECEIVED THE PERMIT BACK FROM THE CITY, THEY ARE READY TO COME OUT ON AN EXPEDITED BASIS THAT NORMALLY THE SCOPE OF WORK WOULD TAKE A COUPLE OF MONTHS, THEY ARE COMMITTED TO TRYING TO GET IT DONE IN A COUPLE OF

WEEKS. >> SO, I'M NOT IN THE POSITION TO CERTIFY SAFETY , AND THE SAFETY OF THE CHILDREN WHICH IS THE E FIRST AND MAIN CONSIDERATION. THE ONLY THING I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT MY EFFORTS HAVE BEEN TO SECURE ALL OF THE SUBCONTRACTORS IN THE PROPER PERMITTING, AND DO IT IN A WAY THAT WAS AFFORDABLE, FOR MR. BRIAN, SES AND OTHERS COME, BUT THE PRICE WAS ASTRONOMICAL, IT WAS ALMOST A HALF $1 MILLION.

SO FAR WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO ALIGN ALL THIS WORK FOR ABOUT $100,000. AND THAT IS BASED ON THE GOODWILL OF OTHER PEOPLE

HELPING. >> SO I CAN'T TECHNICALLY

ANSWER THAT QUESTION. >> I APPRECIATE IT, YOU'VE CLARIFIED WHAT THE ISSUES ARE WITH THE BUILDING.

>> PROSECUTOR, YOU ARE ASKING FOR A VIOLATION?

>> WHAT ARE THE GRADE LEVELS WITH THE SCHOOL? K-6 RIGHT NOW. ONCE WE GET ALL THE CERTIFICATION DONE, THE SCHOOL IS GOING TO BE PRE-THROWS -- PRESCHOOL THROUGH SECOND GRADE.

ALL RIGHT ANYTHING FURTHER? >> THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT, YOU ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE 60 DAYS TO

OBTAIN THE PERMIT? >> BASED ON THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES I FIND VIOLATION EXISTS, AND YOU WILL BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECT TO AT LEAST EVERY 160 DAYS UNTIL IT HAS BEEN CLOSED AND COMPLIED, OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY WILL BE ASSESSED .

30 DAYS TO APPEAL. ALL RIGHT, GOOD LUCK.

[L. 23-2840 917 N 9th Street Mitchell, Barry & Wendy Miles Keller]

>> THE NEXT CASE IS 23-2750 -- 23-2840, 917 NORTH NINTH STREET. BARRY AND WENDY MITCHELL.

>> COULD WE JUST TOLD BRIEFLY UNTIL THE RESPONDENT CAN COME

UP? >> WHEN YOU ARE READY MILES

KELLER. >> MILES KELLER , INSPECTOR

[01:20:06]

MITCHELL? >> MISS MITCHELL, CAN YOU HEAR

ALL RIGHT? >> FOR THE RECORD. 23-2840, 917 NORTH NINTH STREET, INITIAL DATA AND ON OFF OVER 28, 2023, OWNERS ARE . WENDY MITCHELL AT 3664 THOMASON CROSSINGS DRIVE , TRIANGLE, VIRGINIA 22172. VIOLATIONS ARE INFESTATION, ELECTRICAL SYSTEM HAZARDS, INTERIOR SURFACES, INTERIOR DOORS, SKYLIGHT AND DOOR FRAMES, WINDOWS, DOORS.

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, TREAT THE PROPERTY FOR PEST INFESTATION, REPLACE MISSING ELECTRICAL FACEPLATES, REPAIR ALL HOLES AND CRACKS AND CEILINGS, FOR, REPAIR EXTERIOR DOORS MISSING HINGES, MAKING EXTERIOR DOORS SECURE AND WEATHERTIGHT, REPLACE NONWORKING WINDOWS OR WINDOWS THAT ARE MISSING WINDOWPANES, REPLACE CRACKED BATHROOM TILES. THE VIOLATORS GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT AND APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED AND COMPLIED WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OF THE VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE RULING. NOT COMPLYING HUNDRED DOLLARS FINE ASSIGNED PER DAY. SO FAR, THERE'S BEEN NO PERMIT, AND NO CONTACT FROM THE OWNERS, AND I

DO ALSO HAVE PICTURES. >> ARE THE PICTURES DATE

STAMPED? >> YES, THEY ARE STAMPED FROM OCTOBER 11 OF 2023. DO THEY ACCURATELY DEPICT WHAT YOU WITNESS AT THE PROPERTY THAT DAY?

>> MISS MITCHELL, HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THE

PHOTOGRAPHS? >> NO, I HAVE NOT.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THEM? >> YES.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> WHAT IS THIS? THE PEST INVESTIGATION AND SOME OF THE DROPPINGS . MISS MITCHELL DO YOU OBJECT TO ME PLACING THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE?

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS, AND MAY I PLACE THEM INTO EVIDENCE AT THIS

TIME? >> NO, -- OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ] RIGHT NOW WE WILL MOVE THE PHOTOS INTO EVIDENCE OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CAN LOOK AT THEM.

>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THESE INTO EVIDENCE AS EXHIBIT COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 1.

>> IS THE PROPERTY OCCUPIED? >>

>> YES, IT IS. I'M SORRY, THEY ARE OUT OF ORDER, JUST LET

[01:25:07]

ME GET THEM BACK IN ORDER. >> IT'S OKAY, YOU DON'T HAVE

TO DO THAT. >> ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> COUNSELOR? WHO LIVES IN THE HOUSE?

>> NOW? RANDY JONES. >> FOR THE RECORD, MISS MITCHELL, CAN YOU TELL ME YOUR RELATIONSHIP OF BARRY AND

WENDY MITCHELL QUESTION MARK >> ON THE MOTHER OF BARRY

MITCHELL? >> HAS HE BEEN GIVEN YOU THE AUTHORIZATION TO SPEAK ON HIS BEHALF TODAY? HE HAS 212 PROPERTIES FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. HE HAS GIVEN ME POWER

OF ETERNITY. >> HE LIVES IN TRIANGLE,

VIRGINIA? >> YES.

>> WHO TAKE SPIRIT OF THE PROPERTIES?

>> I DO. >> MISS MITCHELL, WHAT TO BE

DONE TO CORRECT THE VIOLATIONS? >> SHE HAS A VIDEO OF IT.

>> JUST TELL HER WHAT YOU HAVE DONE.

