[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:09]
>> THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING OF JANUARY 15TH, 2025 IS CALLED YOUR ORDER. MAY I PLEASE HAVE EVERYONE STAND FOR
THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH
LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> IF YOU ARE PROVIDING TESTIMONY, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND BE SWORN IN. DO YOU SWEAR THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU WILL PROVIDE WILL BE THE
TRUTH? THANK YOU. >> DID MORNING, EVERYONE. FIRST THINGS FIRST. IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN NEED OF AN INTERPRETER OR HEARING EXISTENCE DEVICES? IF SO, PLEASE LET US KNOW AND ONE WILL BE PROVIDED TO YOU. HEARING NONE, WE WILL PUSH FORWARD. TODAY, WE HAVE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, FELICIA HOLLIMAN. WE HAVE BECKY RAISE AND ISAAC FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT AND LIZ BACK OF OUR CORE LIZ BACK AS OUR CLERK.
PLEASE TAKE NOTE THAT THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE BEING LIVE STREAMED AND RECORDED . FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE RECEIVED A CITATION OR VIOLATION NOTICE, WE ARE GOING TO BE REFERRING TO YOU AS A RESPONDENT AND IT IS IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND HOW THESE PROCEEDINGS WILL OCCUR. SO, FIRST, THE CITY WILL PRESENT ITS CASE THROUGH EVIDENCE AND THIS EVIDENCE COULD INCLUDE TESTIMONY OF CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS , POLICE OFFICERS, INVESTIGATORS, OR OTHER WITNESSES. THE EVIDENCE MAY INCLUDE PHYSICAL ITEMS SUCH AS PHOTOGRAPHS , WHICH WILL REFER TO THEM AS EXHIBITS. THE STANDARD OF PROOF, WHETHER A VIOLATION HAS BEEN PROVEN IS BASED ON THE COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. THE RESPONDENT WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE LEGAL OBJECTIONS TO CROSS-EXAMINE WITNESSES IF THEY SO CHOOSE. ONCE THE CITY HAS CONCLUDED PRESENTING THEIR CASE, THE RESPONDENT WILL THEN BE ALLOWED TO MAKE A STATEMENT, PRESENT WITNESS TESTIMONY, AND PRESENT IN PHYSICAL EVIDENCE SUCH AS DOCUMENTS AND PHOTOS. AND THEN I, AS SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, WILL MAKE THE FINAL RULING. AND SO, I ASK THAT EVERYBODY CONDUCTS THEMSELVES IN A CALM, RESPECTFUL MANNER AT ALL TIMES. ANY COMMENTS SHOULD BE ERECTED TO ME AS A SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. SO, THAT BEING SAID, WE CAN
[2. Case No: Violation Location (Address PID #) Investigating Officer CE2024-84 2202 N US Highway 1 Heather Debevec]
CALL THE FIRST CASE, PLEASE. >> OKAY. THE FIRST CASE THIS MORNING IS CASE CE2024-84 2202 NORTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1.
>> WHENEVER YOU ARE READY. >> GOOD MORNING, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, MY NAME IS HEATHER DEBEVIK . PROPERTY 2202 NORTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1. VIOLATION WAS ISSUED ON OCTOBER 18TH OF 2024 . IT WAS TO DO OVER NEIL DEVELOPMENT INC. SIGNS AND MAINTENANCE 24 .A. NELSONS OUTSIDE STORAGE AND RUBBISH WHICH HAS BEEN TAKEN CARE OF. IPM CO2 .203 SIDEWALKS AND DRIVEWAYS. IPM C30 4.2 PROTECTIVE TREATMENT, IP MOC FOR ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION AND I DO HAVE PHOTOS AND WISH TO
SUBMIT. >> MR. GATES WOULD YOU LIKE TO
-- >> NO OBJECTIONS TO THE PHOTOS.
>> THE BETTER, YOU PROVIDED PHOTOGRAPHS DATED OCTOBER 15TH AS WELL AS A COPY OF THE NOTICE THAT WAS MAILED TO DOVER NEIL DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS IN JANUARY 6TH OF THIS YEAR. IS
THAT CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM. WE ALSO --
>> YOU ALSO TOOK PHOTOGRAPHS ON JANUARY 16TH?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> TO THE PHOTOS ACCURATELY EVIDENCE THE VIOLATIONS YOU STATE?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> I WILL ENTER IT INTO
[00:05:10]
EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.>> OFFICER DEBEVIK, COULD YOU DESCRIBE FOR US WHAT YOU
BELIEVE IS STILL OUT STANDING? >> THE REST OF THE LIST. THERE ARE STILL OUTSTANDING BUT WHAT YOU CANNOT SEE IS SOME OF THE POTHOLES STILL IN THE PARKING LOT. JUST ANOTHER VIEW OF THE SAME THING AND IN THE BACK, YOU CAN SEE SOME LANDSCAPE DEBRIS.
NOTHING MAJOR. I AM HERE SHOWING THAT THERE IS NOT NUMBERS ON THE SECOND FLOOR UNITS. THE REPAIR THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE ON THE SECOND FLOOR. THE SIGN NEEDS TO BE REDONE AS IT IS COMPLETELY FADED. ANOTHER SIGN THAT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED EITHER WITH THE NAME OF THE BUSINESS. ANOTHER STUCCO REPAIR ON STAIRS DONE ABOVE THE SURF SHOP. WOULD OVER THE WINDOWS.
GRASS THAT NEEDS TO BE MOWED. IT IS JUST ANOTHER PICTURE OF
THE UPSTAIRS FROM JANUARY 6TH. >> I KNOW YOU TOOK PHOTOGRAPHS ON MULTIPLE DATES BUT WE ARE JUST FOCUSING ON THE MOST RECENT ONES FROM THE OTHER DAY?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO SPEAK
WITH THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY? >> I HAVE NOT SPOKEN WITH ANYBODY ON THIS. I BELIEVE THAT MR. YATES' SECRETARY HAD CALLED AT ONE POINT BECAUSE WE HAD A LOT OF VEHICLES ON THE PROPERTY. WE HAD SPOKEN ABOUT THAT. WE BRIEFLY TOUCHED ON THIS CASE AND I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM ANYBODY SINCE.
>> OTHER THAN THIS MORNING, CORRECT?
>> OTHER THAN JUST TALKING TO HIM TWO SECONDS AGO. YES,
MA'AM. >> ANYTHING FURTHER YOU WOULD
LIKE TO ADD? >> NOT AT THIS TIME.
>> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. MR. YATES, WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE HEARD ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER?
>> YES, MA'AM. IN FACT, I HAVE A WITNESS, MR. TONY SNYDER, WHO HAS BEEN ADDRESSING THE CITATIONS AND I WILL ASK MR. SNYDER WHAT HAVE YOU DONE AS TO THE SIGNS AND MAINTENANCE?
>> I DID NOT KNOW THAT THAT ONE SIGN WAS AN ISSUE. IT SAID SIGNS THAT ARE LARGER THAN 32 SQUARE FEET NEEDS TO BE REMOVED. I DID NOT REMOVE THAT ONE SIGN BECAUSE IT WAS SMALLER. I WILL REMOVE IT. IT IS NO BIG DEAL. I AM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THE BUILDING TO LET YOU KNOW. AS FAR AS NUMBERS ON ANY UNIT, THERE ARE NUMBERS ON ALL OF THE UNITS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT PICTURES THAT SHE -- CAN I SEE? THE BACK WHERE SHE SHOWED THERE WERE NO NUMBERS?
>> THAT WOULD BE THE SECOND FLOOR THERE, OFFICER DEBEVIK?
>> YES, MA'AM. THAT IS THE SECOND FLOOR FACING U.S. ONE.
>> AND THEIR NEED TO BE NUMBERS ON THE SECOND FLOOR UNITS?
>> THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME IDENTIFICATION ON EVERY UNIT.
>> I THINK THERE IDENTIFICATION ON ALL OF THEM. THERE IN THE SHADOWS BUT THEY ARE ABOVE THE DOORS. BUT I WILL MAKE SURE THEY WILL GET NUMBERS IF THEY ARE NOT.
>> THE APARTMENT'S RECOMMENDATION AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN HERE IS ANY SORT OF VIOLATIONS BE CURED BY FEBRUARY 15TH. IS THAT FEASIBLE?
>> THAT IS FEASIBLE. THE NUMBERS, GETTING THE MOWING DONE ON THE BACK THERE, YES. I WAS IT OUT THERE WORKING ON THAT AND WILL CONTINUE WORKING ON IT.
>> HOW ABOUT THE OUTSIDE STORAGE TRASH AND RUBBISH?
>> OKAY. I JUST NEED TO CLEAN UP THAT HOME FROM THERE, WHICH I CLEAN UP ALL THE TIME, BUT THEY KEEP FALLING.
>> FOR A MONTH OR TWO. I COME AROUND AND PICK THEM UP. IT IS JUST SOMETIMES, WHEN THE WIND BLOWS, THEY BREAK AND FALL
>> WHAT CAN I SAY? >> AND AS TO THE SIDEWALKS AND
DRIVEWAYS? >> POTHOLES. I HAVE BEEN FIXING THEM. THOSE HAVE JUST RECENTLY COME AROUND. AS YOU CAN TELL, THERE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE TIMES WHERE I HAVE FIXED POTHOLES THERE ALREADY. PEOPLE COME IN AND OUT OF THERE VERY QUICKLY.
[00:10:02]
THEY DRIVE LIKE MANIACS WHEN THEY ARE COMING AROUND THERE AND CREATE POTHOLES. SO I WAS INTENDING ON FIXING THOSE OFTHIS WEEK ALREADY. >> AND AS TO THE EXTERIOR TRUCK SURE STRUCTURE, WHAT WAS THE SPECIFIC --
>> THAT I DID NOT KNOW WAS THERE. I WILL TRY TO GET IT
FIXED THIS WEEK. >> THERE IS ALSO THE STAIRWELL.
>> THE STAIRWELL TOO? >> ABOVE THE SURF SHOP.
>> GO BACK TO THE BARBERSHOP PHOTO. ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE SIGN THAT IS NOT THERE BECAUSE SHE JUST MOVED OUT JANUARY.
>> IF SHE IS MOVED OUT, THEN IT WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED WITH
A BLANK FACE -- >> YES. I AM GOING TO DO THAT AND THE CLEAN UP HER WINDOWS BUT SHE JUST MOVED OUT.
>> WELL, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS GOING FORWARD, YOU CAN ALWAYS GET WITH THE DEPARTMENT. I AM SURE YOU ALREADY RECEIVED AN ITEMIZED LIST OF THINGS THAT NEED TO BE
RECEIVED. >> YES, BUT IT WASN'T VERY
CLEAR. >> THAT IS WHY YOU COMMUNICATE WITH THEM MORE AND THEY WILL GIVE YOU. WE HAVE THESE PHOTOS NOW AND KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS THEY ARE LOOKING FOR. OKAY?
>> YEP . >> ANYTHING FURTHER FROM YOU,
MR. YATES? >> I HAVE SPOKEN TO MR. SNYDER AND HE HAS BEEN LOOKING FOR A RESTRIPING -- A PERSON THAT CAN DO THE STRIPES OF PARKING LOT. THEY HAVE JUST BEEN UNABLE --
>> OF THE OWNER HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO DECIDE ON WHAT COMPANY HE WANTS TO DO FOR REDOING THE PARKING LOT. BASICALLY, HE IS GOING TO HAVE RECODED AND RENEWED AND RENEW THE STRIPES OF THE PARKING LOT LINES THAT WILL BE DONE THEN, BUT HE HASN'T DECIDED ON THE COMPANY HE WANTS TO USE YET. HE IS
STILL WAITING FOR ANOTHER BED. >> ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THAT
APARTMENT? >> NO, MA'AM. I PROVIDED MR. SNYDER WITH MY BUSINESS CARD EARLIER SO IF YOU CAN GIVE ME A CALL TODAY, I CAN MAKE ARRANGEMENTS WITH HIM THIS WEEK TO MEET AT THIS PRETTY WORD OF THE PROPERTY HE HAS IN QUESTION
IF HE SO WISHES. >> FOR THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, WE ASK THAT HE NOW BE FINED IN VIOLATION OF THE SIGNS AND MAINTENANCE. EXTERIOR STRUCTURE, PROTECTIVE TREATMENT, AND ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION AND ALLOW UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH FOR THOSE VIOLATIONS TO BE CURED.
