[1. CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:16] THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER POD WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR [A. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH TO DEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES] ALL. PLEASE REMAIN STANDING. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH? >> YES . >> THANK YOU. YOU MAY NOW BE SEATED. >> FIRST THING IS FIRST. DOES ANYONE NEED THE ASSISTANCE OF AN INTERPRETER OR HEARING DEVICE? IF SO, LET MS. CALDER ON KNOW UP FRONT AND WE WILL PROVIDE THAT FOR YOU. JUST SO YOU KNOW, THIS MORNING, WE HAVE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY HALDERMAN, MS. PEGGY ARRAIZ FROM THE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT AND WE HAVE MISS CALL DEREK, THIS MAY SHOW MAGISTRATE CLERK AND I WILL BE SERVING AS YOUR SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, THIS MORNING. JUST FOR YOUR BACKGROUND, THESE PROCEEDINGS WILL BE LIVE STREAMED AND RECORDED. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE RECEIVE A CITATION OR VIOLATION, WE WILL REFERRED TO YOU TODAY AS RESPONDENTS AND IT IS IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND HOW THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE GOING TO UNFOLD, THIS MORNING. FIRST, THE CITY WILL PRESENT ITS CASE THROUGH EVIDENCE . THIS EVIDENCE MAY INCLUDE TESTIMONY OF CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS , INVESTIGATORS , POLICE OFFICERS AND OTHER WITNESSES . THE EVIDENCE MAY INCLUDE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OF ITEMS SUCH AS PHOTOGRAPHS AND WE WILL REFER TO THOSE AS EXHIBITS. THE STANDARD OF PROOF IS WHETHER A VIOLATION HAS BEEN PROVED BASED ON A COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. THEN, YOU AS A RESPONDENT WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE LEGAL OBJECTIONS, CROSS-EXAMINE WITNESSES IF YOU SO CHOOSE . ONCE THE CITY HAS FINISHED PRESENTING ITS CASE, THEN YOU AS A RESPONDENT WILL THEN BE ALLOWED TO MAKE YOUR OWN STATEMENTS , PRESENT WITNESS TESTIMONY, PRESENT PHYSICAL EVIDENCE SUCH AS PHOTOGRAPHS AND DOCUMENTS. AND THEN I AS YOUR SPECIAL MAGISTRATE WILL ISSUE THE FINAL RULING ON THE MATTER. ALL I ASK , TODAY, IS THAT YOU CONDUCT YOURSELVES IN A CALM AND RESPECTFUL MANNER AT ALL TIMES DURING THE PROCEEDINGS AND [2. 24-404 1117 Orange Ave Stately Dolphin LLC Heather Debevec] PLEASE DIRECT ANY COMMENTS TO ME AS YOUR SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. THAT BEING SAID, MS. CALL DEREK, -- CALDERONE >> THIS IS CASE 24 DASH 404 AND 1117 ORANGE AVENUE . YOU CAN NOW COME UP TO THE PODIUM. >> GOOD MORNING MR. YATES, HOW ARE YOU? >> I AM WELL. >> THAT IS GOOD TO HEAR. >> GOOD MORNING SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, HEATHER DEBEVEC FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT. THIS IS CASE NUMBER 24 404-1117 ORANGE AVENUE. THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON FEBRUARY 9TH TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, STATELY DOLPHIN LLC . I PNC -- ON AUGUST 14TH OF 2024, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FROM THE VIOLATIONS ACCESSED AND GRADED THE VIOLATOR 30 DAYS TO COMPLY OR BE FINED $250 DAILY. DECEMBER 12, 2024, AND AFFIDAVIT OF NONCOMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED. ON MARCH 24TH OF 2025, AND AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED. VIA EMAIL AND THE BALANCE WAS $25,430 AT THAT TIME. INAUDIBLE ] THE VIOLATION WAS MODERATE AND ANY AND ALL ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE -- WAS COMPLIED . ANY PREVIOUS VIOLATIONS COMMITTED BY THE