[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:01:22]
>> YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT AND WE WILL HEAR FROM THE CITY FIRST
[A. 24-1191 603 Ixoria Ave - Pool The Hemingway Condo Assn, FP Miles Keller ]
BEFORE YOU CAN ADDRESS THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THANK YOU.>> GOOD MORNING. I AM MILES KELLER, INVESTIGATOR FOR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. CASE NUMBER 24 E- 1191 FOR A POOL.
CASE INITIATED MAY 24, 2024, OWNER, THE HEMINGWAY CONDO ASSOCIATION. 3.22 ENCLOSURES. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS. MAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS TO THE POOL, FENCE, AND GAIT.
RECOMMENDATIONS, THE CITY REQUEST THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS A VIOLATION EXISTS, THEY HAVE 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED, COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 BE ASSESSED. SO FAR THE FENCE HAS BEEN REPAIRED AND THE PLANS TO HAVE IT INSPECTED SOON AFTER THE HEARING. AND I DO HAVE PICTURES OF THE LOCATION.
>> SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS BEFORE I PLACE THEM INTO EVIDENCE? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
>> PHOTOGRAPH DATED MAY 17TH AND SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2024 .
THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION YOU HAVE
>> THE CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> PHOTOGRAPHS SUBMITTED WILL BE EXHIBIT ONE.
>> ANYTHING ELSE, MR. KELLER? >> NO.
>> THANK YOU. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO --
>> VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED.
>> I AM SORRY, SIR. STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD APPEARED
>> GARZA. >> DOES THE HEMINGWAY CONDO ASSOCIATION KNOW YOU ARE HERE TODAY? HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN AUTHORITY TO SPEAK ON ITS BEHALF?
>> I WAS VOTED IN BY THE BOARD AS A PROPERTY SITE MANAGER.
>> HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN AUTHORITY TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF
>> OKAY, GO AHEAD. >> I WILL BE CALLED TODAY TO LET YOU KNOW IT IS READY FOR REINSPECTION.
>> OKAY. DOES THE CITY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE?
>> NO. THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS.
>> I FIND THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THAT THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS. IF YOU HAVE IT ALREADY TODAY, THAT'S FINE BUT YOU HAVE UP TO 60 DAYS FOR APPROVAL FOR THE REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AND AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED. CONDITIONS AND ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER . FAILURE TO DO SO WOULD RESULT IN A $100 FINE PER
[00:05:04]
DAY. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL. YOU HAVE 30 DAYS TOFILE AN APPEAL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.
[B. 24-1192 1945 Harbortown Dr SMH Harbortown LLC Anthony Jetmore]
>> ARE NEXT CASE, 6B, 24-1192, 1945 HARBORTOWN DRIVE. AND SMH
HARBORTOWN LLC IS THE OWNER? >> HI. MY NAME IS ANTHONY JETMORE. I AM AN INVESTIGATOR AND INSPECTOR FOR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. 24-1192 , HARBORTOWN DRIVE . CASE INITIATED SEPTEMBER 24TH, 2024. THE OWNER IS SMH HARBORTOWN LLC. THE VIOLATION IS FBC 105.1. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, OBTAIN A PERMIT FOR INSTALLING STORAGE CONTAINERS.
RECOMMENDATION, THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATORS BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS FOR EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED, COMPLY WITH OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY. THIS WAS SUBMITTED JULY 30TH, 2024 AND HAS BEEN REJECTED BY PLANNING AND ENGINEERING REQUIRING RESUBMITTAL SINCE AUGUST 20TH, 2024.
>> DO YOU HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> I DO.
>> SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS?
>> I SAW. YEAH. >> THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION YOU HAVE TESTIFY TO, MR. JETMORE?
>> MR. JETMORE, THE PHOTOGRAPHS APPEAR TO BE UNDATED. CAN YOU TESTIFY THE DATE THEY WERE TAKEN?
>> IT WAS AN INITIATION OF THE PERMIT, WHICH WAS ON THE VERY
BEGINNING, JULY 30TH, 2024. >> THANK YOU. THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE.
>> PHOTOGRAPHS WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE.
>> OKAY. >> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE,
MR. JETMORE? >> NOT YET. NOT RIGHT NOW.
>> OKAY. SIR, WHAT IS HER NAME?
>> MY NAME IS JOSH POWERS AND I AM THE MANAGER OF THE MARINA.
>> THE MANAGER OF SMH HARBORTOWN LLC?
>> WE SUBMITTED A PERMIT I BELIEVE BACK IN JULY. LIKE ANTHONY SAID, IT WAS DENIED PENDING A BOUNDARY SURVEY. WE COMPLETED THE BOUNDARY SURVEY LAST WEEK AND RESUBMITTAL IS ON THE SIXTH, SO THEY DIDN'T RESUBMIT IT THROUGH THE CONTRACTOR. AS OF THE SIXTH, EVERYTHING WAS RESUBMITTED WITH
THE BOUNDARY SURVEY INCLUDED. >> NOVEMBER 6TH?
>> 11/6, YES. >> ANYTHING ELSE?
>> THAT'S IT. >> THE CITY REQUEST FINDING A VIOLATION, THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS.
>> THE VIOLATION EXISTS. THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT IS CLOSED, COMPLY WITH ANY OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND CURE ANY VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER. NOT DOING SO WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 A DAY BEING ASSESSED AND THERE IS A 30 DAY
RIGHT TO APPEAL. >> THANK YOU.
>> I BELIEVE THE NEXT CASE MIGHT REQUIRE AN INTERPRETER.
[00:10:05]
DID YOU WANT ME TO DO THAT CASE NOW ?[H. 24-1203 4228 Aberfoyle Ave Sagastume, Mario & Sandra Miles Keller]
>> LET'S GO ON WITH THE CASES THAT DON'T REQUIRE AN
INTERPRETER, PLEASE. >> ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE SOMEONE HERE PRESENT FOR 6H , 24-1203, 4228 ABERFOYLE AVENUE , AND MARIO AND SANDRA SAGASTUME ARE THE OWNERS.
>> WHEN YOU ARE READY. >> CASE NUMBER 24-1203, ADDRESS 4228 ABERFOYLE AVENUE , CASE INITIATED MAY 28, 2024 .
THE OWNERS ARE MARIO AND SANDRA SAGASTUME AND VIOLATIONS , 105.1 PERMIT REQUIRED. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, OBTAIN A PERMIT FOR THE REMOVAL AND REINSTALLATION OF THE SOLAR PANELS AND ROOF REPAIR BEING DONE. RECOMMENDATIONS, THE CITY REQUESTED IS THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS, VIOLATORS HAVE 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, INSPECTIONS EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED, COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE OTHER ALL VIOLATIONS NOT REQUIRED IN THE PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 A DAY. NO PERMITS HAVE BEEN APPLIED FOR. RECEIVED FROM THE ATTORNEY INDICATE THE ENGINEER DRAWINGS ARE BEING PREPARED AND THE PERMIT WOULD BE APPLIED FOR UPON COMPLETION. AND I DO HAVE PHOTOS.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOS?
>> PLEASE PASS THEM FORWARD. DO THESE PHOTOS -- OH, I WILL WAIT. MR. KELLER, DO THESE PHOTOS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE
VIOLATION YOU TESTIFY TO? >> YES, THEY DO.
>> THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO COMPOSITE ONE.
THEY WERE TAKEN ON SEPTEMBER THE 30TH.
>> PHOTOGRAPHS PRESENTED WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE. OKAY.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD, MR. KELLER?
>> NO, I DON'T. >> ARE YOU SANDRA SAGASTUME?
>> NO, I AM THEIR DAUGHTER. THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO BE PRESENT TODAY AND I AM JOINED BY OUR LEGAL ATTORNEY ON THIS
CASE TO BE HERE TODAY. >> I SENT NOTICE OF REPRESENTATION TO THE ATTORNEY AND I DIDN'T RECEIVE IT BACK.
>> OKAY. WE WILL HEAR YOUR TESTIMONY FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING TO SHOW THAT YOU ARE AUTHORIZED TO BE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE OWNERS. BUT WE WILL HEAR YOUR TESTIMONY FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD.
>> THIS HAS BEEN A VERY, VERY LONG LEGAL BATTLE FOR MY PARENTS. WE HAD -- THEY HAD SOLAR PANELS INSTALLED BY A COMPANY AND THEY STARTED GETTING WATER DAMAGE AND WE GOT OUR ATTORNEY INVOLVED IN THE MATTER AND THEY HAD SOMEONE COME OUT AND THIS IS WHY WE ARE IN THIS VIOLATION. WE FIXED IT.
ONCE WE RECEIVED THE NOTICE WE SENT IT OVER TO OUR ATTORNEY AND HE CONTACTED SYNERGY AND THEY STATED THEY HAD PERMITS AND TO CONTINUE. AS OF RIGHT NOW WE ARE IN A VERY LONG LEGAL BATTLE WITH THEM. THERE IS NOTHING ELSE I COULD ADD TO THAT. THEY HAVE BEEN NONRESPONSIVE.
>> ANYTHING TO RESPOND? >> I WILL BASICALLY PIGGYBACK WHAT SHE SAID. I DID PUT THE STOP WORK ORDER AND SYNERGY DID CALL ME AND SAID THEY DID NOT NEED THE PERMITS BECAUSE IT WAS
A REPAIR. >> WHEN WAS THAT DONE? WERE
[00:15:01]
I'M SORRY, WHEN DID YOU HEAR FROM SYNERGY THAT THEY DID NOTNEED PERMITS? >> I BELIEVE IT WAS THE DAY AFTER THESE PICTURES WERE TAKEN, SO MAY 25TH. WE DID TELL THEM THEY NEEDED THE PERMITTING BECAUSE IT WAS OVER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE AND, YOU KNOW, SHE SAID THEY WOULD OBTAIN THE PERMITS AND THEY STILL HAVE NOT DONE THAT.
>> OH, SHE SAID THEY DIDN'T NEED PERMITS, BUT THEY WERE
>> AND WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE ATTORNEY?
>> LEONARD DESIR . >> I WILL ASK MR. COSS TO EXPLAIN TO THE WITNESS THE POLICIES AND PREACHERS -- PROCEDURES FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME.
>> IF JUSTIFIABLE, WE CAN PROVIDE A 90 DAY ADMINISTRATIVE EXTENSION, BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TO SHOW JUSTIFIABLE CAUSE FOR THAT. YOU SAID THERE IS CURRENTLY A CASE PENDING IN THE COURT. IS THAT CORRECT? A LAWSUIT?
