[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:14]
>>> THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING OF OCTOBER 2 HIS CALL TO ORDER. IF WE CAN PLEASE 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 UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH
>> IF YOU COULD PLEASE REMAIN STANDING. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR AND AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY THAT
[A. 24- 374CE 735 Orange Avenue FORT PIERCE HAITIAN UNITED METHODIST CHURCH INC. Heather Debevec]
YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH? THANK YOU. OUR FIRST CASE TODAY WILL BE SIX A IN VIOLATION CASES, CASE NUMBER 24-374 CE , 735 ORANGE AVENUE, FORT PIERCE HAITIAN UNITEDMETHODIST CHURCH, INC. . >> GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING, COULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME, PLEASE?
>> MY NAME IS AMO'S, A MOS, ID. A.
>> ADHD MAR , ARE AS IN RABBIT. ADH . THAT IS WHAT I WROTE. MR. ADHMAR, CODE ENFORCEMENT IS GOING TO PRESENT ITS CASE AND THEN THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE WILL HEAR YOUR SIDE. WHEN
YOU'RE READY. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS CASE NUMBER 24-374 CE FOR 735 ORANGE AVENUE OWNED BY FORT PIERCE HAITIAN UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, INC. . THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON FEBRUARY 16 OF THIS YEAR FOR IPM C3 OR 4.2, PROTECTIVE TREATMENT, EXTERIOR STRUCTURES. THE CITY REQUESTED OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS A VIOLATION EXISTED FOLLOWING THE ORDER. VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 30 DAYS TO PRESSURE WASH, PAINT THE DISCOLORED AREAS OF THE BUILDING, PAY THE AREAS OF THE BUILDING WHERE THE PAINT IS PEELING, OBTAIN A PERMIT AND APPLY WITH ALL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS -- AROUND THE BUILDING. FAILURE TO COMPLY WOULD RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED, AND I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT.
>> HAVE YOU SHOWN THE PHOTOS TO THE RESPONDENT?
>> MR. ADHMAR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS? ALL RIGHT.
[00:05:36]
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO ME PLACING THESE PHOTOGRAPHS
>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU . THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE DATED FEBRUARY 8 . AUGUST THE 30 , SEPTEMBER THE 24TH. AND SEPTEMBER THE 30TH. EACH PHOTOGRAPH IS DATE AND TIME STAMPED. TO THOSE DATES AND TIMESTAMPS ACCURATELY , TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS THAT YOU OBSERVED ON THE DATE AND AT THE TIMES REFLECTED ON THE PHOTOS? THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
THE PHOTOS WILL BE ENTERED AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
>> PROPERTY WAS INITIALLY CITED , FEBRUARY 24.
HAVE THERE BEEN ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PROPERTY OR ANY RESPONSE TO THE VIOLATIONS?
>> NO. >> OKAY . ANYTHING FURTHER?
>> NOT AT THIS TIME. >> MR. ADHMAR, CAN YOU TELL THE COURT WHAT YOUR RELATIONSHIP IS TO THE CHURCH? IT IS AN
INCORPORATED COMPANY . >> I AM THE PASTOR.
>> YOU ARE THE PASTOR? >> APPOINTED BY THE FLORIDA FORT PIERCE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH.
>> WHEN YOU ARE READY , YOU CAN ADDRESS THE TESTIMONY.
>> YES, YOUR HONOR, THINK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO BE HERE. WE,
WE -- >> SHE WILL BE THE JUDGE.
ADDRESS YOUR COMMENT TO THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, PLEASE.
>> IT IS MY FIRST TIME . I HAVE NEVER BEEN IN COURT BEFORE.
>> WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.
>> I REPRESENT DEFENSE OF EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE TO DO .
WE STARTED TO WORK ON THAT BUILDING. THEY NOTICED THAT , BUT THE PROBLEM WE HAVE, WHEN WE, WE HAVE TO REPLACE ABOUT 25 FEET OF THE , THE FASCIA IN THE -- I DOESN'T NEED PERMIT. MANY PROBLEMS ARE PENDING. WHEN THEY GET THIS, THEY SENT THE NOTICE.
THE REASON WE START WORKING ON IT , BUT WHEN WE FIGURE OUT THAT , WHEN THEY COME WITH EVERYTHING, WE ORDERED THE MATERIALS, AND I TOLD THE WORKERS, LET ME GO TO THE CITY TO FIGURE OUT IF WE NEED A PERMIT. SO THEY SAID WE NEED A PERMIT. OKAY ? BUT BEFORE THAT, WHEN WE DISCOVERED , WHEN THE PEST CONTROL DID THE EVALUATION, THEY FIGURED OUT THAT WE NEED TO TAKE OUT THE TERMITES BEFORE REPLACING ALL OF THESE THINGS. THAT IS WHY, THAT TAKES TIME. IN THE SECOND THING THAT TAKES TIME AS THE PERMIT, BECAUSE OF THAT , WE CANNOT FIND A CONTRACTOR TO PULL OUT THE PERMIT. I WENT TO THE PERMIT AND THEY SAID I CANNOT PULL OUT THE PERMIT, BECAUSE I HAVE SOME PEOPLE IN MY CHURCH WHO CAN, THEY DO CONSTRUCTION , THEY CAN DO THAT WORK. THEY SAID I CANNOT PULL OUT THE PERMITS , SO I HAD TO GO TO FIND SOMEONE TO PULL OUT THE PERMITS. FINALLY, WE , WE HAVE , I THINK LAST WEEK , MAYBE THIS WEEK, LAST WEEK , SOMEBODY FINALLY PULLED OUT THE PERMIT FOR US. THE PERMIT NUMBER IS C BLD 2024 -00259 .
[00:10:11]
THAT IS WHAT THEY TOLD ME. SO BECAUSE OF THAT , WE HAVESTARTED TO DO THE WORK. >> THE PERMIT HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR , IS THAT WHEN YOU ARE SAYING?
>> YES, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE PERMIT BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING ON
THE BUILDING. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, GIVE ME ONE MOMENT I'M SIGNING IN TO CHECK THAT. CAN SOMEONE HELP ME WITH THE PAPERWORK REALLY QUICK JUST SO I CAN SEE IT? I NEED HIS PAPER. IT WILL HELP ME FIND WHAT I NEED REALLY QUICK. NO, NOT THAT ONE. DID YOU HAVE THE PERMIT PAPER WITH YOU?
>> NO, I DON'T HAVE THE PERMIT. I HAVE THE NUMBER.
>> YES MOTHER NUMBER. >> THE CONTRACTOR , I CALLED THEM TO GIVE ME THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE PERMIT.
>> CAN YOU READ THAT NUMBER AGAIN?
>> I HAVE IT. I HAVE IT. >> O, YOU HAVE IT? OKAY.
>> I AM NOT AS FAST IN THE NEW SYSTEM AS I AM IN THE OLD ONE.
>> YEAH. SO , I HAVE, I CAN HAVE THE , THE CONTRACTOR ON MY PHONE TO ANSWER , TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE PERMIT. I WENT TWICE IN THE CITY AND THEY SAID I CANNOT PULL IT OUT.
>> THE PERMIT APPLICATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO REPLACE THE ROTTEN . THAT IS THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED.
>> YES, BUT FOR THE PAINTING AND THE PRESSURE WASHING , THEY SAID I DON'T NEED PERMIT FOR THAT.
>> NO, YOU DON'T, SIR. >> SO I NEED THE PERMIT TO FIX WHATEVER WE HAVE TO FIX, AND THEN TO PAINT, WE CAN START DOING THIS BY THIS WEEK. IF THE PERMIT GETS APPROVED , WE CAN START DOING IT THIS WEEK, BECAUSE WE HAVE -- ALREADY IN
THE CHURCH . >> AT THIS TIME ALL I SEE IS THAT IT WAS SUBMITTED, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. I DON'T SEE THAT IT HAS BEEN APPROVED OR YOU KNOW, ANYTHING , BUT IT HAS
BEEN SUBMITTED. >> WHAT IS THE DATE IT WAS
SUBMITTED? >> 10/1, YESTERDAY .
>> I DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE , THIS IS MY FIRST TIME, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT WILL TAKE , SO WE, THE ISSUE IS, WAS THE TERMITES , WE FINISHED TO TAKE OUT THE TERMITES, AND NOW WE ARE FINISHED WITH THE TERMITE , AND THE PERMITS, SO WE NEED THE PERMITS. ONCE WE HAVE THE PERMIT FINISHED, WE WILL FIX THE FASCIA, AND THEN WE CAN GO WITH THE PAINTING. IF WE HAVE EVERYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE IN THREE WEEKS, 3 TO 4 WEEKS.
>> SO THE CITY IS CURRENTLY RECOMMENDING THAT YOU BE GIVEN 30 DAYS. DO YOU THINK THAT THE PERMIT , I MEAN, DO YOU THINK THAT THE WORK CAN BE DONE WITHIN 30 DAYS?
>> NO. >> HOW MUCH TIME ARE YOU ASKING
FOR? >> ONCE I HAVE THE PERMIT , THAT FASCIA WILL TAKE A WEEK . AND FOR THE PAINTING TO BE DONE , THAT COULD TAKE 2 TO 3 WEEKS BECAUSE THEY NEED TO PRESSURE WASH AND TO FIX WHATEVER LITTLE CRACKS THEY HAVE IN THE
BUILDING. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE , STAFF WOULD BE OKAY TO AMENDING OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 30 DAYS TO PRESSURE WASH AND PAINT THE AREAS. 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE THAT THE BUILDING PERMIT IS CLOSED WHICH MEANS THAT HE'S GOTTEN HIS BUILDING PERMIT FOR HE HAS COMPLETED ALL OF HIS STUFF. WE STILL WOULD LIKE TO 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN THE PERMIT AND COMPLY WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND THEN WE WOULD CHANGE THE PAINT AND PRESSURE WASH TO THAT 30 DAYS TO START WHEN THAT WORK HAS RECEIVED FINAL APPROVAL , AND THEN THE 30 DAYS FOR PAINTING WOULD KICK IN AT THAT TIME. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> YEAH. SO, 30 DAYS, THE CITY IS RECOMMENDING 30 DAYS TO GET THE PERMIT , AND THEN BEYOND THAT --
>> BUT, YES. >> THE TIME WITH START WHEN THE
[00:15:03]
PERMIT CLOSES. >> I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT PERMIT WILL TAKE BECAUSE I , I AM NOT IN CHARGE OF APPROVING THE PERMIT . OKAY? THEY NEED TO APPROVE IT IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. IT IS A HUGE BUILDING , YOUR HONOR. IT IS A HUGE BUILDING. THE ONLY FACE THEY SHOW YOU IS NOT THAT BUILDING .