VIOLATOR, NONE. [00:05:01] >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, WE DO NEED TO VERBALLY AMEND NUMBER TWO BECAUSE THEY DID BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. >> ALL, EXCELLENT. THANK YOU . ANYTHING FURTHER, OFFICER HEATHER DEBEVEC? >> NOT AT THIS TIME , NO. >> MR. YATES, WHAT DO YOU HAVE FOR ME, SIR? >> GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR. THE STATELY DOLPHIN -- HAS BEEN SEEKING TO -- TO HAVE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BURNED THIS BUILDING . IT HAS NO VALUE TO THE PROPERTY. WE HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE FIRE ACADEMY AND -- AND THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED. PROBABLY THE BEST THING TO DO WOULD BE TO SEEK A PERMIT FOR DESTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING AND -- I APOLOGIZE >> QUITE ALL RIGHT . >> AS HEATHER DEBEVEC TESTIFIED, THE BUILDING WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE AND WE WOULD TESTIFY -- ASK FOR THE VERY LOWEST FINE THAT YOU DEEM ACCEPTABLE . >> WELL, THANK YOU, MR. YATES. ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THE PARTIES? >> NO, SIR. >> ONE MOMENT. MS. PEGGY ARRAIZ, IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE REDUCTION OF THE FINE OR ARE YOU LEAVING IT IN THE HANDS OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE TO DECIDE IF THERE SHOULD BE A REDUCTION OF THE FINE AND WHAT THAT MIGHT BE? >> SO WE ARE LEAVING IT IN THE HANDS OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FOR REVIEW. WE HAD INITIATED AN ORANGE AVENUE SUITE WHICH IS HOW THIS CAME ABOUT AND IT WAS ASSIGNED TO MISS HEATHER DEBEVEC TO ADDRESS. WE DO HAVE A PHOTO SHOWING THE REPAIRS THAT WERE DONE AND IT WAS A BUILDING THAT HAD FALLEN INTO DISREPAIR. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WANT TO , HONESTLY, DEMOLISH IT . BECAUSE -- AND WE HAVE PHOTOS , I BELIEVE WE HAVE PHOTOS IN THE FILE THAT WE CAN TURN IN SO THAT YOU CAN GET AN IDEA OF WHAT THE PROPERTY LOOKS LIKE. >> WE HAVE PHOTOS HERE FROM FEBRUARY 11TH . THE BUILDING WAS IN COMPLIANCE BY FEBRUARY 11TH. >> MR. YATES, DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO ME ENTERING THESE PHOTOS INTO EVIDENCE OF THE BUILDING? >> YES. >> WOULD THESE PHOTOS HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE OF THE INITIAL --? >> THEY WERE IN THE ORIGINAL CASE, YES . AND THE PURPOSE IS TO GIVE THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE AN IDEA OF THE STATE THAT THE STRUCTURE IS IN. IT IS SECURED, NOW . AND THE OUTSIDE DAMAGE HAS BEEN REPAIRED. BUT STAFF ACKNOWLEDGES THAT ANY ATTEMPT TO REHABILITATE THIS PROJECT WOULD BE COSTLY. >> I HAVE NO OBJECTION. >> THANK YOU . >> SO YOU WOULD MOVE THAT INTO EVIDENCE AS COMPOSITE ONE ? >> I WILL INTO THIS AS COMPOSITE ONE . >> MAY I ASK A QUESTION? MR. YATES? >> YES. >> THE TIME IS IMPORTANT . >> NO, THAT IS OKAY. MR. YATES, ON BEHALF OF YOUR CLIENT OR PERHAPS YOUR CLIENT CAN SPEAK TO THIS, WHAT REDUCTION OR HOW MUCH ARE YOU ASKING FOR IT TO BE REDUCED? >> >> STAFF IS NOT OPPOSED TO THAT . >> AND WHAT IS THE ADMINISTRATIVE COST ON THIS ONE? [00:10:01] >> UNFORTUNATELY, I ONLY RECEIVED THE CASE YESTERDAY. FROM ME SITTING HERE, THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY FOR MR. SALCIDO SO I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION THAT I WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO THE $1000. >> ANYTHING FURTHER? >> NO SIR . >> I WILL DISTURB THE CORD BETWEEN THE PARTIES. I WILL ALLOW THE REDUCTION TO $1000 . THANK YOU, MR. YATS . AND THANK YOU, SIR, FOR COMING DOWN . >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH . HAVE A GOOD