>> LAWSUIT BETWEEN MARIO AND SANDRA SAGASTUME AND SYNERGY .
>> I AM TRYING TO LOOK THAT UP .
>> WHAT HE WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN WAS IF WE FIND A VIOLATION TODAY AND WE GIVE YOU 60 DAYS TO GET THE PERMITS AND EVERYTHING TOGETHER, AND YOU CAN'T GET IT DONE WITHIN THOSE 60 DAYS, YOU COME BACK TO THE DEPARTMENT AND ASK FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE EXTENSION AND THEY ARE AUTHORIZED TO GIVE YOU AN EXTENSION OF ANOTHER 90 DAYS, ALL RIGHT?
>> ARE WE ABLE TO PULL THAT PERMIT, OR IS THAT STILL THEIR
RESPONSIBILITY? >> I BELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR NEEDS TO PULL THE PERMIT BECAUSE THEY DID THE WORK. AM I
CORRECT? >> YOU ARE ABLE TO PULL THE PERMIT BUT BEING THE PERMIT HOLDER, YOU WOULD BE THE ONE ACCEPTING RESPONSIBILITY AT THAT TIME.
>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE? I DID HEAR FROM THE SOLAR COMPANY ATTORNEYS YESTERDAY AND THEY INDICATED ENGINEER DRAWINGS WERE BEING PREPARED AND THEY WOULD PULL PERMITS ONCE THOSE
DRAWINGS WORK COMPLETED. >> THAT WAS THE SOLAR COMPANY'S ATTORNEY? I WOULD LIKE THE NAME FOR THE RECORD,
PLEASE. >> I THINK IT WAS JOHN SHE'LL
>> I SPOKE TO HIM OVER THE PHONE.
>> THANK YOU. DOES THE CITY HAVE ANY OTHER TESTIMONY BASED
ON THE WITNESS'S TESTIMONY? >> YES, MA'AM, IF I COULD HAVE
A MINUTE , PLEASE. >> I THINK SHAUN WANTS TO CHECK SOMETHING.
>> OKAY, THE CASE , 2024 3007 FOR MARIO SAGASTUME AND SYNERGY HAS BEEN CLOSED. FIND A PERMIT TO PROVIDE 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED, AND CURE ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT, OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY MAY
BE OBSESSED -- ASSESSED. >> ANYTHING ELSE? I FIND THE VIOLATION EXISTS IN THE VIOLATOR HAS 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN THE PERMIT AND ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS. 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT IS CLOSED. AND ANY OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER. IF NOT, A FINE OF $100 A DAY WILL BE ASSESSED. HOWEVER AS WAS INDICATED TO YOU, IF YOU NEED , YOU KNOW, MORE TIME, YOU CAN GO TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND REQUEST ONE BUT MAKE SURE IT IS BEFORE THE INITIAL, YOU KNOW, PERIOD GOES BY. OKAY? AND THERE IS A 30 DAY RIGHT TO APPEAL.
[I. 24-1365 100 Corner Dr Bldg E Sabal Chase Essential Housing Logan Winn ]
>> THE NEXT CASE, 6I, 24-1365, 100 CORNER DRIVE BUILDING E,
[00:20:10]
SABAL CHASE ESSENTIAL HOUSING IS THE OWNER.>> WHEN YOU ARE READY. >> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS LOGAN WINN FROM THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. WE'VE GOT CASE NUMBER 24-1365, 100 CORNER DRIVE BUILDING E . THE CASE WAS INITIATED JUNE 18, 2024. THE OWNER IS SABAL CHASE ESSENTIAL HOUSING , ACQUISITIONS LLC AT 2 COOPER STREET 14TH FLOOR, CAMDEN, NEW JERSEY 08101 AND THE VIOLATIONS ARE IPMC 304.10 , STAIRWAYS, DECKS, PORCHES, AND BALCONIES, IPMC 304.2, PROTECTIVE TREATMENT, IPMC 304. 13.2. ONE, MAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS TO THE CRACKED LANDINGS AND WALKWAYS OBTAINING A PERMIT IF NEEDED. TWO, MAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING WHERE THERE ARE HOLES, CRACKS AND WHERE STUCCO IS MISSING, OBTAINING A PERMIT IF NEEDED. THREE, REPAIR AND REPLACE THE WINDOW THAT IS AN OPENABLE. COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND YOUR OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 A DAY BE ASSESSED. MANAGEMENT WAS ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL TIME.
THEY WERE INFORMED THE PERMIT HAD BEEN SUBMITTED LONG AGO.
THE PERMIT WAS APPLIED AND REVIEW FEES WERE PAID ON 10 30, 2024. ON 11/6, 2024, RESUBMITTAL FOR ELECTRICAL. I HAVE PICTURES FROM THE PROPERTY AS WELL.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS?
>> THANK YOU. THE PHOTOGRAPH IS DATED JUNE 13TH, 2024.
>> MR. WINN, DID YOU WANT THIS BACK? THANK YOU. DO THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION YOU TESTIFY TO?
>> YES, THEY DO. >> WHERE THEY TAKEN IN 2024?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE AS COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE.
>> PHOTOGRAPHS SUBMITTED WILL BE IMAGE ONE.
>> MR. WINN, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT AND PHOTOGRPH C,
PLEASE? ON THE SCREEN. >> THAT IS A WINDOW THAT IS
BOARDED UP. >> THAT IS THE INOPERABLE WINDOW? THE ON OPENABLE WINDOW?
>> CORRECT. >> IS THIS AN APARTMENT COMPLEX? WAS THERE A TENANT RESIDING ?
>> I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR APARTMENT.
>> OKAY. YOU ARE DOING THE ENTIRE BUILDING LETTER E WITH
THIS? >> THE COMPLAINT WAS REGARDING
MULTIPLE . >> THANK YOU. OKAY.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? >> NO, MA'AM.
>> COULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME, PLEASE?
>> KEISHA FIDEL. >> AND YOU ARE HERE REPRESENTING SABAL CHASE ESSENTIAL HOUSING?
>> YES. >> WHAT IS YOUR ROLL OR DO YOU HAVE AUTHORITY TO SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF TODAY?
>> I AM THE PROPERTY MANAGER. >> GO AHEAD.
>> A FEW OF THOSE THINGS HAVE ALREADY BEEN FIXED. FOR EXAMPLE, THE WINDOW. THERE ARE PEOPLE THERE CURRENTLY TODAY
[00:25:02]
WORKING ON THAT BUILDING. THEY HAVE BEEN THERE FOR THE LAST WEEK. WE ARE JUST ASKING FOR MORE TIME IN ORDER TO GET THEWORK COMPLETELY DONE. >> THE RECOMMENDATION IS 60
DAYS. IS THAT SUFFICIENT? >> YES, MA'AM .
>> NOTHING FURTHER. THE CITY REQUESTS 60 DAYS.
>> THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL OF ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS FOR AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMITS HAVE CLOSED. COMPLY WITH ANY OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ANY OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER OR A $100 A DAY WILL BE ASSESSED. YOU HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. IF YOU NEED MORE TIME MAKE SURE YOU REQUEST IT BEFORE HAND.
>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. AND WE WILL KEEP
[L. 24-1453 112 Calypso Dr Sabal Chase Essential Housing Frank Remling]
HER HERE BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO MORE CASES FOR SABAL CHASE. AND THE NEXT IS 6L, 24-1453, 112 CALYPSO DRIVE.>> WHEN YOU ARE READY, MR. REMLING.
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS FRANK REMLING AND I WORK FOR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AS AN INSPECTOR . THIS IS CASE NUMBER 24-1453, 112 CALYPSO DRIVE, CASE INITIATED JULY 8TH, 2024.
THE OWNER IS SABAL CHASE ESSENTIAL HOUSING. THE VIOLATIONS ARE IPMC 309.1, INFESTATION. TREAT THE UNIT AND PROPERTY FOR ALL PEST INFESTATION INCLUDING THE ACTIVE TERMITE INFESTATION. THE CITY REQUEST THAT IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FIND A VIOLATION EXISTS THE VIOLATORS BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS FOR EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT IS CLOSED, COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. WE WENT BACK FOR REINSPECTION AND WE DID GET A RECEIPT FOR THE PEST CONTROL BUT UPON MY ARRIVAL SHE MET ME -- THE PROPERTY MANAGER MET ME AT THE JOBSITE. NO EVIDENCE OF TERMITES. THEY WILL HAVE TO REDO IT. I HAVE PICTURES OF THAT AND WE DO HAVE A RECEIPT
OF THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS OR RECEIPT? WOULD YOU HAND THOSE UP, PLEASE , SO I CAN PLACE THEM INTO EVIDENCE?
>> 1ST . TO THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY REPRESENT THE VIOLATION YOU HAVE TESTIFIED TO , AND WHERE THEY TAKEN ON JULY 1ST? AND A RECEIPT FROM NOLAN FOR TERMITE BARRIER , LOOKS LIKE THE WORK WAS DONE ON JULY 24TH, 2024, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS AFTER THIS CASE WAS INITIATED. THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOGRAPHS AND DOCUMENTS INTO EVIDENCE AS
CITY COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE. >> PHOTOS AND COPY OF THE RECEIPT WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE.
>> MR. REMLING, DID YOU HAVE ACCESS TO ONE UNIT? HOW MANY UNITS ARE THERE IN THIS BUILDING?
>> QUITE A FEW. >> QUITE A FEW? 16? AND YOUR CITATION IS FOR THE ENTIRE BUILDING, OR THE ONE UNIT?
>> THE ONE UNIT THAT I SAW. >> OKAY, BUT DID YOU -- IS YOUR
[00:30:06]
CITATION AGAINST THE ENTIRE BUILDING? DO THEY NEED TO TENT AND TREAT EVERY UNIT IN THE BUILDING? WHAT IS THE CITYASKING FOR HERE? >> THAT UNIT, I BELIEVE.
>> THAT UNIT. OKAY. NOTHING FURTHER. GO AHEAD.
>> THE REASON WHY IT TOOK SO LONG IS BECAUSE WHEN SHE DID BRING IT TO MY ATTENTION, WE DID THE ENTIRE BUILDING. THERE ARE ACTUALLY TWO BUILDINGS I NEEDED TO WAIT TO GET APPROVAL DUE TO THE AMOUNT SO WE DID TAKE CARE OF IT, HOWEVER WE WENT INTO REPLACE THE BASEBOARDS AND DOOR FRAMES AND WE NOTICED THERE WAS ACTIVITY SO I CALLED THE COMPANY AND THEY CAME OUT THE SAME DAY FRANK CAME SO WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO CLEAR IT UP HOPEFULLY BY NEXT WEEK.