>> ISAAC , CAN YOU SCROLL THIS OVER SO I CAN SEE THE --
>> YEP. GIVE ME ONE SECOND. >> THANK YOU. SO, THIS COURT FINDS THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THAT THE FOLLOWING BE ORDERED. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH, 2025 TO REPAIR OR REPLACE LINES THAT ARE FATED OR IN DISREPAIR FOR BUSINESSES AND ON THE BUILDING, REPLACE MISSING SIGNS WITH A BLANK FACE SIGN, REMOVE ALL LOOSE ITEMS FROM THE OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING AND PARKING LOTS, PREPARE POTHOLES IN THE PARKING LOT, REPAIR THE AREAS OF THE BUILDING WHERE CEMENT HAS BEEN DAMAGED ON THE SECOND FLOOR AND ANY OTHER BUILDINGS -- AREAS OF THE BUILDINGS AND STAIRWELLS. IN SHORT EACH UNIT HAS ADDRESSED NUMBERS DISPLAYED AND OBTAIN ANY NECESSARY PERMITS AND COMPLY WITH ANY AND ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE STATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $250
PER DAY BEING ASSESSED. >> THANK YOU . A PLEASURE TO
[5. Case No: Violation Location (Address PID #) Investigating Officer CE2024-0103 701 Texas Ct Charmaine Kirkland]
NUMBER CE2024-0103 701 TEXAS COURT.[00:15:07]
>> GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR. CHARMAINE KIRKWOOD. CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. CASE NUMBER CE2024-0103 OCCURRED AT 701 TEXAS COURT . IT IS A -- I AM SORRY. NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED OCTOBER 31ST, 2024 . THE OWNER IS STEPHANIE ECKER AND JULIE SWANSON. VIOLATIONS IS CITED SECTION 322 SUBSECTION C, SUBSECTION ONE. FENCES AND HEIGHT RESTRICTION. I DO HAVE PHOTOS THAT DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS I WITNESSED IT.
ALSO, THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION. ALSO, AN EMAIL FROM ASEA FORT PIERCE ARBITER AND PHOTOS THAT I TOOK ON YESTERDAY.
>> MA'AM, COULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD?
>> JULIE SWANSON. >> MISS SWANSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THESE EXHIBITS BEFORE THEY ARE HANDED UP?
>> I'M FINE. >> OFFICER KIRKLAND, I KNOW YOU STATED YOU HEADED UP THE VIOLATION THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MAILED AS WELL AS SEVERAL PHOTOGRAPHS DATED NOVEMBER 22ND OF LAST YEAR. THE EMAILS WITH MR. BERTRAM, WHO IS A ARBORISTS , IT IS, WITH THE CITY. PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN OCTOBER 31ST OF LAST YEAR AND PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN JANUARY 3RD AND JANUARY 13TH OF THIS YEAR. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> TO THE PHOTOS TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS THAT YOU HAVE
OBSERVED ON THOSE DATES? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> WE WILL HAVE THESE EVIDENCE MOVED INTO THE CITY'S COMPOSITE
EVIDENCE ONE. >> I WILL MOVE IT INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
>> MS. KIRKLAND, JUST TO PUT ON THE RECORD, HOW DID THIS PROPERTY COME TO YOUR ATTENTION?
>> THE PROPERTY CAME TO MY ATTENTION BY ENFORCING THE INVESTMENT DURING THE INSPECTION OF THE WHOLE STREET.
IT STARTED FROM A SECRET FIX COMPLAINT THAT WAS AT ANOTHER ADDRESS AND I REACHED OUT TO THE COMPLAINANT AND HE ADVISED ME -- I ASKED HIM DID HE HAVE THE CORRECT ADDRESS THAT HE PUT ON THAT SEE QUICK FIX AND HE WAS LIKE, NO. SO, I ENFORCED THAT THE PROPERTY THAT HE HAD ON THIS SEE QUICK FIX AND ALSO THIS PROPERTY HERE, WHICH IS ON THE SAME BLOCK.
>> CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT AC CLICK FIX IS?
>> IT IS A WEBSITE WHERE THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE GO ON TO MAKE COMPLAINTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
>> SO JUST TO SUMMARIZE, THERE WAS A COMPLAINT THAT CAME OUT FOR DIFFERENT PROPERTY SO, WHY DID YOU LOOK AT ALL OF THE
PROPERTIES IN THAT AREA? >> AS A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, WE DO THE ENTIRE BLOCK OR STREET WHERE WE SEE VIOLATIONS AND THAT ADDRESS WAS A VIOLATION I SAW. I SAW A
VIOLATION SO, I CITED IT. >> YOU SAY THAT IF A COMPLAINT COMES OUT FOR HOUSE ON A PARTICULAR BLOCK, YOU WILL LOOK AT ALL THE HOUSES ON THE BLOCK OR THAT STREET IN PARTICULAR JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS IN COMPLIANCE ON THE STREET?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> THE HOUSE AT THAT , CAME OUT WAS OBVIOUSLY NOT MISS SWANSON'S HOME. DID THEY GET
CITED AS WELL? >> YES, THEY DID.
>> DID THEY COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH YOUR CITATION?
>> YES, MA'AM. CONNECT JUST RETURNED TO THE MOST RECENT REST PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH WOULD BE YESTERDAY, COULD USE DESCRIBE WHAT IT IS THAT WE ARE SEEING HERE AS A VIOLATION?
>> SO, THE LANDSCAPE IS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE FENCE, WHICH IS IN VIOLATION. MISS SWANSON DID CUT -- IT WAS TALLER THAN THAT. SHE DID CUT SOME OF IT DOWN BUT IT IS STILL WEEDS AND SHRUBS ALONG THE FENCE LINE THAT NEEDS TO BE
ADDRESSED. >> ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
PHOTOGRAPHS, ISAAC? >> IN THIS PHOTO, THESE ARE I BELIEVE THEM TO TYPE PLANTS . I HAD REACHED OUT TO PAUL BERTRAM, WHICH IS THE CITY'S URBAN FORRESTER AND HE ADVISED THAT IN THE EMAIL AS PROVIDED, HE ADVISED THAT IT WOULD NOT KILL THE PLANTS IF SHE WAS TO CUT THEM DOWN.
[00:20:09]
>> HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH MS. SWANSON OR ANYONE ELSE WHO WAS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR THIS
>> WHAT WAS THE CONTENT OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS?
>> MS. SWANSON STATED THAT SHE DID NOT WANT TO CUT DOWN THE BAMBOOS BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T SEE THAT IT IS A PROBLEM. IT IS A VIOLATION SO, SHE JUST BROUGHT IT TO MY ATTENTION THAT SHE IS NOT WILLING TO DO THAT AT THAT TIME.
>> AND YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE CODE HERE, 125 ¿ 322 SUBSECTION C SUBSECTION ONE REQUIRES THAT THE SHRUBBERY BE CUT BACK OR NOT AT LEAST BE AS TALL IF NOT TALLER THAN THE
FENCE. IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY BUT MISS SWANSON, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO BE HEARD? >> DO I SAY MY SEEING OR DO I ASK A QUESTION FROM WHAT SHE SAID?
>> YOU CAN ASK HER QUESTIONS IF YOU WISH OR YOU CAN GIVE YOUR
OWN STATEMENTS. >> HOWEVER YOU CHOOSE TO
PROCEED. >> I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PROCEED SO I WILL GO WITH THAT. THE INITIAL CLICK IT THING WAS FOR 801 TEXAS COURT . THAT IS A DIFFERENT BLOCK THAN I LIVE IN.
I LIVE IN 701 TEXAS COURT. OTHER SIDE OF GEORGIA. A DIFFERENT BLOCK. AS SOON AS I GOT THE NOTICE ON THE TYPE OF PERSON. I RUN DOWN TO THEM. I TALKED TO THEM AT LENGTH. I COULDN'T BELIEVE THERE WAS A PROBLEM. THEY SAID SOMEONE REPORTED ME ON THE CLICK IT AND I SAID HOW DO FIND OUT WHO IS REPORTING ME? HOW DO I FIND IT OUT? THEY GAVE ME THE WEBSITE AND THEN, I DID A REQUEST FROM THE CITY, WHOEVER DOES THAT , AND I GOT IT BACK FROM ON HERE AND I HAD FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH THE OFFICE THAT DAY AND I SAID, YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING ME. I HAVE TO CUT -- EVERYTHING HAS GOT TO BE FOUR FOOT HIGH ON YOUR FRONT? I SAID I HAVE TREES, BUSHES . EVERYTHING IN YOUR FRONT YARD HAS TO BE FOUR FOOT OR BELOW? THAT INDICATED, YES. THAT IS TRUE. AND SO I EVEN MENTIONED MANY THINGS ABOUT LIVING -- I AM FROM A DIFFERENT STATE AND I MOVED HERE BUT ANYHOW, ABOUT THE PROBLEMS IN THIS AREA GENERALLY. AND I HAVE SET THE HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET WAS IN ARSON AND BURNED THE HOUSE DOWN ACROSS THE STREET. WITHIN THE LAST SIX MONTHS, ANOTHER ARSON ON THE HOUSE ON THE CORNER OF TEXAS AND GEORGIA HAS IN ARSON ON THE FIRE THERE. I SAID I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE COMPLAINING WHOEVER THIS IS IS COMPLAINING ABOUT THIS BAMBOO WHEN YOU CAN GO DOWN THE BLOCK AND SEE PEOPLE USE THE STREET AS GARBAGE. I MEAN IT IS JUST LIKE A WRECK ON DIFFERENT PARTS OF OUR STREET. AND SO, THAT IS THE WAY IT IS AND THEY SAID FURTHERMORE, THERE IS THIS GUY THAT KEEPS COMING AND DUMPING -- FOOD ON THE SIDEWALK AND WE HAVE ALL OF THESE CHICKENS WILD AND ALL OF HIS CATS WILD. IT IS A CONTINUOUS PROBLEM IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. I STILL CAN'T BELIEVE THAT THIS BAMBOO ON THE SIDE OF THE FENCE IS A FLAG SOMEHOW THAT SOMEBODY -- WHOEVER THEY ARE . BUT I DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. THEY ARE VERY NICE. THEY SAY LET'S REVIEW THIS OR WHATEVER. AND THEY SAID IF I CUT THE BAMBOO ALL IN HALF, IT WOULD BE LIKE HAVING A BOUQUET OF FLOWERS AND YOU CUT ALL THE FLOWER TOPS OFF AND I'M AFRAID YOU WERE GOING TO KILL THIS BAMBOO. THEY SAID THEY WOULD GET IN TOUCH WITH THE ARBITER OR WHOEVER AND LET ME KNOW THEIR DECISION. OKAY. I NEVER HEARD THAT UNTIL MUCH LATER BUT REGARDLESS, OKAY. SO I GO HOME. AND I GET A COPY OF THIS AND IT SAYS ON HERE WERE THE CODE ENFORCEMENT CONDUCTS THE PERSON, MR. BOB, GIVE ME A CALL. I BELIEVE YOU HAVE THE WRONG ADDRESS. DID YOU MEAN 701 TEXAS COURT? AND SO, I GO BACK. I EVEN SEND AN EMAIL AND I SAY, OH MY GOSH AND THEY GET A COPY AND IT IS 801. AND I SAY IT IS A MISTAKE. YOU GUYS PICKED 701 AND YOU MEANT 801. IT IS JUST A MISTAKE. NO, NO, NO. ONCE WE GET IN, WE DO A SWEEP AND WE SWEEP THE BLOCKS. I SAID, OH. WELL I AM ON A DIFFERENT BLOCK SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU DID THE BLOCK OF 801 AT THE EXISTING HOUSE? AND I HAVE PICTURES HERE OF THAT BLOCK.