>> I PAINTED IT. EVERYTHING THAT WASN'T RIGHT, I TOOK CARE OF IT. IT HAS BEEN SPRAYED, BUT , SHE WOULD NOT LET ME IN

THERE. >> I TRIED TO GO IN THERE AND DO SOME THINGS,

>> WHO IS SHE? >> SHE IS THE PREVIOUS TENANT, THERE'S A NEW TENANT SINCE THIS HAS OCCURRED.

>> WHAT IS YOUR NAME AGAIN? >> TO MAKE A ROLE , I AM HER

GRANDDAUGHTER. >> IT IS YOUR TESTIMONY TODAY THAT BETWEEN THE PRIOR TENANT IN THE CURRENT TENANT YOU ENTERED THE PROPERTY, AND REPAIRED EVERY ONE OF THE VIOLATIONS?'S ON THE CITATION?

>> RIGHT. >> DID YOU CALL THE CITY FOR

REINSPECTION? >> I DIDN'T KNOW I HAD TO.

>> THE THING IS, WE JUST GOT THE LETTER ABOUT THE COURT DATE PRIOR TO, SHE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THERE WAS AN INSPECTION DONE THAT THINGS HAD TO BE CORRECT. IT'S JUST THAT THE TENANT HAD TO BE EVICTED, YOU KNOW, YOU GO IN, AND PREPARE THE APARTMENT BEFORE THE NEW TENANT MOVES IN . IT WAS SOMETHING SHE WAS DOING NOT KNOWING THAT SHE HAD VIOLATIONS TO CORRECT? SHE CORRECTED THE MANY WAYS, NOT KNOWING. WE JUST GOT THOSE WHEN CLEARED UP, WHEN GRANDMOTHER? THE END OF

JANUARY? >> WE DIDN'T KNOW THE

INSPECTION WAS DONE. >> THE FIRST LETTERS DATED

OCTOBER. SHE DID NOT KNOW. >> WENDED MICHAELA VACATE THE

PREMISES? >> IN NOVEMBER.

>> THE PHOTOGRAPHS HERE , ARE DATED OCTOBER 11, 2023.

>> SHE DIDN'T WANT TO PAY HER RENT, SO SHE WOULDN'T LET ME IN THERE. I TRIED TO COME IN THERE FOR THE INFESTATION, BECAUSE WITH EVERY HOUSE, I HAVE BEEN A LANDLORD FOR 57 YEARS, I'VE NEVER BEEN TO COURT FOR ANYTHING LIKE THIS. I ALREADY TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEMS. ANYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, DO IT IMMEDIATELY. AS SOON AS I CAN GET SOMEONE OUT TO DO IT. HER NAP IN THE RED, SHE DIDN'T WANT ME TO COME IN THERE TO DO ANYTHING. I COULDN'T GET IN THERE. SHE

EVEN CURSED ME OUT. >> I'M NOT SURE WHEN THE TWO

[01:30:15]

>> I HAD NO NOTICE. BUT YOU DO ADMIT THAT THE PROPERTY WAS IN VIOLATION OF ALL THESE THINGS THAT ARE DESCRIBED THAT NEED TO BE CORRECTED? ARE YOU ADMITTING THAT YOU KNEW?

>> WHEN YOU EVICTED THE TENANT, DID YOU BECOME AWARE OF THE VIOLATIONS THAT THE CITY STATED IT

>> YES, I SAW IT IN THE PAPER. >> DID YOU WITNESS IT WITH YOUR OWN EYES WHEN YOU WENT INTO THE PROPERTY? YES.

>> SHE SAID, DID YOU WITNESS THE VIOLATIONS WHERE THEY ARE?

>> THE ELECTRICAL FACEPLATES MISSING, DID YOU HAVE SOMEONE COME IN AND FIX ALL THAT. I SAW ONE PLATE OFF OF ONE SOCKET . I DIDN'T SEE WIRES LOOSE OR NOTHING. I HAD SOMEONE COME REPLACE THE TILE IN THE BATHROOM, SHE COST SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE OUT. SHE SAID I GOT THE RENT MONEY. I'M GOING TO KEEP IT SO WHEN I GO SOMEPLACE ELSE, AND SHE'S BEEN IN THERE OVER TWO AND HALF YEARS.

>> SHE DIDN'T WANT ME TO COME IN THERE, BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T

WANT TO PAY THE MONEY. >> I ALWAYS TAKE CARE. I'VE GOT SEVERAL PROPERTIES ADDRESSES RIGHT HERE. MY SON OWNS THEM , AND I'VE NEVER BEEN IN COURT.

>> I ALWAYS TAKE CARE OF THINGS. PEOPLE LET ME SEND PEOPLE TO THE HOUSE, TO DO THE WORK, BUT SHE WOULD NOT.

>> I UNDERSTAND. THE CITY IS ASKING THE MAGISTRATE TO FIND THAT THE VIOLATIONS EXIST, AND, WHERE ASKING FOR A FINDING OF VIOLATION IN 60 DAYS TO MAKE THE REPAIRS. IF THE REPAIRS OF ALREADY BEEN MADE, YOU CAN CALL FOR REINSPECTION.

>> ALL RIGHT. I'D BE GLAD TO PICK

>> BUT THE MAGISTRATE IS CAN A ROLE THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT, ANYTHING FURTHER? NO, MA'AM.

>> YOU KNOW SOME OF THESE VIOLATIONS WOULD'VE TAKEN ONLY A FEW MINUTES , AND A SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY TO REPLACE, OR

CORRECT. >> BUT JUDGE, WHAT COULD YOU DO WHEN SOMEBODY WON'T LET SOMEBODY COME IN THERE PICK

>> THAT'S WHAT THE POLICE SAID, EVICT HER. WE DID. SHE HAD A MONTH TO MONTH LEASE. OF THE PLACE IS NOT SUITABLE, LET ME COME IN AND FIX IT. I HAD TO GIVE HER 30 DAYS OR

WHATEVER, OKAY. >> ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> KNOW I CAN TELL YOU THIS JUDGE, I HAVE BEEN A LANDLORD FOR 57 YEARS, BECAUSE I ALWAYS TAKE CARE PROPERTY. I WANT PEOPLE TO LIVE LIKE I LIVE . I DON'T MISS TREAT PEOPLE. I'M

NOT A SLUMLORD. >> ANYTHING ELSE?