THAT IS ABOUT A QUARTER OF THAT BUILDING . SO WE HAVE TO DO THE WHOLE BUILDING, PRESSURE WASH THE WHOLE BUILDING. SO I NEED THE TIME I GET THE PERMIT, I NEED , THAT WORK CAN BE DONE IN 3 TO 4 WEEKS. I AM NOT THE WORKER, BUT GIVE ME TWO MONTHS
TO GET THAT DONE. >> SO, JUST TO BE CLEAR WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS, OKAY, IS 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN THE PERMIT. TO GET THE PERMIT. IT IS A FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD PERMIT. IT IS JUST TO REPLACE THE WOOD SOFFIT ON THE BUILDING . IF THERE IS A PROBLEM WITHIN THAT 30 DAYS OF HIM OBTAINING THE PERMIT, HE CAN ALWAYS COMMUNICATE WITH STAFF AND EXPAND WITH THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE CAN GRANT AN EXTENSION IF NEEDED, BUT IT IS A VERY STRAIGHT FORM AND -- STRAIGHTFORWARD PERMIT TO REPLACE THE SOFTENING , SO STAFF IS GIVING 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN THE PERMIT. THAT PERMIT IS GOOD FOR UP TO SIX MONTHS. SO THE WORK CAN BE COMPLETED.
ONCE THE WORK IS COMPLETED AND IN FINAL INSPECTION IS DONE , THAT IS WHEN STAFF WAS START THE CLOCK FOR THE 30 DAYS TO PAINT, SHE WOULD HAVE AN ADDITIONAL FOUR WEEKS AFTER THE REPAIRS ARE COMPLETED TO DO THE PAINTING.
>> OKAY. THAT'S FAIR . >> THE 30 DAYS TO GET THE PERMIT, LIKE , WAS JUST STATED. YOU , IF YOU ARE GETTING CLOSE TO THE 30 DAYS AND YOU THINK IT IS NOT QUITE DONE, YOU CAN CONTACT STAFF , AND ASK FOR AN EXTENSION OF THAT AS WELL. BUT FOR TODAY , IT WILL BE 30 DAYS TO GET THE PERMIT.
>> OKAY. >> AND FURTHER THAT --
>> AND FURTHER PRESSURE WASH AND PAINTING, YOU WILL GIVE ME
30 MORE DAYS ? >> AFTER THE PERMIT IS , AFTER ALL OF THE PERMITTED WORK IS FINISHED AND YOU GET THE WORK APPROVED , THAT IS WHEN SHE IS GIVING YOU ANOTHER 30 DAYS AFTER ALL OF THAT TO GET THE PRESSURE WASH AND PAINTING DONE. AND AGAIN, IF YOU NEED AN EXTENSION, YOU JUST COME TO STAFF BEFORE THE DEADLINE AND ASK FOR THAT, AND THEY , THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GIVE YOU ANOTHER EXTENSION, AND IF THEY DENY YOU, THEN THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HAS AUTHORITY TO
GIVE YOU ANOTHER EXTENSION. >> SEVERAL STEPS .
>> NOT BECAUSE WE DON'T, WE DIDN'T WANT TO REPAIR THE BUILDING . WE STARTED WORKING ON THE BUILDING WAY BEFORE THAT . THEY, THEY JUST GAVE YOU A LITTLE PART OF THE BUILDING.
THEY SHOULD SHOW YOU ALL OF THE GRASS OF THE BUILDING. THE FRONT OF THE CHURCH. IT IS WELL-MAINTAINED, BUT WITH TIME , WE NEED TO DO SOME MORE PAINTING . WE UNDERSTAND THAT , AND I EXPLAINED THAT TO THEM, BUT THEY , THEY WANT TO GO
FURTHER, SO, THINK YOU . >> SO, I , I FIND THAT YOU , THE VIOLATION EXISTS TO GIVE 30 DAYS TO GET THE PERMIT . UNLESS YOU NEED THE EXTENSION, YOU WILL COME AND ASK FOR IT BEFORE
THE 30 DAYS ARE DONE. >> OKAY.
>> WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IS PRESSURE WASHING AND PAINTING THE DISCOLORED AREAS, PAINTING THE AREAS OF THE BUILDING WHERE THE PAINT IS PEELING, OBTAINING A PERMIT TO COMPLY, WHICH WE HAVE DISCUSSED , WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS TO REPAIR OR REPLACE ROTTING TRIM, SOFFIT, OVERHANG, AND WINDOW FRAMES AROUND THE BUILDING. FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED ONCE THOSE DEADLINES, IF THOSE DEADLINES ARE NOT MET. THERE ALSO IS A 30 DAY RIGHT TO APPEAL IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THAT ORDER.
>> OKAY. OKAY. THAT MEANS, TOGETHER BY DECEMBER WE HAVE TO GET THAT DONE, RIGHT? TO BE MORE SPECIFIC?
>> AGAIN , IT ALL DEPENDS. IF YOU COMPLY WITH THE PERMIT CONDITIONS, IT IS GOING TO BE BASED ON HOW FAST YOU GET THE
WORK DONE? >> THAT'S FINE. WE, WE CAN HAVE IT FASTER THAN THAT, BUT I WANT TO KNOW THE FRAME, THE LIMIT FRAME FOR THE WHOLE THING, THE PERMIT AND WHAT WILL
BE DONE . >> IT, IT IS GOING TO BE BASED
[00:20:02]
ON THE WORK THAT YOU DO UNDER THAT PERMIT. THAT IS GOING TO DETERMINE, BECAUSE YOUR PERMIT CAN BE GOOD FOR UP TO SIX MONTHS, AND SIX MONTHS FROM NOW WOULD BE MARCH.>> OKAY. >> SO THE FASTER YOU GET THE WORK DONE, THE FASTER WE CLOSE EVERYTHING OUT.
>> OKAY. OKAY. SO WHEN WE FINISHED WITH THE WORK, I WANT TO MAKE, I WANT TO BE CLEAR, ONCE WE FINISH WITH THE WORK, THAT IS WHEN WE ARE GOING TO START PAINTING . SO THE WORK HAS TO BE DONE , AND YOU WILL GIVE ME ANOTHER 30 DAYS TO
>> THANK YOU. >> AND STAY IN COMMUNICATION WITH OFFICER HEATHER DEBEVEC . SHE CAN HELP IF YOU NEED IT.
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. >> HAVE A GOOD DAY.
[C. 24- 786CE 213 Osceola Avenue Lela E Piersall (EST) Heather Debevec]
>> THANK YOU. >> ARE NEXT CASE IS 60 IN VIOLATION CASES , 24-786, 213 OSCEOLA AVENUE , LELA E.
PIERSALL ESTATE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ROALD PEREZ. I'M THE ATTORNEY AND PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE STATE OF MS. LELA E. PIERSALL. I HAVE BEEN RECEIVING THESE NOTICES . UNFORTUNATELY THERE ARE NO ASSETS IN THE ESTATE. THE HOME ITSELF , WE HAD A REALTOR GO OUT THERE TO INSPECT THE PROPERTY TO SEE IF WE COULD SELL IT AND GET WHATEVER THINGS WERE NECESSARY TO GET IT UP TO STANDARDS.
HOWEVER, THE HOME ITSELF FROM MY UNDERSTANDING IN THE PICTURES I HAVE SEEN IS BASICALLY TO THE , TO THE STUDS. SO THERE IS NO WAY TO POSSIBLY SELL THE PROPERTY, PAY OFF THE MORTGAGE, AND ALSO MAKE ANY AND ALL CORRECTIONS IN THE MEANTIME. THAT IS WHY WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO ADDRESS ANY OF THESE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO US .
CURRENTLY I AM WORKING ON A MOTION TO DISMISS MYSELF FROM THE CASE, AS THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO AT THIS MOMENT.
>> IS A HOME OCCUPIED? >> IT IS NOT.
>> SO , IT IS A VACANT HOME? >> YES. MS. PIERSALL WHEN SHE PASSED AWAY THERE WAS NOBODY LIVING THERE. I DON'T BELIEVE ANYBODY SHOULD BE LIVING THERE BASED ON WHAT I HAVE SEEN.
THERE IS NO DRYWALL. THERE IS NO AIR CONDITIONING FROM WHAT I CAN SEE. BASICALLY FROM THE INTERIOR OF THE PROPERTY, IT IS TILE, A WOOD FRAME, AND THAT IS IT.
>> ALL RIGHT. AND I, I DID, I DID LOOK AT THE ESTATE CASE AND I SAW THAT SOMEBODY FILED A WILL IN THAT CASE? TELL ME ABOUT THAT. I'M SORRY, TELL THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE ABOUT
THAT. >> SO WHEN I WAS HIRED TO DO THIS CASE, I WAS HIRED FROM SOME LONG-LOST RELATIVES, THE CLOSEST RELATIVES THAT WE COULD FIND. WE PETITIONED THE COURT ON THEIR BEHALF. ONCE WE GOT APPOINTED, ONCE I GOT APPOINTED, I SENT ONE OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS DOWN TO THE HOME TO INSPECT IT. ONCE I GOT TO THE PROPERTY, THEY WERE INFORMED BY A NEIGHBOR THAT SOMEONE ELSE WAS THE OWNER . AT THAT POINT, WE TRIED TO GET IN CONTACT WITH THAT PERSON. THAT PERSON'S NAME I BELIEVE IS PAUL ESTES. HE FILED A WILL WITH THE COURT. AT THAT POINT , IT WAS RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING OF PROBATE ADMINISTRATION, SO I ASSUMED HE WAS GOING TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY AND TAKE OVER THE CASE AND GO FROM THERE. HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY FUNDS, EITHER , SO WE, THE CASE WAS JUST LEFT IN LIMBO . I TRIED TO FILE A PETITION FOR THE TERRITORY RELIEF, AND THE JUDGE WOULDN'T HEAR IT. SO AT THIS POINT AFTER TRYING TO SELL THE PROPERTY AND FINDING OUT THAT THE MORTGAGE IS ALMOST $100,000 , AND AT MOST WHAT WE CAN GET FOR THE PROPERTY IS MAYBE $50,000, MAYBE , I SAID THE ESTATE IS INSOLVENT, SO JUST GOING TO, I FILED A MOTION TO DISMISS AND TO PUT AN END TO
>> I AM ADVISED BY THE DEPARTMENT THAT THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD ADVISE, THAT THEY WOULD PREFER TO CHANGE THE NATURE OF THIS CASE TO A BOARD UP ANTILOCK CLEARING CASE. AND I AM GOING TO ALLOW PEGGY TO EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHAT THAT
MEANS. >> WHAT IS PRESENTED , OR HAS BEEN PRESENTED BUT IS TO BE PRESENTED TO THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE'S ISSUES, NUMBER ONE, WITH THE LANDSCAPING BECAUSE OF THE GRASS BEING TALL, AND PROTECTOR TREATMENT,
[00:25:02]
WHICH IS A PROPERTY MAINTENANCE TYPE ISSUE. WITH WHAT YOU JUST ADVISED US OF , A PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ISSUE JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THE MOST LOGICAL PATH FORWARD . WE DO HAVE ORDINANCES ON THE BOOKS THAT REQUIRE VACANT STRUCTURES TO BE PROPERLY SECURED SO THAT VANDALS DON'T GET IN IT AND WE JUST HAD AN EMERGENCY SITUATION LAST WEEK , WHERE VANDALS HAD GOTTEN IN AND UNFORTUNATELY OVERDOSED AND THERE WAS A PROBLEM. SO WHAT STAFF WOULD RECOMMENDED CHANGING THIS TO A BOARD UP REQUEST RATHER THAN A PROPERTY MAINTENANCE REQUEST, SO THAT THE PROPERTY IS PROPERLY SECURED AND NOBODY CAN GET IN AND CAUSE -- IT WILL BE A LIFE HEALTH SAFETY FOR THE COMMUNITY. WE DON'T WANT IT TO BECOME ATTRACTIVE TO ANYBODY BYIT BEING VACANT SITTING THERE. >> FOR MY UNDERSTANDING , THE PERSON WHO SUBMITTED THE WILL, MR. ESTES I BELIEVE IS HIS LAST NAME, I BELIEVE HE HAS THE KEY TO THE PROPERTY . FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, NO ONE HAS ACTUALLY GONE INSIDE WHEN MY, WHEN THE RELATIVES TRIED TO GAIN ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY OF THE NEIGHBORS CALLED THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THEY WENT OUT THERE, AND THAT IS WHY THEY NEVER ENTER THE PROPERTY. THE ONLY REASON WE WERE ABLE TO ACCESS THE PROPERTY IS BECAUSE WE TALKED TO MR. ESTES TO TRY TO SEE IF THERE WAS A WAY TO BENEFIT ALL PARTIES AND SELL THE PROPERTY, AND THAT IS WHY I HAVE PICTURES OF THE ACTUAL INTERIOR. SO, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, I BELIEVE IT IS SECURE , BUT IS THERE MORE THAN JUST A LOCK AND KEY THAT HAS TO BE DONE?
