[1. CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:15] THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. [a. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH TO DEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES] >> IF YOU CAN PLEASE REMAIN STANDING. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH? THANK YOU. YOU CAN NOW BE SEATED. >> ALL RIGHT. FIRST THINGS FIRST, IF ANYONE IS IN ANY NEED OF AN INTERPRETER OR A HEARING DEVICE, PLEASE LET US KNOW. WE'LL SURE ONE IS PROVIDED FOR YOU. AND SO IN FRONT OF YOU, ATTORNEY HOLOMON. MR. SAUCEDO FROM THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT, YOU HAVE MS. CALDERON, THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CLERK, AND MY NAME IS JAMIE, I'LL BE SERVING AS YOUR SPECIAL MAGISTRATE THIS MORNING. PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS MORNING'S PROCEEDINGS ARE LIVE STREAMED AND RECORDED. AND SO THIS MORNING, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE RECEIVED THE CITATION OR VIOLATION, WE'RE GOING TO REFER TO YOU AS RESPONDENTS. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS MORNING'S PROCEEDINGS ARE GOING TO UNFOLD. SO FIRST, THE CITY IS GOING TO PRESENT ITS CASE THROUGH EVIDENCE. THIS EVIDENCE MAY INCLUDE TESTIMONY OF CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, INVESTIGATORS, POLICE OFFICERS, OR OTHER WITNESSES. THE EVIDENCE MAY INCLUDE PHYSICAL ITEMS, SUCH AS PHOTOGRAPHS. WE'RE GOING TO REFER TO THOSE AS EXHIBITS. THE STANDARD OF PROOF THIS MORNING IS WHETHER A VIOLATION HAS BEEN PROVEN BASED UPON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. YOU WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE LEGAL OBJECTIONS AND CROSS EXAMINE WITNESSES IF YOU SO CHOOSE. ONCE THE CITY HAS FINISHED PRESENTING ITS CASE, THEN YOU, AS A RESPONDENT, WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A STATEMENT, PRESENT YOUR OWN WITNESS TESTIMONY, PRESENT PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, SUCH AS DOCUMENTS AND PHOTOGRAPHS. THEN I, AS YOUR SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, WILL RENDER THE FINAL RULING. I JUST ASK THIS MORNING, YOU CONDUCT YOURSELVES IN A CALM AND RESPECTFUL MANNER AT ALL TIMES DURING THESE PROCEEDINGS. ANY COMMENTS SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO ME, AS YOUR SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. [7. Case Number: CE-2025-335 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: 5750 Orange Ave] THAT BEING SAID, CAN WE HAVE THE FIRST CASE, PLEASE? >> OUR FIRST CASE WILL BE VIOLATION CASES. THIS IS NUMBER SEVEN. THIS IS CASE CE-2025-335 AT 5750 ORANGE AVENUE. IF YOU COULD PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM? >> GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR, CHARLREAN MAPSON, CITY OF FORT PIERCE. THIS IS CASE NUMBER CE-2025-335. THIS IS A COLD CASE. VIOLATION OCCURRED ON 5750 AFTER. ISSUE DATE WAS JUNE 2, 2025. REGULAR MAIL, NTA ISSUED DATE, SEPTEMBER 23, 2025. CERTIFIED MAIL AND POSTED AT PROPERTY. THE POSTING DATE WAS OCTOBER 3, 2025. THE LAST INSPECTION DATE WAS OCTOBER 12, 2025. THE OWNERS ARE PALMWAY INVESTMENTS, LLC, AND CORPORATION SERVICES COMPANY. VIOLATIONS ARE 117-3 SUBSECTION B, MAINTENANCE. DOW HAVE PHOTOS AS I WITNESSED IT. >> SIR, WHAT IS YOUR NAME? >> FRANK CALVERT. >> HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO SEE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> NO, I'M GOOD. I KNOW WE'RE ON TOP OF IT, IT'S FINE. >> MS. KIRKLAND, YOU PROVIDED INFORMATION, AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHS DATED MAY 20 OF THIS YEAR, OCTOBER 2, AND OCTOBER 11. DID YOU TAKE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> YES, MA'AM. >> THE PHOTOGRAPHS TRULY AND ACTIVELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, THEY DO. >> YOU ALSO PROVIDED A COPY OF WHAT LOOKS LIKE A RECEIPT FOR A SIGN THAT'S BEEN PURCHASED BY THE OWNER, IS THAT CORRECT? [00:05:02] >> YES, MA'AM. >> WAS THAT PROVIDED BY THE OWNER? >> YES, MA'AM. >> THIS TIME THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EXHIBIT ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> MS. KIRKLAND, WHAT IS IT THAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED AT THIS TIME? >> THE TOP PORTION OF THE SIGN, IT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED WITH THE ACTUAL BUSINESS SIGN. WHILE THE BUSINESS IS OPEN AND RUNNING FOR BUSINESS, SO THEY JUST NEED TO REPLACE THE TOP PORTION OF THE SIGN. >> IS THAT FROM THE RECEIPT? IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE HAS BEEN MOVEMENT TO REPLACE THE SIGN. IS THAT CORRECT? CENTER YES, THEY HAVE. >> ALL RIGHT, NOTHING FURTHER. >> GOOD MORNING, SIR. HOW ARE YOU? >> I'M DOING WELL, THANK YOU. TELL ME, WHAT WAS YOUR NAME AGAIN? >> FRANK. >> CAN YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME? >> F-R-I-C-H. >> WHAT IS YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PROPERTY? >> I'M THE GENERAL MANAGER FOR ALL OF OUR LOCATIONS IN FLORIDA. >> THANK YOU. AND SO TELL ME, WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? >> MARCH 10, 2025, A TORNADO, A MINI TORNADO CAME STRAIGHT DOWN ON ORANGE AVENUE, KNOCKED OUT THE JOHN DEERE SIGN, THEN KNOCKED OUT THE