>> NO, YOUR HONOR. IF YOU HAVE COPIES OF THE VIDEOTAPE THEM I WISH YOU COULD GIVE THE CITY, AND LET THEM GET A COPY OF IT FOR THEIR RECORDS. BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY

DEPLORABLE. >> IF YOU'D SEEN THE WAY SHE KEPT THAT PLACE. THERE WAS MAGGOTS IN THE REFRIGERATOR. I THREW AWAY THE REFRIGERATOR IN THE STOVE.

>> THEY WERE EVEN IN THE FREEZER.

>> LISTEN, YOU ALL ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS PROPERTY.

AND WHEN TENANTS DON'T PAY, WHEN THERE IS ABNORMAL WEAR AND

TEAR, EVICT THEM. >> THAT'S WHAT I DID.

[01:35:04]

>> WELL, YOU ALL WAITED A LONG TIME.

>> ALL RIGHT. I FIND THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS AT 917 NORTH 19TH STREET, AND BARRY MITCHELL, AND WENDY MITCHELL ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION, AND WHAT IS YOUR

NAME, MA'AM? >> OH, FANNY MITCHELL . IS THE PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPERVISING THE PROPERTY, AND DO YOU HELP SUPERVISE THE PROPERTY?

>> BOTH OF YOU ALL ARE RESPONSIBLE. YOU JUST CAN'T SIT THERE AND LET PEOPLE TEAR YOUR HOUSE UP, AND YOU DO NOTHING. I'LL GIVE YOU 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT AND OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRE EXPECTIONS 100 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. I SUGGEST YOU ALL CONTACT AND STAY IN TOUCH WITH THE CITY IF YOU'VE ARTIE TAKEN CARE OF SOME OF THESE VIOLATIONS, THEN THE CITY WILL PROBABLY COMPLY YOU ON THAT. BUT YOU CAN'T JUST THINK THAT YOU KNOW, THEY CAN SEE, THEY GOT A LOOKING GLASS AND WHETHER OR NOT THE VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN CURED.

>> -- WE WERE ALL SHOCKED BY THIS WHEN WE RECEIVED THIS TWO WEEKS AGO NO ONE WAS AWARE. LIKE I SAID, EVERYTHING IS BEEN REPAIRED, IT WAS JUST OUT OF CUSTOMARY PRACTICES, NOT BECAUSE WE RECEIVED VIOLATIONS, IT WAS BECAUSE SHE WAS FINALLY EVICT IT. SIX OUT OF SIX OF THE VIOLATIONS WERE CREATED BY THE

TENANT. >> DID CHILDREN LIVE ON THE PREMISES? IF SOMETHING HAPPENED ONE OF THOSE KIDS, I GUARANTEE YOU, YOU WOULDN'T BE OVER HERE? YOU WOULD BE OVER THERE IN A BIG COURTHOUSE. WE'VE DONE IT ALL. BUT HAVE BEEN OUT THERE MANY TIMES. THEY'VE BEEN OUT THERE BY HEART, AND THE PRACTICE THAT WE HAD TO TAKE, IT WAS A LONG PROCESS.

>> NOW YOU KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO.

>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, WHICH CLARIFIED THAT BARRY AND WENDY MITCHELL ARE THE RESPONSIBLE PARTIES, YOU ARE MANAGING THE PARTY, BUT THE VIOLATORS OF THE OWNER'S OF THIS PROPERTY? IS

THAT CORRECT? >> YES. THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE? >> YOU WILL BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED, COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OF THE VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY WILL BE ASSESSED, AND YOU HAVE 30 DAYS

TO APPEAL. ANYTHING FURTHER? >> ALL RIGHT. GOOD LUCK.

>> NEXT CASE. 23-2858, 1509 AVENUE E , RONALD AND JANNIE

[M. 23-2858 1509 Avenue E Sweeting, Ronald & Jannie Kevin Young]

SWEETING ARE THE OWNERS. >> WHEN YOU ARE READY.

>> ARE YOU RONALD SWEETING? >> YES.

>> WERE YOU SWORN IN? >> YES, I HAVE.

>> OKAY. >> KEVIN YOUNG, CITY INVESTIGATOR, AND INSPECTOR. 23-2858, 1509 AVENUE E , CASE INITIATED OCTOBER 25TH, VIOLATIONS ARE PERMIT REQUIRED, GENERAL, INTERIOR SERVICES, INVESTIGATION, FOOD

[01:40:07]

SEE THEM? >> I AM HAVING A HARD TIME

FINDING THEM, HERE. >> THOSE ARE THE CORRECT

PHOTOS, RIGHT THERE. >> THESE ONES?

>> THOSE OF THE OLD ONES. I WENT TO SEE THE NEW ONES THAT

YOU TOOK YESTERDAY. >> ARE THEY THIS ? ARE THESE ONCE YOU TOOK YESTERDAY? WE DIDN'T BUT THE ONES IN EVIDENCE OF THE ITEMS THAT YOU CORRECTED. WOULD INPUT THE PHOTOS INTO THE PACKET THAT OF ITEMS THAT YOU ALREADY

CORRECTED. >> THE PHOTOS ARE OF THE ITEMS

THAT YOU HAVE NOT CORRECTED. >> THE ONES THAT YOU DID CORRECT, WE TOOK OFF OF VIOLATIONS. SO THEY JUST ARE THE ONES THAT ARE STILL DAMAGED. THIS IS THE OUTLET HANGING OUT OF THE WALL. CAN WE PLACE THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE SO THE MAGISTRATE CAN LOOK AT THEM ON HER SCREEN, AT LEAST? THIS IS THE REINSPECT ONE.

>> THIS SHOWS THE CABINETS WITH THE STUFF INSIDE.

>>

>> SO YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE PICTURES?

>> THESE ARE THE ITEMS THAT ARE NOT CORRECT IT.

>> BUT MOST OF THEM HAVE BEEN CORRECTED, RIGHT?

>> YES, YOU FIXED THE FLOOR TILES.

>> SO WHAT ELSE NEEDS TO BE DONE?

>> I'D LIKE TO PLACE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE AS IT IS COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE . DID THE PHOTOGRAPHS, MR. YOUNG,

[01:45:02]

THE PROPERTY YESTERDAY? >> ELECTRICALLY, HE GOT THE PERMITS, BUT NO WORK HAS BEEN DONE.