>> TO CLARIFY, DID YOU TENT THE BUILDING OR SPOT TREAT ?
>> SPOT TREAT. THEY DID A BARRIER AROUND THE BUILDING.
>> THEY DID NOT GO IN THE UNITS?
>> THEY DIDN'T. ONLY TWO APARTMENTS WERE AFFECTED.
>> ALL RIGHT. THE CITY -- THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION IS 60
DAYS. AND FINDING A VIOLATION. >> I FIND A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, APPROVAL OF ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS CLOSED, COMPLY WITH ANY OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND CURE ANY OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER OR FINE OF $100 A DAY WILL BE ASSESSED. THERE IS A 30
DAY RIGHT TO APPEAL. >> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. >> I HAVE ANOTHER ONE.
>> ONE MORE, RIGHT? >> YES. THE LAST CASE FOR SABAL
[M. 24-1454 1002 Mades Drive Sabal Chase Essential Housing Miles Keller ]
CHASE, CASE 6M, 24-1454, 1002 MADES DRIVE.>> WHEN YOU ARE READY. >> CASE NUMBER 24-1454, 1002 MADES DRIVE , CASE INITIATED JULY 8TH, 2024. VIOLATIONS, IPMC 305.6, EXTERIOR WALLS, IPMC 305.3, IPMC 304.13, IPMC 504.1, IPMC 603.1. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, ONE, MAKE REPAIRS TO THE EXTERIOR WALLS THAT ARE CRACKED, TWO, REPAIR THE WATER DAMAGED FLOORS AND WALLS, THREE, REPAIR LEAKING PLUMBING VALVES, FOUR, REPAIR THE LOOSE ELECTRICAL OUTLETS, AND FIVE, MAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS TO THE WINDOWS THAT ARE NOT INSTALLED PROPERLY. 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 OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. IT SAYS ITEM NUMBER ONE. IT WILL BE COVERED UNDER THE PERMIT AND WE WILL CURRENTLY APPLY FOR REINSPECTION. ITEM NUMBER FOUR WAS TAKEN CARE OF. I DO HAVE PICTURES AND I DO HAVE MORE PICTURES FOR THE INSPECTION THAT WAS DONE FOR THIS STUFF.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS ON THIS ONE?
>> SOME OF THESE ARE THE ORIGINALS.
[00:35:08]
>> SO WE HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS DATED JULY 1ST, 2024. MR. KELLER, YOUR TESTIMONY IS THOSE ARE FROM YOUR ORIGINAL INSPECTION,
>> DO THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT WHAT YOU HAVE TESTIFIED TO AND WHAT YOU OBSERVED ON JULY 1ST, 2024?
>> YES, THEY DO. >> NOVEMBER 5TH, 2024. DO THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY -- YOU HAVE TESTIFIED THESE PHOTOS WERE TAKEN ON NOVEMBER 5TH, 2024 WHEN YOU WENT FOR REINSPECTION? AND DO THESE ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION YOU HAVE TESTIFIED TO THAT YOU OBSERVED ON NOVEMBER 5TH, 2024?
>> YES. THEY DO. >> THE CITY MOVIES INTO EVIDENCE AS A SINGLE COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE.
>> PHOTOGRAPHS SUBMITTED WILL BE ENTERED AS A COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE FOR THE CITY.
>> THE PHOTOGRAPHS WE JUST OBSERVED HAD PLASTIC BAGS SHOVED IN THE TRACK OF THE WINDOW. WAS THAT THERE WHEN YOU
INSPECTED THE PROPERTY? >> YES, IT WAS.
>> THANK YOU. AND SCROLL BACK UP. ARE THOSE -- WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT HERE AT THE BASEBOARDS?
>> THOSE ARE ON THE BACKSIDE OF WHERE THE LAUNDRY SPIGOTS WERE LEAKING. EVIDENCE OF WATER AND MOLD INTRUSION STARTING.
>> IS IT DIRT OR MOLD ? >> DOWN THERE AT THE BASEBOARD,
YOU CAN SEE WATER DAMAGE. >> THE QUESTION WAS IS THE BLACK WE SEE IN THE PHOTO DIRT OR MOLD?
WAS THAT UNIT OCCUPIED? >> YES.
>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE,
MR. KELLER? >> NOT AT THIS TIME .
>> THANK YOU. >> WHEN YOU ARE READY.
>> CURRENTLY IT SEEMS TO BE GETTING DONE AND I BELIEVE HE WAS ABLE TO SEE THE CONTRACT. THE COMPANY THAT IS WORKING ON THAT BUILDING, THE LAST VIOLATION, THEY ARE THERE TODAY. WE ARE JUST ASKING FOR MORE TIME TO GET IT COMPLETED.
>> I FIND THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN THE PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED, AND COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS. IF THAT DOES NOT OCCUR, THE VIOLATOR WILL BE ASSESSED A FINE OF $100 A DAY AND THERE IS A 30 DAY RIGHT TO
[J. 24-1413 2403 Okeechobee Rd CKOne Properties LLC Miles Keller]
>> THE NEXT CASE WILL BE 6J, 24-1413, 2403 OKEECHOBEE ROAD, AND CK ONE PROPERTIES LLC IS THE OWNER.
>> WHEN YOU ARE READY, MR. KELLER.
[00:40:01]
>> CASE NUMBER 24-1413, 2403 OKEECHOBEE ROAD, CK ONE PROPERTIES LLC, CASE INITIATED JUNE 25TH, 2024. VIOLATIONS, IPMC111.1.1 , UNSAFE STRUCTURES, IPMC 111.1.3, 2021, STRUCTURE UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY, IPMC 111.1.5, DANGEROUS STRUCTURE PREMISES, IPMC 304.2, PROTECTIVE TREATMENT, IPMC 304.13, WINDOWS, SKYLIGHTS, DOOR FRAMES, IPMC 304.13.1 , GLAZING, IPMC 304.15 , DOORS, IPMC 304.18, BUILDING SECURITY, IPMC 305.3, INTERIOR SURFACES, IPMC 604.3, IPMC 604.3.1.1, AND IPMC 604.3.2.1. ANY STRUCTURAL DAMAGE WILL REQUIRE SIGNED AND SEALED REPAIR PLANS DESIGNED BY A REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL. RECOMMENDATIONS, THE CITY REQUEST IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS A VIOLATION EXISTS THE VIOLATORS BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED, COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND CURE ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. SO FAR NO PERMITS OR CONTACT FROM THE OWNER AND I DO HAVE PICTURES OF THE VIOLATIONS.
>> SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS BEFORE YOU PLACE THEM INTO EVIDENCE? OKAY.
>> THE PHOTGRAPH IS DATED JUNE 18TH .
>> WERE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BY YOU ON JUNE 18TH, MR. KELLER , AND THEY ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION YOU HAVE
TESTIFIED TO TODAY? >> YES. THEY DO.
>> THE CITY MOVES INTO EVIDENCE COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE.
>> PHOTOGRAPHS SUBMITTED WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE.
>> MR. KELLER, DID YOU HAVE ANY CONVERSATION WITH ANYONE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY BEFORE COMING INTO THE
PROCEEDINGS? >> I THINK I SPOKE TO THE OWNER THE DATE IS HAPPENED BUT I HAVE NOT HAD ANY CONTACT SINCE.
>> THANK YOU. AND TO CLARIFY, WE ARE LOOKING AT A DAMAGED
UPSTAIRS? >> FIRE UPSTAIRS AND WATER
DAMAGE ON THE FIRST FLOOR. >> ALL RIGHT. AND WAS THERE A TENANT ON THE FIRST FLOOR? WAS IT OCCUPIED?
>> YES, THERE WAS. >> IT DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE
OCCUPIED TO YOU? >> IT WAS I THINK A SUICIDE AND
FIRE . >> ON THE GROUND FLOOR?
>> THE SECOND FLOOR. >> WAS THE GROUND-FLOOR
OCCUPIED? >> NOT AT THE MOMENT BUT IT IS
AN ACTIVE BUSINESS. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. SIR, WHAT IS YOUR NAME?
>> I AM THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND HE IS THE OWNER.
>> MY NAME IS KENNETH JACKSON, PROPERTY OWNER.
>> THANK YOU. WHEN YOU ARE READY.
[00:45:01]
>> SO, WE BASICALLY -- I HAVE SEALED DRAWINGS FROM THE ARCHITECT WHO IS WELL KNOWN HERE IN FORT PIERCE. WE ARE KIND OF GOING INTO IT AND WE JUST GOT THESE DRAWN UP. THE PROBLEM IS WITH MR. JACKSON IS OBVIOUSLY INSURANCE. SO, THEY HAVE ITEMIZED THE DAMAGE WHICH IS NOWHERE NEAR -- I HAVE DONE A COST BREAKDOWN FOR WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AND I HAVE TO GIVE THEM BUILDING CODES TO REBUILD THIS PLACE TO TODAY'S CODES AND I HAVE TO ITEMIZE EVERY LINE ITEM. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON WHY WE -- WE ARE GOING INTO PERMIT AND WE WILL HAVE A PERMIT BUT WE CAN'T START CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE I CAN'T START AND FINISH THIS THING UP AND INSURANCE AS WELL, WE ALREADY DID IT WITHOUT PAYING. IT IS A CATCH-22 BUT GETTING THE PERMIT INTO EFFECT, WE ARE DEALING WITH THE INSURANCE BECAUSE BEFORE WE COMMENCE WORK, WE REALLY NEED TO GET THAT IRONED OUT SO EVERYONE IS ON THE SAME PAGE REGARDING THE COST MR. JACKSON WILL INCUR PAYING ME AND HOW MUCH THEY ARE
GIVING HIM. >> MR. JACKSON, WOULD YOU LIKE
TO ADD ANYTHING? >> NO. THE INVESTIGATOR THAT WAS HIRED BY THE INSURED BUILDING, WHAT SHE TURNED AND TO THE INSURANCE COMPANY WAS NOT GOING TO COMPLY WITH THE CODES THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE WOULD REQUIRE. THAT IS WHY AGAIN OUR ARCHITECT WAS HIRED BECAUSE SHE WAS -- SHE LEFT OUT SO MANY THINGS AND COMPILING THE CODES FOR THE INSURANCE COMPANY, THEY WANT EACH COAT ITEMIZED FOR WHAT IT IS AND THIS IS TAKING THE LENGTH OF TIME SINCE WE JUST RECEIVED THE DRAWINGS SHORTLY AGO FROM THE ARCHITECT.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? >> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY ONE
MORE. WHAT IS YOUR NAME? >> MILES.