SIGN NEXT TO US, THEN KNOCKED OUT OUR SIGN. SO THEN I'M GOING BACK HERE. ON MARCH 14, I HAVE AN E-MAIL FROM OUR MARKETING DEPARTMENT IN BALTIMORE THAT SAID THEY ALREADY CONTACTED THE SIGN COMPANY AND THINGS ARE ROLLING. BUT WHEN YOU'RE REPLACING MANUFACTURED SIGNS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, YOU JUST DON'T DO IT YOURSELF. IN JUNE, WE GOT THE NECESSARY INFORMATION. PLACED THE ORDER WITH THE U.S. SIGN, WHICH IS IN FORT MYERS. I THINK THE LOCAL INSTALLER, SOMEBODY OVER HERE. THEN I SENT THAT TO CHARMAINE. THEN WE FINALLY GOT THE PERMIT. APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED THE DAY BEFORE YESTERDAY OR YESTERDAY, BUT IT'S BEING HELD UP BECAUSE THERE'S A CODE COMPLIANCE HOLD ON THE PERMIT. WE'RE NOT SITTING ON OUR HANDS, BUT WE'RE JUST TRYING -- WHEN YOU DEAL -- IT'S NOT JUST OUR SIGN. THE STORE PUT IT UP. WE HAVE TO GET APPROVAL FROM PETER BUILT, WHICH IS THE TRUCK, THE OWNER COMPANY. >> UNDERSTOOD. CAN SOMEONE ENLIGHTEN ME WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE CODE COMPLIANCE HOLD? >> SO I'VE BEEN AWARE HE PLACED AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO INSTALL THE SIGN. MY CASE IS ESSENTIALLY INTERCEPTING THE PERMIT TO GO THROUGH. SO I WANT TO CHANGE MY RECOMMENDATION FOR SEVEN DAYS TO MAYBE 30 DAYS, SO THAT THE PERMIT SITUATION CAN MOVE FORWARD AND HE'LL BE ABLE TO INSTALL THE SIGN. >> OKAY, OKAY. >> SO WE ENDED UP COMMUNICATING WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. ESSENTIALLY THERE SHOULDN'T BE A HOLD BECAUSE WE ARE REQUIRING FOR THEM TO FIX THE SIGN AND THEY NEED TO GET A PERMIT. SO IT COULD BE A LACK OF MAYBE COMMUNICATION OR SOMETHING THAT'S INTERFERING WITH THE SYSTEM. THAT'S JUST NOT ALLOWING THEM TO PROCEED. BUT WE WILL SPEAK TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. HOPEFULLY 30 DAYS, YOU KNOW, WILL BE SUFFICIENT FOR THAT PERMIT TO BE APPROVED. >> ANYTHING FURTHER FOR ME? >> YEAH, COULD I GET 60 DAYS JUST FROM EXPERIENCE ABOUT HOW SOMETIMES THESE THINGS GO? 30 DAYS SEEMS A LITTLE TIGHT. UNLESS, YOU KNOW, JUST NEED TO ADD ANOTHER -- UNTIL IT'S COMPLETED, RIGHT? THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING ONCE YOU GET INTO THE BUILDING, ANYTHING WITH BUILDING THEN. >> ONCE THE PERMIT GETS APPROVED, YOU HAVE 180 DAYS TO COMPLETE THE JOB. >> OKAY, THAT'S FINE. >> IT'S JUST THOSE 30 DAYS FOR YOU TO GET THE PERMIT. >> OKAY, PERFECT. THAT'S FINE. >> EXCELLENT. ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THE PARTIES? >> NO, SIR. >> ALL RIGHTY. THAT BEING SAID, IT IS THE COURT'S FINDING THE VIOLATION DOES EXIST, AND THAT THE FOLLOWING BE ORDERED. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN 30 DAYS TO REPAIR BUSINESS SIGN, WHERE DISREPAIR HAS OCCURRED. RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED, WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. AND MR. HELFRICH, THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN TO GET THIS SORTED OUT, AND THANK YOU FOR MOVING QUICKLY ON THIS ONE. >> MAGISTRATE, CAN I ASK, JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR ON THE RECORD. HE'LL HAVE 30 DAYS TO REPAIR THE BUSINESS SIGN WHERE DISREPAIR HAS OCCURRED OR OBTAIN A PERMIT WITHIN 30 DAYS, AND YOU HAVE 180 DAYS TO CLOSE THAT PERMIT? >> CORRECT. YES, THANK YOU. THAT WILL BE REFLECTED IN THE ORDER. >> OKAY. [00:10:02] >> ALL RIGHTY, THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> WE'RE GOOD? >> YES. >> THANK YOU. [3. Case Number: LTCL-2025-255 Investigating Officer: Heather Debevec Violation Location: 3325 S US Highway 1] >> OUR NEXT CASE WILL BE LOCK CLEARING CASE, 2025-225. THIS IS NUMBER THREE IN OUR NUANCE CASES. AND THIS IS FOR 3325 SOUTH US HIGHWAY 1. >> GOOD MORNING, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, HEATHER DEBEVEC, CITY FORT PIERCE CODE ENFORCEMENT. THIS IS LOT CLEARING CASE 2025-255. ADDRESS, 3325 SOUTH US HIGHWAY 1. THE ISSUE WAS NOTICED ON OCTOBER 15, 2025. BOTH DONE ON AUGUST 21 OF 2025. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS DOUGLAS O'KEEFFE. THE VIOLATION IS 2419, SUBSECTIONS 11, AB, 3IS. LARGER THAN THREE ACRES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS, IN WHICH TO SUBMIT. I HAD A SHORT CONVERSATION WITH THE OWNER AFTER I FIRST CITED IT. HE WAS WORKING ON TRYING TO GET IT TAKEN CARE OF. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE CONTRACTOR, I BELIEVE TWICE, TWO OR THREE THINGS. I THINK IT WAS TWO DIFFERENT CONTRACTORS, EXPLAINING WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE ON THE PROPERTY. >> GOOD MORNING, SIR, WHAT IS YOUR NAME? >> JAMES DOWNEY. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> I KNOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. >> AND MS. DEBEVEC, YOU PROVIDED A PHOTOGRAPH DATED AUGUST 14 OF THIS YEAR, AUGUST 21, OCTOBER 6, AND OCTOBER 13. DID YOU TAKE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> YES, MA'AM. JUST A REMINDER, I BELIEVE THE GENTLEMAN TO MY LEFT NEEDS TO BE SWORN IN. >> AND DO THESE PICTURES TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> AND YOU ALSO PROVIDED A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE VIOLATION TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS, IS THAT CORRECT? >> I'M SORRY? >> YOU PROVIDED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION, THE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE VIOLATION? >> YES, MA'AM. >> AT THIS TIME, WE WILL MOVE TO COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY, ALTHOUGH -- SIR, DID YOU GET SWORN IN? >> I DID NOT. >> SO BEFORE YOU TESTIFY, IF YOU DON'T MIND DOING THAT, AND MS. CALDERON WILL DO THAT FOR YOU. >> ALL RIGHT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. >> JAMES DOWNEY. >> DO YOU SWEAR, AFFIRM THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH? >> YES. >> THANK YOU. >> SIR, MR. DOWNEY? >> YES. >> COULD YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME, PLEASE? >> D-O-W-N-E-Y. >> MR. DOWNEY, WHAT'S YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PROPERTY? >> WE ARE THE HIRING CONTRACTOR, AND I HAVE A LETTER FROM THEM, STATING THAT I CAN REPRESENT THEM HERE TODAY, IF YOU NEED THAT. >> DO YOU WANT TO ADMIT THAT INTO EVIDENCE? >> IF YOU WANT. >> THIS WILL BE RESPONDENT, EXHIBIT ONE, NO OBJECTION. >> THANK YOU, I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT ONE. SO TELL ME, MR. DOWNEY, WHAT'S GOING ON? >> SO WE DID THIS PROPERTY IN '24, ALSO, SAME THING. BROUGHT IT BACK UP TO CODE. WENT IN THERE, CUT, TRIMMED, RAN THE MACHINES THROUGH. SO THE CLIENT REACHED OUT AND SAID THEY WERE TRYING TO FIND SOMEBODY LOCAL TO DO THE WORK BECAUSE WE'RE FROM ORLANDO. AND I GUESS HE'S BEEN HAVING A HARD TIME. HE SAID HEY, CAN YOU GET DOWN HERE IMMEDIATELY? I CONTACTED CODE ENFORCEMENT AND TOLD THEM WE WOULD GET IN THERE JUST LIKE WE DID LAST YEAR AND CLEAN IT ALL UP AND SPRAY. SO TWO WEEKS AGO, I CAME IN WITH MY MACHINE AND MY GUYS, AND THE PROPERTY IS FLOODED OUT. SO WE COULDN'T GET VERY FAR WITH THE MACHINE. SO WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SPRAY. I HAVE A CREW TO GO OUT THERE, BUT WE WERE LOOKING FOR A LITTLE BIT OF A BEREAVEMENT TO MAYBE GIVE A 30 TO 45 DAYS TO LET IT DRY OUT AND GET A MACHINE IN. >> YOU WERE GOING TO GO SPRAY? >> YEAH, THEY HAVE A LOT OF EVASIVE, BRAZILIAN PEPPER IN THERE THAT'S GROWING. WE CUT A LOT OF IT LAST YEAR, BUT IT GROWS SO FAST. WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND KILL THAT STUFF OUT, [00:15:01] SO WE DON'T HAVE THIS PROBLEM AGAIN BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S TRYING TO TAKE OVER AND IT IS AN EVASIVE TO FLORIDA. >> UNDERSTOOD, UNDERSTOOD. >> I CAN'T REALLY BRING THE MACHINE IN BECAUSE WE JUST HAD ALL THIS RAIN THE LAST TWO WEEKS. SO HOPEFULLY NOW WE'RE BEING DRY, HOPING WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, I CAN BRING THE MACHINE IN. PROBABLY TAKE US A WEEK TO GET IT DONE, SO WE COULD GET MAYBE 45 DAYS. IT'LL BE COMPLETE AND BACK TO WHERE IT WAS. >> OKAY. AND ANY RESPONSE FROM THE CITY? >> NO, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT, ANYTHING FURTHER FOR ME? >> NO, SIR. >> ALL RIGHTY. WELL, IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING A NUANCE CONDITION EXIST IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. A NUANCE BE ADDRESSED. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN 45 DAYS TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, BUSHES TO THE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED IN A NOTICE OF VIOLATION. THE LANDSCAPER REQUIREMENT OF SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION B SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR A 100-FOOT WIDE STRIP FROM EVERY ROAD, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE RIGHT OF WAY. EVERY DEVELOPED PARCEL. 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, $100 PER DAY. FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUANCE CONDITION, THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. AND MR. DOWNEY, THERE WILL BE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL THIS DECISION IF THE OWNER SO CHOOSES, BUT I THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN AND GETTING THIS RECTIFIED. [11. Case Number: LTCL-2025-278 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: TBD (2408-506-0065-000-4)] >> YES, SIR. >> ALL RIGHTY, NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> OUR NEXT CASE WILL BE A LOT CLEARING CASE, 2025-278. THIS IS TO BE DETERMINED ADDRESS FOR 2408, 5065, 0064, IF YOU CAN PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM. >> YOUR HONOR, THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2025-278. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING -- SORRY, LOCATION, VIOLATION LOCATION IS TO BE DETERMINED. PARCEL NUMBER 2408-506-0065-000-4. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING, NOTICE OF VIOLATION DATE, SEPTEMBER 26, 2025. NOTICE OF VIOLATION SERVICE MET, THERE WAS REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, POSTED AT PROPERTY. THE ISSUE DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 12, 2025. THE REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, AND POSTED AT PROPERTY. THE POSTING DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 12, 2025. THE OWNER IS THE LOVE CENTER FELLOWSHIP INC. VIOLATION IS 24-19, SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A AND B. NUANCE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES, AND I DO HAVE PHOTOS AS I WITNESSED IT, AND ALSO A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION. >> SIR, WHAT IS YOUR NAME? >> HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> YES. AND MS. KIRKLAND, YOU PROVIDED A NOTICE OF THE VIOLATION TO THE OWNER. AND TO MR. RYAN, AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN SEPTEMBER 12, OCTOBER 4, OCTOBER 11 OF THIS YEAR. DID YOU TAKE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, THEY DO. >> THIS TIME THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT IT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> MS. KIRKLAND, HAVE YOU HAD CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER BEFORE TODAY? >> YES, I HAVE. I MET WITH HIM, I'M SORRY, A FEW TIMES AT THE PROPERTY. HE HAS DONE SOME WORK, BUT THE WORK HE HAS DONE BECAUSE OF THE WEATHER, HE HASN'T BEEN ABLE TO COMPLETE IT. UP TO THE STANDARDS. >> WHAT REMAINS AS FAR AS YOU KNOW? >> IN IT THIS PHOTO HERE AROUND THIS LITTLE PATCH YEAH, THAT LITTLE PATCH OF GRASS NEEDS TO BE CUT. OTHER AREAS ON THE PROPERTY, IT'S VERY LARGE PROPERTY. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING, MR. RYAN. TELL ME, WHAT'S YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PROPERTY? >> I'M THE PASTOR OF THE LOVE CENTER. [00:20:02] >> THE PASTOR OF THE LOVE CENTER. THANK YOU, SIR. TELL ME, WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? >> WE NEED TO CUT THE GRASS. WE JUST NEED ANOTHER FIVE, SIX DAYS, SEVEN DAYS WILL BE GREAT TO HAVE IT DONE. >> EXCELLENT. ANYTHING FURTHER? >> NO, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT. >> CAN I JUST CONFIRM, WERE YOU SWORN IN THIS MORNING? >> WELL, I STOOD IN THE BEGINNING WHEN EVERYBODY RAISED THEIR HAND. >> YOU WERE HERE THIS MORNING? >> YES, MA'AM. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, SO YOU'RE SAYING SEVEN DAYS WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TIME? >> YES. WE'RE GOOD. >> EXCELLENT. WELL THANK YOU. IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND SUCH NINE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT, SAFETY OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN SEVEN DAYS TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, 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 NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUANCE CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. AND YOU WILL HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL THIS DECISION IF YOU SO CHOOSE. BUT I THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN AND MOVING SWIFTLY TO GET THIS RESOLVED. [1. Case Number: NUIS-2025-3 Investigating Officer: Isaac Saucedo Violation Location: 101 Seaway Drive] >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> OUR NEXT CASE IS NUIS-2025-3 AT 101 SEAWAY DRIVE. YOU CAN NOW COME UP TO THE PODIUM. >> THIS IS CASE NUMBER NUIS-2025-3 AT 101 SEAWAY DRIVE. THIS IS A NUANCE ABATEMENT CASE. THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON FEBRUARY 10 OF 2025. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS SENT REGULAR CERTIFIED AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED. THE NOTICE TO APPEAR HAS A DATE OF FEBRUARY 12 OF 2025, AND THAT WAS SENT REGULAR CERTIFIED MAIL, AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED. THE POSTING DATE IS FEBRUARY 12, 2025, THOUGH I LATER -- OF 1325 SOUTHWEST PINE COVE IN PORT ST. LUCIE. VACANT BUILDINGS, IPMC, VACANT STRUCTURES AND LAND. ON MARCH 19 OF 2025, THIS SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FOUND THE OWNER WAS IN VIOLATION AND PROVIDED SEVEN DAYS TO COMPLY OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY, AND THE COST OF DATING THE NUANCE CONDITION. ON APRIL 8, 2025, AN INSPECTION WAS COMPLETED, PROPERTY REMAINED OUT OF COMPLIANCE, AND THE FINES INITIATED. ON APRIL 10, IN AN AFFIDAVIT OF NON-COMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED. AUGUST 7 OF 2025, AN INSPECTION WAS COMPLETED. PROPERTY CAME INTO COMPLIANCE AND THE FINES STOPPED. ON AUGUST 27, AN AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED. AUGUST 28 OF 2025, A MASSEY LETTER WAS SENT TO THE OWNER. ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2025, A REQUEST FOR A MASSEY HEARING WAS RECEIVED. THERE'S A TOTAL BALANCE OF $16,200. THE GRAVITY OR SERIOUSNESS OF THE VIOLATION WAS MODERATE. ANY AND ALL OTHER ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE VIOLATOR TO CORRECT THE VIOLATION WERE NONE. THE CITY DID HIRE A VENDOR TO COMPLETE THE WORK. AND ANY PREVIOUS VIOLATIONS COMMITTED WERE NONE. IS IT OKAY IF I PULL UP? THE COS ESTIMATOR HERE? THAT IS A TOTAL OF $5,101.13. THAT INCLUDES THE $4,000 THE VENDOR CHARGED TO TAKE CARE OF THE PROPERTY, TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. THE CITY IS -- DOES AGREE TO REMOVE THAT DAILY FINE AND BRING THIS BALANCE DOWN TO THE $5,101.13. >> OKAY. >> GOOD MORNING, SIR. >> GOOD MORNING. >> WHAT IS YOUR NAME? >> JOE, I AM THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE PROPERTY AND REPRESENTATION OF MR. SHATIVA, WHICH IS IN THE AUDIENCE THIS MORNING. >> CAN YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME? A-N-D-U-J-A-R. >> ANDUJAR? >> ANDUJAR. >> THANK YOU, MR. ANDUJAR. YOU SAID