>> NOTHING HAS BEEN INSPECTED FOR THAT.

>> AND THE OTHER PHOTOGRAPHS. HE PATCHED THE FLOOR WITH THE BROKEN TILES IN THAT COMMENT SOME OF THE PICTURES THEY HAVE BEEN PATCHED OVER WITH NEW TILE.

>> OKAY. >> HE ALSO REPLACED THE

COUNTERTOP IN THE KITCHEN? >> IS THAT ONE OF THE PHOTOS

SHE'S LOOKING AT? >> THOSE ARE ALL FIXED, THEY ARE NOT ON THE LIST ANYMORE FOR NO VIOLATION.

>> SO YOU DON'T HAVE ANY PICTURES THAT A BEEN

CORRECTED? >> MR. SWEETING, NO PHOTOS THAT WERE TAKEN YESTERDAY ARE BEING PRESENTED AS EVIDENCE TODAY, SO ONCE THEY ARE ACCEPTED BY THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, WE CAN REVIEW THIS AS PHOTOS OF THE OUTSTANDING

VIOLATIONS BUT >> YOU TOOK PICTURES YESTERDAY, THEY ARE NOT BEING PRESENTED.

>> SO, I HAVEN'T CORRECTED EVERYTHING? NO, NO SIR.

>> THE ELECTRIC STILL NEEDS TO BE INSPECTED. WITH EXPOSED

WIRING. >> EXCUSE ME, SIR, ON THE SCREEN IN FRONT OF YOU THERE IS A -- SHEET THAT SHOWS THE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ON YOUR SCREEN. CAN YOU SEE THE SCREEN

IN FRONT OF YOU? >> I THOUGHT THE ONLY ELECTRICAL WORK THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE WAS IN THE KITCHEN?

>> YOU DIDN'T SEE ALL OF THESE PHOTOS OF WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE HOUSE? YOU THOUGHT IT WAS OKAY FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE

LIKE THAT? >> I THOUGHT I'D CORRECTED

EVERYTHING? >> YOU NEED TO GET WITH THE

WORKERS HERE. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, HAVE YOU ACCEPTED THE PHOTOS INTO EVIDENCE? I'D LIKE TO MOVE THEM INTO EVIDENCE AS COMPOSITE ONE.

>> KEVIN, IF WE COULD GO TO THROUGH THE PHOTOS AND YOU CAN ADVISE WHAT IS STILL OUT STANDING, PLEASE? MR. YOUNG, MR. YOUNG? I'M SORRY, MR. SWEETING, LOOK AT THE SCREEN, AND HE'S GOING TO TESTIFY AS TO WHAT THE VIOLATIONS ARE THAT NEED TO BE CORRECTED. PROCEED, MR. YOUNG.

>> I THOUGHT I HAD CORRECTED ALL OF THE FLOOR TILE.

>> PHOTO B IS TAKEN THE BROKEN TILES OUT AND PUTTING YOU KNOW, STUCK DOWN NEW TILES IN THOSE AREAS.

>> THERE, TOO. IN PHOTO C. THAT HAS BEEN CORRECTED. PHOTO D, HE HAS REPLACED THE CABINETS AND APPLIED A NEW COUNTERTOP TO THE CABINETS WITH NEW DOORS.

>> THEY ARE OPERABLE. >> THE FLOORING HAS BEEN

PATCHED OVER LIKE TILE. >> PHOTO E --

OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ] >> ALL OF THAT HAS BEEN DONE.

>> MR. YOUNG, I'M SORRY, MR. SWEETING, WE WILL HAVE TODD TO HEAR YOUR CASE AFTER MR. YOUNG HAS HAD A TIME TO PRESENT THE

CITY'S CASE. >> THIS HAS BEEN REPAIRED.

PHOTO G, HAS BEEN REPAIRED. PHOTO H HAS BEEN PAINTED OVER.

>> IS THAT A VIOLATION? OR HAS IT BEEN CORRECTED?

>> IT HAS BEEN CORRECTED. >> PHOTO J, THIS IS THE AIR HANDLER UNIT, IN THE LADIES BEDROOM IN THE BACK.

[01:50:04]

>> WHAT VIOLATIONS ARE DEPICTED IN J , THAT ARE STILL IN

VIOLATION? >> THAT OUTLET , THERE.

>> THE TILES HAVE BEEN PATCHED OVER IN PHOTO K. EVIDENTLY, A NEW GFI IS BEEN INSTALLED, BUT THE WIRING HAS BEEN INSTALLED ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE WALL TO IT.

>> GOING BACK. >> ON PHOTO L, IS THERE A VIOLATION THERE PRESENTLY? IN THE KITCHEN AREA?

>> WELL, IT'S NOT BEEN INSPECTED .

>> SAME AIR HANDLER, IT'S JUST BEEN FOAMED IN THROUGH THE TOP FOR AIR HANDLING. THAT IS BROKEN TILES THERE THAT HAVE

BEEN REPLACED. >> HE FIXED ALL THE CABINETS IN THE KITCHEN, PHOTO P, I DID NOT GET A PICTURE OF THAT. I DID NOT SEE THAT, BUT IT IS EXPOSED WIRING. THESE ARE JUST

PHOTOS OF THE OUTSIDE . >> ARE THERE VIOLATIONS

DEPICTED IN THESE PHOTOS? >> NO, SIR I JUST PICTURES ALL

THE WAY AROUND. >> PHOTO S , EXPOSED WIRING .

PHOTO T, IS EVIDENCE OF A SMOKE DETECTOR, AND I'M NOT

SURE IF IT WORKS, OR NOT. >> THIS, THAT PHOTO, X, IS THE OUTLET THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. IT IS WIRED ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE WALL. THIS WOULD BE PART OF THE ELECTRICAL

PERMIT >> ALL OF THAT IS BEEN CORRECTED, THOUGH. MR. SMITH IS THE ONE THAT DID THE WORK.

>> THIS IS PART OF THE ELECTRICAL PERMIT, THIS IS THE BACK BEDROOM. IT'S GOT EX POST ELECTRIC ON THE BOTTOM AND THE OUTLET, PHOTO C, AND THE BROKEN TILES IN PHOTO Y, HAVE BEEN COVERED OVER. HERE'S ANOTHER SMOKE DETECTOR IN AA , AND PHOTO BB WAS WHERE THEY REMOVED THE TREE THAT WAS OVER BY THE HOUSE WHERE THEY CUT THE TREE DOWN AND FIXED THE FRONT DOOR AND BROKEN GLASS IN THE FRONT PORCH.