>> UPON MIKE MENARDS AND THE ENGINEER REVIEWING THE PROPERTY THERE WAS NO STRUCTURAL DAMAGE. POUCH CAUGHT ON FIRE. THE PROBLEM UPSTAIRS, THERE IS NO DRYWALL IN THAT BUILDING. IT IS OLD CHICKEN WIRE. THAT IS WHY NOTHING BURNED. THE WHOLE BUILDING IS CONCRETE INSIDE AND OUT. I THINK YOU MET WITH MR. JACKSON AND DISCUSSED THERE WAS NO STRUCTURAL DAMAGE.
>> I DON'T RECALL THAT. >> OKAY.
>> PROBABLY WHY THEY WOULDN'T REQUIRE THE CEILING.
>> THE CEILING IS CONCRETE TOO. ONCE WE GET INTO PERMITTING, WE ARE GOING TO REBUILD IT TO TODAY'S BUILDING CODE. IT WILL BE TOTALLY REDONE. THERE IS A COPY OF THE PLANS IF YOU NEED
THEM. >> SHAUN, DO YOU WANT A COPY OF
THE PLANS? >> WE WILL WAIT . THANK YOU.
>> THE CITY IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO REQUEST A FINDING OF A VIOLATION, THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS. IF YOU'RE UNABLE TO GET THE PERMITS APPLIED FOR, COME BACK AND REQUEST AN EXTENSION. THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT CAN GRANT EXTENSIONS OF UP TO 90 DAYS AND IF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT DENIES A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION THAT WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FOR CONSIDERATION.
>> THANK YOU. >> I FIND THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND YOU HAVE 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 STATED IN THE ORDER AND IF NOT, THERE WILL BE A FINE OF $100 A DAY UNLESS YOU HAVE AN EXTENSION. THERE IS A 30 DAY RIGHT TO APPEAL. THANK YOU.
[F. 24-1196 1206 N 29th St Bldg. 1-4 SP Pine Creek Village LP Logan Winn ]
>> THE NEXT CASE, AND I BELIEVE THE PERSON HAS TO BE SWORN IN AS WELL FOR THIS CASE. IT IS 6F, 24-1196, 1206 NORTH 29TH
[00:50:14]
STREET , BUILDING ONE THROUGH FOUR. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THE TESTIMONY YOU PROVIDE WILL BE>> THANK YOU. >> WHEN YOU ARE READY, MR.
WINN. >> 1206 NORTH 29TH , THE OWNER, SP PINE CREEK VILLAGE LP, SUITE 150, SAN JUAN CALIFORNIA, 92675. VIOLATIONS, IPMC 304.13.2, IPMC 309.1, IPMC 305.3, IPMC 605.1, IPMC 704.1, IPMC 504.1, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, REPAIR AND REPLACE NON-OPENABLE WINDOWS, TWO, TREAT PROPERTY FOR ALL PEST INFESTATIONS, THREE, MAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS TO HOLES IN THE WALL, FOUR, REPLACE MISSING LIGHT FIXTURES, FIVE, REPLACE MISSING SMOKE DETECTORS, SIX, REPLACE BATHROOM VANITY, SEVEN, REPLACE WATER HEATER. COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND YOUR OTHER VIOLATIONS NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. THERE HAS BEEN NO REQUEST FOR REINSPECTION AT THIS TIME. I HAVE A SET OF PICTURES ALSO.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPH?
>> I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE PROBLEM IS. 60 DAYS IS GOOD FOR US. WE ARE RENOVATING THE WHOLE UNIT.
>> YOU WILL GET YOUR TURN. >> WE HAVE TO INTRODUCE THE
PICTURES. >> WE HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN MAY 25TH, 2024. I'M SORRY, MAY 23RD, 2024. THE INTERIOR OF WHAT APPEARS TO BE AN OCCUPIED UNIT. WAS THE UNIT OCCUPIED WHEN YOU ARE ON THE PROPERTY? AND WHERE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN MAY 23RD, 2024? DO THEY ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION
>> THE CITY MOVE THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS COMPOSITE IMAGE
ONE. >> PHOTOGRAPHS WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE.
>> WHAT IS YOUR NAME? >> JEANNIE DRAGON.
>> AND THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SP PINE CREEK VILLAGE LP. DO YOU HAVE AUTHORITY TO SPEAK ON THEIR
BEHALF TODAY? >> I AM THE SITE MANAGER.
>> HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN IN THAT POSITION?
>> IN THE PROPERTY, I TOOK OVER IN JUNE.
>> THIS CASE WAS INITIATED MAY 24, 2024. IS THERE A TENANT IN
THIS PROPERTY? >> VACANT RIGHT NOW.
>> IT WAS OCCUPIED WHEN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN?
>> IF HE IS SAYING YES -- >> YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT? HAVE ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THIS LIST BEEN REPAIRED
SINCE? >> NONE OF THOSE RIGHT NOW HAVE BEEN REPAIRED BECAUSE IT IS GOING INTO -- IT HAS BEEN VACANT FOR A LONG TIME. AND THEY ARE REMEDIATING THE WHOLE
[00:55:03]
UNIT. WE WILL GET CONTRACTORS AND EVERYTHING TO REDO THAT UNIT. CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW THE 60 DAYS WILL FIT . THEY WILL START REMEDIATION AND GOVERNING IT OUT TODAY.>> OKAY. ANYTHING? >> I FIND THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE VIOLATOR HAS 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT AND ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT IS CLOSED AND COMPLY WITH ANY OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS AND VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER. IF NOT, A FINE OF $100 A DAY WILL BEGIN AFTER THE 60 DAYS AND THERE IS A 30 DAY
RIGHT TO APPEAL. >> THANK YOU.
[N. 24-1463 1111 N 27th St 10-81 SP Pine Creek Village LP Logan Winn ]
>> I WILL CALL IT. ALL RIGHT, THE NEXT CASE, 6N , 24-1463, 1111 N 27TH STREET 10-81, AND SP PINE CREEK VILLAGE LP IS THE
OWNER. >> OKAY, WE HAVE 24-1463, 1111 N 27TH STREET 10-81, OWNER SP PINE CREEK VILLAGE LP , AND VIOLATIONS, IPMC 603.1. DIRECTIVE ACTION, REPAIR OR REPLACE THE AC UNIT THAT IS NOT WORKING. THE CITY REQUESTS THAT IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR 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 OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100.00 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. THERE HAS BEEN NO REQUEST FOR REINSPECTION ON THIS UNIT AND I HAVE A SET OF PICTURES.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS?
>> NO, I SAW THEM ALREADY. >> THANK YOU.
>> THE PHOTOGRAPH IS DATED JULY 9TH. INTERIOR OF THE UNIT. WAS THE UNIT OCCUPIED ON JULY 9TH WHEN YOU TOOK THESE
>> TO THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION
>> THE CITY MOVES THESE INTO EVIDENCE AS COMPOSITE IMAGE
ONE. >> PHOTOGRAPHS WILL BE ENTERED AS COMPOSITE IMAGE ONE .
>> ANYTHING FURTHER ? WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THE VIOLATIONS?
>> I KNOW THE VIOLATION WAS CORRECTED. I JUST NEED TO SUBMIT THE PAPERWORK. FOR REINSPECTION.
>> THE CITY WILL ASK -- THE CITY REQUESTS 30 DAYS ON THIS
ONE AND FINDING OF VIOLATION. >> 30 DAYS?
>> 30 DAYS. I FIND THE VIOLATION EXISTS IN THE VIOLATOR HAS 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN PERMIT AND ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS WHICH DOESN'T REALLY APPLY. OTHERWISE A FINE OF $100 A DAY WILL APPLY AND YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO APPEAL AND YOU HAVE 30 DAYS.
>> MAY I HAVE THE CASES THAT REQUIRE AN INTERPRETER?
>> ALL RIGHT . CAN YOU CALL THE CASE, PLEASE?
[C. 24-1193 1127 Avenue E Unit A Misael Hernandez Resendiz Joel Smith]
[D. 24-1194 1127 Avenue E Unit B Misael Hernandez Resendiz Joel Smith]
[01:00:07]
>> THE CASE IS 6C AND D, 24-1193, 1127 AVENUE E UNIT A, AND 24-1194, SAME ADDRESS BUT UNIT B. I WILL CALL THE
INTERPRETER. >> CALLS MAY BE MONITORED AND RECORDED FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE PURPOSES. THANK YOU FOR CALLING LANGUAGE LINK. PLEASE ENTER YOUR NUMBER FOLLOWED BY THE POUND SIGN. PLEASE ENTER YOUR ACCOUNT NUMBER FOLLOWED BY THE POUND SIGN. PLEASE ENTER YOUR ACCOUNT NUMBER FOLLOWED BY THE
POUND SIGN. >> LET'S TAKE A FIVE MINUTE
>> LET'S TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK TO HAVE A DISCUSSION OUTSIDE WITH THE RESPONDENT, SOMEONE WHO CAN SPEAK SPANISH AND RESOLVE THIS. LOOKS LIKE HE APPLIED FOR A PERMIT ON 10- 25.
>> SPEAK SPANISH? YOU HAVE ALREADY HAD A CONVERSATION? DOES HE UNDERSTAND THE 60 DAYS WE ARE REQUESTING? DOES HE CAN SEND TO
LANGUAGE ] >> HE CONTACTED THE CONTRACTOR
THIS MORNING. >> DOES HE CONSENT TO 60 DAYS?
>> DOES THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT HAVE A STIPULATION FORM?
>> WE WOULDN'T HAVE ONE IN SPANISH.
>> ALL RIGHT. LANGUAGE LINK. BACK ON THE RECORD. TRY AGAIN.
>> AND YOU TALKED TO THE CONTRACTOR?
>> YES. >> THAT'S ANOTHER PROBLEM.