STARTING WITH THE DAY THAT I FIND THIS OUT AND I WENT, THEY HAVE SHRUBBERY IN THEIR FRONT YARD. THIS IS FROM THE DAY AND THIS IS FROM LAST WEEK OR SO BUT THE SHRUBBERY IS ABOUT FOUR FOOT IN THEIR FRONT YARD. SO, I SAY, WELL, HOW CAN THAT BE? IF I CAN HAVE IT THE ORIGINAL ONE WHICH THEY SAID THEY LEFT WHATEVER. SO THEN I ASKED THEM, DID YOU GO TO ALL THE OTHER
[00:25:01]
HOUSES? THEY ARE VERY VAGUE ON THAT. THIS IS ACROSS THE STREET WHERE YOU CAN SEE IT IS WELL ABOVE FOREFOOT. THIS IS TWO DOORS DOWN WHICH IS LIKE 12 FOOT. HIGH HEDGES. THIS IS THE END OF THE BLOCK ON THE BLOCK WHERE THE WHOLE BLOCK HAS ARECA PALMS. AND OF THESE POEMS, THEY EVEN BLOCK THE STOP SIGN. AND THIS IS AROUND THE WHOLE PROPERTY. THESE PEOPLE WEREN'T CITED. AND I WOULD BE GLAD TO I GUESS GIVE THESE TO YOU. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORKS. THESE PICTURES.>> IF YOU WANT THEM ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE, YOU CAN PASS --
>> THIS IS THE BLOCK OF 801. SO, FURTHER DISCUSSIONS AND OF COURSE I HAVE BEEN BACK THERE A COUPLE OF TIMES. I KEEP MY PROPERTY MAINTAINED. THERE IS NO GARBAGE ON THE CORNER OF MY SEAT ON TEXAS OR FLORIDA. THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE TO DO IT. I TAKE CARE OF IT AND IT IS CLEAN. WE TRIED TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CLEAN. COME TO FIND OUT, I GO BACK AND WE ARE TALKING AGAIN ABOUT THIS AND THEY HAD SAID TO ME, IF I HAD PICTURES OF THE GUY DOING THE -- FOOD OR WHATEVER, BRING IT IN BECAUSE IT IS A VIOLATION. SO, I HAVE PICTURES AND VIDEO OF THE MAN THAT IS DOING THIS.
>> ONE MOMENT. YOU WANT THESE ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE. I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO IT YOU WILL CALL RESPONDENTS EXHIBIT ONE .
>> I WILL ACCEPT IT INTO EVIDENCE AS COMPOSITE EXHIBIT
ONE. >> AS TO THESE PHOTOGRAPHS,
THEY ARE NOT RELEVANT -- >> THEY ARE RELEVANT.
>> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND YOU CAN TESTIFY
ABOUT IT BUT -- >> THIS IS THE PERSON THAT MADE
THE INITIAL CLICK IT COMPLAINT. >> HE DID NOT MAKE IT AGAINST
YOUR PROPERTY? >> SHE JUST SAID THAT SHE CALLED HIM AND ASKED DID YOU MAKE A MISTAKE AND DID YOU MEAN 701 AND SHE SAID YES. HE SAID, YES, I MEANT 701.
>> I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS THE TESTIMONY.
>> WELL, THAT IS WHAT SHE SAID. AND SO MY THOUGHT ON THIS IS EVERYONE WHO WORKS HERE KNOWS WHO THIS PERSON IS AND THEY SAID TO ME IN CODE ENFORCEMENT, WELL, HE WAS AN EX-COMMISSIONER. HE DOES WHAT HE WANTS. IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN TELL HIM OR ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE BEEN SHOWING IT SO I'M NOT SAYING IT IS RELEVANT FOR YOU TO TAKE TESTIMONY ABOUT IT THAT I'M SAYING WE ARE GETTING OFF TOPIC OF WHETHER OR NOT THERE
ISVIOLATION ON YOUR PARTY. >> ACCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT THE WHERE THE VIOLATION CAME IS THE PERSON HAS AN AGENDA BECAUSE I HAVE SEVERAL THINGS ABOUT HIM ILLEGALLY DUMPING FOOD IN FRONT OF MY PROPERTY THE NOW HE HAS SOMEHOW HAS A LONG ARM
CONNECTION -- >> LET ME ASK YOU. DID YOU REPORT HIM TO LAW ENFORCEMENT?
>> I TALKED TO LAW ENFORCEMENT BACK AT THE START OF IT AND HE SAID YOU HAVE TO TAKE PICTURES OR VIDEO. OKAY. I DO HAVE VIDEO AND PICTURES. I DID NOT GO BACK AND MAKE A FORMAL THING WITH THE POLICE. BECAUSE I TALKED TO CODE ENFORCEMENT ABOUT IT.
>> THAT IS WHAT YOU NEED TO DO. IS MAKE A FORMAL COMPLAINT WITH
POLICE. >> SINCE IT WENT THROUGH CODE ENFORCEMENT, IT DOES NOT TAKE A LOT TO SEE WHERE THIS IS GOING.
THE PERSON WHO MADE A COMPLAINT, TALK TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE CODE ENFORCEMENT SAY, DID YOU REALLY MEAN 701? NOT 801. 701. OH. IT IS THE SAME PERSON THAT I HAVE HAD MULTIPLE ALBUMS WITH IN FRONT OF MY PROPERTY UP AND -- FOOD AND HE IS VERY CONFRONTATIONAL AND AGGRESSIVE.
SO OKAY. THAT IS WHAT I SAID. AS SHE SAID -- I'M SORRY. I DON'T MEAN SHE. AS THE OFFICER SAID, BY OPENING THE DOOR TO COMPLAINT, WE LOOK AT THE BLOCK. WELL, THE BLOCK IS 801, NOT 701 AND I JUST GIVE YOU ALL OF THESE VIOLATIONS WHICH ARE JUST IGNORED AND YOU JUMPED RIGHT 2701.
>> SO WE WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO TAKE ANY COMPLAINTS AFTER WE COME PRESENT YOUR CASE AND FINISH DISCUSSING YOUR CASE. YOU CAN GET WITH CHARMING OR ONE OF US. WE WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO TAKE ANY SPECIFIC ADDRESSES THAT YOU HAVE OR LOCATIONS AND LOOK INTO THOSE AS WELL, BUT FOR NOW, I THINK WE SHOULD FOCUS ON THE 701 TEXAS COURT SO THAT WE ARE NOT
GETTING OFF TOPIC. >> OKAY. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. THE ARGUMENT JOHNNY CAN GO I WANT TO GO. IF JOHNNY JUMPED OFF THE BRIDGE, WOULD YOU JUMP OFF THE BRIDGE? JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE OTHER VIOLATIONS DOES NOT DETRACT FROM THE FACT THAT I HAVE VIOLATIONS. I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. AND QUITE FRANKLY, THE FOLLOW-UP ON THAT PART OF IT, THE MAYOR'S HAMMER WINNER , WHICH WOULD BE THE EXAMPLE.
[00:30:09]
JUST GOT THE MAYOR'S AWARD IN MAY OF THIS LAST YEAR , WHICH WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF HOW OUR PROPERTIES SHOULD LOOK, HAS NOTHING BUT HEDGES OVER SIX FOOT TALL SOLID ON THE CORNER OF THE BLOCK IN KENTUCKY. MORE SO -- MS. SWANSON. FORGIVE ME.I'M GOING TO CUT YOU OFF THERE. TODAY, WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT AND IT SOUNDS LIKE MR. KLEYN YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG AND IT GOES AGAINST YOUR INVESTIGATION ONE. IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A VIOLATION OF THE CODE INVOLVING BAMBOO THAT IS IN FRONT OF THE FENCE. WHAT DO YOU HAVE PREPARED TO TELL ME AGAIN ABOUT THE BAMBOO IN FRONT OF THAT FENCE?
>> THE BAMBOO ON MY SIDE OF THE FENCE?
>> YES. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE IF IT IS A QUESTION OF YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED ANYTHING TO HAVE ABOVE THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE THAN MY WHOLE CITY OR WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE AND I FEEL LIKE I WAS SPECIFICALLY TARGETED BECAUSE THIS PERSON WITH HIS ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR AND TIES TO THE DEPARTMENT DOES NOT THAT IS THERE WAY TO GET ME SO TO SPEAK. AND THAT IS WHY I AM SAYING SPECIFICALLY, THIS HOUSE THAT WON THE MAYOR'S AWARD HAS A SIX FOOT FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD WHICH YOU CANNOT HAVE OUT OF COMPLIANCE AND THEY ALSO HAVE THIS HEDGE THAT GOES AROUND THE PROPERTY. SO I BROUGHT THIS UP TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND I SAID, WELL, IF THEY CAN HAVE ALL OF THIS, WHY ARE YOU COMING DOWN AFTER ME?
>> TRUST ME, I APPRECIATE YOU LETTING ME KNOW AND I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND. I CAN HEAR WHY THAT MIGHT BE FRUSTRATING. MY SUGGESTION , I CAN PROVIDE YOU LEGAL ADVICE OF ANY KIND, I SUGGEST IT WOULD BE WHAT MR. SOCIDO SUGGESTED BEFORE. IF YOU SEE A VIOLATION I SUGGEST YOU REPORT THAT BUT THE FACT REMAINS IS THAT WE ARE HERE FOR THIS BAMBOO. SO, ARE YOU PREPARED TO ADDRESS THIS PARTICULAR CODE VIOLATION?
>> I JUST WOULD LIKE CLARIFICATION. THE OFFICER WAS OUT YESTERDAY AND THEY SAID DEPENDING HOW THIS GOES, I SAID WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR SO THERE IS NO MISUNDERSTANDING? BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK PAST THE BAMBOO, LIKE AND EVERYBODY ELSE'S ART WHERE YOU HAVE PLANTS THAT ARE HIGHER THAN FOUR FOOT, ARE YOU EXPECTING ME TO RAISE MY WHOLE FRONT YARD DOWN? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING TO ME OR IS THE ISSUE JUST TO BAMBOO? AND THE OFFICER SAID, THAT IT WAS JUST THE BAMBOO. AND IF I CORRECT THAT, THEN WE ARE GOOD TO GO. AND SO IF THAT IS THE CASE AND I HAVE NO RECOURSE AND IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW WE GOT HERE AND IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT I AM TARGETED SPECIFICALLY FROM THIS PERSON THAT IS UTILIZING THEIR POWER THAT WAY, AND I WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE AND I WILL CUT
THE BAMBOO DOWN AS WHOMEVER . >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, MAY I?
>> YES, PLEASE. >> GOOD MORNING, MA'AM. I AM THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT'S WHITE WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND FROM THE APARTMENT'S POINT OF VIEW.
WE RECEIVED TARGETED COMPLAINTS EVERY DAY. WE HAVE NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR DISPUTES. THE SOURCE OF THE COMPLAINT DOES NOT AFFECT WHETHER OR NOT A VIOLATION EXIST. WE RECEIVED SIMILAR TYPE COMPLAINTS EVERY DAY THAT IS KIND OF -- A LOT OF PEOPLE UTILIZE CODE ENFORCEMENT AGAINST A NEIGHBOR. THAT IS WHY WE DO AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. WE GO ABOUT AND INVESTIGATE TO SEE IF A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THEN WE ADDRESS IT AS WE FIND IT. THAT IS WHY WE DON'T INITIATE CASES BASED ONLY ON A COMPLAINT PEOPLE WILL SUBMIT PHOTOS, ET CETERA. WE HAVE TO SEE IT OURSELVES AND THEN ADDRESS THE COMPLAINT. SO, THE SOURCE OF THE COMPLAINT HONESTLY IS NOT RELEVANT FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU FEEL TARGETED BY THIS INDIVIDUAL, IT IS CITYWIDE LABOR TO NEIGHBOR.
I DON'T LIKE THE PERSON THAT LIVES ACROSS THE STREET SO I'M GOING TO CALL CODE ENFORCEMENT. IT IS A VERY COMMON ISSUE FOR US TO RECEIVE A COMPLAINT BASED ON THAT TYPE OF COMPLAINT. THAT IS WHY WE GO OUT AND INVESTIGATE. SOMETIMES THERE IS A VIOLATION THAT IS CONFIRMED AND SOMETIMES THERE IS NOT, IN WHICH CASE WE SAY IT IS UNFOUNDED. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WE RECEIVED A COMPLAINT. WE DID DOUBLE CHECK TO SEE WHERE IT WAS GOING OR NOT. I'M NOT SURE WHAT CHARMAINE SAID
[00:35:03]
BUT I BELIEVE IN OUR NOTES SOMEWHERE, MR. BURKA SAID IT WAS 801. IT WAS IN OUR NOTES SOMEWHERE. THE BOTTOM LINE IS, WE GO OUT. WE INVESTIGATE. WE FOUND A VIOLATION AND WE ADDRESSED IT IN OUR STANDARD TYPICAL FASHION REGARDLESS OF WHERE IT CAME FROM. I GET COMPLAINTS THAT COME FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. I GET COMPLAINTS THAT COME FROM CITIZENS OR FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE TO SEE IT, CONFIRM IT, AND ADDRESS IT IN THE STANDARD FASHION AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE ASKING YOU TO DO. FOCUS ON THE VIOLATION WEIDENTIFIED WHEN WE WENT OUT. >> YES. THAT MAKES SENSE AND THAT OBVIOUSLY THAT IS HOW PEOPLE DO IT AND I THINK THAT THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE PEOPLE GIVE THEIR NAME NOW SO YOU CAN'T ANONYMOUSLY DO IT HELPS CURTAIL SOME OF THAT MALICIOUS REPORTING. HOWEVER, WHEN YOU SAY THAT YOU GOT INTO THAT ADDRESS AND YOU THEN YOU DID A SWEEP AND THAT YOU DID NOT SWEEP EXCEPT FOR SPECIFICALLY MY YARD, THAT MAKES IT FEEL LIKE IT IS A DIFFERENT REALM. NOW, IF EVERYBODY IS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLIANT AND I DON'T WANT TO BE A JUNIOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND SPEND MY TIME WITH MY NEIGHBORS .