>> YES, SIR . THE ORDINANCE DOES REQUIRES ALL THE DOORS AND WINDOWS TO BE PROPERLY SECURED WITH EITHER SHUTTERS, PLYWOOD, OR YOU CAN EVEN USE THE CLEAR POLYCARBONATE TYPE MATERIALS IF YOU WANT TO ALLOW SUNLIGHT TO STILL BE INSIDE , BUT THE ORDINANCE DOES SAY SHUTTERS , COMMERCIAL GRADE PLYWOOD, AND/OUR POLYCARBONATE TO SECURE ALL THE WINDOWS AND DOORS.
OBVIOUSLY, IF A DOOR IS PROPERLY LOCKS, THAT COULD BE SECURED , BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE SHUTTERS THAT CAN BE PUT ON THOSE WINDOWS, OR IF PLYWOOD WOULD JUST BE THE MOST LOGICAL. AGAIN , TRYING TO THINK LOGICALLY WITH THE SITUATION WE ARE FACED WITH, PLYWOOD, PAINTED WHITE ON THE
>> WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO CONTINUE THIS CASE, OR FIND VIOLATION ? WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO CONTINUE THIS CASE SO THE PARTIES CAN TALK ABOUT AND PERHAPS GET THE CONSENT OF WHOEVER ACTUALLY IS THE TRUE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY
NOW? >> IF I MAY, TECHNICALLY THE ESTATE IS THE LEGAL OWNER OF THE PROPERTY UNTIL THE MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE IS CONCLUDED . THEY STARTED THAT FORECLOSURE CASE I BELIEVE IN JANUARY . I WAS JUST SERVED THIS WEEK. SO IT APPEARS SOMEONE WAS INTO DOING THINGS ON TIME ON SERVICE. I WAS SERVED. I ASSUME THEY ARE GOING TO START THE PROCESS TO CLOSE DOWN THAT CASE, AND THERE IS NO REASON FOR ME TO FIGHT THAT, ESPECIALLY SINCE THERE IS NO WAY TO BE ABLE TO PAY OFF AND THERE BE ANY BENEFIT TO ANY OF THE BENEFICIARIES. SO , I BELIEVE THE APPROPRIATE PARTY WOULD BE THE BANK OR WHOEVER THE LONER IS TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE ISSUES.
>> MR., MR. ESTES HAS THE KEY , AND MR. ESTES HAS FILED A WILL THAT SAYS HE GETS THE HOUSE , AND THERE IS A CONTINGENT BENEFICIARY IF MR. ESTES DOESN'T GET THE HOUSE OR DECLINES THE GIFT OR DIES BEFORE THE GIFT IS MADE . SO I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE STATE LAW. THAT IS WHY AS A WILL THE REAL OWNER PLEASE COME TO COURT, AND I, BUT IT , IF IT IS CITED FOR NEW SINCE, WHICH IS THE BOARD UP AND THE LOCK CLEARING, THE CITY AND YOU AGREE TO IT. THE CITY DOES THE BOARD UP. THE CITY DOES THE LOCK CLEARING. THE PROPERTY IS CHARGED, AND IT BECOMES CHARGED FOR THE EXPENSE, AND IT WILL BECOME A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY . CORRECT?
>> CORRECTS. >> YOU ARE CURRENTLY THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE, SEE YOU HAVE AUTHORITY TO ALLOW THAT , BUT I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE CONTINUE THIS CASE FOR 30 DAYS BECAUSE SOMEBODY ELSE HAS THE KEY TO THAT HOUSE , AND LET'S GET THAT FIGURED OUT AND MAKE SURE HE HAS ALL HIS STUFF OUT AND ALL THAT HAVE.
>> YES. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION , AS FAR AS PROBATE IS CONCERNED, ALTHOUGH HE FILED THE WHALE, HE NEVER TOOK THE PROPER PROCEDURE TO HAVE IT DECLARED THE ACTUAL WELL , SO I AM STILL IN CHARGE AND HE IS THERE . THAT IS WHY IT, WE ARE IN LIMBO. HE HAS A KEY , TECHNICALLY IN CHARGE, AND WE
[00:30:02]
WEREN'T GOING TO FIGHT THE WILL , BUT HE HAS NOT TAKEN ANY STEPS. SO, YOU KNOW , IF WE CAN CONTINUE THIS, MAYBE WE CAN HAVE SOME TYPE OF RESOLUTION . AT THIS POINT, I WOULD BELIEVE THAT THE MORTGAGE COMPANY IS GOING TO STEP IN AND DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO AND POSSIBLY, IF THEY GET THEIR ORDER OF DEFAULT OR WHATEVER HAS TO OCCUR THEN THEY WOULD BE THE PEOPLE IN CHARGE, BUT I AM NOT OPPOSED TO THE SUGGESTION OF, WHAT IS THE PROCESS CALLED AGAIN?>> IT IS OUR NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM.
>> I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT, NUMBER ONE TO SECURE THE PROPERTY AND AS YOU SAID TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT A FURTHER NUISANCE. I THINK IT WOULD BE THE RIGHT THING TO DO UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES. >> YOU WANT TO CONTINUE IT AND
>> I, I WOULD, WHEN IS OUR NEXT HEARING? THE 16TH?
>> WE CAN DO NOVEMBER 6, BUT ASKED TO BE THE 16TH.
>> 30 DAYS WOULD BE NOVEMBER 6. >> TWO WEEKS IS OCTOBER 16TH.
>> YES, AT 9:00 A.M. >> I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE IT FOR THE TWO WEEKS TO ALLOW US TO ADDRESS ANY, LIKE, PROVIDE THE NOTICES TO WHOMEVER WE NEED TO DO. AND WE HAVE AN EMAIL ADDRESS FOR MR. ESTES, CORRECT? WE DON'T?
>> NOT FOR MR. ESTES. >> AND WE CAN ALSO PROVIDE THE NOTICE TO THE, THE MORTGAGE ATTORNEY, THE FORECLOSURE
ATTORNEY. >> THE FORECLOSURE COULD TAKE A YEAR. I'VE GOT CASES THAT ARE IN DEFAULT AND A GOOD TAKE FOREVER.
>> WE CAN SEND NOTICE -- >> WE WILL CONTINUE UNTIL THE
NEXT HEARING DATE. >> I'M SORRY.
>> GO AHEAD. >> ONE QUESTION. I'VE BEEN RECEIVING SOME EMAILS BUT I'M NOT SURE WHO WAS COMING FROM.
OKAY. SO I DO HAVE THE EMAILS OF THESE PEOPLE, SO I WILL FORWARD THOSE TO YOU SO THAT YOU CAN NOTIFY THEM ALL.
>> THANK YOU. >> SO , IT WILL BE CONTINUED
UNTIL NOVEMBER 6? >> OCTOBER. OCTOBER 16.
>> OCTOBER 16, CORRECT? >> AT 9:00 A.M.
>> AND MR. PEREZ, ARE YOU LOCAL IN FORT PIERCE OR DID YOU
TRAVEL? >> I DID TRAVEL. IN SEBASTIAN.
>> SINCE HE IS ACTUALLY THE PARTY, THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, HE CAN APPEAR BY TELEPHONE UNDER OUR RULES.
>> THANK YOU. I WANTED TO BE IN PERSON JUST IN CASE, BUT IF POSSIBLE, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING THAT.
>> CAT WILL SEND YOU THE FORM IF THAT IS WHAT YOU CHOOSE TO
>> THANK YOU. >> OUR NEXT CASE IS 60 IN
[D. 24-676 CE 610 N 6th Street HAMID SLIMANE Heather Debevec]
VIOLATION CASES, CASE NUMBER 24-676 , 610 NORTH 6TH STREET ,HAMID SLIMANE . >> GOOD AFTERNOON.
>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THIS IS CASE NUMBER 24-676, 610 NORTH 6TH STREET, OWNED BY MR. HAMID SLIMANE. CASE WAS INITIATED ON MARCH 22 OF THIS YEAR FOR SECTION 2419, 2420, 2421, SOME SESSIONS ONE AND FIVE, NUISANCES AND OUTSIDE STORAGE.
SIX AND 2419, 2421, NEW CITIZENS AND OBJECTS OUTSIDE STORAGE AND FURNITURE. , I PMC 304.21 HANDRAILS AND GUARDS, IPM -- SIDEWALKS AND DRIVEWAYS, 3.297, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. AS I , I DO HAVE PHOTOS IN WHICH TO SUBMIT, AND I BELIEVE THAT THE ONLY ORDINANCE THAT WAS LEFT WAS THE I PMC 302.3 SIDEWALKS AND DRIVEWAYS. THE OTHERS WE WERE REQUESTING REVIEW AND DETERMINATION ON.
>> SIR, I WOULD LIKE TO PLACE THE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE, AND THEN WE CAN SHOW THEM ON THE OVERHEAD.
>> THAT'S FINE. THAT'S FINE. >> ALL RIGHT. THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE DATED FEBRUARY 15.
>> AUGUST 1 . SEPTEMBER 23. AND SEPTEMBER 30. THE CITY MOVES,
[00:35:08]
I'M SORRY, BEFORE I MOVE ANYTHING, OFFICER DEBEVEC, DO THE DATE AND TIME STAMPS ON THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS THAT YOU HAVE TESTIFIED TO THAT YOUOBSERVED ON THOSE DATES? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. THE PHOTOGRAPHS WILL BE ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES OF COMPOSITE EXHIBIT
ONE. >> IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR TESTIMONY THE ONLY REMAINING CODE VIOLATION IS SIDEWALKS AND
DRIVEWAYS CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM . EVERYTHING ELSE WE ARE REQUESTING REVIEW AND DETERMINATION.
>> YOU ARE REQUESTING THAT MR. SLIMANE , THAT MR. SLIMANE BE GIVEN 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT AND COMPLY WITH PERMIT CONDITIONS TO REPAIR THE PARKING LOT THAT HAS POTHOLES AND DETERIORATION . THAT IS THE CURRENT REQUEST?