>> SIR, DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD WITH TODAY'S
HEARING WITHOUT AN INTERPRETER? >> DO YOU WANT AN INTERPRETER ,
OR OKAY FOR TODAY? >> IT'S OKAY FOR TODAY. I HAVE
THIS PERMIT. >> DO YOU AGREE TO GO FORWARD
TODAY WITHOUT AN INTERPRETER? >>
>> CALLS MAY BE MONITORED OR RECORDED FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE PURPOSES. THANK YOU FOR CALLING LANGUAGE LINK. PLEASE ENTER YOUR ACCOUNT NUMBER FOLLOWED BY THE POUND SIGN. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A THIRD-PARTY CALL PLEASE PRESS ONE. PRESS TWO TO CAN DO -- PRESS ONE FOR SPANISH. PLEASE ENTER YOUR DEPARTMENT CODE FOLLOWED BY THE POUND SIGN. YOU'VE ENTERED 2 9 0 2. IF THIS IS CORRECT, PRESS ONE.
[01:05:11]
THE SPANISH INTERPRETER. IS YOUR CLIENT PRESENT ?>> HE IS PRESENT. I JUST NEED TO KNOW IF YOU ARE ABLE TO INTERPRET FOR LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
>> YES, I AM. >> OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. I NEED TO SWEAR YOU AND FOR TESTIMONY THEN.
>> I'M SORRY? >> I HAVE TO SWEAR YOU AND THAT YOU WILL INTERPRET CORRECTLY, IF THAT'S OKAY.
>> SURE. IT IS OKAY. >> DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM YOU WILL ACCURATELY TRANSLATE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE INTO SPANISH AND SPANISH LANGUAGE INTO ENGLISH?
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JOEL SMITH . I AM WITH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. I AM A BUILDING INSPECTOR /INVESTIGATOR.
>> GOOD MORNING. SHOULD I START INTERPRETATION?
>> GO AHEAD, JOEL. >> THE CASE NUMBER IS 24-1193,
ADDRESS, 1127 AVENUE E UNIT A. >>
LANGUAGE ] >> THE OWNER IS MISAEL
HERNANDEZ RESENDIZ . RESENDIZ. >>
LANGUAGE ] >> THE CASE WAS INITIATED SEPTEMBER 11, 2024. THE VIOLATION IS FBC 105.1, PERMIT
REQUIRED. >> INTERPRETER SPEAKING. PLEASE
REPEAT FOR ME. >> THE CASE WAS INITIATED SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2024, AND THE VIOLATION IS FBC 105.1, PERMIT
>> CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, OBTAIN A PERMIT FOR THE NEW HVAC SYSTEM INSTALLED, INCLUDING DUCTWORK AND ELECTRICAL WIRING DONE
WITHOUT A PERMIT. >> INTERPRETER SPEAKING. PLEASE
REPEAT FOR ME. >> CORRECTIVE ACTIONS. OBTAIN A NEW PERMIT FOR THE HVAC SYSTEM INSTALLATION, INCLUDING DUCTWORK AND ELECTRICAL WIRING DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT.
>> EXCUSE ME. THIS IS CITY ATTORNEY --
>> CITY MOVES TO CONTINUE CASE NUMBER 24-1193 AND 24-1194 FOR
[01:10:18]
>> DOES THE RESPONDENT AGREE TO CONTINUE THE CASES?
>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, CONTINUED?
>> YES. >> BOTH CASES WILL BE CONTINUED
FOR 30 DAYS. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. THE NEXT CASE WILL BE 9A, 23-52 , 429 N 20TH STREET.
I WILL CALL THE RESPONDENT. 429 N 20TH STREET, UNIT B. IS SHARON JOHNSON I WILL BE CALLING.
>> DO YOU KNOW WHAT CASE EVERYONE IS HERE FOR ? I WOULD RATHER DO THE CASES FOR THOSE ACTUALLY HERE. DO THEY REQUIRE
AN INTERPRETER? >> THEY ARE HERE FOR SOUTH OCEAN BUT THE ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT ASKED FOR US TO CALL HER BECAUSE SHE HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE ENGINEERING
COMPANY. >> YOU CAN GO FORWARD WITH THE
TELEPHONE ONE. >> WE ARE DOING 9A AND B.
>> YOUR CALL HAS BEEN FORWARDED TO AN AUTOMATED VOICE MESSAGE
SYSTEM. 561644 -- >> DO YOU WANT ME TO TRY AGAIN?
>> HAVE YOU TRIED BOTH NUMBERS?
>> SHE ONLY PROVIDED ONE. THE FIRST TIME I CALLED, I USED
ONE. >> HAVE YOU BEEN PUT INTO VOICEMAIL? IS THAT WHAT THAT WAS, A VOICEMAIL REQUEST?
>> I DID TELL HER OUR HEARING WAS 9:00 UNTIL 11:00.
>> DID SHE FILL OUT THE TELEPHONE REQUEST FORM?
>> SHE DID. >> TRIED ONE MORE TIME BEFORE WE DROP HER TO THE END OF THE DOCKET.
>> YOUR CALL HAS BEEN FORWARDED TO AN AUTOMATED VOICE MESSAGING
[C. 23-1981 715 S Ocean Dr Boardwalk Condominium Assn Inc. Shaun Coss ]
-- >> OKAY. THE NEXT CASE, 9C, 23 E- 1981 , 715 S OCEAN DRIVE, BOARDWALK CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION AND I WILL BE CALLING THE OWNER.
[01:15:03]
>> TYPE YOUR >> THIS IS ELIZABETH WITH THE CITY OF WORKERS DEPARTMENT. YOU ARE IN AUDIO ATTENDANCE OF THE
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING. >> YES, THANK YOU.
>> I NEED TO SWEAR YOU AND FOR TESTIMONY. IF YOU COULD RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THE TESTIMONY YOU
PROVIDE WILL BE THE TRUTH? >> YES, I DO.
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SHOULD I MOVE FORWARD, OR WILL YOU LET
ME KNOW? >> THIS IS CASE 23-1981, 715 S OCEAN DRIVE, BOARDWALK CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION . THIS MATTER CAME BEFORE THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IN JUNE OF 2024. A 30 DAY EXTENSION OF TIME WAS GRANTED AUGUST 20TH, 2024 AND THE AFFIDAVIT OF NONCOMPLIANCE WAS RECORDED SEPTEMBER 24TH, 2024. WE HAVE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM THE OWNERS ASSOCIATION REQUESTING A FURTHER EXTENSION OF TIME. THAT MATTER WAS INITIALLY SCHEDULED FOR THE OCTOBER SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING CANCELED DUE TO THE HURRICANE SO IT IS HERE TODAY BEFORE YOU. PRIOR TO MAKING A RECOMMENDATION I WOULD LIKE TO
HEAR FROM THE OWNER. >> WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST MORE TIME AND A CANCELLATION OF FINES. WE DID GET THE ENGINEERING REPORT DONE AND THE ORIGINAL REPORT WE GOT AFTER TALKING WITH THE PEOPLE AT THE CITY, WE FOUND OUT IT NEEDED TO BE STAMPED AND SEALED AND WE WERE CONCERNED AFTER TALKING TO SEVERAL CONTRACTORS WHETHER THE REPAIRS THEY WERE CALLING FOR WERE JUSTIFIABLE AND NECESSARY. WE WENT BACK TO THE ENGINEERS AND EXPLAINED TO THEM WE NEEDED TO CORRECT THE PROBLEMS , BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE A DESIRE TO REBUILD ANYTHING THAT DID NOT HAVE TO BE REBUILT. THE CUSTOMER SAID THEY HAD OBTAINED BECAUSE THEY WERE UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THEY WOULD GET TO DO THE WORK. WELL, OVER $200,000. WE ASKED FOR THEM TO LOOK BACK AT THE PLANS TO SEE WHAT WAS NECESSARY AND I WANT TO STATE TOO THAT THEY DID TELL US THERE WAS NO IMMEDIATE SAFETY CONCERNS. THEY SAID THIS WAS BECAUSE OF AGING AND IT WAS NECESSARY SO THEY REVISED THE PLAN. WE HAD A MEETING IN EARLY OCTOBER. THEY HAD BEEN TRYING TO GET ESTIMATES FOR US. I SUBMITTED THE PLANS AND THE ESTIMATES THAT THE ONE ESTIMATE THEY WERE ABLE TO GIVE US. WE TOOK THOSE PLANS TO OTHER COMPANIES BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET THREE PLANS ACCORDING TO -- I GUESS NOT THREE PLANS BUT THREE ESTIMATES BASED ON THE CONDO ASSOCIATION BYLAWS . WE ARE WORKING ON GETTING TWO OTHER ESTIMATES. WE HAVE ONE THAT SHOULD BE FINISHED ANY DAY NOW FROM CARTER CONCRETE. WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE THEY SAID THEY WOULD GET TO IT. THE PROBLEM WE ARE RUNNING INTO IS WE ARE A SMALL JOB COMPARED TO THE BIG JOBS THEY ARE DOING. THEY SAID THERE IS A DECEMBER DEADLINE . SOMETHING TO DO WITH 40 YEAR INSPECTIONS FOR ALL OF THE LARGER BUILDINGS SO THEY ARE NOT PUTTING US AS A PRIORITY. AND OUR JOB AGAIN AS CLARIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR IS MORE OF AN AGING ISSUE THAN AN IMMEDIATE SAFETY ISSUE. SO I AM WORKING WITH THEIR TIMELINE TRYING TO GET IT DONE. CARTER CONCRETE IS WORKING WITH OUR OTHER BUILDING COMPANY. THEY ARE A LOCAL COMPANY THAT HAS DONE WORK FOR US BEFORE. THEY SAID THEY CAN PULL THE PERMIT BUT THE PROBLEM IS IF THEY PULL THE PERMIT WE CAN'T COMMIT TO THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE A THREE BID -- THREE BIDS AND TO ACTUALLY HIRE
[01:20:09]