THIS HOUSE, THIS HOUSE, THIS HOUSE -- WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT IT WOULD BE , I WOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE BUT IT IS VERY DIFFICULT WHEN THE HOUSE IN THE PICTURES THAT I SHOWED YOU , MOST PEOPLE WERE EXCITED. I WAS IN I WASN'T EVEN IN THE BLOCK.
AND THE PERSON THAT COMPLAINED ABOUT THAT HOUSE THAT HAS HEDGES ABOVE YOUR REQUIREMENTS, THEY DON'T GET CITED FOR IT.
SO IF THAT IS NOT TARGETED, SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE HE HAS SOME KIND OF POWER, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS BUT THE FACT THAT I AM ON THE WAY DARK, I WANT TO BE OFF THE RADAR. I WILL BE COMPLIANT AND DO WHAT I HAVE TO DO BUT I AM JUST SAYING, THERE IS NO WAY THAT THIS WASN'T BECAUSE THIS PERSON WHO WAS A COMMISSIONER 30 YEARS AGO DOES NOT HAVE SOME KIND OF POLL IF HE STILL DRIVES A CITY TRUCK AND HE CAN MAKE THIS PROBLEM.
IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE, IT IS OBVIOUS ON WHAT IS GOING ON HERE. AND I JUST THINK THAT WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO ACHIEVE? THAT I CUT THIS BAMBOO DOWN AND THEN EVERYBODY ELSE HAS TO CUT THIS BEAUTIFUL HOUSE THAT GOT THE MAYOR'S AWARD. THEY HAVE TO CUT ALL OF THEIR SURROUNDING PROPERTY BECAUSE THIS ONE , I WILL MAKE A FORMAL COMPLAINT ON BECAUSE YOU WERE HOLDING THIS UP TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS THE IDEAL. THIS IS THE IDEAL PROPERTY THAT WE SHOULD ALL ASPIRE TO AND IT IS A VERY THING THAT YOU CITED ME FOR. IT MAKES NO SENSE.
>> THANK YOU, SWANSON. ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD?
>> NO, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THESE PICTURES. I GUESS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SAY NO, YOU DON'T EVEN WANT THEM SO I DON'T HAVE TO HAND THEM?
>> IF YOU WANT TO SUBMIT THE PHOTOGRAPH TO MOVE THINGS ALONG OR ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL PHOTOGRAPHS IF YOU WANT TO SUBMIT THE EVIDENCE -- I'M GUESSING IT DOES NOT MATTER
ANYWAY SO OKAY. >> DO WE HAVE A RESPONSE FROM
THE CITY? >> THE CITY IS RECOMMENDING MA'AM JUST SO THAT YOU ARE AWARE THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT YOU HAVE UNTIL JANUARY 25TH WHICH WOULD BE THIS SATURDAY. THE FOLLOWING SATURDAY TO HAVE THAT TRIMMED
DOWN. IS THAT FEASIBLE TO YOU? >> IF I CAN HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME. IT PROBABLY WILL BE DONE BY THAT BUT JUST IN CASE THERE IS AN ISSUE, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO NOT BE IN VIOLATION.
SO, COULD YOU HAVE ME DO IT UNTIL THE 15TH OF FEBRUARY AND I WILL CONTACT THEM AS SOON AS IT IS DONE? IS THAT REASONABLE?
>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE PRETTY REASONABLE. IF YOU FINISH PRIOR TO THAT, JUST GET WAS CHARMAINE BUT THE 15TH IS FINE OF
FEBRUARY. >> THEY ARE VERY APPROACHABLE IN THE OFFICE AND SHE IS VERY APPROACHABLE. I WON'T HAVE A PROBLEM. I WILL TAKE AND WON'T GET IT DONE BUT I JUST WANT A LITTLE BIT OF TIME BECAUSE I WILL BE DOING IT SO IT IS NOT
REALLY VERY EASY TO DO. >> THE 15TH IS FINE OF FEBRUARY AND MIXTURE AFTER THE HEARING GET WITH CHARMAINE TO PROVIDE ANY OTHER ADDRESSES THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FORMAL
COMPLAINT ABOUT. >> I WILL HAVE TO REFLECT ON
>> AND THAT IS THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION.
>>, SWANSON, THANK YOU FOR COMING TODAY AND VOICING YOUR POSITION. THIS COURT FINDS THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THAT THE FOLLOWING BE ORDERED. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH 2025 TWO CUT OR TRIM ALL HEDGES IN THE FRONT OF THE HOME. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED. THANK YOU.
>> DO I JUST GO THEN? >> YES. THANK YOU.
[00:40:16]
>> OKAY. OUR NEXT CASE IS 5B1 . CASE NUMBER 20-769 712 NORTH
[2. Case Number: 20-766 Investigating Officer: Manuel Fernandez Violation Location: 712 N 20th St]
20TH STREET. >> MORNING, YOUR HONOR. MY NAME IS MANUAL HERNANDEZ JUNIOR . BEFORE YOU TODAY, I HAVE CASE NUMBER 20-769 . THERE IS A VIOLATION WAS ISSUED MARCH 12 2020 SENT REGULAR MAIL. THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WAS ISSUED ON JUNE 26TH, 2020 . THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WAS SENT CERTIFIED AND REGULAR MAILING AS WELL AS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY. THE REQUESTER IS MR. MICHAEL BARTLEY. THE PROPERTY WAS CITED FOR IP EMCEED THE REAL 4.1 EXTERIOR STRUCTURE GENERAL, IPMC 304.14 WINDOWS, SKYLIGHTS, AND DOOR FRAMES. IPMC 302.7 INSTRUCTION RESTRUCTURES. ON OCTOBER 7 2020 SPECIAL MAGISTRATE ROSS FOUND THE VIOLATION EXISTED AN ORDER 10 DAYS TO COMPLY FOR A $250 FINE -- DAILY FINE. THAT SURE SHALL PROCURE ON DECEMBER 2020. THE FINES WERE INITIATED. ON NOVEMBER 19TH OF 2020, A MASSIVE LETTER WAS SENT. ON MAY 17TH, 2021, IN ORDER ASSESSING FINES AND OPPOSING MEANS WERE RECORDED AND MAILED TO THE OWNER. OCTOBER 29TH 2024, AN AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED AND ON DECEMBER 9TH, 2024, WE HAD RECEIVED THE REQUEST FOR A LIEN REDUCTION.
THE BALANCE DUE FOR THIS CASE IS $365,780 . OUR REDUCTION CRITERIA IS WHETHER THE REQUESTING PARTY IS THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ORIGINAL VIOLATION THAT RESULTED IN THE LIEN THAT IS KNOWN. WHETHER THE PARTY HAS ESTABLISHED THE EXISTING OF EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES -- MY APOLOGIES.
ONE OF THE REQUESTING PARTY HAS ESTABLISHED THE EXISTENCE OF EXTENDED WING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD HAVE PRESENTED THEM PREVENTED THEM FROM BRINGING THE PROPERTY IN COMPLIANCE.
THAT IS A NO. WHETHER THERE IS A CURRENT CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ON THIS PROPERTY OR ANY OTHER PROPERTY UNDER COMMON OWNERSHIP. THAT IS ALSO A NO. THE TYPE OF LIEN REDUCTIONS GRANTED FOR THIS PROPERTY UNDER FURTHER PROPERTIES UNDER OWNERSHIP IN THE PAST 24 MONTHS . NONE ASIDE FROM THE OTHERS SCHEDULED FOR TODAY AND WHETHER THE GRANTING OF THE REDUCTION IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY THAT IS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. I DID HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK WITH MR. BARTLEY OUTSIDE. THE CITY HAS OFFERED $2500 FOR THIS PROPERTY TO CELLO. HE HAS DENIED AND WISHED TO PRESENT HIS CASE IN FRONT OF YOU FOR A LOWER NUMBER.
>> AND TO CLARIFY, YOU SAID $2500 OF A REDUCTION OF 2500?
>> YES , SIR. THE PRICE YOU HAVE TO BE THAT THE CITY WOULD
BE AGREEABLE TO IS $2200. >> OKAY. NOT THIS -- OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. IS THAT ALL YOU HAVE FOR ME?
>> YES, SIR. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE
CITY. >> THANK YOU. SIR, DO YOU HAVE
ANYTHING FOR ME? >> YES, SIR. GOOD MORNING, YOUR MAGISTRATE, AND MORNING EVERYONE AND THEIR RESPECTIVE PLACES. I BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY LAST YEAR -- AND I'M SORRY.
YOUR NAME? >> MICHAEL BARTLEY. FOR THE
RECORD. >> SIR, YOU WEREN'T PRESENT FOR SWEARING SO IF I DO FOR YOU IN?
>> SURE. >> THESE RAZOR RIGHT HAND. YOU SWEAR YOUR TESTIMONY YOU PROVIDE WILL BE THE TRUTH?
>> SO, I PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY AND I THOUGHT
[00:45:01]
EVERYTHING WAS IN GOOD STANDING AND THEN I GET A LETTER A LITTLE BIT AFTER I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY OF THIS TOTAL LIEN. AND SO I SAID, WAIT A SECOND HERE. I DON'T OWN THIS LIEN ANYWAY. SO, I WENT OVER AND CALLED MR. MANUAL AND CATHERINE AND I SPOKE TO THEM THAT MR. MANUAL CAME UP AND I SAID, NUMBER ONE, I DON'T LIKE TO BE IN ANY VIOLATION. AND I SAW THE LIST OF THE VIOLATION. I DID EVERYTHING ON THE VIOLATION AND ABOVE. PAINT, CUT, REMOVE ALL DEBRIS. THE PLACE IS LIKE BRAND-NEW. AND SO I SPENT ALL THAT MONEY TO BRING THE PLACE UP TO PAR AND NOW WHAT I AM SEEING IS THAT IT WAS NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY OF THE VIOLATION AND ALL I AM SAYING, IF I COULD PAY SOMETHING LESS OF THEM BECAUSE I DID NOT CREATE THIS VIOLATION AND IT WAS NOT DONE UNDER ME. SO, WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO BEAR SOMEBODY ELSE'S BURDEN? AND I WAS TOTALLY NOT EVEN IN THE PICTURE. THIS WAS FROM 2020.>> WHEN DID YOU PURCHASE THE HOME?
>> JUNE. AUGUST. >> AUGUST OF?
>> I DID EVERYTHING, YOUR MAGISTRATE. I DID EVERYTHING.
WHEN I SAY EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING. NOT EVEN A PIECE OF GARBAGE . YOU CAN WALK AROUND THE PROPERTY. I HIRED SOMEBODY TO CUT AND JUST TO KEEP IT BEAUTIFUL. AND SO THAT IS WHY I AM STANDING HERE TO SEE IF I CAN GET A LOWER REDUCTION,
PLEASE. >> THANK YOU FOR COMING TODAY
AND SHARING YOUR POSITION. >> MAY I ASK A QUESTION?
>> ABSOLUTELY. >> SIR, DO YOU HAVE A WARRANTY
DEED ON THIS PROPERTY? >> I THINK SO. YES, I DO. IT IS
MY WIFE. >> IS YOUR WIFE ALSO A OWNER OF
THE PROPERTY AS WELL? >> YES. I OWN AND SHE OWNS.
>> IT IS FLORIDA. IT IS THE LAW.
IT. >> HAVE YOU SPOKEN WITH THE GUARANTEE PROPERTY FOR TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE LIENS
YOU WERE NOT AWARE OF? >> OKAY. SO, I CALLED THE TITLE COMPANY AND I SAID, HOW COME WE DIDN'T PICK THIS UP? AND THEY SAID WE DID NOT SEE IT. SO I SAID HOW ARE WE GOING TO RESOLVE IT? AND HE SAID, YOU OWN IT. YOU GET WHAT I'M SAYING? SO, IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS MY BABY.