>> THOSE HAVE BEEN TAKEN OFF OUR VIOLATIONS. THE KITCHEN CABINET , THEY ARE ALL WORKING PROPERLY. THE DOORS WERE, BUT THERE IS EVIDENCE OF INFESTATION IN ALL OF THE

CABINETS IN PHOTO DD . >> PHOTO EE IS WHERE THEY

TRIED TO REPAIR A DOORJAMB. >> GO BACK TO EE, IS THAT AN

INTERIOR DOOR? >> LETTER FF IS THE BOTTOM

OF THE TUB WITH CARPET ON IT. >> THAT IS NOT EVEN ONE OF THE

VIOLATIONS? >> DO PHOTOS GJ, AND HH, DO

THEY SHOW A VIOLATION? >> THIS IS FROM THE ORIGINAL TIME, AND THE HOLE UNDERNEATH THE TUB.

>> IS PHOTO F REFLECTIVE OF CORRECTION ACTION NUMBER THREE?

>> THE PIECE OF CARPET THAT'S UP AGAINST THE TUB BY ITSELF, IF YOU PICK IT UP, THE WHOLE IS STILL THERE.

>> THE BOTTOM OF THE TUB IS GONE.

>> IS THAT CORRECTED? IF WE PUT A PIECE OF CARPET THERE?

[01:55:01]

>> IF THIS WOULD SUBFLOORS NOT BEEN PROPERLY REPAIRED, AND ONLY SUB FLOOR HAS BEEN PLACED, --

OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ] >> I WAS NOT AWARE THAT THAT

WAS A VIOLATION. >> IT SAYS MAKE STRUCTURAL REPAIRS TO WHERE THE FLOOR IS REPAIRED, THIS AREA APPEARS

TO BE MISSING WOULD. >> AND I, IS FECES IN THIS

CABINET. >> YEAH, THAT IS THE FIRST ITEM. THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS LIVING IN

THERE. THEY RENT THE ROOM. >> I SAW SIGN UP THERE TELLING THEM WHAT THE RULES AND REGULATIONS WERE.

>> YES, MA'AM . THAT SIGN WAS NOT UP THERE YESTERDAY.

>> DID YOU GET THE NAMES OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING

THERE? >> IT'S ON MY INVESTIGATION

SHEET. >> IT IS IN THE PHOTOS.

>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, TO CORRECT THE RECORD, THERE'S DOES APPEAR TO BE FOR THE REST YESTERDAY THAT I HAVE BEEN

SUBMITTED. >> PHOTO KK,

>> YES, THAT IS FROM YESTERDAY.

>> IF WE GET FINISHED GOING THROUGH THESE PHOTOS, AND I BELIEVE THERE WERE A COUPLE MORE TAKEN YESTERDY.

>> AND THAT'S THE ONLY THING. >> THE STRIP OF CARPET UP

AGAINST THE TUB. >> HAD I KNOWN IT WAS A VIOLATION I WOULD'VE CORRECTED IT . IT WAS NOT ON THE SHEET?

>> CAN WE JUST CLARIFY WHAT VIOLATIONS SPECIFICALLY ARE CURRENTLY ON THIS PROPERTY THAT WERE -- IN WHICH CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ADDRESS THE VIOLATIONS.

>> THE ELECTRICAL PERMITS WERE REPLACING OUTLETS AND ADDING ELECTRICITY WHERE IT'S NEEDED. THE PERMIT REQUIRED FROM CHANGING FROM A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE TO A ROOMING HOUSE.

SO IT IS A CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY.

>> IT'S NOT A ROOMING HOUSE. >> CONTINUE.

>> NO, I MEANT FOR MR. YOUNG TO CONTINUE. YOU WILL HAVE YOUR

CHANCE. >> WHERE THE TUB IS, THE FLOOR UNDERNEATH IT IS PRETTY MUCH GONE, AND THE SIDE OF THE TUB IS HANGING OFF. IT'S HANGING BY A THREAD. THE ONLY THING THAT WAS DONE WAS THE CARPET HEY TAKE OVER IT.

>> HE REPLACED THE BROKEN GLASS IN THE FRONT WINDOWS, AND FIXED

THE FRONT DOOR. >> WAS THE PROPERTY TREATED FOR PEST INFEST CESSATION ? HE HAD ATTACK ON THE DOOR.

>> FOR THE PAST COMPANY, BUT THERE WAS STILL EVIDENCE OF FECES IN THE CABINETS. AND I BELIEVE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT WOULD NEED A RECEIPT FROM THE COMPANY.

>> CORRECTIVE ACTION NUMBER THREE ADDRESSES SUPPORT STRUCTURE OF THE FLOOR THAT'S ROTTEN AND COLLAPSING IN SEVERAL AREAS . CAN YOU IDENTIFY THE AREAS YOU'RE

TALKING ABOUT? >> THE FRONT DOOR, THE OTHER AREA WAS IN THE KITCHEN UNDERNEATH THE OVEN, WHICH HAD PLYWOOD SCREWED DOWN, NOW HAS TILE OVER IT. THE OTHER ONE IS

UNDER THE TUB. >> AND YOUR FIRST VIOLATION IS CONVERTING A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME INTO A MULTIUNIT DWELLING?

>> FOR NEEDING TO OBTAIN A PERMIT TO DO THAT? THAT'S THE FIRST VIOLATION? AND YOU FOUND THREE ADULTS LIVING IN THE

PROPERTY? >> YES, MA'AM. WHAT WERE THE APPROXIMATE AGES OF THOSE ADULTS?

[02:00:05]

>> I WOULD SAY OVER 65. >> ALL RIGHT, WHAT ROOMS

APPEARED TO BE INHABITED? >> THERE ARE TWO BEDROOMS TO THE LEFT, WHICH I'VE NEVER BEEN IN, BECAUSE IT DIDN'T SEEM THAT THEY WANTED ME TO GO IN THERE, BUT THE BACK ROOM IS A LAUNDRY ROOM, THERE'S A LADY IN BOTH BEDROOMS.

>> SO THERE'S ONE PERSON SLEEPING IN THE LAUNDRY ROOM AND ONE PERSON EACH AND EACH OF THE TWO BEDROOMS QUESTION MARK FOR THE RECORD, HOW MANY BEDROOMS AND BATHROOMS ARE IN

THIS PROPERTY? >> TWO BEDROOMS AND ONE BATH.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER FOR YOU?

>> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. >> WOULD YOU LIKE THE RESPONDENT TO ADDRESS THE COURT?

>> HE CAN IF HE WANTS TO? >> NOW IT'S YOUR TURN ?

>> WHAT IS THE PROBLEM NOW? >> YOU HAVE, AS TESTIFIED, YOU ARE OPERATING A MULTIUNIT DWELLING .

>> SIR, SIR. S THE QUESTION, WHEN SHE FINISHES, YOU CAN

SPEAK. DON'T INTERRUPT HER. >> YOU HAVE BEEN DOING THIS EVER SINCE YOU GOT UP TO STAND AND TESTIFY.

>> SO, ARE YOU USING THE PROPERTY AS A MULTIUNIT

DWELLING? >> IT IS NOT. SEVEN YEARS AGO I HAD AN ENGINEER, MR. JEMISON, TO SPEAK WITH SHAUN COSS, ABOUT THIS ISSUE. HE CONVINCED SHAUN COSS, THAT IT WAS NOT CONVERTED INTO A MULTIUNIT.

>> I HEAR YOU. THANK YOU. MR. SWEETING, HOW MANY TENANTS ARE

IN THE PROPERTY? >> THERE ARE THREE.

>> ALL RIGHT, AND CAN I SEE THE SCREEN WITH THE NAMES?

>> I TRY TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR LOW INCOME PEOPLE. THESE PEOPLE ONLY MAKE ABOUT SEVEN OR $800 PER MONTH . IF I DIDN'T DO THIS, SOME OF THEM WOULD BE IN THE STREET. HOMELESS. I TRY TO GET BACK TO THE COMMUNITY, TO HELP PEOPLE SURVIVE UNDER

THESE CONDITIONS. >> I UNDERSTAND. IF THEY HAD TO RENT A WHOLE HOUSE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE OUT OF 12 OR $1300. I TRY TO PROVIDE NOMINAL FEES FOR THEM SO THAT

THEY CAN HAVE A PLACE TO LIVE. >> DOES MS. PINKY PAY RENT? YES. AND I ONLY CHARGE 400 AND $50 PER MONTH

>> PLEASE LET ME FINISH MY QUESTION.

>> DOES MS. NEED TO PAY RENT TO YOU?

>> HOW MUCH DOES SHE PAY? >> $450.

>> AND DOES MS. WALLACE , IS THAT I MISS WALLACE ? DOES SHE

PAY RENT TO YOU? >> $450?

>> ARE THERE OTHER TENANTS IN THE PROPERTY.

>> MISS WALLACE, MS. PINKY, AND MISS NEED .

>> SO YOU HAVE THREE UNRELATED INDIVIDUALS LIVING IN THE

PROPERTY? >> OKAY. AND THEY ONLY WAY THEY CAN PAY RENT IS BY PAYING $450 A MONTH, WHICH INCLUDES RENT, CABLE, AND IT ALSO INCLUDES UTILITIES.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER

FOR THIS RESPONDENT. >> YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS IF HE

WOULD LIKE . >> NO, I DON'T REALLY HAVE

ANYTHING TO ASK HIM. >> SO THE CITY IS ASKING FOR A FINDING THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND HE BE GIVEN 60 DAYS.

>> ANYTHING FURTHER FROM YOU SIR?

>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO KNOW WHAT I CAN DO PACIFICALLY TO

[02:05:01]

RENDER THIS PROBLEM? >> OH, YOU'RE GOING TO FIND

OUT. >> I FIND THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS, AND THAT RONALD AND JANIE SWEETING ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATIONS. THEY WILL BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRES EXPECTION AT LEAST ONE HUNDRED AND 80 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED AND COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND FILL ALL THE VIOLENCE SINCE DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER OR FIND A $100 PER DAY BSS. YOU HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. YOU WILL GET A COPY OF

THIS ORDER. >> MAY ASK A QUESTION?

>> WHAT DO I NEED A PERMIT FOR?

>> THAT WILL BE EXPLAINED TO YOU WHEN YOU GET A COPY OF THE ORDER. YOUR HOUSE AND YOUR HOUSE IS IN NONCOMPLIANCE .

>> HE NEVER SHOWED THE PICTURES WED CORRECT THAT THE

THINGS. >> DON'T INTERRUPT ME.

>> YOU'RE ASKING ME, AND I'M TRYING TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS BASED ON EVIDENCE PRESENTED HERE, AND YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND AND YOU HAVE MORE QUESTIONS, YOU TALK TO MR. YOUNG. HE WILL

TELL YOU WHAT'S WRONG. >> YOU'VE GOT A MESS. NOW,

ANYTHING FURTHER? >> NOTHING FURTHER.

>> AND HOW OLD ARE THESE WOMEN ABOUT?

>> OVER 65. >> YEAH, THEY ARE SENIOR

CITIZENS. I FIGURED THAT. >> THE ORDER WILL BE MAILED TO

YOU. AT 309 AVENUE HIM. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO MR. YOUNG ABOUT WHAT ALL I NEED TO DO.

>> OKAY, THAT NEXT CASE IS SIX-DAY , CASE 19 DEST 35 --

[A. 19-3145 4060 Selvitz Road Johnson, Bobby & Wanda Shaun Coss]

>> THIS IS SHAYNA, THIS IS ELIZABETH WITH THE CITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT, CAN YOU MIELKE?

>> I HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK WITH ATTORNEY BARRY YESTERDAY, SHE HAS INDICATED THAT THEY NEED SOME ADDITIONAL TIME TO COMPLETE THAT PRIOR TO MAKING A RECOMMENDATION I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM MR. MAYOR, OR MISS JOHNSON IS ALSO PRESENT HERE THIS MORNING AS TO HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL TIME IS BEING

REQUESTED. >> HI, GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE, THIS IS ATTORNEY SHAYNA BAER, THE LESSEE , AS WELL AS PROPERTY OWNER WORKING DILIGENTLY, WE RETAINED THREE DIFFERENT ENGINEERING FIRMS TO REPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT. I'VE SAID THIS TO SEAN BEFORE, CAN'T CONTROL THE ENGINEERS. THEY ALL PROMISED THAT THE DESIGN, AND REPORTS WOULD BE COMPLETED BY

[02:10:04]

REQUIRED. >> THANK YOU. STAFF IS AGREEABLE TO PROVIDING AN ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS IN A FORM OF EXTINCTION. WE ASK THAT A EXTINCTION BE GRANTED IN LIEU

OF A CONTINUATION. >> ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> NO, YOUR MAGISTRATE. ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> I'LL GRANT A 30 DAY EXTENSION REQUEST.