THE OWNER IS IN THE GALLERY [00:25:04] THIS MORNING? >> YES. >> GOOD MORNING. ALL RIGHT. MR. ANDUJAR, TELL ME WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? >> WELL, I'M GLAD TO HEAR THE COMMENTS OF THE CITY. AS HE STATED, THIS WAS A FOUR OR FIVE-PRONG CASE ON THE PROPERTY. WE TOOK CARE OF APPROPRIATELY OF THE MAJORITY OF THE ITEMS BESIDES THE BOARDING UP. AND MY APOLOGIES, BUT NEITHER HAD A NOTICE TO APPEAR TO DEAL WITH THAT ISSUE. IF IT WAS REGULAR MAIL, WE DON'T REMEMBER RECEIVING IT AT ALL, OTHERWISE WE WOULD HAVE BEEN PRESENT. WHEN THE INITIAL FINES WERE ISSUED, DAILY FINES, WE HAVE NO RECORD OF RECEIVING THAT NOTICE TO APPEAR. SECONDLY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT THE ISSUE OF THE BOARDING UP, AND I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. BETWEEN THE LAST WEEK AND MAY AND THE FIRST WEEK IN JUNE, AND I HAVE A COPY OF AN E-MAIL THAT BACK AND FORTH, DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE OF THE BOARDING UP ON JUNE 6, JUST BASICALLY SAYING HEY, YOU KNOW, IN THE CONVERSATION, WE DISCUSSED HEY, WE'RE ABOUT TO GET A PERMIT HERE. THEY'RE HOLDING US UP, THE UTILITIES DEPARTMENT, BUT WE'RE ABOUT TO GET A PERMIT. AND IN THAT CONVERSATION, NOT FROM ME, BUT FROM HER. SHE SAID, AND I'M PARAPHRASING HERE. I UNDERSTAND WHY WE BOARD UP THE PROPERTY. YOU'RE GOING TO BE WORKING IN THERE. AND IN THE JUNE 6 E-MAIL THAT I HAVE HERE. THAT WAS CONFIRMED. SO THIS ISSUE WE HAD WAS TAKEN CARE OF, LESS THE BOARDING UP, WHICH WE DISCUSSED AS EARLY AS THE LAST WEEK, THE FIRST WEEK OF JUNE VIA E-MAIL. AND WE FINALLY GOT A PERMIT ON THE 29TH. SO THAT IN AND OF ITSELF SHOULD HAVE HELD UP THE BOARDING. >> THE 29TH OF WHAT MONTH? >> OF JULY. >> JULY, OKAY. >> THE BOARDING WAS DONE AFTER THE FACT. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME MISSING ISSUES HERE BECAUSE ONCE WE HAD A PERMIT AND WE'RE WORKING IN THERE, THAT SHOULD HAVE HELD UP ANY MOVEMENT FROM THE CITY TO BOARD THIS THAT SAID, WE'RE FINE WITH THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE IT'S WORK DONE ON THE PROPERTY. THE OWNER WOULD HAVE DONE EITHER WAY. YOU KNOW, IT WAS SET FOR THE HURRICANES, SO WE WOULD HAVE INCURRED THAT COST EITHER WAY. SO IF THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CITY IS TO ELIMINATE THESE FEES, YOU KNOW, GO WITH THIS $5,000, I THINK THE OWNER WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT. IS THAT GOOD? >> OKAY. SO JUST TO CLARIFY, LIKE HE MENTIONED, THERE WAS A PERMIT THAT WAS PULLED, BUT THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR A GREASE DROP, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY IRRELEVANT IN REGARDS TO BOARDING UP THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY IS ABANDONED. SO THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN ABANDONED FOR SOME TIME. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING ESSENTIALLY THEY'RE GOING TO OPEN UP A BUSINESS. BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW IF YOU DRIVE BY, THE PROPERTY CONTINUES TO BE ABANDONED. THERE IS NO WORK BEING DONE. SO I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO STATE THAT FOR THE RECORD. >> AND IF I MAY, WE DISPUTE THAT TOTAL. THIS IS NOT AN ABANDONED PROPERTY. THERE'S WORK BEING DONE INSIDE PER THE GREASE TRAP BECAUSE OF THE PLUMBING THAT HAS TO BE CONNECTED TO THE GREASE TRAP. WE'RE THERE PERSONALLY EVERY WEEK. THE LANDSCAPER IS [00:30:01] THERE EVERY MONTH. SO THIS DOES NOT FIT IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM THE DEFINITION OF AN ABANDONED PROPERTY. >> MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANY VIOLATIONS ON THIS PROPERTY RIGHT NOW? >> AS OF RIGHT NOW, NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. ONLY THING THAT'S PROBABLY SOME LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE THAT MAY BE NEEDED. I DROVE BY THE OTHER DAY, THAT'S PROBABLY ABOUT IT. >> I KNOW THE GRASS HASN'T BEEN CUT THIS MONTH, BUT HE USUALLY GOES THE SECOND OR THIRD WEEK BY THE PROPERTY. AND WITH ALL THE RAIN, YOU KNOW, IT IS EIGHT TO TEN INCHES ON THE NORTH SIDE THERE BY THE RENTAL PROPERTY FENCE. >> AT WHAT POINT DOES THE CITY DECIDE I'M GOING TO HIRE A VENDOR TO TAKE CARE OF THIS? AT WHAT POINT? >> WELL, WE SEND NOTICE TYPICALLY WHEN THERE'S A VACANT STRUCTURE. IT DOES HAVE TO BE PROPERLY SECURED. WHAT THE CITY WANTS TO DO IS PREVENT FUTURE ISSUES FROM ARISING, YOU KNOW, EITHER BROKEN WINDOWS OR VAGRANT ON THE PROPERTY. I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE. HEATHER, THE OFFICER WHO INITIALLY INITIATD THE CASE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN COME UP TO THE PODIUM. BUT I KNOW IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR SOME TIME. >> YOUR HONOR, I CAN'T SPEAK AS TO EXACTLY HOW LONG IT THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN VACANT. THERE WAS A BARBECUE PLACE IN THERE A COUPLE YEARS BACK. WHEN THAT BARBECUE PLACE CLOSED UP, THE BUILDING BECAME VACANT. IT HAD BEEN CITED IN THE PAST FOR VARIOUS MINOR CODE VIOLATIONS, WHICH WERE ALWAYS TAKEN CARE OF RATHER QUICKLY. AND IT WAS CITED FOR A BOARD UP ONCE BEFORE AS WELL. AND IT DID GET BOARDED UP. FORGIVE ME IF I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY IF