>> JUST TO READ INTO THE RECORDS, THERE ARE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE RULES THAT COVER THIS PROCEEDING AND PART OF THE RULES REQUIRE THAT IF YOU'RE REQUESTING A LIEN REDUCTION THAT, ONE, IT IS IN WRITING WHAT YOU DID. APPLICABLE FEE
HAS BEEN PAID, WHICH YOU DID. >> I DID THAT.
>> THE REQUEST INCLUDES A STATEMENT OR EXPLANATION THE CITY SHOULD CONSIDER THE REQUEST FOR ADJUSTMENT. WHICH HE DID. YOU ARE SPOT THIS PROPERTY AND THIS WAS NOT YOUR LIEN THAT YOU CREATED FOR. THAT IT MUST BE NAMED BY THE OWNER, WHICH ARE. FIVE THAT A COPY OF THE DEED SHOWING TITLE TRANSFER TO THE CURRENT OWNER MUST BE PROVIDED. IF THE LIEN ENCUMBER THE PROPERTY WHEN THE CURRENT OWNER ACQUIRED TITLE IN THE PROPERTY WAS CONVEYED TO THE OWNER VIA SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED OR WARRANTY DEED, THE OWNER MUST PROVIDE PROOF OF THEIR ATTEMPT TO HAVE THE GUARANTEEING PARTY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE DEBT WITHOUT SUCCESS. SO YOU ARE SAYING THAT YOU HAD A PHONE CALL WITH THE TITLE COMPANY?
THAT RECENTLY? >> I DON'T WANT TO SAY A DATE BECAUSE I WOULDN'T REMEMBER BUT IT WAS AFTER I HAVE GOTTEN THE LETTER I WENT IN AND I SPOKE WITH THEM.
>> AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING THOUGH -- THEY TELL
ME IT IS NOT THEIRS PERIOD. >> AND WHO IS THE INDIVIDUAL
>> WHAT WAS THE NAME? TOKS . >> IT SOUNDS LIKE IT HAS BEEN
BROUGHT TO COMPLIANCE. >> 150%. AS A MATTER OF FACT, HE CAME OUT, DID PICTURES AND SAID THIS PLACE IS BEAUTIFUL.
>> I DID SAY THE PROPERTY DID HAVING MEAT MEAT APPEARANCE TO
[00:50:05]
IT. >> MR. BARCLAY, YOU CAME ASKING FOR A REDUCTION. WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU REQUESTING? WHAT FIGURE
ARE YOU REQUESTING? >> IF I COULD PAY $1000 FOR BOTH FOR THE BUILDING -- I MEAN, I SHOULDN'T BE PAYING ANYTHING BECAUSE I SAID IT IS NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY BUT --
ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? >> NO, SIR.
>> MR. FERNANDEZ, HOW MUCH ARE THE ADMINISTRATION COSTS? CAN
YOU BRING THAT UP? >> AFTER A CALCULATION SET MR. REYES DID, THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS WOULD BE $1371.41 PER
YEAR IT . >> MR. BARCLAY, I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOUR POSITION AND THE FACT THAT YOU PURCHASED THIS POVERTY . IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU DID EVERYTHING YOU COULD TO MAKE SURE IT IS IN COMPLIANCE AND IT DOES SOUND LIKE YOU MIGHT HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME WITH THIS TITLE COMPANY. I AM PREPARED TO GRANT A REDUCTION BUT TO THE ADMINISTRATION COSTS. SO, TO THIS $1371.41 AMOUNT. ISAAC , CAN YOU BRING US BACK TO THAT LAST SCREEN, PLEASE? THANK YOU. AND SO, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER TO ADD?
>> NOT FOR MYSELF. ISAAC? >> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING.
>> SO, IT IS THIS COURTS DETERMINATION THAT A REDUCTION WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY. I AM GRANTING A REDUCTION TO THE AMOUNT OF -- TO THE ADMINISTRATION COST OF $1371.41 . DO WE HAVE A TYPICAL TIMELINE BY WHICH THAT NEEDS TO
BE PAID? >> WITH 30 DAYS BE FEASIBLE?
>> EFFECTIVE. >> ALL RIGHT. WE ORDER THAT IT BE PAID IN 30 DAYS. IF FOR SOME REASON SOMETHING COMES UP, PLEASE BE SURE TO REACH OUT TO SOMEONE WITH THE DEPARTMENT TO
DISCUSS THIS FURTHER. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
GREATLY APPRECIATE IT. >> JUST STAY THERE BECAUSE WE DO HAVE OTHER CODE VIOLATIONS THAT WERE SOME FROM THE SAME PROPERTY. SO WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A QUICK HEARING ON THAT AS
WELL. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, ON A REDUCTION REQUEST, IF IT IS NOT PAID WITHIN THE TIME ALLOTTED WE TYPICALLY QUEST THAT IT BE REVERTED BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL
AMOUNT. >> I WOULD LIKE THAT TO BE PART OF THE ORDER AS WELL. I WILL ADOPT WHAT MR. REYES WAS TELLING ME NOW. WHAT IS OUR NEXT MATTER?
>> THE NEXT CASE IS 5B2 20-766 .
[1. Case Number: 20-769 Investigating Officer: Manuel Fernandez Violation Location: 712 N 20th St]
>> WE JUST DID 766. >> YEAH. DID ACTUALLY.
SPEAKERS ] >> OKAY. WE ARE DOING 769 NOW.
>> THIS IS CASE NUMBER 20-769 AT 712 NORTH 20TH STREET. THIS IS A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN REDUCTION. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED ON MARCH 13TH, 2020. IT WAS SENT THROUGH REGULAR MAIL. THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WAS ISSUED JUNE 26TH, 2020 AND IT WAS SENT CERTIFIED AND REGULAR MAILING AS WELL AS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY. THE REQUESTER IS A MICHAEL BARTLEY.
THE PROPERTY WAS CITED FOR $16.46 , 60 ¿ 47, 60 ¿ 48 SUBSECTIONS ONE AND FIVE OUTSIDE STORAGE. THE FINDINGS WERE ON OCTOBER 7, 22 . SPECIAL MAGISTRATE ROSS FOUND THE VIOLATION WAS ISSUED FIVE DAYS TO COMPLY OR A $50 FINE BE ASSESSED. NOVEMBER 2ND, 2020 AND AFFIDAVIT OF NONCOMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED. FINES WERE INITIATED. ON NOVEMBER 19TH 2020, A LETTER WAS SENT. ON MAY 17 2021, IN ORDER ASSESSING FINE AND IMPOSING LIEN RECORDED WAS MAILED TO THE OWNER. ON OCTOBER 29TH 2024, AND AFFIDAVITS OF COMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED. ON DECEMBER 9TH, 2024, THE DEPARTMENT RECEIVED A
[00:55:01]
REQUEST FOR REDUCTION OF THE TOTAL BALANCE OF $73,000 . THE REDUCTION CRITERIA WHETHER THE REQUESTING PARTY IS THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ORIGINAL VIOLATION IN THE LIEN, THAT IS A NO. WERE THE REQUESTING PARTY HAS ESTABLISHED EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST, THAT IS A NO. WHETHER THERE IS A CURRENT CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ON THIS PROPERTY OR ANY OTHER PROPERTY UNDER COMMON OATH, THERE ARE NONE. THE TYPE OF NUMBER OF LIEN REDUCTIONS RENTED FOR THIS PROPERTY OR ANY OTHER PROPERTY UNDER COMMON OWNERSHIP IN THE PAST 24 MONTHS, NONE BESIDES THE OTHER CASE WE HAVE JUST HEARD. WHETHER GRANTING THE REDUCTION IS THE BEST INTEREST IN THE CITY THAT WOULD BE DETERMINED BY THE SPECIALMAGISTRATE. >> AND WHAT IS THE CITY'S POSITION REGARDING THE REDUCTION?
>> IT WAS THE SAME AS A PREVIOUS CASE. I SPOKE TO MR. BARCLAY OUTSIDE AND WE ALSO OFFERED HIM $2500 FOR HIM TO PAY INSTEAD OF THE $73,000. HE DID NOT ACCEPT IT AND HE WANTED TO COME IN FRONT OF YOU TO TRY AND GET A LOWER NUMBER AS WELL.
>> IS TO BARTLEY, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ADDITIONAL TO ADD?
>> WELL, AS PREVIOUSLY SAID, IT WAS NOT MY VIOLATION . I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR SOMEONE ELSE'S VIOLATION AND SINCE I HAVE OWNED THE PROPERTY, THE PROPERTY IS IN 100% -- AND WHEN I GOT THE PROPERTY, I DID LOOK AND THE PROPERTY HAD PIGS ON IT, DOGS ON IT , ABOUT SEVEN CATS IN THE HOUSE. FOR PIT BULLS AND I SAID, I CAME IN I LOVE ANIMALS BUT NOT IN THIS SENSE. YOU KNOW? SO, I SAID I HAVE TO CLEAN THIS ALL UP. AND
THAT IS WHAT I DID. >> THANK YOU. WHAT IS THE ADMINISTRATION COSTS ON THIS ONE?
>> I BELIEVE AFTER MR. REYES HAD DONE ALL OF THE CALCULATIONS, THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR THIS
PROPERTY WAS $1430.91. >> WELL, I DO FIND THAT A REDUCTION WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY. I WILL GRANT A REDUCTION TO THE ADMINISTRATION COSTS HERE AS WELL. SO, WE WILL REDUCE THE AMOUNT TO $1430.91 TO BE PAID IN 30 DAYS OR WITHIN 30 DAYS OF MY ORDER. AND MR. BARTLEY, IF YOU DO NOT COMPLY, THE REDUCTION WILL REVERT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT OF 73 SOME ODD THOUSAND DOLLARS. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER ON THIS PROPERTY?
>> NO, YOUR HONOR. >> JUST THREE DAYS TO PAY OFF.
WOULD THAT BE FEASIBLE? AND IF IT IS NOT PAID ON THAT TIME, IT
WOULD REVERT. >> IT IS ADEQUATE. IT IS ADEQUATE. THANK YOU. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU, YOUR
[1. Case Number: LTCL-2024-139 Investigating Officer: Manuel Fernandez Violation Location: 804 N 22nd St]
>> OKAY. OUR NEXT CASE IS A CALL IN CASE. THAT IS CASE 5A .
THE CASE NUMBER IS LTCL-2024-139 FOUR 804 NORTH 22ND STREET. WE WILL BE CALLING ON ATTORNEY JONATHAN DALY.
>> THANK YOU FOR CALLING DAILY LAW. PLEASE PRESS ONE TO SPEAK
WITH A MEMBER OF OUR TEAM. >> PLEASE HOLD WHILE WE CONNECT
YOUR CALL TO EXTENSION ONE. >>
>> GOOD MORNING. DAILY LAW. >> JONATHAN DALY PLEASE.
>> OKAY. WHAT IS THIS IN REGARDS?
>> THIS IS THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND WE ARE IN A SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING AND HE IS EXPECTING OUR CALL.
>> PERFECT. LET ME GO AHEAD AND TRANSFER. PLEASE HOLD.
[01:00:02]
>> PLEASE HOLD WHILE WE CONNECT YOUR CALL TO EXTENSION 2.
>> IS AN >> HELLO. THIS IS JONATHAN
DALY. >> HELLO. THIS IS ELIZABETH WITH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU CAN
HEAR ME OKAY? >> HI, ELIZABETH. YES. THANK
YOU. I WAS EXPECTING YOUR CALL. >> OKAY. YOU'RE IN AUDIENCE ATTENDANCE OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING.
>> AWESOME. IS THIS OKAY THAT WE ARE DOING THIS WITHOUT
MARIAH, MY CLIENT, IS IT? >> MR. DAILY, THIS IS FELICIA HOLLIMAN ON THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. IF YOU DO NOT WISH FOR HER TO ATTEND, YOU CAN SPEAK ON HER BEHALF. OBVIOUSLY, IF THERE IS ANY TESTIMONY THOUGH THAT YOU'RE ANTICIPATING FROM HER, WE NEED TO GET HER ON THE PHONE TOO.
>> I DON'T THINK IT WILL BE NECESSARY. ELIZABETH, WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE THE EXHIBITS THAT WE SENT IN YESTERDAY?