>> GOOD LUCK TO YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SEAN. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER CASES FOR

[C. 23-2055 1704 Rio Vista Dr Peters, Jacquelyn Miles Keller]

TODAY? >> THE NEXT CASE IS 5C, 23-2055 , 1704 RIO VISTA DRIVE. JACQUELINE PETERS IS

THE ORDER. >> CASE NUMBER 23-20055, CASE INITIATED AND ISSUED OF JULY 23, 2023 . FLORIDA BUILDING

CODE 105.1 PERMIT REQUIRED. >> CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TO OBTAIN A JETSKI LEFT INSTALLED WITHOUT A PERMIT. THE MAGISTRATE FINDS THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS, AND THE VIOLATORS WILL BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO A TAINE A PERMIT, APPROVAL FOR REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS INTO THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED, COME LIE WITH ALL OTHER CONDITIONS AND SECURE ALL VIOLATIONS NOT REQUIRED, OR BE FINED $100 OF DAY . SO FAR, THERE HAVE BEEN NO PERMITS, THIS IS THE SECOND

TIME IT MAGISTRATE. >> I THOUGHT SO. HAS ANYBODY

HEARD FROM MS. PETERS? >> THEY HAVE BEEN IN TO GET A DIFFERENT PERMIT, BUT THE NOT THE NEW PERMITTING FOR THIS.

>> DO WE HAVE ANY PHOTOS WE WANT TO PLACE IN EVIDENCE?

>> I BELIEVE THEY HAVE ALREADY BEEN. THEY WERE PLACED IN

EVIDENCE IN THE FIRST HEARING. >> SO WHAT WE NEED TO DO?

JUST FIND THEM IN VIOLATION? >> THE CITY IS ASKING THAT WE

FIND IN VIOLATION. >> AND GIVE THEM 60 DAYS?

>> YES, I REMEMBER THIS. IT WAS A JETSKI LEFT WHICH WAS THE FIRST TIME SOMETHING HAD COME BEFORE ME, AS I RECALL. ALL RIGHT. JACQUELINE PETERS IS NOT PRESENT, NEITHER IS A REPLICATION ON DRAFT . A VIOLATION EXISTS, SHE WILL BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL OF ALL COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS AND AT LEAST 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. COMPLY WITH ALL THE PERMITS AND SECURE THE VIOLATION FOR A FINE OF $100 A DAY THE ASSESSED WITH

[D. 23-2167 1704 Rio Vista Dr Peters, Jacquelyn Miles Keller]

30 DAYS TO APPEAL. >>

] >>

[02:15:29]

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS OBTAINED A PERMIT FOR THE DOCK BEING BUILT WITHOUT A PERMIT. THE RECOMMENDATIONS, THE CITY REQUESTS THAT IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS VIOLATIONS EXIST, THE VIOLATORS BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT. AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND CURE OTHER CONDITIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER IS AT THE TIME, I HAVE NO PERMITS, AND MAGISTRATE AS WELL.

>> YEAH, ONE OF A KIND. I DO FIND THAT SHE IS GUILTY OF THE VIOLATION BUILDING A DOCK WITHOUT A PERMIT. SHE'LL BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, ATTAIN APPROVAL. COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT. I

[G. 23-2583 2703 Ave L Bldg 5 Apt 37 SP Pine Creek Village LP Miles Keller]

>> THANK YOU. AND THE NEXT CASE IS 5G 23-584. 2307 AVENUE A, APARTMENT 5, BUILDING 7. SP PINE CREEK VILLAGE LP IS THE

OWNER. >> WHEN YOU'RE READY.

>> CASE 23-2583. ADDRESS 2703 AVENUE L, BUILDING 5, APARTMENT 37. CASE INITIATED ON SEPTEMBER 14TH OF 2023. OWNER IS SP PINE CREEK VILLAGE, LP. 31899 DELL OBSEPO SUITE 150.

SAN JUAN, WHATEVER, CALIFORNIA. 92675. VIOLATIONS ARE IPNC 111.1.121. UNSAFE STRUCTURE. STRUCTURE UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY. IPNC 305.32021 INTERIOR SURFACES. IPNC, MECHANICAL APPLIANCES. IPNC 604-203-2021 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM HAZARDS. ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS OBTAIN A PERMIT TO REPAIR, REPLACE ALL FIRE DAMAGED WIRING. ELECTRICAL FIXTURES, MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AND DRY WALL. ANY STRUCTURAL DAMAGE WILL REQUIRE SIGN AND SEAL REPAIR PLANS DESIGNED BY A REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL. RECOMMENDATIONS IS THE CITY REQUESTS THAT IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATIONS EXIST, THE VIOLATORS BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT.

OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. CURE ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THAT MAGISTRATE AND SO FAR NO PERMITS HAVE CAME THROUGH.

AND I DO HAVE PICTURES OF THE PROPERTY.

>> DO THE PICTURES ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS?

>> YES, THEY DO. >> ARE THEY DATE AND TIME

STAMPED? >> YES. THE DATE WOULD BE

SEPTEMBER 7TH OF '23. >> THANK YOU.

>> I'D LIKE TO MOVE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE AS

CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 1. >> ANYTHING FURTHER?

[02:20:03]

>> NO, JOURNAL. >> YOUR HONOR.

>> AND YOU HAVEN'T HEARD OF ANY REPRESENTATIVE FROM PINE

CREEK VILLAGE? >> SHE APPEARED AT THE LAST HEARING. FROM MY NOTES, YOLANDA IRWIN APPEARED AT THE LAST HEARING AND REPAIRS HAD NOT YET BEEN APPROVED BY THE OWNERS TO WHAT SHE TESTIFIED TOO. THE FIRE WAS ON AUGUST 30TH.

>> ALL RIGHT. THERE IS NOT A REPRESENTATIVE HERE FROM SP PIN CREEK VILLAGE LP. HOWEVER, I DO FIND BASED ON THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION. I WOULD GIVE THEM 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT. COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND CURE ALL OVER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. 30 DAYS TO APPEAL.