IT WAS BY THE OWNER OR US BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER. AND IN THIS CASE, JUST LIKE OUR LOT CLEARING, THEY WERE EXTENDED THE SAME WAY. WE SENDS OUT NOTICES, REGULAR AND CERTIFIED MAIL, AND WE POST THE PROPERTY, WHICH ALL THREE WERE DONE IN THIS CASE BY MYSELF. AND THEN AFTER SO LONG, IT DOES NOT GET ADDRESSED. IT AUTOMATICALLY GETS SCHEDULED FOR THE HEARING. THIS GONE TO HEARING. I DON'T BELIEVE ANYBDY HAD SHOWED UP TO THAT HEARING. IT GIVES SEVEN DAYS, NOTHING HAD BEEN DONE, IT GETS NON-COMPLIANCE, AND GOES TO BID. AT SOME POINT, I DID SPEAK WITH MR. ANDUJAR AS HE STATED. THERE WERE APPLICATIONS FOR THE PERMITS AT THAT TIME. THE ONE APPLICATION I DON'T BELIEVE HAS GONE THROUGH YET. THEY WERE STILL HAVING TO REDO PAPERWORK. GREASE TRAP WAS ISSUED, I BELIEVE IN JULY. >> JULY 29. >> WHICH ALL OF THIS WAS DONE AS YOU CAN SEE RELATIVELY IN BETWEEN. SPEAKING WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, THE GREASE TRAP WOULD NOT HAVE PREVENTED THE BOARD UP. >> OKAY. ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THE PARTIES? >> I THINK OUR CONVERSATION CONFIRMED BY THE E-MAIL ON JULY 6 SHOULD HAVE PREVENTED THAT BOARD UP. AS IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING IN SPEAKING WITH THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, AGAIN, I'M PARAPHRASING. I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE HAVING PERMITS, YOU'RE GOING TO START WORK IN THERE, AND YOU DON'T WANT THE PLACE BOARDED UP. >> WELL THANK YOU. >> AND THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED JULY 29, AND THE BOARD UP WAS DONE AFTER THAT PERMIT WAS ISSUED. >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. I'VE HEARD ENOUGH. I FIND IT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY TO GRANT A REDUCTION IN THE FINES HERE. AND I FIND THAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE SUCH THAT IT WOULD BE REASONABLE TO DO SO. I WILL ORDER THE REDUCTION TO THE $5,101.13 AMOUNT. MR. ANDUJAR, ABOUT HOW LONG, IF I WERE TO GIVE 30 DAYS FOR THIS PAYMENT TO BE MADE, WOULD YOU FIND THAT'S A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME TO MAKE THAT PAYMENT? >> HE'S IN AGREEMENT, YES, 30 DAYS. >> ALL RIGHT, SO I WILL ORDER [00:35:01] THIS PAYMENT NEEDS TO BE PAID IN FULL IN 30 DAYS. IF IT IS NOT PAID IN 30 DAYS, THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT OF $16,200 WILL BE REVERTED TO THAT AMOUNT. HE WILL HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL THIS DECISION, BUT I THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN THIS MORNING. >> THANK YOU. >> I'LL SEND OUT AN ORDER. >> I WILL SEND YOU A LINK TO PAY ONLINE. >> OKAY. >> YOU HAVE HIS E-MAIL? >> YEAH, I HAVE YOUR E-MAILS FROM EARLIER. >> YOU HAVE MY E-MAIL? >> YEAH, WHEN WE WERE SCHEDULING EVERYTHING. I'LL CONFIRM THAT RIGHT NOW. [1. Case Number: 24-294 Investigating Officer: Isaac Saucedo Violation Location: 2614 Avenue I] >> THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? YES. >> OUR NEXT CASE WILL BE A LIEN REDUCTION, 24-294 FOR 2614 AVENUE I, IF YOU CAN PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM. >> GOOD MORNING. >> GOOD MORNING. THIS IS CASE NUMBER 24-294, 2614 AVENUE I. THIS IS A CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE. NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED ON FEBRUARY 24, 2024, I'M SORRY, AND THE SERVICE METHOD WAS REGULAR MAIL. THE NOTICE TO APPEAR ISSUE DATE WAS APRIL 1 OF 2024. AND THAT WAS SENT CERTIFIED MAIL AND THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED. THE POSTING DATE WAS APRIL 19 OF 2024, AND THE VIOLATOR IS QUEEN GIBBS. THE VIOLATOR, SUBSECTION NUMBER 1 AND 5 FOR NUANCE AS AN OBJECT, OUTSIDE STORAGE, SECTION 123-37, SUBSECTION 12, LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE, AND IPMC, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. ON MAY 1 OF 2024, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE GAVE THE VIOLATOR TEN DAYS TO REMOVE ALL PLYWOOD AND CEMENT BLOCKS. GIVE ME ONE -- SORRY ABOUT THAT. CEMENT BLOCKS AND TRIM ALL OVERGROWN BUSHES, SHRUBS AND BRUSH OR REMOVE THE FENCE OR BE FINED $150 PER DAY. ON MAY 20, 2024, THE PROPERTY WAS INSPECTED AND NOT IN COMPLIANCE. THAT'S WHERE THE TYPES WERE INITIATED. JULY 9 OF 2024, AFFIDAVIT OF NON-COMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED. ON AUGUST 27, 2024, THE MASSEY LETTER WAS SENT TO THE VIOLATORS. SEPTEMBER 13 OF 2024, THE PROPERTY WAS INSPECTED AND BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE, AND THAT'S WHEN THE FINES WERE STOPPED. SEPTEMBER 19, AN AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WAS ISSUED. ON SEPTEMBER 24 OF 2024, A SECOND MASSEY LETTER WAS SENT TO THE VIOLATOR. DECEMBER 11 OF 2024, AN ORDER ASSESSING FINE AND IMPOSING LEAN -- ON SEPTEMBER 11 OF 2025, A REQUEST FOR LIEN REDUCTION WAS RECEIVED AND THE TOTAL BALANCE IS $16,540. WHETHER THE REQUESTING PARTY IS THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ORIGINAL VIOLATION THAT RESULTED IN A LIEN, I'M SORRY, THAT'S A YES. WHETHER THE REQUESTING PARTY HAS ESTABLISHED THE EXISTING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT PREVENTED TIMELY COMPLIANCE AND/OR ANY EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES, THAT SUPPORT THE REDUCTION BELOW. THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AMOUNTS PROVIDED -- I'M NOT SURE. SORRY. PROVIDED A SPECIAL MAGISTRATE RULE 5.1 SUBSECTION B1 KNOWN. WHETHER THERE IS A CURRENT CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ON THIS PROPERTY UNDER THE COMMON OWNERSHIP. THE TYPE OF NUMBER OF LIEN REDUCTIONS GRANTED FOR THIS PROPERTY OR ANY OTHER PROPERTY UNDER COMMON OWNERSHIP IN THE PAST 24 MONTHS IS NONE. WHETHER THE GRANTING OF THE REDUCTION IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY. THAT'S TO BE DETERMINED BY YOU, BY THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. ALTHOUGH YOU DO HAVE THE ULTIMATE, YOU KNOW, SAY ON WHAT THE FINAL RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE, THE CITY DOES RECOMMEND THEY ACCEPT THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES AND HAVE THE FINE REDUCED TO $1,500, AND TO BE PAID WITHIN 30 DAYS. I ALSO WANT TO PULL UP THE TOTAL COST [00:40:03] ESTIMATOR, WHICH THAT WAS A TOTAL -- $1,205.78. >> THANK YOU, ARE YOU MS. GIBBS? GOOD MORNING, MA'AM. TELL ME WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. >> WELL, WHAT HAPPENED WHEN THIS WAS ALL GOING ON, I WAS IN THE HOSPITAL IN A COMA. I SPOKE WITH MS. CHARMAINE AND ALL THE LETTERS BEING SENT OUT, THEY WERE KEEPING THE LETTERS OR HAVING THEM COME BACK TO THE CITY. SO WHEN I DID SPEAK TO MS. CHARMAINE, I GOT EVERYTHING UP TO CODE. I CAN'T AFFORD NO $16,000. BUT I CAN, YOU KNOW, I SAID I CAN WORK ON THE $1,500. >> AND MS. GIBBS, SO TELL ME, YOU WERE IN A COMA. THANK GOODNESS YOU'RE HERE, ABSOLUTELY. ABOUT HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU TO GET INTO COMPLIANCE AFTER? >> AS FAST AS I COULD BECAUSE I WAS GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH MY DIALYSIS. WHEN I SPOKE TO MS. CHARMAINE, I BROUGHT IT UP. I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT TOOK. I THINK IT TOOK A WEEK, MAYBE TWO. >> I'M GOING THE SAY THE CASE WAS OPEN FEBRUARY 2, IT CAME INTO COMPLIANCE SEPTEMBER 19, SO IN REALITY, FROM THE TIME THE CASE WAS INITIATED TO THE MOMENT, IT WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE, NOT EVEN A YEAR. SO JUST A COUPLE. >> THEY WERE KEEPING THE MAIL. >> WHO? >> THE PEOPLE THAT WAS LIVING IN THE HOUSE. >> SO WHO WAS LIVING IN THE HOUSE? >> I WAS LETTING THE OLD LADY STAY THERE AND SHE LET HER BOYFRIEND MOVE IN. >> I SEE. OKAY, ANYTHING FURTHER WHAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION WILL BE TO REDUCING THAT, I WOULD PROBABLY, THE ONLY THING I WOULD RECOMMEND, INSTEAD OF 30 DAYS, MAYBE 60 DAYS, 90 DAYS. >> CAN I GET 90 DAYS? DEPENDING ON HOW YOU WANT TO MOVE FORWARD. >> RIGHT. CAN YOU SHOW ME THE ADMIN COST FEE, PLEASE? ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THE PARTIES? >> NO, SIR. >> SO MS. GIBBS, I THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN THIS MORNING. I CERTAINLY AM EMPATHETIC TO THE FACT WHILE THIS WAS GOING DOWN, ONE, YOU HAD SOMEONE THAT DIDN'T TAKE CARE OF THE PROPERTY. YOU WERE IN A COMA. IN LIGHT OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, I FIND THERE IS EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES INVOLVED HERE. AND ULTIMATELY IT WOULD BE GRANTING A REDUCTION WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY. THAT BEING SAID, I'M ORDERING ALL THE FINES BE WAIVED IN THIS MANNER, AND YOU WILL RECEIVE AN ORDER TO THAT EFFECT. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> NEXT CASE, PLEASE? [1. Case Number: PK-2025-296 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: Jaycee Park] >> ALL RIGHT, >> SO WE'RE GOING TO JUMP INTO OUR CITATION, PK2025-296 FOR JAYCEE PARK. >> YOUR HONOR, THIS IS CASE NUMBER PK-2025-296. THIS IS A PARK CITATION ISSUED AT JAYCEE PARK. NTA DATE SEPTEMBER 23, [00:45:05] 2025, AND IT MEANT IT WAS CERTIFIED MAIL AND POSTED AT CITY HALL. THE POSTING DATE WAS OCTOBER 3, 2025. THE OWNER IS BRIGHT STAR EXPEDITE, LLC. ADMIN FEE OF $10, LATE FEE OF $18, A TOTAL OF $78. I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO DEPICT THE VIOLATION AND COPY OF THE CITATION. >> YOU HANDED OUT THE PARKING CITATION THAT WAS LEFT ON THE VEHICLE, AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHS DATED JULY 5 OF THIS YEAR. DID YOU TAKE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS THEY OBSERVE IT? >> YES, THEY DO. >> HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER? >> NO, MA'AM. >> IT THIS TIME, THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE ASSESSED THE FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF $78. FAILURE TO COMPLY, FAILURE TO PAY SUCH A FINE WITHIN 15 DAYS WILL RESULT IN A CITATION BEING FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY COURT SYSTEM, 30 DAYS [1. Case Number: CE-2025-373 Investigating Officer: Jarvis Gamble Violation Location: 1705 Boston Avenue] TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> OUR NEXT CASE IS A CODE CASE, CODE VIOLATION. CE-2025-373 AT 1705 BOSTON AVENUE. >> YOU SAID 1705 BOSTON? >> YES, 1705 BOSTON. >> MORNING, JARVIS GAMBLE, CITY OF FORT PIERCE, CODE ENFORCEMENT. CASE NUMBER CE-2025-373, VIOLATION LOCATION AT 1705 BOSTON AVENUE. THIS IS A REGULAR CODE