>> YES. >> AWESOME. SO OUR MAIN ARGUMENT IS JUST ASKING FOR LENIENCE . MY CLIENT HAD NO NOTICE PERCEIVED AS SHE WAS IN NEW YORK. SHE DID NOT RECEIVE A NOTICE TO APPEAR. THE ONLY EVIDENCE I SEE IS THE CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT, WHICH I LAST NIGHT PUT INTO THE USPS TRACKING SYSTEM AND IT SHOWS THAT IT IS STILL IS PENDING AND
NEVER WAS DELIVERED. >> WELL, MR. DAILY, WE ARE GOING TO PRESENT ON OUR END JUST SOME FINDINGS FROM OUR OFFICER AND THEN, YOU CAN BE HEARD AGAIN IF THERE IS
ANYTHING ADDITIONAL, OKAY? >> OKAY. THAT IS FINE.
>> AND MR. HERNANDEZ, WOULD YOU PROCEED?
>> YES, MA'AM. THIS IS CASE LTCL-2024-139 ENTRE 19. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS SENT CERTIFIED AND REGULAR MAILING AS WELL AS POSTED ON THE PRETTY. THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WAS ISSUED ON AUGUST 23RD, 2024 AND WAS ALSO CERTIFIED AND REGULAR MAILING AS WELL AS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY. THE OWNER IS PRIYA RANA PRESENTED BY JONATHAN DAILY ESQUIRE.
PROPERTY WAS CITED FOR 24-19 11 SUBSECTIONS A AND B. NUISANCE FOR LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES. ON SEPTEMBER 4TH 2024, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE PELLETIER FOUND THE OWNERS AND VIOLATION AND GAVE SEVEN DAYS TO COMPLY OR BE FINED $100 A DAY. THE ASSESSED AND THE CITY WOULD TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUISANCE CONDITIONS , THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. ON DECEMBER 30TH, 2024, AND AFFIDAVIT OF NONCOMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED AND DAILY FINES WERE STARTED. ON NOVEMBER 7TH, 2024, THE LOT WAS CUT BY THE OWNER. THE AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE ISSUES. THE FINES STOPPED. ON DECEMBER 5TH, , 2024, A MASSEY LETTER WAS SENT. AND ON DECEMBER 10TH, 2024, A MASSEY REQUEST WAS RECEIVED FOR A TOTAL OF $5000. THE GRAVITY OR SERIOUSNESS OF THE VIOLATION WAS MINOR. ANY AND ALL ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE VIOLATOR TO CORRECT THE VIOLATIONS. CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS.
THEY DID CUT THE PROPERTY , JUST NOT IN THE ALLOTTED TIME THAT WAS ORDERED. ANY PREVIOUS VIOLATIONS COMMITTED BY THE VIOLATOR WERE NONE . THE RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD BE OUT TO
THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. >> THANK YOU, MR. FERNANDEZ.
MS. HOLLAND, ANYTHING FOR YOU? >> THE ATTACHMENTS, MR. FERNANDEZ THAT ARE A PART OF THIS CASE HERE. I WANTED TO DISCUSS IT AND MR. DAILY, WERE YOU ABLE TO LOOK AT THE ATTACHMENTS ON THE AGENDA FROM THE CITY?
>> YES, I WAS. >> SO, FOR EXHIBIT ONE, THE NOTICE TO APPEAR , WHICH OBVIOUSLY WERE HEARD FROM MR. DAILEY THAT HIS CLIENT DID NOT RECEIVE . WAS THAT MAILED REGULAR MAIL AND CERTIFIED MAIL TO THE ADDRESS THAT WE SEE
>> AND THAT WAS NOT JUST A NOTICE TO APPEAR BUT ALSO A NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT WAS SEPARATELY MAILED TO HER. IS
THAT CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM. SO THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WOULD HAVE BEEN AUGUST 22ND, CORRECT?
>> YES, MA'AM. TOO AND THAT WAS CERTIFIED AND REGULAR MAIL.
>> YES, MA'AM. >> AND THEN THERE WAS A HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 4TH THAT YOU JUST NOTED. WAS THERE AN ORDER THAT
WAS SENT TO HER AS WELL? >> YES, MA'AM. IT WAS SENT ON
[01:05:01]
THE ADDRESS AS YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN.>> IS THAT SENT CERTIFIED AND REGULAR OR JUST REGULAR?
>> I BELIEVE SO. >> I AM SORRY. PEGGY RAISED THE DIRECTOR FOR THE APARTMENT. THE ORDERS ARE SENT REGULAR MAIL
ONLY. >> AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN TO THAT SAME ADDRESS IN NEW YORK?
>> I BELIEVE SO. YES. >> HAVE ANY OF THESE MAILINGS AND SENT BACK TO THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE?
>> NO, MA'AM. >> HAVE YOU EVER SPOKEN WITH MS. REA? THAT MAYBE SHE GOT THESE NOTICES MAYBE LATER OR SOMEBODY TOLD HER ABOUT THIS? HOW DID YOU COME TO LEARN THAT
THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN CUT? >> I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY
PROPERTY. >> HOW DID YOU LEARN ABOUT THE
PROPERTY BEING TAKEN CARE OF? >> THE PROPERTY WENT OUT ON BIT TO ONE OF OUR CONTRACTORS AND I BELIEVE WE HAD RECEIVED AN EMAIL OR TEXT BACK FROM ONE OF OUR CONTRACTORS STATING THE PROPERTY HAD ALREADY BEEN CUT. NOT BY THEM BUT BY SOMEBODY ELSE WE ASSUMED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.
>> THE DATE THAT YOU HAVE IS LISTED AS A COMPLIANCE DATE DECEMBER 7 2024. IS THAT THE DATE THAT YOU REALIZE IT HAD
BEEN TAKEN CARE OF? >> ALL RIGHT. THERE IS NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. MR. DAILY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE
>> SURE. >> SO IT IS MR. FERNANDEZ,
RIGHT? >> FERNANDEZ WITH AN F.
>> FERNANDEZ. EXCUSE ME. MR. FERNANDEZ, JUST TO REITERATE THERE IS NO NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS MAILED WHEN?
>> AUGUST 22ND, 2024. >> AUGUST 22ND. AND THE NOTICE
TO APPEAR, WHEN WAS THAT SENT? >> AUGUST 23RD 2024.
>> AUGUST 23RD. OKAY. THE CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS. WAS IT A NOTICE OF VIOLATION OR NOTICE TO APPEAR WITH THE CERTIFIED MAIL PETE RECEIPTS THAT WERE LISTED FOR THE CITY?
>> USUALLY, THE CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT IS OF WHAT WE SENT AND CERTIFIED SO THAT WOULD HAVE INCLUDED THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND THE NOTICE TO APPEAR.
>> YES. AND THIS IS PEGGY I RAISE AGAIN THE DIRECTOR. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION FROM THE RECORD , THE LETTER WAS DRAFTED OCTOBER 22ND. I BELIEVE THE MAILING BECAUSE WE DO SEND THE NOTICE TO APPEAR AND THEN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION TOGETHER IN THE SAME ENVELOP. I BELIEVE THEY WERE DRAFTED ONE DAY AND THEN THE SECOND DAY AND THE END UP GOING IN THE MAIL TOGETHER
ON THE SECOND DAY. >> RIGHT. OKAY. WERE YOU ABLE TO REVIEW OUR EXHIBIT FROM THE USPS TRACKING NUMBER ?
70190140000 39378792? >> YES. WOULD YOU LIKE THAT
ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE, SIR? >> YES. I WOULD, PLEASE.
>> YOU ALSO PROVIDED TO GIVE THEM BOTH AS A COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ON YOUR BEHALF, TYPES LANDSCAPE INVOICE. WOULD YOU LIKE THAT ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE AS WELL?
>> YES, PLEASE. INVOICE 8032. >> WE DO HAVE THEM PRINTED HERE AND WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THEM TO THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. NO
OBJECTIONS FROM THE CITY. >> AWESOME. LIKE I SAID, OUR MAIN ARGUMENT WAS THAT THE NOTICE TO APPEAR WAS FINED BY CATHERINE CAULDRON DATED EIGHT 23 , 2024 IS WHAT I PRESUMED IT TO BE CORRESPOND TO MAIL TRACKING RECEIVED THAT IT WAS NEVER ACTUALLY DELIVERED. IT LINES UP WITH WHAT MY CLIENT HAS ALLEGED THAT SHE NEVER RECEIVED IT. AS YOU CAN SEE WITH THE INVOICE THAT WE HAD IN THERE AS WELL, THAT IT WOULD MAKE SENSE THAT SHE DID RECEIVE THE ORDER BECAUSE THE ORDER WAS BRIEFLY ORDERED BY THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE'S TO HAVE THE DRAFT CUT MUCH CLOSER TO THE INVOICE DATE OF 10 THREE. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT DATE THAT MY CLIENT RECEIVED THE ORDER BUT IT WAS SHORTLY THEREAFTER AUGUST DATE OF THE CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT THAT SHE NEVER RECEIVED TO REAPPEAR BUT SHE HAS RECEIVED THE ORDER AND WAS ABLE TO COMPLY AND THIS, IN CONJUNCTION WITH HOW QUICKLY THE CLIENT IS DOING THE VIOLATIONS I WOULD ASK THAT THE ENTIRE FINE BE WAIVED AND OBVIOUSLY NO LIEN BE
PLACED ON THE PROPERTY. >> THANK YOU, MR. DAILY. THIS IS SPECIAL MAGISTRATE JAMIE BARREAU . I'M GOING TO ADMIT THAT USPS TRACKING NUMBER ENDING IN 8792 AND THE INVOICE
[01:10:10]
AMOUNT SHOWING AN INVOICE PAID OF $150 FOR CUTTING OF GRASS AT THE 804 NORTH 22ND STREET ADDRESS INTO EVIDENCE AS RESPONDENTS COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. SO, CLARIFY FOR ME, MR. DAILY, WHAT ARE YOU ASKING FOR US TO DO HERE? YOU ARE ASKINGFOR A REDUCTION ? >> I AM ASKING FOR THE ENTIRE FINE TO BE WAIVED. OBVIOUSLY, ANY ALTERNATIVE FOR THE REDUCTION WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO MY CLIENT. I DO WANT TO POINT OUT 40 STATUTE 162 102 WHICH IS THE BASIS FOR THE POWER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE FINES HERE. THAT SPECIFICALLY SAY THAT THE POWER IS TO IMPOSE THE ADMINISTRATIVE FINES AND OTHER NONCRIMINAL PENALTIES TO PROVIDE EQUITABLE EXPEDITIOUS EFFECT OF AND INEXPENSIVE METHODS OF ENFORCING THE CODE .
>> EXCELLENT. THANK YOU, MR. DAILY. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE
YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO CONSIDER? >> NO. THAT WOULD BE IT.
>> MR. FERNANDEZ, IS THE CITY ASKING FOR THE FULL AMOUNT
HERE? >> THE CITY WOULD ASK FOR THE FULL AMOUNT IT WOULD BE UP TO YOUR DETERMINATION ON WHAT THE
AMOUNT WOULD BE. >> WHAT ARE THE ADMINISTRATION
COSTS HERE? >> THE ADMINISTERED OF COSTS AFTER MYSTERY IS A CALCULATOR THEM CAME OUT TO $975.85.
>> WELL, IT IS THE COURT'S DETERMINATION THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY THAT WE REDUCE THIS FINE DOWN TO THE ADMINISTRATION COSTS . SO, MR. DAILY, I AM ORDERING YOUR CLIENT TO PAY THE SUM OF $975.89 TO COVER THE ADMINISTRATION COSTS . DO YOU THINK YOUR CLIENT WOULD BE ABLE
TO DO THAT IN 30 DAYS? >> IN 30 DAYS? I WOULD IMAGINE SO . IF HER SOME REASON SHE COULDN'T, BUT I CONTACT YOUR
OFFICE? >> LET'S PUSH IT UP TO 60 DAYS TO MAKE SURE SHE HAS ENOUGH TIME TO GET THAT DONE.
>> I'M SURE SHE WILL BE ABLE TO GET WITH THAT.
>> EXCELLENT. EXCELLENT. >> I APPRECIATE THAT.
>> ABSOLUTELY. SO IT IS THE ORDER OF THIS COURT THAT THE NET SUM OF $975.85 BE PAID BY THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY WITHIN 60 DAYS OF MY ORDER. A FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL RESULT IN THIS REDUCTION BEING REVERTED BACK TO THE ORIGINAL $5000 AMOUNT. SO, THANK YOU, MR. DAILY. WE WILL GET THAT
ORDER OUT SHORTLY. >> THINK YOU GUYS.