>> WE DON'T NEED A PERMIT FOR PATCHING UP WHATEVER IT IS.
>> JUST ONE SECOND. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THE TESTIMONY. AS TO THE OTHER VIOLATIONS , YOU ARE ASKING THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE TO REVIEW THEM, FIND THAT THE VIOLATION DID EXIST BUT THAT THEY WERE CURED BEFORE THE HEARING.
>> CORRECT. >> ANYTHING FURTHER?
>> NOT AT THIS TIME. >> MR. SLIMANE YOU MAY ADDRESS
THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. >> OKAY. THAT'S THE ONE WE HAVE, BECAUSE THE LAST TIME WHEN I WAS SUPPOSED TO BE CALM, OR HEATHER CALLED ME I SHOULD SAY, I HAD OTHER STUFF TO DO , SO THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO WAIT FOR EVERYTHING TO BE DONE, BECAUSE I TALKED TO HER, AND SHE CALLED ME OR I CALLED HER, SHE'D SAY THIS MEETING, WHATEVER WAS THIS LAST MEETING WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HELD, I HAD OTHER STUFF. I HAVE SO MUCH OTHER THINGS TO DO. SHE KNOWS WHAT I'M DOING THERE, WHAT I'M BUILDING UP, ACTUALLY. BUT WHEN WE ARE SEEING THAT OVER HERE, JUST THIS PATCH, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND PATCH THEM, YES. 30 DAYS, I'M GOING TO ASK FOR 60 DAYS, NOT 30 DAYS, BUT I WOULD TRY TO SEE IF I CAN GET THEM BEFORE THEN.
I'M NOT GOING TO DO THE WHOLE PARKING LOT. THAT IS WHAT IT WAS FROM BEFORE, SO I'M JUST GOING TO PATCH WHATEVER -- INAUDIBLE ] -- THE PARKING LOT. IN THIS PARTICULAR PLACE. THIS IS ACTUALLY HIM OF THIS IS TWO BUILDINGS. IT WAS TWO PARCELS FROM BEFORE AND WE MADE IT ALL COMBINED INTO ONE. AND THEY JUST COMBINED THEM LATELY TOGETHER, YOU KNOW. YOU KNOW , 610 AVENUE E AND THEN THE NEXT BUILDING WAS 610 , AND WE HAVE CONFUSION EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE WITH THE POLICE AND ALL OF THAT, SO WE JUST DID, COMBINED TWO BUILDINGS IN ONE , AND EVEN THE AVENUE E , AND YOU KNOW, BUT -- IS WHY WE PUT IT UNDER 610 NORTH 6TH STREET .
>> OKAY, CAN I CLARIFY , WHAT KIND OF KNOW WHAT KIND OF BUILDING IS ON THIS STRUCTURE?
>> THIS IS JUST A MOTEL TYPE. >> IT IS A MOTEL?
>> YES. >> IS A MOTEL OCCUPIED? IS IT
RUNNING AS A BUSINESS? >> IT IS OCCUPIED YES . PEOPLE
STAY FOR A LONG TIME, YES. >> SO YOUR CUSTOMERS ARE DRIVING IN AND THROUGH THIS DRIVEWAY ACROSS THESE SERVICES?
>> YES. >> THE CITY ASKED THAT THE RECOMMENDATION REMAIN THE SAME, THAT HE BE GIVEN 30 DAYS TO
REPAIR THOSE POTHOLES. >> REPAIR THEM OR TO GET --
INAUDIBLE ] >> WELL, DOES HE NEED A PERMIT TO REPAIR THE AREAS OF THE PARKING LOT THAT HAVE POTHOLES
AND DETERIORATION? >> THAT WOULD BE A CALL FOR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT . WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND IS THAT HE CHECK WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO SEE YOUR KEY HAS MULTIPLE PERMITS ON THE PROPERTY OF EDDIE. THERE'S A LOT OF RENOVATIONS GOING ON. I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE HIM TO CONTACT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO CONFIRM HE DOESN'T NEED TO DO ANYMORE REPAIRS THEN FILLING THAT POTHOLE . I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THEM. SOMETIMES THEY SAY NO THE WHOLE THING NEEDS TO BE REPAVED AND SOMETIMES THEY SAY OKAY YOU CAN REFILL THESE POTHOLES. IT IS NOT A BIG ENOUGH AREA TO REQUIRE THE FULL. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE. I WOULD SAY THAT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONTACT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO DETERMINE IF A PERMIT IS NECESSARY, AND EITHER OBTAIN A
[00:40:02]
PERMIT OR MAKE THE REPAIRS IF NO PERMIT IS NECESSARY WITHIN30 DAYS. ABOUT MAKE SENSE? >> DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO YOU?
>> I DO KNOW THAT FOR FACT WHEN YOU DO SOME PATCHING , ANYTHING THAT COSTS AN AMOUNT OF MONEY CAN DO IT WITHOUT A PERMIT, BUT IF THAT IS WHAT IT IS , I CAN GET A PERMIT, BUT I KNOW THIS WAS FOR A FACT, AND VERY LITTLE, AND IS NOT MUCH, MAYBE HALF A TON OF ASPHALT , SPREAD IT AND PACK IT AND LEAVE IT, YOU KNOW, AND YOU KNOW, IT IS NO BIG DEAL. I WAS PLANNING TO DO IT, BUT LATELY WE'VE BEEN HAVING SO MUCH RAIN, AND THAT ASPHALT JUST IS ONLY GOOD FOR 24 HOURS IF YOU'VE GOT IT, AND I DID IT BEFORE , AND THE NEXT DAY IT IS RAIN, RAIN, RAIN, AND I LOST THE WHOLE PILE. SO I'M GOING TO TRY TO DO IT SOMETIME.
>> IF HE HAS 30 DAYS, IF THE SITUATION IS SUCH THAT HE IS CLOSE TO THE 30 DAYS AND HE NEEDS A LITTLE MORE TIME, HE
CAN ASK FOR THAT, CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM. YOU CAN ASK FOR AN EXTENSION BEFORE THE 30 DAYS IS UP IF YOU NEED IT.
>> WE AREN'T GOING TO HAVE ANY MORE RAIN.
>> NO. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, I FIND THAT THE, THE ONLY , THE ONLY EXISTING VIOLATION STILL IS IPMC 32.3, SIDEWALKS AND DRIVEWAYS, AND THAT THE RESPONDENT HAS 30 DAYS TO DO THAT, OR ASK FOR AN EXTENSION.
>> WE ARE TALKING ABOUT JUST THIS ONE HERE, THE WHEN I HAD
SEEN THE PICTURE, RIGHT? >> YES, CORRECT. THE OTHER ITEMS WERE, I FIND THAT THERE WAS A VIOLATION, BUT THAT THE VIOLATION WAS CURED PRIOR TO TODAY'S HEARING. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT IS THAT IF YOU VIOLATE AGAIN , THEN THE PROPERTY, THE , PER STATE STATUTE, ADDITIONAL TIME TO CORRECT THE VIOLATION IS NOT REQUIRED.
>> REPEAT THAT AGAIN, BECAUSE I --
>> I FIND THAT THE , THE VIOLATIONS EXISTED ON THE OTHER ITEMS, 2419, 304.2, 304.12, 302.7 , BUT THAT THEY HAD BEEN CORRECTED PRIOR TO THE HEARING.
>> AT THAT SAME ADDRESS? OKAY.
>> AND THAT THE , IF, IF THERE IS A FURTHER VIOLATION --
>> MA'AM, WHEN YOU SAY -- I AM RENTING THIS SPACE. I HAVE 10 TENANTS IN THAT PARTICULAR SPACE INCLUDING THE OTHER SIDE.
IF SOMETHING HAPPENS , IT DOES NOT MEAN I AM DOING IT ON PURPOSE, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THIS IS A VIOLATION, YOU KNOW, I GUESS -- MAINTAIN, DO MAINTENANCE, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO TELL YOU , IF SOMETHING HAS HAPPENED, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IF IT HAS BEEN CORRECTED, IT HAS BEEN CORRECTED. IF IT HAPPENS AGAIN WE WILL DO IT. YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES PEOPLE HAVE A CHAIR INSIDE, OUTSIDE, SITTING OUTSIDE, THEY FORGOT IT, AND CODE ENFORCEMENT IS COMING IN AND LOOKING AT IT AND WRITING ME UP. I'M NOT GOING TO BE A BABYSITTER FOR THESE TENANT. IF SOMETHING IS HAPPENED, WE TRIED TO CORRECT IT, BUT -- INAUDIBLE ] -- IS SOMETHING TO BE HAPPENED WE ARE GOING TO
CHARGE YOU OR FIND YOU. >> I MEAN, AS FAR, AS FAR AS THE CHAIRS BEING OUTSIDE, IT IS NOT THAT IT IS A CHAIR , IT IS THAT IT IS A PIECE OF INDOOR FURNITURE THAT HAS BEEN MOVED OUTSIDE. THE WAY SOME OTHER LANDLORDS HAVE RESOLVED THIS IS BY ACTUALLY PROVIDING APPROPRIATE PATIO FURNITURE FOR
>> BUT YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO. >> SO MANY TIMES, EVEN I WORK WITH HER TO THE TENANTS AND TELL THEM RIGHT IN FRONT OF HER, I AM IN TROUBLE -- PEOPLE DON'T CARE. I CAN'T GET THEM EVICTED SOMETIMES.
>> YOUR HONOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION. MR. SLIMANE IS A QUESTION IS IS POTHOLE IN THE PICTURES AT THE ONLY WHEN I NEED TO FIX? NO, THERE ARE A FEW ON THAT PROPERTY THAT YOU NEED TO BE ADDRESSED, SO WE DO NEED TO MAKE IT AS TO ALL OF THE -- I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS AN UNDERSTANDING THAT IS NOT JUST THE ONE IN THE PICTURE.
>> I UNDERSTOOD IT TO MEAN THAT WHOLE AREA, WITH NOT JUST ONE
>> WHATEVER ONES ARE NEEDED WILL BE ADDRESSED.
>> SAYING THAT THERE IS MORE THAN ONE. YEAH.
[00:45:06]
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT --
>> BECAUSE I WAS WAITING FOR HER TO TELL ME WHAT IT IS, BUT I DO HAVE A FEW THINGS IN MIND TO BE CORRECTED, YES.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT HE HAS CORRECTED THE OTHER VIOLATIONS , BUT THAT THEY DID EXIST.
>> THE OTHER VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. THE ONLY THING LEFT IS THE POTHOLES IN THE DETERIORATION OF THE PARKING LOT AREA , DRIVEWAY AREAS. EVERYTHING ELSE, THAT IS WHY WE WERE REQUESTING THE REVIEW AND THE DETERMINATION FOR MR. SLIMANE TO KEEP A CLOSE EYE ON IT AND KEEP EDUCATING HIS TENANTS TO TRY TO PREVENT FURTHER ISSUES.
>> I THINK THAT IS UNDERSTOOD, RIGHT?
>> I WILL COME BACK OVER THERE AND WE WILL GO OVER AGAIN ONE MORE TIME AND THEN WE WILL GET THAT READY.
>> IT IS GOOD EXCEPT FOR THE POTHOLES YOUR HONOR.