THE CONTRACTOR TO DO THE WORK. FURTHERMORE WE ARE LOOKING AT FUNDING. WE HAVE LOOKED AT SEVERAL COMPANIES. EVEN THOUGH THAT $2000 BID WAS REDUCED TO MORE THAN HALF OF THAT, IT IS STILL QUITE EXPENSIVE. YOU KNOW, WE WILL HAVE TO RESURFACE THE BALCONY AREA AND ALL OF THESE CONCRETE COMPANIES CHARGE QUITE A BIT SO WE ARE LOOKING AT FUNDING BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE MOST FAMILIAR WITH US BECAUSE OF OUR INVESTORS, WE HAVE A THIRD OF OUR OWNERS LIVE IN THE UNIT AND LIVE OFF SOCIAL SECURITY. IT IS ONLY 13 UNITS. $80,000 , SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS IN INVESTMENT. WE ARE LOOKING AT LOANS. WE HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH A COUPLE BANKS TO GET LOANS SO THOSE RESIDENTS WHO CANNOT AFFORD THIS WOULD BE ABLE TO GET SOMETHING THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO PAY OVERTIME. WE ARE JUST ASKING RESPECTFULLY FOR A LITTLE MORE TIME AND UNDERSTANDING WE ARE KIND OF PUT IN A POSITION AT THE MERCY OF, ONE, THE ENGINEERING PEOPLE CHANGING THE PLANS. AND TWO, WHICH WE WANTED TO CHANGE IT BECAUSE WE WANTED IT TO REFLECT WHAT WAS NECESSARY, NOT WHAT IS GOING TO COST US HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. AND TWO, THE CONCRETE COMPANIES BEING INUNDATED WITH OTHER THINGS RIGHT NOW. AGAIN, WE CAN PULL A PERMIT BUT WE MIGHT HAVE TO CHANGE THE CONTRACTOR. SO I DON'T WANT TO POSE -- PULL SOMETHING JUST TO PULL. I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR A LITTLE MORE TIME AND THAT , YOU KNOW, THE FINES ARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE OWNERS WHO ARE JUST WAITING FOR THE CONTRACTORS TO GET THAT INFORMATION.>> OKAY, AND I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS. FIRST OF ALL, THE FINES CANNOT BE WAIVED OR REDUCED UNTIL THIS CASE HAS BEEN BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CAN CONSIDER WHETHER TO STAY THE FINES OR IF THE FINES SHOULD RESUME OR CONTINUE. THE CONTRACTOR THAT PROVIDED AN ESTIMATE I BELIEVE HE SAID $200,000. WHAT WAS THE
CONTRACTOR'S NAME ? >> THAT WAS ORIGINALLY WHAT THE ESTIMATED IT AND THAT CONTRACTOR ACTUALLY CAME FROM MBB . PART OF MY ISSUE IS WHEN WE CONTRACTED THE ENGINEERING COMPANY FOR THE PLANS, WE TOLD THEM WE HAVE TO GET THREE ESTIMATES BUT THEY ARE ASSUMING THEY GET TO DO THE WORK. THEY ARE COMING UP WITH PLANS THAT ARE FISCALLY BENEFICIAL TO THEM. THAT CAME THROUGH THEIR CONTRACTOR. THAT ESTIMATE CAME VIA THEM. WHEN WE SAID WE WERE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT GETTING OTHER ENGINEERING REPORTS BECAUSE WHEN I TOOK THOSE PLANS TO ANOTHER COMPANY TO GET A FOLLOW-UP ESTIMATE, THEY SAID ALL OF THIS DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DONE LIKE THIS AND I GOT TO MBB AND THEY REVISED THE PLANS AND SAID THEY WOULD GET US ESTIMATES FOR THE SMALLER WORK PROJECT. THE MORE COST-EFFECTIVE APPROACH TO FIXING THE PROBLEM. THEN THEY CAME BACK. I SUBMITTED TO THE ESTIMATE THAT THEIR CONTRACTOR CAME BACK WITH AND THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO GET OTHER CONTRACTORS EITHER SO WE HAVE BEEN KIND OF WORKING TOGETHER
AND GETTING THIS. >> AND THE ESTIMATE THAT YOU EMAILED, WAS THAT FROM AMERICAN ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESTORATION?
>> YES. >> THE ESTIMATE AMOUNT WAS
$89,228. IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. THAT WAS BASED ON THE REVISED PLAN FROM THE ORIGINAL PLANS. YES.
>> OKAY, AND THE ESTIMATE WAS DATED AUGUST 20, 2024 AND WAS
[01:25:02]
VALID FOR -- >> SO I NOTICED --
>> 30 DAYS. >> I AM SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU.
I DID NOT RECEIVE IT. I CAN CHECK TO SEE WHEN I RECEIVED IT BECAUSE WE MET WITH THEM TO UNDERSTAND THE PLANS, BUT HE DID NOT GIVE US REVISED PLANS UNTIL EARLY OCTOBER. BECAUSE -- LET ME GET THE EXACT DATE WHEN I GOT THAT FROM HIM. HE SAID HE THOUGHT HE SENT US THE REVISED PLANS AND THESE ARE THE FOLKS MBB BUT WE DID NOT GET REVISED PLANS UNTIL WE REQUESTED A MEETING WITH HIM AND HE SENT THEM TO US AND THAT WAS -- HOLD ON. I AM TRYING TO SEE THE EXACT DATE. WE MET -- OCTOBER 2ND IS WHEN WE GOT THE ACTUAL UPDATED CLAIM.
>> OKAY. >> AND WE PROVIDED IT WHO SENT IT TO CARTER CONCRETE AND WE CONTACTED SEVERAL OTHER CONCRETE COMPANIES BUT I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET THE
RESPONSE YET FROM THEM. >> AND THOSE WERE REVISED PLANS THAT WERE RECEIVED AFTER YOU SPOKE TO ENVIRONMENTAL
RESTORATION , OR BEFORE? >> I THINK AMERICAN RESTORATION WAS DONE -- WE ASKED FOR THE SMALLER APPROACH. WE ASKED FOR THAT AND IN AUGUST, WHEN WE ASKED ABOUT THE STAMP FIELD PLANS, I ASKED ABOUT THEM AUGUST 21ST. I SAID THESE ARE NOT THE FORMAT THAT WE NEED. WE NEED STAMPED PLANS. WE ASKED ABOUT THE BIDS FOR THE SMALLER APPROACH BECAUSE WE ASKED ABOUT THAT NUMEROUS TIMES, EVEN WHEN HE REVIEWED IT. HE SAID HE WOULD GET THOSE TO US. I ASKED FOR A MEETING TO SET UP BECAUSE WE HADN'T RECEIVED THOSE AND WE HADN'T RECEIVED THE PLANS, SO WE SET UP A PHONE MEETING AND THAT IS WHEN HE SAID HE DID NOT REALIZE WE DID NOT GET THE PLANS. I THINK HE GAVE US -- LET ME CHECK. HE MIGHT HAVE GIVEN US THE PROPOSAL BEFORE BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE PLANS TO MATCH THE PROPOSAL, SO HE GAVE US THE PROPOSAL FROM AMERICAN IN SEPTEMBER, BUT HE DID NOT GIVE US -- WE COULDN'T GET COMPETING BIDS BECAUSE HE HAD THOUGHT HE HAD GIVEN US THE UPDATED PLANS . WHILE WE WERE TALKING TO HIM DURING THE MEETING, WE SET, YOU KNOW, WE NEED THE PLANS TO PREDICT THE REPAIR. THEY CAN'T JUST SAY , WELL, WE WILL DO A LESS COSTLY APPROACH. IT HAS TO BE IN THE PLAN. THAT IS WHEN HE SENT THE PLANS. HONESTLY IT WAS A MISCOMMUNICATION BUT WE DID NOT GET THE PLANS TO PRESENT TO OUR PEOPLE. WE HAD GIVEN THEM THE MORE EXPENSIVE PLANS UNTIL OCTOBER. THE BEGINNING OF OCTOBER. OCTOBER 2ND.
>> OKAY. AND WHEN THE ESTIMATE WAS EMAILED TO YOU, DID YOU
ALSO EMAIL A SET OF PLANS? >> YES, I DID.
>> WHERE THOSE THE ORIGINAL OR THE REVISED PLANS?
>> THE REVISED PLANS. >> THANK YOU. AND WHEN YOU SAY YOU ARE REQUESTING A LITTLE MORE TIME, HOW MUCH TIME IS A LITTLE MORE TIME THAT YOU ARE REQUESTING?
>> IF WE COULD HAVE ANOTHER 30 DAYS. TO BE HONEST, WE HAVE NOT EVEN HAD PEOPLE RESPOND TO US. WE HAVE BEEN CALLING ALL OVER TO GET THAT THIRD PERSON. CARTER CONCRETE SAYS THEY WILL HAVE THAT TO US IN A FEW DAYS AND THAT IS OUR SECOND
[01:30:03]
ESTIMATE. SEVERAL PEOPLE SAID THEY WILL GET OUT THERE TO REVIEW IT BUT I HAVE TO FOLLOW UP AND SEE WHERE WE STAND WITH THE TIMELINE. IF WE CAN AT LEAST GET THE SECOND ONE IN, AT LEAST WE HAVE SOMETHING TO MOVE FORWARD. AGAIN, CARTER IS WORKING WITH GULFSTREAM BUILDING. THEY CAN PULL THE PERMIT -- WE HAVE TO HAVE A VOTE ON THE CONTRACTORS AND WE MIGHT HAVE TO CHANGE IT IF THEY DON'T COME IN WITH THE BEST ESTIMATE. I MEAN, WE WOULD LOVE 30 DAYS.>> THANK YOU. SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, IF I COULD HAVE A MOMENT TO REVIEW THE INFORMATION PRESENTED, I WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU. THE INFORMATION EMAILED TO MISS BACK -- MS. BECK ARE A SET OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS NOT SIGNED AND SEALED DATED JULY, 2024 AND DO NOT REFLECT ANY REVISIONS.
ALSO SUBMITTED WAS AN ESTIMATE FROM ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION DATED AUGUST 20, 2024 IN THE AMOUNT OF $89,228. THE OFFER STATES IT IS VALID FOR 30 DAYS FROM ISSUANCE SO THE OFFER IS NO LONGER VALID HER THAT.
>> I CAN GET AN UPDATED ESTIMATE. HE -- WHEN WE --
>> I'M SORRY. HOLD ON FOR ONE MOMENT. THIS IS LIKE TO MOVE THESE DOCUMENTS INTO EVIDENCE CONSISTING OF AUGUST 20, 2024 FROM AMERICAN ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION. AND PLANS BY MBB ENGINEERING , THE CITY MOVES THESE INTO EVIDENCE AS
COMPOSITE IMAGE -- EXHIBIT ONE. >> THESE WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. AND MBB?
>> THANK YOU. DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO SAY?
>> WE HAVE NO PROBLEM REQUESTING AN UPDATED ESTIMATE BECAUSE THAT ONE DOES EXPIRE BUT WHEN WE DID THE REVISION OF PLANS , I DON'T KNOW IF HE CHANGED THE DATE BUT HE CHANGED THE WHOLE PLAN AND HE TOLD US SOMETHING ABOUT THE FACT THE STAMPED SEAL GOES IN ELECTRONICALLY NOW SO THIS IS JUST A COPY OF THE PLANS HE GAVE US.
>> UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T BELIEVE YOU ARE ANY CLOSER TO COMING INTO COMPLIANCE WHETHER IT IS 30 DAYS OR 90 DAYS AT THIS POINT. THE TESTIMONY THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED AND THE DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHER, TO BE HONEST TO YOU, WITH THE TIMELINES. IN CONSIDERATION OF THAT, MY RECOMMENDATION TO THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IS WE DENY THE REQUEST FOR EXTENSION AND THE FINES CONTINUE TO ACCRUE. ONCE THE CASE HAS BEEN BROUGHT INTO
[01:35:07]
COMPLIANCE, THIS CAN BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FOR A REDUCTION OF FINES . MY RECOMMENDATION IS IN CONSIDERATION WITH THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE RULE 4.1 EXTENSION AND COMPLIANCE SECTION C 1 STATES IF THE DEPARTMENT DENIES A REQUEST FOR EXTENSION UNDER SPECIAL MAGISTRATE RULE OR IF THE RESPONDENT IS UNABLE TO COMPLY WITH AN EXTENDED TIME FRAME GRANTED YOU MAY REQUEST AN EXTENSION FROM THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. THAT HAS BEEN DONE. SPECIAL MAGISTRATE EXTENSIONS MAY ONLY BE GRANTED WHERE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES PREVENT COMPLIANCE SUCH AS BUT NOT LIMITED TO FINANCIAL OR SERIOUS PERSONAL ISSUES. SUBSECTION C 2 STATES EVIDENCE SHOULD BE LIMITED TO THE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES ALLEGED BY THE RESPONDENT COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORIGINAL ORDER INCLUDING ANY PRIOR EXTENSIONS OF THE ORDER. I DO NOT FEEL THAT CRITERIA HAS BEEN MET. THAT IS WHAT MYRECOMMENDATION IS BASED OFF. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, I WILL ADD IN HAND TO YOU THE RULE 4.1 C AT THE CLOSE OF THE EVIDENCE THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE SHALL ISSUE FINDINGS OF FACT BASED ON EVIDENCE OF RECORD AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND SHALL ISSUE AFFORDING THE PROPER RELIEF WITH THE POWERS GRANTED BY STATE LAW AND THE CODE AND SUBPART 4 SAYS THE RULING WILL
BE REDUCED TO WRITING. >> I FIND BASED ON THE TESTIMONY TODAY AND THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES AND AS SUCH THE REQUEST FOR EXTENSION IS DENIED AND THE FINES WILL CONTINUE TO
SOMETHING? >> WHO -- THE EVIDENCE IS CLOSED AND THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HAS ISSUED HER RULING. IF YOU LIKE TO CALL THE DEPARTMENT AFTER THE HEARING AND TALK TO THEM ABOUT WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, YOU'RE MORE
THAN WELCOME TO DO THAT. >> THANK YOU. THAT IS THE
RULING. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? >>
>> PARDON? >> IS THIS APPEALABLE? I DON'T THINK IT IS EITHER. NO. NO, BECAUSE THE VIOLATION
CONTINUES, IT IS NONAPPEALABLE. >> I THINK THAT CONCLUDES THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY HAS BEEN RULED ON AND THE REQUEST FOR EXTENSION IS DENIED. AS I SAID, BASED ON THE TESTIMONY THAT WAS GIVEN AND THE LACK OF EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MEET THE CRITERIA. AND THE FINE WILL CONTINUE AT $100 A DAY.
[E. 24-1195 2204 Sunrise Blvd East Sunrise LLC Joel Smith ]
>> OKAY. THE NEXT CASE, 6E, THE CASE IS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT PRESENT. CASE 6E, 24-1195, 2204 SUNRISE BOULEVARD. EAST SUNRISE
LLC IS THE OWNER. >> GOOD MORNING. JOEL SMITH, CITY OF FORT PIERCE BUILDING INSPECTOR AND INVESTIGATOR. WE HAVE CASE 24-1195 , LOCATED AT 2204 SUNRISE BOULEVARD. THE OWNER IS EAST SUNRISE LLC, P.O. BOX --
>> I'M SORRY, JOEL, WE WILL CONTINUE THIS CASE.
>> IT IS CURRENTLY PENDING REVIEW.
[G. 24-1198 1105 Avenue D Zevallos, Karla Anthony Jetmore ]
>> WE WILL NOT ASK FOR THE VIOLATION AT THIS TIME. WE WILL
JUST CONTINUE. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THEN WE WILL DO 6G, 24-1198, 1105 AVENUE D, AND KARLA ZEVALLOS IS THE OWNER.
[01:40:09]
>> THE OWNER, KARLA ZEVALLOS, AND THE VIOLATION, IPMC 111.1, IPMC 111.1.5, IPMC 304.1.1, IPMC 304.4, IPMC 304.6, IPMC 306.1, AND IPMC 306.1.1. CORRECTIVE ACTION, OBTAIN A PERMIT TO MAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS TO REHABILITATE OR DEMOLISH THIS PROPERTY. ANY STRUCTURAL REPAIRS WILL REQUIRE SIGNED AND SEALED REPAIR PLANS DESIGNED BY A REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL. RECOMMENDATION, THE CITY REQUESTS THAT IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR 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 OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100.00 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. I
HAVE SOME PICTURES. >> ALL RIGHT. THIS PHOTOGRAPH IS DATED MAY 17. THE LAST TWO PHOTOGRAPHS WITH THE GREEN SIGN, WHERE THOSE ALSO TAKEN ON MAY 17TH OR A LATER DATE?
>> I BELIEVE THEY WERE TAKEN THE SAME DATE.
>> THE CITY MOVES -- SORRY. DO THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION YOU TESTIFY TO?
>> THEY DO. >> CITY COMPOSITE IMAGE --
EXHIBIT ONE. >> PHOTOGRAPHS SUBMITTED WILL BE CITY COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE .
>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE ORDER DETERMINING VIOLATION ISSUED IN CASE 24138 SIGNED BY YOU SEPTEMBER 16, 2024. AND ALSO JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF NONCOMPLIANCE ISSUED BY THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IN THAT CASE.
>> TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE TWO, THE AFFIDAVIT AND THE ORDER SUBMITTED. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE?
>> I FIND THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AT LEAST EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED, COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER CONDITIONS AND CURE ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER. NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 A DAY WILL BE ASSESSED. THERE IS A 30 DAY RIGHT TO APPEAL.
[K. 24-1443 2825 S US Hwy 1 2825 S US Hwy 1 LLC Joel Smith]
>> OKAY, 6K, 24-1443, 2825 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1.
>> GOOD MORNING. JOEL SMITH. WE HAVE CASE NUMBER 24-1443 LOCATED AT 2825 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1. THE OWNER IS 2825 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1 LLC LOCATED AT 9900 SOUTHWEST 168TH
[01:45:14]
STREET MIAMI, FLORIDA. IT CAME IN AS A COMPLAINT FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE VIOLATION IS FBC 105.1 , PERMIT REQUIRED.CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, OBTAIN A PERMIT FOR THE PAVING/STRIPING DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT.. RECOMMENDATION, THE CITY REQUESTS THAT IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR 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 OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100.00 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. I DO HAVE PICTURES OF THE PARKING LOT . AT THE TIME OF THE PICTURES, MY TIMESTAMP WAS NOT WORKING, HOWEVER THESE PICTURES WERE TAKEN JULY 1ST, 2024.
>> DO THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION
YOU HAVE TESTIFY TO? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> THE CITY MOVES THESE PHOTOS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE CONSISTING OF A, B, C, D, E, AND F.
>> I DO HAVE ONE THING TO ADD THAT I FORGOT.
>> ALL RIGHT. LET'S LET HER --
>> PHOTOGRAPHS ENTERED WILL BE CITY COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
ANYTHING ELSE? >> I APOLOGIZE. THE PERMIT HAS BEEN READY SINCE MAY 15, 2024. IT IS JUST LACKING A REGISTERED CONTRACTOR, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH.
>> AND NO COMMUNICATION WITH THE OWNER?
>> NO COMMUNICATION AT ALL, NO. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. I FIND THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN THE PERMIT, OBTAIN APPROVAL OF ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS EVERY 180 DAYS UNTIL THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CLOSED, COMPLY WITH ANY OTHER PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND ANY OTHER VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT OR A FINE OF $100 A DAY WILL BE ASSESSED. THERE IS A 30 DAY RIGHT TO APPEAL.
>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY, SHOULD WE CALL 429
NORTH 20TH STREET? >> YES, GIVE ANOTHER TRY.
>> I DID EMAIL AFTER THE FIRST CALL HIM SAID WE TRIED TO CALL
>> YOUR CALL HAS BEEN FORWARDED TO VOICEMAIL.
>> ALL RIGHT, SO THIS IS CASE NUMBER -- GIVE ME THE CASE
[A. 23-52 429 N 20th St Unit A Johnson, Sharon Shaun Coss ]
[B. 23-54 429 N 20th St Unit B Johnson, Sharon Shaun Coss ]
NUMBERS AGAIN, BOTH OF THEM, PLEASE.>> IT IS 9A AND B, 23-52, 429 NORTH 20TH STREET UNIT A AND
23-54, UNIT B. >> I WILL ASK THE CLERK DID THE RESPONDENT REQUEST TO APPEAR BY PHONE?
>> YES. >> WAS HER REQUEST SUBMITTED ON A FORM PROVIDED BY THIS DEPARTMENT?
>> YES. >> DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE REQUEST WE CAN PUT INTO EVIDENCE?
>> YES. >> FUNKY. -- THANK YOU.
>> REQUEST TO APPEAR TELEPHONICALLY FOR THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING DATED 11-7 , THIS MORNING. REASON FOR
[01:50:03]
REQUEST, UNABLE TO GET A DAY OFF FROM WORK BECAUSE PREVIOUS ONE DIDN'T WORK OUT. THE CITY MOVES THIS AND EVIDENCE AS CITYEXHIBIT NUMBER ONE. >> REQUEST TO APPEAR BY PHONE WILL BE ENTERED AS CITY EXHIBIT ONE.
>> JUST ONE MOMENT. I AM REVIEWING THE TELEPHONE RULE.
CAN YOU GO AHEAD AND CALL THE LINE 1 MORE TIME.
>> YES. CAN YOU HEAR US? >> YES, I CAN.