[3. Case Number: 13-575 Investigating Officer: Isaac Saucedo Violation Location: 705 Boston Ave]
>> OKAY. WE HAVE ANOTHER CALL IN CASE. THIS WOULD BE CASE 5B3 13-575 . WE WILL BE CALLING CATHERINE CAMBRIDGE.
>> SHE IS IN SPAIN. >> YOUR CALL HAS BEEN FORWARDED
>> THIS YOUNG LADY SAID SHE WOULD SPEAK ON MISS AMBRIDGE'S
BEHALF. >> THIS IS CASE NUMBER 13-575 , 705 BOSTON AVENUE. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION ISSUE DATE WAS FIVE MARCH 27TH OF 2013. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION SERVICE METHOD IS LIKE REGULAR MAIL AND ALSO AND ALSO THE NOTICE TO APPEAR -- SORRY. THE NOTICE TO APPEAR DATE WAS JULY 8TH OF 2013TH AND THE SERVICE METHOD WAS THROUGH CERTIFIED MAIL. THE
[01:15:03]
OWNER IS KATHLEIN H. AMBRIDGE AND PATRICIA F. HOEFLING .VIOLATION 16, 46, 47, 48 AND 22-187 13 SUBSECTION B FOR MINSKY MINIONS. THE FINDINGS WERE ON AUGUST 7TH, 2013, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE ROSS FOUND A VIOLATION EXISTED AND ORDERED 60 DAYS TO COMPLY OR $100 FINE DAILY. OCTOBER 14TH, 2013, AND AFFIDAVIT OF NONCOMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED AND FINES BEGAN AT THAT MOMENT. OCTOBER 15TH 2013, A MASSEY LETTER WAS SENT.
DECEMBER 26TH, 2013, AN ORDER ASSESSING FINE AND IMPOSING LIEN WAS ORDERED . JANUARY 30TH OF 2014, A NOTICE OF LIEN WAS SENT. MARCH 17TH, 2014, AN AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WITH ISSUE AND DECEMBER 4TH, 2024, WE RECEIVED A REQUEST FOR A REDUCTION. THERE IS A TOTAL BALANCE OF $15,000 -- $15,440 .
I'M SORRY. AND WHETHER THE REQUESTING PARTY IS THE PERSON REQUESTING THE -- I AM SORRY. WHETHER THE PERSON REQUESTING PARTY IS THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ORIGINAL VIOLATION THAT RESULTED INTO THE LIEN, NO, SHE IS ACTUALLY THE DAUGHTER. AND WHETHER THE REQUESTING PARTY ESTABLISHED EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST , NO, SHE WASN'T THE OWNER AT THE TIME AND SHE IS THE DAUGHTER. WHETHER THERE IS A CURRENT CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ON THIS PROPERTY OR ANY OTHER PROPERTY UNDER COMMON OWNERSHIP IS NONE. THE TYPE OF NUMBER OF LIEN REDUCTIONS PROPERTY RENTED FOR THIS PROPERTY OR ANY OTHER PROPERTY UNDER COMMON OWNERSHIP UNDER THE NEXT 24 MONTHS IS NONE AND WHETHER GRANTING OF THE REDUCTION IS IN THE CITY'S BEST INTEREST FOR THE CITY.
THAT IS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. STAFF IS REQUESTING REDUCING THAT TOTAL BALANCE OF $15,440 TO $1540.
AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE FOR NOW.
>> THANK YOU. MS. DURHAM, IS IT?
>> YES. >> THANK YOU FOR COMING TODAY.
>> IT IS NICE TO SEE YOU. >> LIKEWISE. LIKEWISE. CLARIFY FOR ME, WHAT IS YOUR RELATION TO THE PROPERTY?
>> PERSONAL ASSISTANT. THE MOTHER PASSED AWAY.
>> PLEASE EXTEND MY CONDOLENCES FOR THEIR LOSS.
>> DO HAVE ANYTHING TO EXTEND TO US?
>> NO, JUST THE FACT THAT TD BANK OWNED THE PROPERTY WHILE ALL OF THESE INSTRUCTIONS WERE OWNED. AND KATHLEIN NOR HER MOTHER NO KNEW ABOUT THEM SO SHE IS ASKING TO NOT HAVE TO PAY THAT UP BECAUSE SHE DID NOT EVEN OWN THE PROPERTY.
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WHEN DID SHE PURCHASE THE PROPERTY?
>> MS. HOLLAND, ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY HERE?
>> JUST FOR THE RECORD, THE OWNER DID NOTE THAT SHE WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY THE $1540. SO, DURING HER REQUESTS.
>> WHAT IS THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS HERE?
>> ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS IS $1426.91.
>> IT IS THE DETERMINATION OF THIS COURT THAT REDUCTION IN THE FINE WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST. OF THE CITY. I AM NOT GOING TO DISTURB THIS AGREEMENT THAT WAS BETWEEN THE HOMEOWNER AND OR THE LEASE I SHOULD SAY SINCE THERE IS NO DISAGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT BEING REQUESTED BY THE CITY IN THE REDUCTION.
SO, I WILL GRANT A REDUCTION TO THE SUM OF $1540 . DO YOU THINK SHE WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT PAYMENT IN 30 DAYS?
[01:20:03]
>> YES. >> EXCELLENT. SO, I ORDER THAT THE PAYMENT BE MADE IN 30 DAYS. IF SHE FAILS TO DO SO OR FAILED TO COMPLY, THIS PRODUCTION WILL ROUTE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL 15,000 SOME ODD AMOUNT. ANYTHING FURTHER FOR ME?
>> THAT IS IT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT. THANK YOU.
>> ONCE AGAIN. NICE MEETING YOU.
>> LIKEWISE. THANK YOU. >> HAPPY NEW YEAR.
>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY. OUR NEXT CASE WILL BE
[1. Case No: Violation Location (Address PID #) Investigating Officer PK-2024-0131 200 Block Boston Ave Heather Debevec]
CASE 4A 1 PK-2024-0131 200 BLOCK BOSTON AVENUE.>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THIS IS CASE NUMBER PARKING TICKET 2024-0131 19. IT IS A VIOLATION ISSUED ON OCTOBER 25TH OF 2024 TO A NICHOLAS COLANGELO . IT IS PARKING CITATION 34-31E PROHIBITED PARKING. IT IS A FINE OF $50, ADMITS RATION FEE OF $10, LATE FEE OF $18 IN TOTAL DUE OF $78 AND I DO HAVE
PHOTOS OF THIS EVENT. >> OFFICER DEBEVEC, YOU PROVIDED A COPY OF THE CITATION AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHS DATED OCTOBER 25TH OF LAST YEAR. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES, MA'AM. DO THE PHOTOS TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT
ACTION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> I WILL ADMIT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS THE CITY'S
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. >> OFFICER, WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE VIOLATION AS WE SEE HERE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH
>> IS PARKED ON A YELLOW CURVE OVER YELLOW LINES, ALSO KNOWN AS THE SAFETY ZONES, WHICH IS SPECIFIC TO NO PARKING.
>> ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THE DEPARTMENT?
>> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY.
>> THANK YOU. >> SO, THIS COURT FINDS THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE FOLLOWING BE ORDERED. THE VIOLATOR BSS THE FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF $78. FAILURE TO PAY SUCH FINE BY JANUARY 30TH 2025 WILL RESULT IN A CITATION BEING FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY COURT SYSTEM.
[1. Case No: Violation Location (Address PID #) Investigating Officer CE - 2024-0051 408 Farmer's Market Rd Unit 6 Heather Debevec]
>> OKAY. THE NEXT CASE IS CASE CAPITAL FOR 4C1 CE - 2024-0051 408 CAPITAL FARMERS MARKET CAPITAL MARKET ROAD UNIT SIX.
>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THIS IS CASE NUMBER CE - 2024-0051 408 FARMERS MARKET ROAD UNIT SIX. IT IS FOR VIOLATION 22 DOES 20 CERTIFICATE OF USE REQUIRED. I DO HAVE PHOTOS IN WHICH TO SUBMIT ALSO INCLUDED IS AN AFFIDAVIT FROM THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE SHOWING WHERE THERE HAS NOT BEEN A CERTIFICATE OF USE OR BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT ISSUED PRIOR OR HAS
BEEN APPLIED FOR. >> OFFICER, YOU PASSED UP PHOTOGRAPHS AND SOME WERE TAKEN AUGUST 19TH OF LAST YEAR AS WELL AS JANUARY SIXTH AND JANUARY 13TH OF THIS YEAR. IS
THAT CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM. YOU ALSO PROVIDED A COPY WITH A NOTICE OF VIOLATION SEND TO SEVERAL
INDIVIDUALS, CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM. AND WHERE THEY ALL ASSOCIATED WITH THIS BUSINESS?
>> YES, MA'AM. THEY WERE DIFFERENT ADDRESSES FOR TAMIA .
>> YOU PROVIDED A COPY OF IT ABSENCE OF RECORD CERTIFICATION
FROM THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. >> YES, MA'AM.
>> CERTIFIED BY THE CITY CLERK. AND YOU ALSO HAVE AN EMAIL FROM THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, CORRECT?
>> YES, MA'AM. THAT WAS TO VERIFY THAT THE AFFIDAVITS WAS
[01:25:02]
IN GOOD STANDING. >> THE PHOTOGRAPHS, THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS YOU OBSERVED?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> I WILL ADMIT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS THE CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
>> OFFICER, AT LEAST AS FAR AS THE MOST RECENT PHOTOGRAPHS ABOUT TWO DAYS AGO AS FAR AS YOU ARE AWARE , THIS BUSINESS DID NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT OF USE STILL?
>> CORRECT. >> HAVE YOU HEARD FROM ANYONE
ON THE BUSINESS? >> THERE IS NOTHING FURTHER
FROM THE CITY AT THIS TIME. >> THANK YOU. THIS COURT FINDS THAT THE VIOLATION BE EXISTED IN THE VIOLATION BE ORDERED.
THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN AND TOLD JANUARY 2ND 2025 TWO SEES ALL BUSINESSES OF USE. OR SEES ALL ACTIVITIES. FAILURE WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BSS AND PER CITY ORDINANCE SECTION 22-28, ALL UTILITY SERVICES TO THE BUSINESS AND PREMISES WILL BE SUSPENDED WHILE THE VIOLATION CONTINUES.
[1. Case No: Violation Location (Address PID #) Investigating Officer LTCL-2024-0004 S US Highway 1 (2427-601-0043-0005) Heather Debevec]
>> OKAY. OUR D1NEXT CASE IS LTCL-2024-5 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY
1. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. THIS IS LIKE CLEARING CASE 2024-4. NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE BOTH ISSUED ON DECEMBER 9TH OF 2024 POSTING TO THE PROPERTY WAS ALSO DECEMBER 9TH 2024. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION TO APPEAR WERE BOTH CERTIFIED AND REGULAR MAIL AND POSTED TO THE PROPERTY. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS A DOUGLAS O'KEEFE. IT IS FOR 24 19TH LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTY LARGER THAN THREE ACRES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT. I DID SPEAK WITH MR. O'KEEFE YESTERDAY. HE COULD NOT BE HERE TODAY. HE DID HAVE THE FRONT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY MOWED AND CLEANED UP. HE STILL NEEDS TO DO THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES TO WHERE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ABOUT TO CLEAN THOSE AT 100 FEET AND I DID EXPLAIN THAT TO HIM. HE IS CONTRACTOR TO TAKE CARE OF THAT WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF
>> AND OFFICER, YOU PROVIDED -- >>
>> HI. I THINK I MISSED A CALL FROM YOU?
>> IS THIS MS. AMBRIDGE? >> IT IS HER ASSISTANT JACKIE.
>> WE DID CONCLUDE THAT CASE. >> NO. DID YOU CALL THIS
NUMBER? TO SPEAK WITH HER? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> OKAY. I AM THE ONE THAT WAS THERE. I AM HER ASSISTANT. AND MY RINGER WAS OFF. I THOUGHT YOU WERE CALLING HER. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> BYE-BYE.
>> SO, RETURNING TO THE LOT CLEARING CASE LAST DIGIT 4, YOU PROVIDED PHOTOGRAPHS DATED DECEMBER 4TH , DECEMBER 9TH OF LAST YEAR JANUARY 6 AND JANUARY 13TH OF THIS YEAR. IS THAT
CORRECT? >> I AM SORRY. YOU SAID I HAVE
PHOTOS FROM LAST YEAR? >> YES. DECEMBER 4TH.