>> WHAT WAS THAT? >> IT IS GOOD EXCEPT FOR THE
POTHOLES, YOUR HONOR. >> AND YOU DO HAVE 30 DAYS TO
[E. 24-465 CE 702 N 6th Street HAMID SLIMANE Heather Debevec]
APPEAL THIS IF YOU DECIDE YOU WANT TO DO THAT. OKAY?>> AND WHAT IS THE OTHER, THE OTHER VIOLATIONS THAT YOU SAY, MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS. THE ONLY THING, THIS ONE RIGHT HERE.
WHAT IS THE NEXT ONE? >> ALL RIGHT. WE ARE GOING TO JUMP OVER TO THE NEXT ONE WHICH IS 702 NORTH 6TH STREET , 6E IN VIOLATION CASES. THE CASE NUMBER IS 24-465 , HAMID
SLIMANE. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THIS IS CASE NUMBER 24-465 IPMC, OWNED BY MR. HAMID SLIMANE PICKETT WAS INITIATED ON FEBRUARY 23 OF THIS YEAR FOR SECTION 24-19, 24-20, 24-21, ITEMS 1 TO 5, NEW SINCE AS AN OBJECT, OUTSIDE STORAGE, IPMC 304.2, PROTECTIVE TREATMENT, IPMC 304.1 EXTERIOR STRUCTURE , IPMC 304.13, WINDOW, SKYLIGHT, AND DOOR FRAMES, SECTION 125-187, ALLOWED USES. THE ONLY ONE THAT THIS CONTINUES IS SECTION 125-187 ALLOWED USES WHICH IS THE STORAGE CONTAINER HERE CALL OTHERS WE ARE REQUESTING REVIEW AND DETERMINATION AS THEY HAVE BEEN TAKEN CARE OF.
>> THIS IS -- >> SIR, SIR, WE NEED TO MOVE THEM INTO EVIDENCE BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT THEM. TAKE A LOOK AT THEM. I ASKED THEM TO SHOW THEM TO YOU . AND AFTER YOU HAVE LOOKED AT THEM, WE WILL MOVE THEM INTO EVIDENCE, AND YOU CAN ADDRESS THEM. WE CAN GO THROUGH THEM ONE AT A TIME IF YOU LIKE.
>> THOSE INTO EVIDENCE BEFORE SHE CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION , SO THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CAN LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE AS WELL. THANK
>> THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE DATED FEBRUARY 15 , AUGUST 1 , SEPTEMBER 23 , AND THERE IS ONE PHOTOGRAPH FROM SEPTEMBER 30TH.
DO THESE , DO THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS THAT YOU OBSERVED ON THOSE DATES?
>> CORRECT, MA'AM. >> ALL RIGHT, THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT PHOTO
ONE. >> THE PHOTOS WILL BE ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
>> AND WAS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, EVERYTHING HAD COMPLIED EXCEPT FOR THERE WAS STILL A STORAGE SHIPPING CONTAINER ON THE PROPERTY WITHOUT A PROPER
>> DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ? YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO CROSS-EXAMINE. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION AS TO WHAT
IS LEFT TO BE DONE? >> YES. THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL , I APPLIED TO COMBINE THE TWO LOTS TOGETHER, AND I DID , THREE MONTHS LATER I WENT BACK TO , I MEAN THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, I MEAN THE COUNTY, AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN DONE. I BROUGHT THE COMMENTS FROM THE COUNTY TO THE CITY.
[00:50:05]
SHE WAS WITH ME WHEN I TALKED TO ONE OF THE STAFF, AND , THIS, THIS ACTUALLY , I NEEDED FOR MY NEXT DOOR BUILDING FOR ME TO CREATE MORE PARKING SPACE, WHICH THIS PARKING SPACE CAN BE REPAIRED AND FIXED FOR FUTURE USE. SO THIS CONTAINER HAS BEEN HERE FOR 15 YEARS, FOR OVER 15 YEARS, AND IS IN THE, IN THE , IN THE PROPERTY THAT HAS CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW.THAT IS THE BUILDING WHERE WE HAVE PERMIT IN SPIRIT TO BE HONEST WITH YOU I WAS GOING TO GET RID OF IT, BECAUSE YOU KNOW, IT JUST IS HIGH ENOUGH THE PART OF THE BUILDING THAT I WANT TO SHOW, BUT THIS BUILDING HERE, THE WHEN SHE BROUGHT UP THE THINGS, I HAVE APPLIED , I'M SAYING IT AGAIN, APPLIED TO COMBINE TWO PLOTS TOGETHER, WHICH THAT IS WHAT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SUGGESTS, BECAUSE WE DID SOME BUILDING -- APPLICATIONS, AND THEN AGAIN , THREE MONTHS LATER I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING. THEN I GO , THE MEMO, I NOTE FROM THE COUNTY TO , TO THE , I GUESS, WHAT IS THAT LADY'S NAME, THE ONE THAT MET WITH US LAST TIME? IT WAS RIGHT HERE WITH ME WHEN SHE COME HERE. SO I GAVE IT TO HER. I GAVE IT TO HER, BECAUSE WE HAVE A LITTLE PROBLEM ONE TIMES FOR THIS, AND HE ACTS LIKE HE CAN DO THINGS ON HIS OWN WHICH IS WRONG. HE WAITED UNTIL THE LAST DAY OF THE DEADLINE, WHICH WAS AUGUST 15, AND HE DENIED US . CAN PROCESS. THEN WHEN I WENT BACK OVER THERE, THEY TOLD ME IT HAS BEEN DENIED. WHEN I COME BACK, RIGHT ON THE STAIRS, AND THE CITY RIGHT ON THE ENTRANCE, AND HE'S SAYING A CONDITION, I SAID WHAT IS A CONDITION OF USE FOR THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN CONDEMNED. I'M GOING TO TEAR IT DOWN. AND , AND THAT IS WHY, AND THEN I TALKED TO HELEN AND SHE SAID OH, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN COMBINED YET. THEY HAVEN'T BEEN COMBINED YET. BEING HONEST WITH YOU, THESE TWO LOTS HERE ARE GOING TO BE RIGHT, RIGHT, WITH THE PLACE THAT I AM BUILDING RIGHT NOW . I DON'T THINK I CAN MOVE THAT CONTAINER, AND I DON'T THINK I SHOULD MAKE THIS RIGHT AWAY, BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT, YOU KNOW , I, I HAVE A PERMIT FOR NEXT DOOR. SO WHY IT HAS NOT BEEN COMBINED? I DON'T KNOW . YOU HAVE TO ASK MR. CALVIN. I DON'T KNOW HIM. HE IS FROM ENGLAND SO HE THINKS HE CAN DO ANYTHING HE WANTS TO -- TO HIM BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE NOW, AND SAY EMILY WAIT FOR THE END OF THE YEAR AND THEN APPLY , WITHOUT ANYTHING ELSE. HE DOES NOT KNOW WHAT HE'S DOING .
>> YOUR HONOR, IF YOU FORGIVE ME, I THINK WHAT MR. SLIMANE IS TRYING TO SAY , THE PROPERTY 614 AND THIS PROPERTY , 702 , HE IS TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO GET THE TWO PARCELS COMBINED, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH PLANNING AND ZONING. THAT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT OF THIS CASE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY. THE CONTAINER, WHETHER IT IS ON, WHICHEVER PROPERTY , WOULD STILL NEED A PERMIT , AND THAT IS WHAT THIS CASE IS ABOUT, IS SPECIFICALLY THAT CONTAINER WITH A PERMIT PICK AND UNDERSTAND HIS FRUSTRATION, BUT THAT IS NOT WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT.
>> OKAY . IT, IT NEEDS TO BE MOVED.
>> IT WOULD EITHER NEED A PERMIT OR NEED TO BE REMOVED ,
YES. >> EXCUSE ME, UNDER THE CONSTRUCTION SITE FOR THAT THE BUILDING IS A CONSTRUCTION SITE, OUT OF LINE OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, I HAVE PERMITS FOR THAT. I CAN MOVE IT WHEN, WHEN I AM DONE WITH MY
WORK. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THERE IS A TEMPORARY PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION TRAILERS. SO IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT CONSTRUCTION SITE YOU ARE ON , IF YOU HAVE A CONSTRUCTION TRAILER FOR STORING MATERIALS, THERE IS A TEMPORARY PERMIT THAT CAN BE OBTAINED.
AM I CORRECT? >> HE DOES NOT. WHETHER PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY, HE HAS TO HAVE A PERMIT. EVEN IF IT IS A CONSTRUCTION TRAILER. LIKE YOU SAID THAT HE IS A PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION, BUT WHETHER HE IS USING IT TO STORE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS OR ANYTHING --
>> BUT WE ARE USING IT FOR STORAGE.
>> LET HER FINISH, PLEASE PICK
>> REGARDLESS OF THE USE IT REQUIRES A PERMIT. IF IT IS THERE BECAUSE HE IS STORING STUFF DURING HIS CONSTRUCTION, HE CAN GET A TEMPORARY PERMIT.
[00:55:01]
>> OKAY. >> AND AS A REMINDER, THAT PERMIT WOULD HAVE TO BE FOR THE PROPERTY IN WHICH THAT CONTAINER IS GOING TO BE ON. SO WHETHER IT IS ON 614 OR 702, THAT IS WHERE HE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE IT FOR.
>> RIGHT NOW IT IS ON -- >> IT IS ON THE 702 PROPERTY.
THE CONSTRUCTION IS ON 614. >> OKAY ?
>> CAN YOU TELL ME HOW LONG THAT CONTAINER HAS PROXIMATELY BEEN THERE? THE VERY 1ST DAY, THE VERY FIRST WEEK WHEN YOU COME IN, IT WAS SEATED. WHEN YOU START WORKING IN THIS COMPANY, IN THE CITY, THE VERY FIRST WEEK, YOU CEDED THIS.
CANNOT YOU TELL ME AFTER 15 YEARS LATER YOU TELL ME I HAVE TO HAVE, I HAVE NO PROBLEM, I'M GOING TO GET RID OF IT
ANYWAY. >> YOU CAN, YOU CAN GET RID OF
IT, I GUESS. >> I CAN GET RID OF IT. IT'S NO BIG DEAL. I DON'T WANT IT THERE. I WILL FIND SOMEBODY ELSE TO COME AND TAKE IT. I'M GOING TO GIVE IT TO SOMEBODY.
THE PROBLEM IS WITH THIS CODE ENFORCEMENT, SHE HAS BEEN SEEING IT FOR OVER 15 YEARS, I DON'T KNOW, FROM THE VERY 1ST DAY WHEN SHE WAS COMING, SHE SEATED PICKET IN THE VERY FIRST WEEK, HER VERY FIRST VIOLATION -- VIOLATION, BUT THAT, THAT THING WAS THERE SITTING THERE FOR SO MANY YEARS, BUT IN RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE --
>> HOW ABOUT, OKAY , I FIND THAT THE VIOLATIONS EXIST , EXCEPT THAT THEY HAVE ALL BEEN , THEY HAVE ALL BEEN COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO THE HEARING EXCEPT FOR SECTION 125-187 , ALLOWED USE . YOU CAN EITHER GET A TEMPORARY PERMIT FOR --
OTHER THINGS. >> OR YOU CAN REMOVE IT AS YOU SUGGEST. THAT'S YOUR CHOICE. BUT YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE, IS IT
THAT. PLEASE. >> WELL I DON'T KNOW IF THAT
>> WAS AT 60 DAYS? >> I READ OUT THE DATES ON THE PICTURES. SHE HAS BEEN OUT THERE MULTIPLE TIMES. THIS PROPERTY LOOKS LIKE IT WAS CITED FOR THE FIRST TIME BACK IN MARCH, INCLUDING THE CITATION FOR THE STORAGE CONTAINER. I MEAN, IT IS, THE CITY --
>> WALKING IN, AND SHE HAS SAID, WE CONTINUE , WE CONTINUE.