>> THIS IS ELIZABETH WITH THE FORT PIERCE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND YOU ARE IN THE ATTENDANCE OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE
>> I HAVE TO SWEAR YOU AND FOR TESTIMONY. COULD YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THE TESTIMONY WILL
PROVIDE WILL BE THE TRUTH? >> YES, I DO.
>> THANK YOU. >> MS. JOHNSON, THIS IS THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. DO YOU HAVE US ON A SPEAKERPHONE?
>> NO. YOU ARE ON A BLUETOOTH. >> THERE IS A LOT OF NOISE IN THE BACKGROUND AND I AM NOT CERTAIN WE WILL BE ABLE TO PICK UP YOUR TESTIMONY. IS THERE ANYWAY YOU COULD --
>> GAVE ME ONE SECOND AND I WILL MOVE TO A BETTER AREA.
>> I HOPE SHE DIDN'T HANG UP ON US.
>> IT SAYS IT IS STILL CONNECTED.
>> OKAY, GOOD. VERY GOOD. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME BETTER NOW?
>> THAT IS MUCH BETTER. THANK YOU. YOU ARE HERE ON CASE NUMBER 23-52 AND 23 -54. WE WILL HEAR FROM THE DEPARTMENT WHO IS REPRESENTED TODAY BY SHAUN COSS.
>> THIS IS 23-52 , 23-54. THE OWNER IS SHARON JOHNSON. BE ISSUE CAME BEFORE THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IN APRIL OF 2019 TO DETERMINE VIOLATIONS AND A 90 DAY EXTENSION WAS GRANTED DECEMBER, 2023. AN AFFIDAVIT WAS NONCOMPLIANCE WAS RECORDED MARCH 27, 2024. THE ORDER PROHIBITS RESPONDENTS EXTENSION OF TIME WAS GRANTED JUNE 14TH, 2024. THAT ORDER SPECIFIED THAT THE VIOLATION WAS NOT REMEDIED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE DAY OF THE ORDER IT WILL BE BROUGHT BACK FOR STAFF HEARING.
UNFORTUNATELY STAFF MISSED THE HEARING ON AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER. THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN SCHEDULED IN OCTOBER HOWEVER THAT WAS CANCELED DUE TO THE HURRICANE SO IT IS HERE BEFORE YOU. THAT MEANS THE RESPONDENT HAS RECEIVED ESSENTIALLY AN ADDITIONAL EXTENSION OF ALMOST 90 DAYS SINCE THE DATE OF THE ORDER. PRIOR TO MAKING A RECOMMENDATION I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR AN UPDATE AS TO THE STATUS OR THE OWNER.
>> MISS JOHNSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TESTIFY FOR YOUR REQUEST FOR
>> THANK YOU. >> ARE YOU READY? I CAN TALK
>> YES, MA'AM. >> I HAVE BEEN GOING THROUGH THE BANK AND THEY DID NOT APPROVE ME FOR NOTHING BUT 87 AND I HAVE A CONTRACT THAT IS SAYING THE COST WILL BE WELL OVER 200 OR CLOSE TO THE 200 MARK AND I'VE GOT ANOTHER ESTIMATE FROM A LOCAL CONTRACTOR, SUNRISE , THEY WERE
[01:55:05]
A LITTLE LESS BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO START THE PROCESS AND WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO FINISH IT SO I WAS LOOKING INTO I CAN'T GET TWO SEPARATE EQUITY LOANS ON MY CURRENT RESIDENCE. I CAN'T HAVE TWO DIFFERENT ONES. I WAS LOOKING FOR -- THEY WERE SAYING THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE TO TAKE OUT A LOAN, USE WHAT I HAVE, AND TAKE OUT ANOTHER LOAN AND I DIDN'T WANT TO BE IN A POSITION OF HAVING A MORTGAGE, YOU KNOW, PAYING BACK ANOTHER SEPARATE LOAN. THAT WAS TOO MUCH. RIGHT NOW I AM CURRENTLY TRYING TO FIND ANOTHER -- SOMEONE ELSE. I AM DOING THE PROCESS THROUGH ROCKET MORTGAGE, IF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THAT ONE. SEEING IF I CAN GET EVERYTHING WITH ONE COMPANY. I AM JUST CURRENTLY WORKING ON IT.>> TO CLARIFY, ARE YOU -- THE CONTRACT YOU SAID OR THE ESTIMATE YOU HAVE IS THAT TO DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE OR
REPAIR THE STRUCTURE? >> IT IS FOR A PARTIAL DEMO, NOT A COMPLETE DEMO. TO REMODEL, NOT TO COMPLETELY DEMO
ESTIMATE? >> ABOUT IT -- WELL, FROM LAST YEAR, I GOT THE ESTIMATE FROM THE LOCAL -- WHAT IS IT, SUNRISE CONSTRUCTION. I GOT THAT FROM THEM BUT ABOUT FOUR MONTHS AGO, I GOT A DIFFERENT CONTRACTOR. THEY DO WORK IN PORT ST. LUCIE. SAINT LUCIE AS WELL. THEY ARE BASED OUT OF MARCEL MARTIN BUT JUST ADDITIONAL ESTIMATE INSTEAD OF
JUST GOING WITH ONE. >> OKAY. WHEN DID YOU APPLY FOR A LOAN TO DO ANY REPAIRS OR DEMOLISH THE PROPERTY?
>> I'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH THAT FOR A LITTLE WHILE.
>> CAN YOU DEFINE THAT? >> EVER SINCE THE LAST -- WHAT,
FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS AGO? >> SINCE THE FINDING OF VIOLATION, OR SINCE FIVE MONTHS AGO? MAY, YOU STARTED APPLYING
FOR EXTENSIONS? JUNE ? >> JUNE? I'M NOT SURE.
>> OKAY. >> I'M NOT SURE. I'VE BEEN KEEPING UP WITH THE OUTSIDE OF IT. KEEP THE SIGNS OFF AND KEEP THE YARD CUT . THE TREES TRIMMED. KEEPING THAT PART OF THE CITY . YOU KNOW, I HAVE SOMEONE KEEP THE OUTSIDE BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO GET THE DOUBLE FINE. YOU KNOW, THE DOUBLE VIOLATION. BUT I'M STILL HAVING PROBLEMS WITH
WATER TOO THERE. >> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO TELL THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE?
>> I'M JUST WORKING ON IT. I'M TRYING. I'M WORKING ON IT. IT ISN'T EASY. I ALSO DON'T WANT TO GET MYSELF IN A BIND AND HAVING, YOU KNOW, TOO MANY RESPONSIBILITIES OF LOANS OUT . TRYING TO DO THIS AND THIS AND THAT.
>> WOULD THE CITY LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION?
>> I CAN SHOW -- I CAN EMAIL YOU THE COMPANY. I CAN EMAIL YOU EVERYTHING THEY'VE SENT ME, WHAT I HAVE BEEN APPROVED FOR, THE CONTRACT. YOU KNOW, ESTIMATES . I CAN EMAIL IT ALL TO YOU, JUST IF YOU WANT TO VERIFY, YOU KNOW , I'M NOT ,
YOU KNOW, UM -- >> I DON'T THINK ANYONE IS QUESTIONING YOUR TESTIMONY OR THE VERACITY OF YOUR TESTIMONY AT THIS TIME . THE QUESTION TO TO AN ADDITIONAL EXTENSION.
THIS PARTICULAR CASE WAS COMMENCED JANUARY 10TH, 2023.
IS THERE A PRIOR CASE ON THIS PROPERTY, MR. COSS?
[02:00:06]
>> YES, THERE WERE. LET ME CHECK THE DATES.
>> WHILE YOU ARE CHECKING I WILL ASK YOU THE STATUS OF IT SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO LOOK THAT UP TOO.
>> TWO OTHER CASES FOR THIS PROPERTY, ONE FOR UNIT A AND ONE FOR UNIT B . THERE ARE CURRENTLY FINES AND A LIEN FOR
BOTH OF THOSE CASES. >> THANK YOU. SO, AT THIS POINT, THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IS BEING ASKED FOR AN EXTENSION UNDER OUR RULES . SHAUN, THIS IS NOT AN ADMINISTRATIVE
>> DOES THE CITY HAVE A RECOMMENDATION?
>> SIMILAR TO THE LAST EXTENSION REQUEST THAT WE HEARD UNFORTUNATELY I DO NOT FEEL WE ARE ANY CLOSER TO BRINGING THIS CASE INTO COMPLIANCE EVEN IF AN EXTENSION WAS GRANTED BASED ON THE PROCEDURE I DO NOT FEEL EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE BEEN DEMONSTRATED THAT WOULD WARRANT AN EXTENSION BE PROVIDED. RECOMMENDATION IS TO DENY THE EXTENSION REQUEST AND FINDS RESUME. ONCE THE CASE HAS BEEN BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE THIS MATTER CAN BE BROUGHT BACK FOR A REDUCTION.
>> OKAY. SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, DO YOU NEED THE RULE AGAIN?
>> NO, I THINK FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD I AGREE THAT THERE IS AN EXTENSION. THERE IS NO SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF TIME REQUESTED BUT I DON'T SEE THAT AN EXTENSION OF TIME WOULD MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE AS FAR AS COMPELLING THINGS TO GO FORWARD. THERE ARE NO NEW EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTNCES GIVEN THAT WOULD WARRANT THE CASE TO BE EXTENDED ANY FURTHER OR THE FINES TO BE REDUCED SO I FIND THE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS DENIED AND THE FINES ARE TO
>> THANK YOU, SHARON. I WILL SEND YOU THE ORDERS VIA EMAIL
AND BY REGULAR MAIL. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
>> ANYTHING ELSE? >> SO -- OKAY. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE VIOLATORS BY CERTIFIED MAIL.
THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED SIGNED AND PLACED IN THE FILE.
THE GREEN CARD RETURNED UNSIGNED OR UNCLAIMED AN AFFIDAVIT WITH MAILING IS MAILED TO THE VIOLATOR 10 DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING AND NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT REGULAR U.S. MAIL WITH AN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING ATTACHED TO IT. COPY WAS PLACED IN THE FILE. 10 DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING, A NOTICE OF HEARING WAS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD IN THE LOBBY OF CITY HALL . NOTICE OF HEARING IS POSTED AT THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WITH AN AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING. IF THE CERTIFICATION CARD IS NOT RETURNED TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING POSTING IS COMPLETED THE SAME WAY AS IF THE CARD WAS RETURNED UNCLAIMED.
>> THANK YOU. NOTHING ELSE? OKAY. THIS SPECIAL MAGISTRATE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.