[J. 23-2750 520 S 10th St Dieseuner, Joseph Joel Smith]

>> THANK YOU. THE NEXT CASE IS 5J23-2750. 520 SOUTH 10TH STREET. JOSEPH DIESEUNER IS THE OWNER.

>> ALL RIGHT, JOE, YOU'RE UP. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> IS THIS YOUR FIRST TIME? ALL RIGHT. WELCOME.

>> MY NAME IS JOEL SMITH. I'M WITH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, AN A BUILDING INVESTIGATOR. I HAVE THIS 23-2750. AND IT'S ON -- LOCATED AT 520 SOUTH 10TH STREET. AND I INITIATED THE CASE OCTOBER 12TH, 2023. AND THE OWNER IS JOSEPH DIESEUNER OF 520 SOUTH 10TH STREET, FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA. VIOLATION IS A PERMIT REQUIRED FBC 105.1. AND THE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARE TO OBTAIN A PERMIT FOR THE PAVERS AND PAVER DRIVEWAY INSTALLED WITHOUT A PERMIT. THE RECOMMENDATION, THE CITY REQUESTS THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATOR EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR OR VIOLATORS BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT. OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL INSPECTIONS AT LEAST 180 DAYS AFTER THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. COMPLY WITH ALL THE PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OVER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. AND THERE HASN'T BEEN A PERMIT FOR

THIS WORK YET. >> MR. SMITH, DO YOU HAVE ANY

PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY? >> I DO HAVE PICTURES. AT THE TIME OF THE PICTURES, MY TIMESTAMP APP WAS NOT WORKING.

HOWEVER, I DO TESTIFY IT THAT THESE PICTURES WERE TAKEN ON OCTOBER 12TH, 2023 AT THE TIME OF THE VIOLATION.

>> DO THEY ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION THAT YOU WITNESS

SNED? >> YES.

>> , MA'AM. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT

THEY BE ADMITTED. >> THEY WILL BE ADMITTED AS

SUCH. ANYTHING FURTHER? >> NO, MA'AM.

>> ALL RIGHT, I FIND THAT JOSEPH DIESEUNER IS NOT PRESENT, NEITHER IS THE REPRESENTATIVE HERE ON HIS BEHALF. BUT AGAIN, I WILL ADMIT THE PICTURES, AND I WILL MAKE THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATION THAT HE IS IN VIOLATION WITHOUT HAVING A PERMIT. CORRECTIVE ACTION IS FOR HIM TO OBTAIN A PERMIT FOR THE PAVERS AND PAVER DRIVEWAY INSTALLED WITHOUT A PERMIT. HE WILL BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS, AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND CURE ALL OVER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN ORDER OF NOT REQUIRING A FINE OF $150 FOR A DAY TO BE

[K. 23-2838 624 1/2 Texas Ct Oley, Tammy Frank Remling]

[02:25:06]

ASSESSED. 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. >> THANK YOU.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> NEXT CASE. OKAY. THE NEXT CASE IS 5K23-2838. 624 1/2, TEXAS COURT. TAMMY OLEY IS THE

OWNER. >> WHEN YOU'RE READY. IT'S A

LONG MORNING. >> MY NAME IS FRANK REMLING.

THIS CASE INITIATED OCTOBER 19TH, 2023, THE OWNER IS TAMMY OLEY, 624 1/2 TEXAS COURT. THE PERMIT REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTION IS OBTAIN A PERMIT FOR THE WINDOWS INSTALLED WITHOUT A PERMIT. THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE CITY REQUESTS THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THE CITY IS GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT. AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN ORDER, NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 A DAY BE ASSESSED. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IT'S BEEN HERE, AND THERE'S BEEN A PERMIT APPLIED FOR ON 2-6-24. AND I DO HAVE

SOME PICTURES OF THE WINDOWS. >> ARE THEY DATE AND TIME

STAMPED? >> YES, MA'AM. OCTOBER 11TH,

2023. >> DO THEY ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION? I'D LIKE TO MOVE THIS PHOTOGRAPH INTO

EVIDENCE AS CITY'S EXHIBIT ONE. >> IT WILL BE ADMITTED AS SUCH.

ANYTHING FURTHER? >> THE PERMIT IS APPLIED FOR, BUT THE CITY IS STILL ASKING FOR A VIOLATION?

>> I THINK THEY WOULD UNTIL IT'S BEEN PICKED UP.

>> THE CITY IS STILL ASKING FOR A VIOLATION.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. IT WAS JUST APPLIED FOR TWO DAYS AGO, SO IT'S STILL IN THE REVIEW PROCESS.

>> OH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> NO, MA'AM. >> ALL RIGHT. I FIND THAT BASED ON THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED THAT TAMMY OLEY IS IN VIOLATION FOR FAILURE TO OBTAIN A PERMIT IN THIS CASE. I WILL GIVE HER 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT IS CLOSED. COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND CURE ALL ORDERS DESCRIBED IN, OR A FINE OF $100 A DAY BE ASSESSED. 30

DAYS TO APPEAL. >> THANK YOU. AND THAT IS IT.

>> OH, THANK YOU. >> ARE WE ADJOURNED?

>> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. >> OH, WAIT, CAN WE READ NOTICE

INTO THE RECORD? >> NOTICE APPEARING WAS SENT TO THE VIOLATORS CERTIFIED MAIL AT THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED SIGNED, IT IS PLACED IN THE FILE. THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED UNSIGNED OR UNCLAIMED, AN AFFIDAVIT IN HEARING WITH A NOTICE OF MAIL IS RETURNED TO THE VIOLATOR. TEN DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING, A NOTICE OF HEARING WAS THEN SENT REGULAR U.S. MAIL. A COPY WAS PLACED IN THE OFFICE FILE. TEN DAYS BEFORE, TEN DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING, A NOTICE OF HEARING IS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD IN THE LOBBY OF CITY HALL. A NOTICE APPEARING IS ALSO POSTED AT THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WITH AN AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING. IF THE CERTIFICATION CARD IS NOT RETURNED TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT WITHIN TEN DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING POSTED IS COMPLETED, THE SAME WAS RETURN

UNCLAIMED. >> OKAY. ANYTHING FURTHER? WE ARE ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.