>> SIR, PLEASE STAND AT THE PODIUM , AND PUT YOUR VOICE
TOWARDS THE MICROPHONE . >> JUST TODAY, I'M WALKING IN HERE FOR THESE MEETINGS , AND SHE IS , SHE SAYS WE CONTINUE.
EVERY TIME THEY CONTINUE, THEY CONTINUE, IT DOES NOT MEAN IT IS MY FAULT. OKAY? THEY CONTINUE TO 3 TO 4 TIMES.
>> WE ARE HEARING IT NOW SO IT IS NOT CONTINUED, CORRECT?
>> MAGISTRATE TO CLARIFY AND TRY TO CLOSE THIS OUT, THERE ARE FOUR CASES. WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE CASES, AND BECAUSE OF THE PERMITS THAT HE DOES HAVE , WE HAVE STOP SOME OF OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS. WE ARE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEM BECAUSE HE DOES HAVE VALID PERMITS ON TWO OF THE PROPERTIES. OKAY? THIS CASE HAS BEEN OPEN SINCE FEBRUARY. WE, WE HAVE CONTINUED IT AND CONTINUED IT IN HOPES OF GETTING FULL COMPLIANCE , AND HE HAS DONE QUITE A BIT. WE CITED MULTIPLE THINGS THAT WE ARE DOWN TO ONE VIOLATION, SO WE THANK HIM FOR DOING THAT WORK. THAT IS WHY WE CONTINUED AND CONTINUED TO GIVEN THAT OPPORTUNITY. WE HAVE ONE ITEM LEFT. STAFF IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO REPRIMAND 30 DAYS TO ADDRESS THAT CONTAINER IN WHATEVER MANNER HE CHOOSES.
WHETHER HE REMOVES IT OR GETS A TEMPORARY PERMIT OR A FULL PERMIT, BUT THE PLEASE ADDRESS THAT CONTAINER AND BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE WITHIN 30 DAYS.
>> AND I AGREE, THAT IS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY WHEN I WAS INTERRUPTED COME UP BUT YOU HAVE 30 DAYS --
>> YOU HAVE 30 DAYS TO EITHER REMOVE IT , GET A TEMPORARY PERMIT, OR GET A FULL PERMIT ON THIS ONE VIOLATION. THE OTHER VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED, AND I JUST, I FIND THAT THEY DID EXIST BUT THEY HAVE BEEN CORRECTED, SEE YOU HAVE 30 DAYS ON THIS REMAINING ONE. AGAIN, YOU CAN APPEAL . YOU HAVE 30
DAYS TO APPEAL IF YOU DISAGREE. >>
>> THANK YOU, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE.
>> THAT IS ALL. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
[01:00:02]
YOU. I AM VERY SORRY. SOMETIMES I JUST , I LOOK LIKE I AM A VERY DISRESPECTFUL PERSON, BUT I'M NOT. I DO TALK A LITTLE BIT LOUDER, BUT SOMETIMES WHEN I SEE SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT, AGAIN I HAVE TO ADDRESS IT, BECAUSE I WAS TOLD NOT TO COME IN AUGUST AND NOT TO COME IN SEPTEMBER AND NOT TO, -->> THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED. >> THANK YOU.
>> OF YOUR PERMITS, SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT LATER.
>> SAY THAT AGAIN ? >> I CAN GIVE YOU A CALL LATER.
[B. 24-20 CE 120 Desota Street Donna M Becker, Juanita Spera, Teresa Van Valkenburgh Heather Debevec]
LET'S GET THROUGH THIS AND I WILL GIVE YOU A CALL LATER>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT CASE WILL BE 11 B , WHICH IS AN OLD BUSINESS, CASE NUMBER 24-20, 120 DESOTA STREET, DONNA BECKER, JUANITA SPIRA, TERESA VAN FALKENBERG.
>> DO WE NEED TO TAKE A BREAK?
>> NO, WE ARE FINE. >> ARE YOU SURE?
>> DEEP BREATH. >> JUST MAKE SURE YOU SPEAK
INTO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THIS IS ACTUALLY A MOTION BY THE CITY TO AMEND AN ORDER DETERMINING VIOLATION WHICH WAS ISSUED BY YOU IN APRIL THE 23RD. 2024 , AND OF THE CITY IS ASKING FOR AN AMENDMENT. THIS HOME WAS FOUND IN VIOLATION , TRIM BUSHES, REPLACE SCREENS, REPLACE WEDDING WOULD, REPLACE THE TRIM AROUND THE HOME. THE, THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE, HAVE DECIDED TO DEMOLISH THIS STRUCTURE, SO WE WOULD MOVE TO AMEND THIS ORDER TO GIVE THEM AN ALTERNATIVE REMEDY OF DEMOLISHING THIS STRUCTURE , OBTAINING A PERMIT TO DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE , ON OR BEFORE A DATE TO BE DETERMINED IN FAIRNESS. HAS THE PERMIT BEEN
OBTAINED? >> THERE IS A PERMIT, BUT IT WAS BACK IN, IN JULY, AND THEY SAID WE NEED AN ASBESTOS SURVEY . DIDN'T NEED ONE, BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT, THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE.
>> SO, SO WE WOULD ASK OF THE ORDER BE AMENDED TO GIVE THEM THE ALTERNATIVE TO OBTAIN THE PERMIT AND COMPLY WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS , AND CLOSE THE PERMIT WITHIN, WHAT, 180
CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT . >> COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS.
>> IT GIVES YOU THE TIMEFRAME, BUT MY QUESTION , I'M SORRY, I
DID NOT GET YOUR NAME? >> DONNA BECKER.
>> I KNOW THAT THE PERMIT HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR. I KNOW THERE AND WHATNOT. YOU HAVE A NEST MADE OF 30 DAYS, 60 DAYS , WHEN YOU THINK THE PERMIT IS IN HAND?
>> I THINK ONCE WE GET THE PERMIT ISSUED,WE ARE GOOD TO GO. WE ARE READY HAVE GIVEN THEM A DEPOSIT THAT WE GIVE THEM BACK IN JULY. THE ONLY THING WAS THAT THE SLAB CAME UP AFTER ALL OF THIS TIME MY EVEN THOUGH IT WAS PART OF THAT.
>> THE ONLY THING THAT WAS LEFT WITH THE SLAB. STAFF WILL RECOMMEND OBTAINING A PERMIT WITHIN 60 DAYS AND COMPLYING
WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS. >> UNTIL THE PERMIT IS CLOSED.
>> AND I WILL HAND YOU THE ORDER THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY
ISSUED. >> IS THAT A CITY'S EXHIBIT?
>> NO, SO YOU SEE WHAT YOU PREVIOUSLY ISSUED .
>> THE ORDER THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY ENTERED DETERMINING A VIOLATION IS, IS BEING , I WILL AMAND TO PROVIDE THAT THE OWNERS HAVE 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT AND THEN COMPLY WITH WHATEVER THE PERMIT REQUIRES , INSPECTIONS AND WHAT HAVE YOU.
>> UNTIL THE PERMIT IS CLOSED.
>> UNTIL THE PERMIT IS CLOSED.
>> AND 30 DAYS TO APPEAL.'S >>
>> WHATEVER YOU WANT ME TO PUT IN HERE I WILL PUT IN. ALL
[B. 24-1151 CE 429 N 11th Street Janie Lee Cash Heather Debevec]
>> THANK YOU . >> ALL RIGHT WE WILL TURN TO VIOLATION CASES. 6B, CASE NUMBER 24-1151, 429 NORTH 11TH
STREET , JANIE LEE CASH. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THIS IS CASE NUMBER 24-1151, 429 NORTH 11TH STREET , OWNED BY JANIE LEE CASH. THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON MAY 24TH OF THIS YEAR FOR IPMC 304.2, PROTECTIVE TREATMENT, IPMC 304.7, ROOFS
[01:05:06]
AND DRAINAGE. I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT. I HAVE SPOKEN TO THE OWNERS SON A COUPLE OF TIMES. I HAVE REFERRED HIM TO GRANTS. I HAVE GIVEN GRANTS THEIR INFORMATION. I HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING BACK IS TO COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES . ON MONDAY, THE LAST SET OF PHOTOS THAT I TOOK, I HAD SPOKE WITH THE OWNER, MS. JANIE LEE CASH HERSELF. I ALSO EXPRESSED TO HER TO REACH OUT TO THE GRANTS DEPARTMENT AS WELL . I DON'T KNOW IF SHE HAS DONE THAT ARE NOT.>> OKAY. SO, THE CITY , THE PHOTOS ARE DATE STAMPED MAY 17, AUGUST 30 , SEPTEMBER 23 , AND SEPTEMBER THE 30TH. DO THEY ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS YOU HAVE TESTIFY TO THAT YOU OBSERVED ON THOSE DAYS?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> THE CITY WILL MOVE THESE PHOTOS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
>> THE PHOTOS WILL BE ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. >> AND LOOKING AT THE SEPTEMBER 30 PHOTOS , HAS THERE BEEN ANY CHANGE IN THE PROPERTY SINCE IT
WAS ORIGINALLY CITED ? >> THE ORIGINAL CITATION INCLUDED SOME OUTSIDE STORAGE , WHICH THEY HAVE CLEANED UP BUT AS FAR AS THE PAINTING AND THE REPAIRS TO THE FASCIA BOARD,
TRIM BOARD, NO. >> THEN THEY ARE NOT BEING
CITED FOR STORAGE AT THIS TIME. >> THEY CLEANED THAT UP.
>> AND THE ROOFS AND DRAINAGE, IS THAT FACIA?
>> YES, THAT IS THE FASCIA BOARD THAT IS ROTTING IN SOME AREAS. THERE ARE TWO PLACES ON IT THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.
RIGHT THERE. >> I FIND THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THAT THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO PAINT THE AREAS WHERE PAINT IS FADING, PEELING, DISCOLORING, AND WOOD IS SHOWING THROUGH,AND OBTAIN A PERMIT AND COMPLY WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS TO REPAIR OR REPLACE RUNNING BOARDS ON THE FASCIA. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY 60 DAYS WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED. THERE IS A 30 DAY RIGHT TO APPEAL.