DAY . >> OH, YES, HOW LONG DO YOU THINK IT WILL TAKE YOU TO MAKE THE PAYMENT? >> THAT, I COULD NOT TELL YOU. DO YOU SEEK A DEMOLITION PERMIT? >> NO, THE PAYMENT OF THE $1000. >> OH, I WILL CONTACT THE OWNER OF STATELY DOLPHIN THIS MORNING AND WE WILL ASK THAT IT BE FEDERAL EXPRESS, TODAY . >> IF I WERE TO SAY -- MAYBE 14 DAYS, I WILL PUT IT IN THE ORDER, DO YOU THINK THAT WILL BE REASONABLE? >> I THINK THAT CAN EASILY BE ACCOMMODATED. >> EXCELLENT . WE WILL PUT 14 DAYS IN THE ORDER OF COURSE WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IF IT ISN'T PAID IN THAT TIME, THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT WILL BE COME DUE AND OWING. BUT I AM CONFIDENT YOUR CLIENT WILL HAVE THAT IN TIME. IF THERE IS AN ISSUE, PLEASE DISCUSS WITH THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT. I DON'T MIND THEM PROVIDING AN EXTENSION. >> THANK YOU . >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT [1. Case Number: LTCL-2025-115 Investigating Officer: Jarvis Gamble Violation Location: 120 N 12th ST] CASE, PLEASE. >> OUR NEXT CASE WILL BE IN OUR OTHER CASES CATEGORY. THIS IS LIKE CLEARING 2025 DASH 115 AT 120 N. 12TH STREET. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE OFFICER JARVIS HERE TO TO CASE NUMBER 2025 DASH 125 AT 2402 ONLY UNDER -- NTA DATE , ISSUE DATE WAS JUNE 18TH 2025. BOTH ARE REGULAR MAIL AND CERTIFIED MAIL POSTED PROPERTY. POSTED DATE WAS JUNE 20TH, 2025 AND LAST INSPECTION DATE -- VIOLATOR IS MILLER , VIOLATIONS 24 DASH 19 SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A, SUBSECTION B . REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS. >> OFFICER, YOU PROVIDED A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT WAS SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPH STATED JUNE 13TH, JUNE 30TH , JULY 8TH AND JULY 16TH OF THIS YEAR? >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> DID YOU TAKE ALL OF THESE PHOTOGRAPHS? DO THE PHOTOGRAPHS TRULY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU -- IT. MA'AM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS BEFORE THEY ARE ENTERED? >> HAVE THEY HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THIS? >> HE DID NOT GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AT. >> WOULD YOU STATE YOUR NAMES FOR THE RECORD? >> -- MILLER. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> THE CITY WOULD MOVE INTO EVIDENCE COMPOSITE ONE. >> I WILL ADMIT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITIES COMPOSITE ONE. >> MR. GAMBLE , FROM THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WHAT STILL NEEDS TO BE COMPLIED ON THE PROPERTY? >> THERE IS A CONCRETE PIPE, A VERY LARGE CONCRETE PIPE . THE GRASS HAS BEEN KEPT WELL MAINTAINED . THEY ARE VERY CONSISTENT WITH KEEPING THE LAWN AS FAR AS THE GRASS NICELY CUT AND MEET . IT IS JUST THAT PIPE THAT YOU SEE TO THE RIGHT IN THIS PICTURE, HERE. THAT IS THE EYE SORE. THAT IS REALLY STOPPING THE PROPERTY FROM KEEPING IN COMPLIANCE . [00:15:03] >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY? >> GOOD MORNING. MRS. MILLER AND YOU, SIR, WHAT IS YOUR NAME? >> MR. WILSON. MOTHER-IN-LAW . >> MR. WILSON IS MILLER SO WHAT IS GOING ON HERE. >> UNDER THE MAGISTRATE , EVER SINCE WE BOUGHT THIS LAND , IT WAS A FOREST . WE COULD NOT EVEN WALK TO THE LAND THE WAY IT WAS. I HAVE THE PICTURES, THE ORIGINAL PICTURES AND SINCE THEN, WE HAVE BEEN CUTTING THOSE BAMBOO TREES, VICTORIES, ALL KINDS OF TREES TO CLEAR THE LAND. NOW THIS CONCRETE THING, IT IS NOT FROM THE NEIGHBORS. IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING LEFT OVER FROM THE CITY WORK. IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN PICK UP OR ROLL . AND I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU THE LAND THE WAY IT WAS WHEN WE GOT IT AND WHAT IT IS NOW. SO THAT IS THE ISSUE WITH THAT THING. IT DID NOT COME FROM THE NEIGHBOR. >> HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THIS, MS. SOLOMON? >> NO, I HAVE NOT . IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT IT AS EVIDENCE, YOU CAN ENTER IT HERE. >> ABSOLUTELY. THE FIRST PICTURES ARE FROM WHEN IT WAS SO HEAVY THAT WE CANNOT WALK THROUGH IT TO SEE WHAT IT IS. THEY HAVE BEEN CUTTING DOWN BAMBOO TREES AND CUTTING TREES AND WHERE IT IS, THAT THING, WE CANNOT MOVE, OFFICER. >> AND WHEN DID YOU BUY THE PROPERTY? >> I THINK IT WAS BEFORE COVID . I THINK IT WAS RIGHT BEFORE COVID. >> OKAY. >> RESPONDENTS EXHIBIT 1 AND I HAVE NO OBJECTION . >> WE HAVE BEEN KEEPING UP WITH THE PROPERTY, YOUR HONOR. I MADE WE HAVE DEALT WITH MS. CHARMAINE WHO WENT BEFORE OFFICER JARVIS AND AS FAR AS KEEPING UP WITH THE PROPERTY, THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING. YOU KNOW? THIS CONCRETE STRUCTURE , IT IS LEFT OVERS FROM WHEN THE CITY WAS DOING THE WORK . AND THERE ARE PLENTY MORE ON THE SOUTH , THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. THE BUSHES ARE ABOUT THIS HIGH SO JARVIS CAN ATTEST TO IT AND THERE ARE MORE CONCRETE OVER ON THAT SIDE. SO IT IS LIKE THE WORKERS THAT THEY HAD MORE THAN ENOUGH AND THEY JUST LEFT SOME HERE AND LEFT SOME THERE. I CANNOT PUT THAT ON MY PICKUP TRUCK TO MOVE IT. >> THANK YOU. ONE MOMENT . SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU . I WILL ADMIT THE PHOTOGRAPHS YOU HAVE PROVIDED INTO EVIDENCE AS RESPONDENTS COMPOSITE EXHIBIT , WASN'T LABELED A OR ONE? >> ONE IS FINE. >> RESPONDENTS COMPOSITE EXHIBIT ONE SO LET ME HAVE A LOOK HERE . JUST TO CONFIRM, THESE ARE IMAGES OF WHAT THE PROPERTY USED TO LOOK LIKE WHEN YOU FIRST PURCHASED IT BEFORE COVID. AND SO, BASICALLY, FOR WHAT I AM LOOKING AT, HERE, YOU ARE TELLING ME THAT THIS CONCRETE STRUCTURE , CONCRETE CYLINDER OR PIPE, THIS WAS THERE WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE PROPERTY . >> OKAY. >> AND SO, TRY NOT BECAUSE WE COULDN'T -- I WAS AFRAID TO GO THROUGH THE BUSH BECAUSE IT WAS SO HIGH. I WAS SCARED TO GO THROUGH SO WE LITERALLY WALKED THROUGH THE PERIMETER OF THE LAND . WE COULD NOT GO THROUGH TO SEE WHAT IS ON THEIR . >> AS YOU CAN SEE, YOUR HONOR, IT IS RIGHT IN THE MIDST OF THE PROPERTY AND HOURS SO SOME IS OVER HERE AND THOMAS OVER HERE. IT IS NOT COMPLETELY ON THE PROPERTY, ITSELF . IT IS HALFWAY HERE AND HALFWAY THERE AND THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER CAN ATTEST TO THAT. >> MS. SOLOMON, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME THE CODE VIOLATION HERE AND THE 24 - 19 ? AND MAYBE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THE CONCRETE STRUCTURE IS IN VIOLATION WITH THE CODE? >> IF MS. THE RAYS HAS ANY INFORMATION TO PROVIDE THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE WHILE I'M READING THE CODE, HERE -- IS ESSENTIALLY, IT COMES DOWN TO WHAT WE CALL DEBRIS OR ANY TYPE OF MATERIALS THAT ARE LEFT ON THE PROPERTY. SO IF YOU GO BACK [00:20:03] TO THE ORIGINAL PHOTOS, IT WAS ORIGINALLY FOREST AND LANDSCAPING. IT DID GET CUT . THERE WAS ANOTHER PHOTO I HAD. YOU CAN SEE THERE WAS LANDSCAPING WHEN WE ORIGINALLY DID IT AND WE LUMP IT ALL UNDER THE ORIGINAL LANDSCAPING AND DEBRIS. DEBRIS CAN BE ANYTHING FROM GARBAGE TO LANDSCAPE DEBRIS TO UNFORTUNATELY, CONCRETE PIPE . THAT IS WHERE THE ORIGINAL VIOLATION STARTED. THEY CLEARLY ADDRESSED THE LANDSCAPING PART OF IT BUT WE STILL, ONCE THE GRASS IS GONE, WE FIND THE PIPE. SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY , WHEN THEY SPOKE WITH THE COLD OFFICER ASKING FOR ASSISTANCE, UNFORTUNATELY, WE CANNOT PROVIDE ASSISTANCE. MAYBE THERE ARE OTHER DEPARTMENTS. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS FPO A OR WHETHER IT IS TREATS AND DRAINAGE. I DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY SO WE CANNOT PROVIDE ASSISTANCE. THE BEST WE CAN DO IS PROVIDE TIME FOR THEM TO MAKE THE INQUIRIES AND FIND SOMEONE , SOME WAY TO GET THAT REMOVED. >> THE CODE SECTION IS VERY BROAD. 11 A IS ANY LANDSCAPING ELEMENT THAT IS NOT MAINTAINED INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LAWN ELEMENT SHOULD BE KEPT TRIMMED AND PREVENTED FROM GROWING OVER -- COMMUNITY. >> THANK YOU . I THINK I AM THOROUGHLY BROUGHT UP TO SPEED ON WHAT IS GOING ON SO I APPRECIATE EVERYONE GIVING ME SOME INFORMATION. MS. MILLER, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE EITHER PARTIES WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO MY ATTENTION? >> NO, MAGISTRATE . >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT . FIRST AND FOREMOST, I COMMEND YOU FOR DOING A GOOD JOB CLEARING UP THE PROPERTY, RIGHT? BECAUSE I SEE THE BEFORE AND I SEE THE AFTER AND I DO SEE THAT YOU MADE AN EFFORT TO CLEAR IT UP. WHILE I SYMPATHIZE WITH YOU ON THE FACT THAT THIS STRUCTURE IS THERE , PERHAPS, IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE YOU PUT IT THERE FOR YOURSELVES . IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WILL HAVE DIFFICULTY MOVING IT, YOURSELVES . HOWEVER, YOU DID PURCHASE THE PROPERTY WITH IT ON THERE, RIGHT? AND IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE THE DEBRIS IS CLEAR AS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. SO WHILE I AM NOT REQUIRING YOU TO GO LIFTED UP AND PUT IT IN THE TRUCK, YOURSELF , BUT I AM REQUIRING YOU TO FIGURE OUT HOW IT IS GOING TO GET MOVED WHETHER YOU HIRE SOMEONE TO DO SO WILL YOU GET INTO CONTACT WITH SOME SORT OF CITY RESOURCE TO DO SO. THAT IS MY MAIN CONCERN. MY CONCERN IS IT BEING REMOVED, RIGHT? AND SO, I AM NOT GOING TO MANDATE YOU ON HOW TO REMOVE IT BUT IT WILL HAVE TO BE REMOVED. I SEE THE RECOMMENDATION IS SEVEN DAYS TO HAVE IT REMOVED AND COME INTO COMPLIANCE. IF I WERE TO GIVE YOU 28 DAYS, DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME TO GET THIS THING IN COMPLIANCE, TO BE ABLE TO CONTACT SOMEONE TO HELP YOU REMOVE IT? >> MR. MAGISTRATE, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT ANOTHER DEPARTMENT YOU COULD ASK TO MOVE THAT THING? >> IT COULD BE POSSIBLE BUT MY PLACE , IT BEING APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO GIVE YOU ADVICE ON WHAT TO DO BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS USE THIS TIME WISELY TO FIND OUT WHAT RESOURCES ARE AVAILABLE. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, IF I COULD JUST -- I BELIEVE AUGUST 20TH , 28 DAYS WILL BE THE 13TH AND THAT WOULDN'T GIVE US TIME TO DO INSPECTIONS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT SO I WOULD ALMOST GO TO THE 19TH. THERE IS A HEARING ON THE 20TH SO AUGUST 19TH WHICH WOULD THEN ALLOW THE CODE OFFICER TO GO OUT AND DO AN INSPECTION OR WHATNOT AND WITH A REMINDER THAT WE ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO AN ADMINISTRATION EXTENSION IF NECESSARY . >> EXCELLENT. IF THAT IS THE CASE, I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO GIVING THE 19TH AS THE COMPLIANCE DATE TO SO THAT YOU ARE CLEAR , I AM GOING TO PUT YOUR COMPLIANCE DATE AT AUGUST 19TH ? AUGUST 19TH . AND SO, ESSENTIALLY, I AM REQUIRING THAT THIS BE TAKEN CARE OF BY AUGUST 19TH. IF FOR SOME REASON YOU CANNOT DO IT BY THAT TIME, REACH OUT TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT. I DON'T MIND THEM GIVING YOU AN EXTENSION, RIGHT? BUT IT IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU GET INTO COMPLIANCE SO THIS CAN BE CLEARED UP AND TAKING CARE OF. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? AM I EXPLAINING THAT [00:25:03] CLEARLY? >> EXCELLENT. THAT BEING SAID, THIS COURT FINDS THAT A NUISANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND AS SUCH NUISANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY AND THAT NUISANCE BE ADDRESSED IN THE CITIES NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN UNTIL AUGUST 19TH , 2025, TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS AND SO FAR THAT IT HAS NOT ALREADY BEEN DONE, OF COURSE, AND BUSHES TO THE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED AS A VIOLATION, 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 IN THE CITY IS TO TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUISANCE CONDITION THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. MS. MILLER, YOU WILL HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL THIS DECISION IF YOU SO CHOOSE . WITH THAT BEING SAID, I THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN, TODAY . AND I HOPE THIS CAN GET RESOLVED, SOON. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> DO YOU NEED THE PICTURES [3. Case Number: CE-2025-199 Investigating Officer: Heather Debevec Violation Location: 1005 Texas Ct] BACK? >> NO . >> OUR NEXT CASE WILL BE IN VIOLATION CASES . SEE E - 2025 - 199 AT 1005 TEXAS COURT. YOU CAN NOW COME UP TO THE PODIUM. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEATHER DEBEVEC . THIS IS CASE NUMBER CE - 2025 - 199 FOR 1005 TEXAS COURT. CODE ENFORCEMENT. THE ISSUE ON MARCH 27, 2025. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS MARTIN SOAK IN. 24 - 19 SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A, B. I DO HAVE PHOTOS IN WHICH TO SUBMIT. >> SIR, WHAT IS YOUR NAME? >> MARTIN SOAK IN -- >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS? THESE ARE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY. STAFF FROM MARCH 27TH? >> THERE ARE SEVERAL OF THEM WITH DIFFERENT DATES. >> OKAY . >> NO OBJECTION. >> YOUR HONOR, I HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH MARTIN SELKIN OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS AND HE HAS BEEN WORKING ON THE PROPERTY. I DID GO BY AND TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT IT LAST NIGHT. THOSE PHOTOS WILL BE IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL FOLDER, IF NEEDED. HE HAS BEEN WORKING ON TRYING TO GET THIS INTO COMPLIANCE. HE DID SHOW ME PICTURES ON HIS PHONE THIS MORNING WHERE HE HAS STARTED PRESSURE WASHING. THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT WOULD STILL REMAIN TO BE TAKEN CARE OF, FINISHING PRESSURE WASHING THE DRIVEWAY . I AM NOT SURE IF YOU GUYS -- THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE FLOWER BED AREA IN FRONT OF THE GARAGE. WHEN I LOOKED AT IT LAST NIGHT, I KNOW THAT HALF OF THE BACKYARD HAD BEEN DONE AND THE OTHER HALF HAD NOT. HE TELLS ME THIS MORNING THAT HE FEELS HE HAS DONE NOT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY COMPLIED WITH THE LANDSCAPING WHICH IS ALMOST THERE AND THAT IS WHAT I HAVE SO FAR. >> MS. HEATHER DEBEVEC, YOU PROVIDED PHOTOGRAPHS JULY 7TH AND JULY 14TH. DID YOU TAKE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DID THE PHOTOGRAPHS DEPICT NOTION YOU ALSO PROVIDED A COPY OF THE NOTICE TO THE HOMEOWNERS, CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> I WILL ADMIT THIS INTO EVIDENCE * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.