>> YES MA'AM. FORGIVE ME. YES, MA'AM.
>> SO, IT IS LAST YEAR. >> NEW YEAR BLUES.
>> CONFUSION. YES. I APOLOGIZE. >> YOU ALSO PROVIDED A COPY OF THE NOTICE THAT WAS SENT AS WELL AS A MAP OF THE AREAS. IS
THAT CORRECT? >> A MAP OF THE PROPERTY, YES, TO SHOW THAT THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES STILL NEED TO BE TRIMMED ABOUT 100 FEET FROM EACH SIDE.
>> DO THESE PHOTOGRAPHS TRULY AND ACCURATELY PICK THE VIOLATIONS AS YOU OBSERVED THEM ON THESE DATES?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> THANK YOU ALL. ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE.
[01:30:03]
>> I SUGGEST FOR THE MOST RECENT PHOTOGRAPHS HEAR FROM TWO DAYS AGO, YOU STATED THAT THERE WERE STILL AREAS OF THIS PROPERTY THAT NEEDED TO BE TRIMMED BACK , CORRECT?
>> CORRECT. THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES AS YOU ARE LOOKING AT THESE PHOTOS IT WILL BE TO THE LEFT WHERE YOU CAN SEE A ROADWAY GOING BY AND WHERE YOU SEE A BUILDING. THAT IS JUST THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY SHOWING THAT THEY DID TAKE CARE
OF THE MAJORITY OF THAT. >> AND THE OWNER IS AWARE OF WHAT ADDITIONAL NEEDS TO BE DONE?
>> YES, MA'AM. I SPOKE WITH HIM YESTERDAY AND HE IS TRYING TO GET SOMEBODY TO COME WORK BETWEEN THIS WEEK AND NEXT WEEK
TO RECTIFY THE PROBLEM. >> IS THE DEPARTMENT'S RECOMMENDATION THAT HE BE GIVEN UNTIL JANUARY 22ND TO DO THE REST OF THE PROPERTY?. NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY.
>> IT IS THIS COURT'S DETERMINATION THAT THE NUISANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT SUCH EXISTENCE -- NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY AND THAT THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITY'S NEW SENSE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL JANUARY 22ND 2025 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 REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS INCLUDING LANDSCAPE DEBRIS, GENERATED 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 THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUISANCE CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS
[2. Case No: Violation Location (Address PID #) Investigating Officer LTCL-2024-6 S US Highway 1 (2427-132-0001-0000) Heather Debevec]
TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. NEXT CASE, PLEASE.>> NEXT CASE IS SIX D 2. LTCL-2024-6 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY
>> THIS IS ANOTHER LOT CLEARING CASE. SOUTH U.S. ONE.
2427-132-0001-0000 PEER NOTICE FOR RELATION AND NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE ISSUED OF DECEMBER 9TH OF LAST YEAR. CERTIFIED AND REGULAR MAIL POSTED THE PROPERTY ON DECEMBER 9TH OF LAST YEAR. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS K AND Z LAND HOLDINGS LLC . IT IS FOR 24-1911 SUBSECTIONS A AND B LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTIES LARGER THAN THREE ACRES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT BUT HAVE NOT HAVE ANY CONTACT WITH THIS PROPERTY AT ALL.
>> THESE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN DECEMBER 4TH , DECEMBER 9TH OF LAST YEAR, JANUARY 6TH OF THIS YEAR, AND JANUARY 13TH. IS THAT
CORRECT? >> DO THESE PHOTOS TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS AS YOU OBSERVED
>> YOU MENTIONED THERE IS NO CONTACT MADE FROM THE PROPERTY?
>> NOT HEARD FROM THIS OWNER. THEY HAVE NOT REACHED OUT TO ME IN ANY WAY AND I HAVE HAD NO CONTACT WITH THE OWNER ON THIS ONE LET THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY.
>> THANK YOU. I WILL ADMIT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS THE CITY'S
COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE. >> SO, IT IS THIS COURT'S OPINION THAT THE NUISANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT SUCH A NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY AND THAT THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITY'S NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR OR VIOLATORS WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL JANUARY 22ND, 2025 TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS AND JUST TO THE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND REMOVE ALL TRASH AND TO BE DEBRIS INCLUDING LANDSCAPE DEBRIS GENERATED FROM BRINGING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE.
FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY ASSESSED FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUISANCE CONDITION . THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED
[3. Case No: Violation Location (Address PID #) Investigating Officer NOOP-2024-0005 3120 S US Highway 1 Heather Debevec]
AGAINST THE PROPERTY. NEXT CASE, PLEASE.>> NEXT CASE IS D3. CASE NUMBER NOOP-2024-0005 . 3120 SOUTH
U.S. HIGHWAY 1. >> YOUR HONOR, THIS IS A
[01:35:04]
NONOPERATIVE VEHICLE CASE 2024-5. ADDRESS IS 3120 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1. NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND YOU IS TO APPEAR WERE ISSUED ON DECEMBER 11TH OF, 2024. THE LETTERS WERE BOTH MAILED CERTIFIED AT REGULAR. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS A DALE P AND GAIL A COYNE . 29-19 SUBSECTION 15 C. NONOPERATIVEMOTOR VEHICLES. >> OFFICER, HAVE YOU HEARD FROM
THESE OWNERS? >> I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM ANYBODY ON ANY OF THESE PROPERTIES. NO.
>> THE PHOTOGRAPHS YOU ENDED UP ARE DATED DECEMBER 9TH. LAST YEAR JANUARY 6 AND JANUARY 13TH OF THIS YEAR. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> AND HE ALSO PROVIDED A COPY WITH THE NOTICE THAT WAS MAILED TO THE PROPERTY. IS THAT CORRECT? AND I KNOW IT SAYS HERE ON 2025 BUT IT WAS LAST
YEAR. >> IT WAS 2024. APPARENTLY I WAS WORRIED ABOUT THE NEW YEAR AND WROTE 2025.
>> TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS TRULY AND ACCURATELY THINK THE VIOLATIONS
AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> IS AT THIS TIME I WOULD MOVE THIS TO CITY'S COMPLIANCE
EVIDENCE COMPOSITE ONE. >> I WILL ADMIT THIS TO EVIDENCE TO THE CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. SO, YES, THIS COURT FINDS THAT A NUISANCE CONDITION EXIST IN VIOLATION OF THE WORLD OF ORDINANCES AND THAT SUCH A NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE TO THE COMMUNITY AND THAT THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITY'S NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. VIOLATORS WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL JANUARY 22ND, 2025 TWO, OR THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION, ENSURE ALL VEHICLES ON THE PROPERTY ARE SAFELY AND LEGALLY OPERABLE. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF THE AMOUNT OF $100 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED PER EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES AND THE CITY IS TO
[4. Case No: Violation Location (Address PID #) Investigating Officer NOOP-2024-6 3120 S US Highway 1 Heather Debevec]
TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUISANCE CONDITION.THE COST OF WHICH IS TO US BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.
NEXT CASE, PLEASE. >> NEXT CASE IS D4 NOOP-2024-6
3120 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1. >> THIS IS ANOTHER NONOPERABLE VEHICLE CASE. 2020-6 . OWNER, DLP AND GAIL A COIN. AND I DO
HAVE PHOTOS IN WHICH TO SUBMIT. >> OFFICER, IS THIS ON THE SAME PROPERTY AS THE PREVIOUS VIOLATION WE JUST HEARD?
>> YES, MA'AM. IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS AGAIN ON DECEMBER 9TH OF LAST YEAR , JANUARY 6TH AND JANUARY 13TH OF THIS YEAR?
>> YES, MA'AM. AS WELL AS A COPY OF THE NOTICE YOU HAVE MAILED TO THE OWNERS? IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> THE PHOTOS TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT?
>> CITY WOULD MOVE INTO EVIDENCE CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE.
>> THANK YOU, ALL. I WILL ADMIT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S
COMPOSITE ONE. >> THIS COURT FINDS THAT A NUISANCE ADDITION CONDITION EXIST IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES THAT SUCH NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY AND THAT THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITY'S NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL JANUARY 22ND, 2025 TWO PER THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION ENSURE ALL VEHICLES ARE SAFELY AND LEGALLY OPERABLE . FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY TO BE ASSESSED PER EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES.
THE CITY IS TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE
[5. Case No: Violation Location (Address PID #) Investigating Officer USB-2024-1 3120 S US Highway 1 Heather Debevec]
NUISANCE CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. READY FOR THE NEXT ONE, PLEASE.>> B 5. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THIS IS USB -2024-1. 3120 U.S. SOUTH HIGHWAY 1. POSTED TO THE PROPERTY ON DECEMBER 11TH OF 2024. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, DALE P & GAIL A COYNE . VIOLATIONS 103-341, VACANT BUILDINGS BOARD UP REQUIRED. 24-19 5, NUISANCES IS DECLARED
[01:40:02]
OTHERWISE BY ORDINANCE OR STATUTE TO BE A NUISANCE, UNLAWFUL, OR PROHIBITED. IPMC 301.3 , VACANT STRUCTURES AND LAND. I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT.>> OFFICER, THIS VIOLATION ALSO IS THE SAME ADDRESS AS THE PREVIOUS VIOLATIONS. THE LAST TWO WE HAD HEARD. THE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE DATED DECEMBER 9TH OF LAST YEAR AS WELL AS JANUARY 6TH AND THE 13TH OF THIS YEAR. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> ALSO PROVIDED A COPY OF THE NOTICE THAT WAS MAILED TO THE OWNERS, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> THAT IS RIGHT. >> AND DO THE PHOTOS TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATIONS AS YOU OBSERVED
THEM? >> YES, MA'AM. I MOVED TO THIS CITY'S EVIDENCE OF COMPOSITE ONE.
>> IT IS THE OPINION OF THIS COURT THAT A NUISANCE ADDITION CONDENSES CONDITION EXISTS AND SUCH NUISANCE POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY AND THAT THE NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITY'S NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR OR VIOLATORS WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL THE JANUARY 22ND, 2025 TO PUT A NOTICE OF VIOLATION. ALL OPENINGS INCLUDING DOORS AND WINDOWS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH PAINTING EXTERIOR GRADE PLYWOOD CLOSURES MATCHED IN COLOR TO THE BUILDING WERE COVERED UTILIZING A CLEAR POLYCARBONATE MATERIAL UNLESS THE SAME ARE PROVIDED WITH AWNINGS, STORM PANELS OR OTHER SIMILAR COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE PRODUCTS DESIGNED FOR THIS INTENDED USE AND INSTALL IN A WORKMANLIKE MATTER. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF $100 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUISANCE CONDITION. THE COSTS OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. NEXT
[B. IDENTIFICATION OF CASES IN COMPLIANCE OR RESCHEDULED]
CASE, PLEASE. >> OKAY. SO, WE HAVE A CASE OF THE CAME INTO COMPLIANCE WERE RESCHEDULED. AND THEY ARE CASES LTC L- 2024-5 , CASE CE-2024-97, CASE AND YOU WHY S-2024-0003- CASE CE 2024-00090. CASE CE -2024-0091 . TWO CASES STIPULATIONS WERE OBTAINED AND THAT WOULD BE CASE CE-2024-0 108 AND CASE CE-2024-0067.
>> THE CASES WERE NOTIFIED. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE VIOLATOR CERTIFIED MAIL AT THE GREEN CARD THAT IS RETURNED SIGNED. IT IS PLACED IN THE FILE OF THE GREEN CARD RETURNED UNSIGNED OR UNCLAIMED. AN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING WITH THE NOTICE OF HEARING ENCLOSED AS MAILED TO THE VIOLATOR HERE 10 DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING, I NOTICE OF HEARING WAS THEN SENT REGULAR U.S. MAIL . AN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING ATTACHED TO IT. A COPY WAS PLACED IN THE FILE. 10 DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING , AND NOTICE OF HEARING IS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD OF THE LOBBY OF CITY HALL. A NOTICE OF HEARING IS ALSO POSTED OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WITH AN AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING. THE CERTIFICATION CARD IS NOT RETURNED TO CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING, POSTING IS COMPLETED THE SAME WAY AS IF THE CARD WERE
RETURNED UNCLAIMED. >> I THINK THAT CONCLUDES OUR
HEARINGS. >> ALREADY. WELL, WE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.