[A. CASE NO.: LTCL-2024-109 VIOLATION LOCATION (ADDRESS PID): 1401 San Diego Ave (143380101220003) INVESTIGATING OFFICER: Heather Debevec]
>> ALL RIGHT. DID YOU WANT TO TAKE CARE OF HEATHER'S LAST
>> WE WILL JUMP TO 11 A IN OLD BUSINESS, CASE NUMBER 27 -2024-
109, 1401 SAN DIEGO AVENUE. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THIS IS THE CITY'S ORDINANCE TO VACATE AN ORDER ISSUED SEPTEMBER 24, 2024 BY THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. I WILL LET HEATHER OR PEGGY
ADDRESS THE REASONING. >> YES. PRIOR TO A LIEN BEING FILED, THE FINES HAD STARTED ON THIS PROPERTY , AND WE SENT OUT A NOTICE THAT THANKFULLY DID MAKE IT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER .
IT TURNS OUT THAT WE HAD TRANSPOSED ADDRESS NUMBERS , 45 , 452 , 45254. THE NEIGHBOR WATCH THE MAIL TO HER. SHE CAME TO TALK TO US. WE REALIZE THAT WE FAILED TO DO ALL OF OUR PROPER NOTIFICATIONS. THE PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE SHE DID GET THAT FINAL NOTICE.
>> RUN CASE. >> THIS IS NOT THAT ONE?
>> NO, THIS IS A LOT CLEARING WHERE I CAN ASSURE YOU THE GRASS IS STILL UP TO MY WAIST OR BETTER. A DIFFERENT ADDRESS
WAS FOUND FOR THE OWNER. >> SO THERE STILL IS AN ADDRESS
ISSUE? >> IT IS STILL AN ADDRESS
OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ] >> WE ARE MOVING TO VACATE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE NOTICE UNDER THE STATUTE. THANK YOU. SO THE ORDER ENTERED PREVIOUSLY WILL BE VACATED.
>> VACATED. >> AND WE WILL JUST TO START A
>> THANK YOU. >> WAS THIS ORDER RECORDED?
[A. CASE NO.: LTCL-2024-179 VIOLATION LOCATION (ADDRESS PID): 1006 N 14th St INVESTIGATING OFFICER Isaac Saucedo]
>> ALL RIGHT. WE WILL JUMP TO NINE A IN OTHER CASES. CASE NUMBER LTCL-2024-179 , 1006 NORTH 14TH STREET.
>> IN AFTERNOON. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2024-179 , 1006 NORTH 14TH STREET. THIS IS A
[01:10:02]
LOT CLEARING CASE. THE CASE WAS ESTABLISHED ON SEPTEMBER 1220 24 AND THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE SENT OUT CERTIFIED REGULAR MAIL AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED.THE OWNER IS VERONICA OF 34 HARBOR ISLE DRIVE WEST 105 RIGHT HERE IN FORT PIERCE AND THE VIOLATIONS ARE 4-19 SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A AND SUBSECTION B FOR NUISANCES, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTY IS. I DO HAVE PHOTOS THAT SHOW THE VIOLATIONS.
>> THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. THE PHOTOS ARE DATED SEPTEMBER 11 AND SEPTEMBER 30TH , AND WITHIN THE CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE IS THE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION. PHOTOS INCLUDING THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WILL BE ENTERED AS CITIES COMPOSITE
EXHIBIT ONE >> I FIND A NUISANCE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THAT SUCH NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY THAT THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL OCTOBER 9 TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND BUSHES TO THE STANDARD IDENTIFIED IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION, AND ALSO REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS INCLUDING THE LANDSCAPE DEBRIS GENERATED FROM THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. A FINE OF $100 PER DAY WILL BE ASSESSED FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUISANCE CONDITION , THE COST OF WHICH WILL BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.
[B. CASE NO.: USB-2024-150 VIOLATION LOCATION (ADDRESS PID): 2706 S 10th St INVESTIGATING OFFICER: Isaac Saucedo]
>> THANK YOU. >> ARE NEXT CASES 9B, USB-2024-150 , 2706 SOUTH 10TH STREET .
>> THIS IS CASE NUMBER USB-2024-150 , THE LOCATION IS 2706 SOUTH 10TH STREET , AND THE CASE IBIS POOL/SPA MAINTENANCE. THE CASE WAS ESTABLISHED ON AUGUST 28 OF 2024 AND THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE SENT A FIRST CLASS CERTIFIED MAIL AND ALSO THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED. THE OWNER IS ROSEMARY RACHET OF 2706 SOUTH 10TH STREET. THE VIOLATIONS ARE I AM PC 303.1, PULL SPA AND MAINTENANCE, 24-19 , NUISANCES UNLAWFUL CONDITIONS, AND 24-19 SUBSECTION 9, NUISANCE ABATEMENT FOR STAGNANT WATER. I DO HAVE PHOTOS. ACTUALLY HAD COMMUNICATION WITH THE DAUGHTER EARLIER TODAY . IT SEEMS LIKE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY HAS RECENTLY PASSED AWAY, AND SAY, SHE IS IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO GET A REAL ESTATE COMPANY TO KIND OF TAKE OVER THE HOUSE BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SELL THE PROPERTY, SO , THAT IS AS MUCH INFORMATION AS I HAVE IN REGARDS TO THE SITUATION AT THIS LOCATION.
>> JUST A MOMENT, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. OKAY. SO IPMC 33.1, POOL/SPA MAINTENANCE, FAILURE TO PROPERLY SECURE THE POOL , AND FAILURE TO TREAT THE WATER ALL RIGHT. SO THE CITY, YOU HAD PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN AUGUST 19, SEPTEMBER THE 20TH, SEPTEMBER THE 30TH . THE CITY MOVES THESE DOCUMENTS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. DID THE, DID THE DATES IS STAMPED ON THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION THAT YOU TESTIFY TO THAT YOU OBSERVED ON THOSE DATES?
>> YES THEY DO. >> AND DESPITE YOUR CONVERSATION WITH THE DAUGHTER , THE SWIMMING POOL IS STILL IN THE BACKYARD FILLED WITH WATER, AND ANYBODY CAN WALK IN THE
YARD AND FILE IN. >> THAT IS CORRECT. AS I MENTIONED, SHE IS IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO, SHE IS SUPPOSED TO CALL ME BACK TO LET ME KNOW OR GAVE ME THE NUMBER OF THE REAL ESTATE COMPANY THAT IS GOING TO BE TAKING OVER TO SEE IF I CAN KIND OF HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THEM AND COME TO AN AGREEMENT PRIOR TO OCTOBER 9 AND BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE. SO I AM STILL WAITING FOR THAT CALL FOR PLEA IT HAPPENS WITHIN THE NEXT DAY OR TWO , SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BECAUSE TIME DOES GO BY PRETTY QUICKLY.
>> DID YOU ADVISOR, WAS SHE AWARE OF THE HEARING TODAY?
>> SHE IS AWARE THAT THERE IS A HEARING TODAY, BUT SHE WAS
[01:15:01]
UNABLE TO MAKE IT BECAUSE SHE JUST HAD SURGERY. SHE HAD SEVERAL DOCTORS APPOINTMENTS TODAY.>> I WOULD ASK THE CLERK, DID ANYONE REQUEST A CONTINUANCE ON
>> THANK YOU. >> DID WE ADMIT THE PHOTOS?
>> NOT YET. >> THE CITY MOVES THE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
>> THE PHOTOS SUBMITTED WILL BE ENTERED AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. AND I FIND THAT THE NUISANCE EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT SUCH NUISANCE POSES A THREAT TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMPUTER AND IT APPEARED THAT THE NUISANCE BE ABATED THROUGH THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR HAS UNTIL OCTOBER 9 TO CORRECT THE NUISANCE. I KNOW IT'S NOT A LOT OF TIME, BUT IT , BUT THIS, THE NUISANCE I THINK IS ONE THAT IS PARTICULARLY OF CONCERN.
>> YEAH. IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE.
>> THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL OCTOBER 9 TO PROPERLY SECURE THE POOL, TREAT, CIRCULATE THE POOL TO PREVENT STAGNANT WATER. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY NEEDS TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO ABATE THE NUISANCE, THE COST OF WHICH
[C. CASE NO.: LTCL-2024-185 VIOLATION LOCATION (ADDRESS PID): 301 N 30th St INVESTIGATING OFFICER: Isaac Saucedo]
IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.>> OUR NEXT CASES 9C IN OTHER CASES, LTCL-2024-185 , 301
NORTH 30TH STREET . >> THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2024-185 . THE VIOLATION ADDRESS IS 301 NORTH 30TH STREET , AND THIS IS A LOT CLEARING CASE. THERE IS A VIOLATION IN THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE SENT CERTIFIED REGULAR MAIL AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS DUCTLESS NIGHT WITH AN ADVERSE APARTMENT 304 IN MARGATE, FLORIDA. THE VIOLATIONS ARE 24-19 SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A AND SUBSECTION B FOR NUISANCES, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES, AND THEY ALSO HAVE PHOTOS TO SHOW THE VIOLATIONS.
>> THE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE DATED SEPTEMBER 18 . SEPTEMBER 11 .
SEPTEMBER 18 , AND SEPTEMBER 30 , AND WE ALSO HAVE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION . THE CITY MOVES THESE INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. THE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION THAT YOU TESTIFY TO?
>> YES THEY DO. >> ON THE DATE THAT THEY ARE
>> THE PHOTOS SUBMITTED INCLUDING THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
I FIND THAT A NUISANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT SUCH NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. THAT THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR HAS UNTIL OCTOBER 9 TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED, TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND BUSHES TO THE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION. REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS INCLUDING LANDSCAPED DEBRIS GENERATED FROM BRINGING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE.
FAILURE TO DO SO BY THE DUE DATE WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY NEEDS TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO ABATE THE NUISANCE, THE COST OF WHICH IS
[D. CASE NO.: LTCL-2024-184 VIOLATION LOCATION (ADDRESS PID): McCray Ct (240482000180003) INVESTIGATING OFFICER: Isaac Saucedo]
TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.>> THANK YOU. >> OUR NEXT CASE IS 90 IN OTHER CASES, LTCL-2024-184 , MCCRAY COURT .
>> THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2024-184 , LOCATION IS MCCRAY COURT WITH A PARCEL NUMBER OF 240482000180003. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING CASE. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE SENT CERTIFIED REGULAR MAIL AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS A SCI NOW ALLYL THE WITH AN AVERAGE OF 21 925 SOUTHWEST 45TH AVENUE IN MIAMI, FLORIDA. VIOLATIONS ARE 24-19 SUBSECTION 11 SUBSECTION A AND SUBSECTION B FOR NUISANCES , LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES , AND I DO HAVE PHOTOS ALSO TO SHOW THE VIOLATION.
>> THE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE DATED SEPTEMBER 11, SEPTEMBER 18, AND SEPTEMBER 30 . THERE IS A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION. THE CITY MOVES THESE DOCUMENTS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE .
[01:20:07]
>> THE PHOTOS IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE . I FIND THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT THE NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. BUT THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM AND THAT THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN UNTIL OCTOBER 9 TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED , TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND BUSHES TO THE STANDARDS SHOWN IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION .
REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS INCLUDING LANDSCAPED DEBRIS GENERATED BY BRINGING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE.
FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED SHALL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 A DAY BEING ASSESSED FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY NEEDS TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS ARE
[E. CASE NO.: LTCL-2024-183 VIOLATION LOCATION (ADDRESS PID): Avenue H (24044200070003) INVESTIGATING OFFICER: Isaac Saucedo]
NECESSARY TO ABATE THE CONDITION, THE COST OF WHICH WILL BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.>> THANK YOU. >> OUR NEXT CASE IS 90 IN OTHER CASES, LTCL-2024-183 , AVENUE H.
>> THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2024-183 . THE LOCATION IS AVENUE H WITH A PARCEL NUMBER 24044 24044200070003 . THIS IS A LOT CLEARING CASE AND THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE SENT CERTIFIED REGULAR MAIL AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED. THE OWNER IS VALERIE E MOORE, CHRISTOPHER CAMPBELL, AND TABATHA JOHNSON WITH AN ADDRESS HERE IN FORT PIERCE . VIOLATIONS ARE 24-19 SUBSECTION 11 SUBSECTION A AND SUBSECTION B, NUISANCES , LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES. I HAVE PHOTOS THAT
SHOW THE VIOLATIONS. >> THE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE DATED SEPTEMBER 11, SEPTEMBER 18 , AND SEPTEMBER 30. ARE THESE MY DO THESE PHOTOS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS THAT YOU OBSERVED ON THAT, ON THOSE DAYS?
>> AS THEY DO. >> ALSO A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION. THE CITY MOVES THESE DOCUMENTS INTO EVIDENCE AS
CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE . >> THE PHOTOGRAPHS INCLUDING THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE . I FIND THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS IN A VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT SUCH NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. THE NUISANCE WILL BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL OCTOBER 9 TO THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL OCTOBER 92, TO TRIM ALL GRASS AND WEEDS, TREES, SHRUBS, AND BUSHES TO THE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION. REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS INCLUDING THE DEBRIS CREATED BY RINGING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED SHALL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 A DAY BEING ASSESSED FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES , AND THE CITY IS , IS TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO ABATE THIS NUISANCE CONDITION, THE COST OF WHICH WILL BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.
[F. CASE NO.: LTCL-2024-182 VIOLATION LOCATION (ADDRESS PID): N 13th St (240444200060006) INVESTIGATING OFFICER: Isaac Saucedo]
>> OUR NEXT CASE IS 9F IN OTHER CASES, LTCL-2024-182 , NORTH
13TH STREET . >> THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2024-182 . LOCATION ADDRESSES NORTH 13TH STREET WITH A PARCEL NUMBER OF 240444200060006 . THIS IS A LOT CLEARING CASE , AND THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE SENT CERTIFIED REGULAR MAIL AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED. THE OWNER IS CHARLIE BAKER AND THE VIOLATIONS ARE 24-19 SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A AND SUBSECTION B FOR NUISANCES , LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES. I HAVE PHOTOS HERE THAT SHOW THE
VIOLATIONS. >> THE PHOTOS ARE DATE STAMPED MAY 28, SEPTEMBER 11 , SEPTEMBER 18 , AND SEPTEMBER 30 . DO THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS THAT YOU HAVE TESTIFIED TO?
>> YES THEY DO. >> THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ALONG WITH A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
>> PHOTOGRAPHS SUBMITTED WILL BE ENTERED AS WELL AS THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE . OKAY. I
[01:25:01]
FIND THAT THE VIOLATION , THE NUISANCE CONDITION EXISTS AGAINST THE VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT IT POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. WITH THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED FOR THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATORS IS GIVEN UNTIL OCTOBER 9 TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND BUSHES , AS WELL AS REMOVING ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS INCLUDING THE LANDSCAPED DEBRIS GENERATED FROM THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 A DAY BEING ASSESSED. IN ADDITION, THE CITY NEEDS TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO ABATE THE NUISANCE CONDITION, THE COST OF[G. CASE NO.: LTCL-2024-180 VIOLATION LOCATION (ADDRESS PID): 1001 N 13th St INVESTIGATING OFFICER: Isaac Saucedo]
WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.>> THANK YOU. >> OUR NEXT CASE IS 90 IN OTHER CASES, LTCL-2024-180 , 1001 NORTH 13TH STREET .
>> THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2024-180 . THE VIOLATION LOCATION IS 1001 NORTH 13TH STREET . THIS IS A LOT CLEARING CASE. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE SENT CERTIFIED REGULAR MAIL AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED. THE OWNER IS USER MY MOON EMISSARY IF I MISS PRONOUNCE THAT, AND ALLAH MOHAMMED -- THE VIOLATIONS ARE 24-19 SUBSECTION 11 SUBSECTION A AND SUBSECTION B, NUISANCES, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES. I ALSO HAVE PHOTOS THAT SHOW THE VIOLATIONS ARE STILL CURRENT.
>> PHOTOGRAPHS DATED SEPTEMBER 11, SEPTEMBER THE 18TH, SEPTEMBER THE 30 , AND THERE IS ALSO A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION . THE DATE AND TIME STAMPS ACCURATE AND ARE THEY ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION WHO TESTIFIED TO?
>> YES THEY DO. THE CITY MOVES THESE DOCUMENTS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
>> THE PHOTOGRAPHS IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. I FIND THAT THE NUISANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT SUCH NUISANCES ARE CONSIDERED A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. WITH THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. LET THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN UNTIL OCTOBER 9 TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND BUSHES TO THE STANDARD IDENTIFIED IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION. ALSO TO REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS INCLUDING THE LANDSCAPED DEBRIS CREATED FROM BRINGING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE . FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO ABATE THE NUISANCE CONDITION,
[H. CASE NO.: LTCL-2024-177 VIOLATION LOCATION (ADDRESS PID): 1012 N 13th St INVESTIGATING OFFICER: Isaac Saucedo]
THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.>> THANK YOU. >> OUR NEXT CASE IS SIGNAGE AND OTHER CASES, LTCL-2024-177 , 1012 NORTH 13TH STREET .
>> THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2024-177 -- I'M SORRY .
CASE NUMBER LTCL-2024-177 . THE LOCATION IS 1012 NORTH 13TH STREET. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING CASE. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE SENT CERTIFIED REGULAR MAIL AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED. THE OWNER IS JOSEPH C MERCER AND VALERIE J MERCER. THE VIOLATIONS ARE 24-19, SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A AND SUBSECTION B , NUISANCE, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTIES LESS THAN THREE ACRES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS THAT SHOW THE VIOLATION.
>> ARE THEY ACCURATELY DATE AND TIME STAMPED?
>> YES THEY ARE. >> AND DO THEY DEPICT THE VIOLATION YOU HAVE TESTIFIED TO ACCURATELY ON THOSE DATES?
>> CORRECT. >> PHOTOGRAPHS DATED SEPTEMBER THE 11TH, SEPTEMBER 18TH, AND SEPTEMBER THE 30TH ALONG WITH A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION. THE CITY MOVES THESE DOCUMENTS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE .
>> THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE . I FIND THAT A NUISANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT SUCH NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY , AND THAT THE NUISANCES TO BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR IS GIVEN UNTIL OCTOBER 9 TO TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND BUSHES TO THE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED IN THE NOTICE OF
[01:30:01]
VIOLATION , AND REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS INCLUDING LANDSCAPED DEBRIS CREATED BY BRINGING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO ABATE THE NUISANCE CONDITION OF THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.>> THANK YOU. >> OUR LAST CASE TODAY IS NINE
[I. CASE NO.: LTCL-2024-176 VIOLATION LOCATION (ADDRESS PID): N 13th St (240480400100007) INVESTIGATING OFFICER: Isaac Saucedo]
I IN OTHER CASES, LTCL-2024-176 , NORTH 13TH STREET .>> THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2024-176 . THE ADDRESS IS NORTH 13TH STREET , WITH A PARCEL NUMBER OF 240480400100007 . THIS IS A LOT CLEARING CASE. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE SENT CERTIFIED REGULAR MAIL AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED. THE OWNER IS ROSS RUTH AND GENEVA RUTH. THE VIOLATIONS ARE 4-19 , SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A AND SUBSECTION B, NUISANCES, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS HERE THAT SHOW THAT THE
VIOLATIONS DO EXIST. >> I THINK THAT IS A TYPO. IT
IS SUPPOSED TO BE 24-19? >> IT SAYS 4-19 AND NOT 24-19 FOR THE SECTION. TO CORRECT THE SECTION IT WOULD BE 24-19.
>> SO VIOLATION OF 24-19, SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A AND
SUBSECTION B. CORRECT? >> YES. AND THE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE DATED SEPTEMBER 11, SEPTEMBER 18, AND SEPTEMBER 30. TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS THAT YOU
OBSERVED ON THOSE DATES? >> ESTATE OR.
>> THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOGRAPHS AND A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE
EXHIBIT ONE. >> THE PHOTOGRAPHS IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. I FIND THAT A NUISANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT SUCH NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY . AT THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM AND THAT THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN UNTIL OCTOBER 9 TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND BUSHES TO THE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION. AND ALSO REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS INCLUDING THE LANDSCAPED DEBRIS CREATED BY BRINGING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE GIVEN WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY NEEDS TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.
[B. IDENTIFICATION OF CASES IN COMPLIANCE OR RESCHEDULED]
>> JUST TO CONFIRM, ALL THE CASES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY CALLED TODAY HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL?
>> ALL RIGHT. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND GO INTO THE IDENTIFICATION OF CASES IN COMPLIANCE THAT WERE RESCALED CONTROLLED.
>> CASE 24- 637, 1816 SOUTH 29TH STREET, 24-452, 2405 SUNRISE BOULEVARD, PINK SUNRISE LLC. 24-469, 704 NORTH SEVENTH STREET. 24-460, 714 NORTH SEVENTH STREET . 24-635, 1813 SOUTH 29TH STREET, GEORGE. CASE NUMBER 2024-175, ADDRESSES TO BE DETERMINED, LOT CLEARING CASE, 2024-178, 1009 NORTH 13TH STREET, AND 2024-186, 707 NORTH 13TH STREET. CODE CASE 24-832, 208 AVENUE A, K AND K II INC. . LOT CLEARING CASE 2024-181, AVENUE L. AND LOT CLEARING CASE 2024-170, NORTH 26TH STREET
APPEARED >> FOR CASES REQUIRING A HEARING PER STATE STATUTE , A NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE VIOLATOR CERTIFIED MAIL. IF THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED SIGNED, IT IS PLACED IN THE FILE. THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED UNSIGNED OR UNCLAIMED, AND AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING WITH THE NOTICE OF HEARING ENCLOSED ASSENT TO THE VIOLATOR REGULAR U.S. MAIL. 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, NOTICE OF HEARING IS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD IN CITY HALL. THE NOTICE OF HEARING IS ALSO POSTED AT THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WITH AN AFFIDAVIT OPPOSING PICK OF THE GREEN CARD IS NOT RETURNED TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS BEFORE THE
[01:35:01]
HEARING, THE POSTING IS COMPLETED IN THE SAME MANNER AS IF THE CARD WAS RETURNED UNCLAIMED. FOR CASES NOT MANDATED BY STATE STATUTE , THE MAILING OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING ARE HANDLED IN THE SAME MANNER STATED PRIOR PICK OF 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. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. THEN, THIS SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING IS ADJOURNED .
>> THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.