CASE. NOTICE OF VIOLATION ISSUE DATE WAS ON JUNE 17, 2025. BY REGULAR MAIL, NOTICE TO APPEAR WAS SEPTEMBER 23, 2025. POSTING DATE WAS SEPTEMBER, I'M SORRY, THIS IS NOT A LOT CLEARING CASE. LAST INSPECTION DATE WAS OCTOBER 14, 2025. THE VIOLATOR IS ALAN SOLAR HERNANDEZ. LANDSCAPE, MAINTENANCE IPMC302.7, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. IPMC302.44, PROTECTIVE TREATMENT. I DO HAVE A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION, AS WELL AS PHOTOS TO PRESENT. >> MR. GAMBLE, YOU PROVIDED A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN JUNE 16 OF THIS YEAR, JULY 9, AUGUST 23, SEPTEMBER 5, SEPTEMBER 13, SEPTEMBER 20, OCTOBER 4, OCTOBER 11, AND OCTOBER 14. ALL OF THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVE THEM? >> YES. >> HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER? >> I HAVE. I SPOKE WITH THEM YESTERDAY. >> IS THE PROPERTY OWNER AWARE OF THE OUTSTANDING VIOLATIONS? >> HE IS. HE'S DONE SOME WORK. HE'S ALMOST DONE. I THINK THE LAST THING HE HAS TO DO IS REPAIR THAT FENCE, THAT SEPARATES THE DUPLEX FROM A AND B. HE DID TELL ME HE WAS IN THE PROCESS OF RECEIVING A PERMIT TO CHANGE OUT THE ENTIRE WOODEN FENCE TO PUT A CHAIN LINK FENCE INSTEAD. HE WAS REQUESTING FOR TEN DAYS PRIOR TO THIS DAY. >> THIS TIME THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, THE COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY COMPOSITE ONE. >> SO MR. GAMBLE, WERE THERE ITEMS ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF? >> YES. HE'S CUT THE GRASS. THAT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST VIOLATIONS THAT WERE COMPLIED. IT TOOK SOME TIME FOR HIM TO PAINT THE BOARDS AND TO REPAIR THE FENCE. BUT THOSE VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLIED AS FAR AS THE EXTERNAL FENCE THAT SURROUNDS THIS PROPERTY. BUT THE INTERNAL FENCE, THE WOODEN FENCE THERE, HE ATTEMPTED TO REPLACE SOME OF THE BOARDS, BUT YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS PHOTO, IT WASN'T COMPLETED. BUT THAT'S WHAT HE [00:50:04] WAS REQUESTING THE EXTRA TEN DAYS TO COMPLY. >> SO I KNOW THE RECOMMENDATION IN HERE IS HE'S TO BE GIVEN TEN DAYS. ARE YOU SAYING HE NEED TODAY DAYS? >> NO, THE TEN DAYS IS FINE. >> OKAY. NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. IT'S THIS COURT'S FINDING A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE FOLLOWING BE ORDERED. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN TEN DAYS TO CUT THE GRASS AND TRIM ALL LANDSCAPING, BUSHES, TREES AND SHRUBS, REPAIR BOTH THE CHAIN LINK FENCE AND THE WOODEN FENCE ON THE PREMISES, TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROPER STANDARDS AND MAINTAIN ALL AND OVERALL APPEARANCE, OVERALL ACCEPTABLE APPEARANCE. PAINT, FASCIA BOARDS, ALL OTHER AREAS, WHERE THERE IS CHIPPING, MOLDING, OR WHERE DETERIORATION HAS OCCURRED. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. [2. Case Number: CE-2025-338 Investigating Officer: Heather Debevec Violation Location: 1401 Orange Ave] NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> OUR NEXT CASE IS CE-2025-338 AT 141 ORANGE AVENUE. >> THIS CASE WAS COMPLIED AS OF THIS MORNING. [3. Case Number: CE-2025-353 Investigating Officer: Heather Debevec Violation Location: 1301 Orange Ave] >> EXCELLENT. ALL RIGHT, SO CASE DISMISSED. >> ALL RIGHT, OUR NEXT ONE IS CE-2025-353 AT 1301 ORANGE AVENUE. >> YOUR HONOR, THIS IS CASE NUMBER CE-2025-353, 1301 ORANGE AVENUE. THIS IS FOR CERTIFICATE OF USE PERMIT. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED ON JUNE 3 OF THIS YEAR. OWNER IS AN ORANGE CORNER FOOD MART. THE VIOLATION IS FOR 22-20 SUBSECTION A, CERTIFICATE OF USE REQUIRED. I DO HAVE PHOTOS IN WHICH TO SUBMIT. THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT EVEN HAVE AN APPLICATION IN TO OBTAIN THE PERMIT AS OF MONDAY. >> YOU PROVIDED PHOTOGRAPHS DATED MAY 28, A COPY OF THAT NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT WENT OUT TO THE OWNER AND THE ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND THEN A MORE RECENT PHOTOGRAPH DATED OCTOBER 3 OF THIS YEAR. THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> AND FROM YOUR MORE RECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THIS ORANGE CORNER FOOD MART IS OPERATING AS A BUSINESS, CORRECT? >> YES. >> WHEN I POSTED THE PROPERTY, I ACTUALLY WENT IN TO THIS BUSINESS, AND I HAD SET THE NOTICE ON THE COUNTER TO TAKE THE PICTURE. I REMINDED THE CLERK THEY NEED TO GET THEIR CERTIFICATE OF USE AT THAT TIME AS WELL. >> AT THIS TIME, THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO COMPOSITE ONE. >> THANK YOU. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> OKAY. >> IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING A VIOLATION EXIST, AND THE FOLLOWING BE ORDERED. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN 340 DAYS TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF USE OR CEASE ALL BUSINESS ACTIVITIES. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITHIN THE TIME PROVIDED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED, AND PER CITY ORDINANCE SECTION 22-28, ALL UTILITY SERVICES TO THE BUSINESS PREMISES WILL BE SUSPENDED WHILE THE VIOLATION CONTINUES WITH 30 [4. Case Number: CE-2025-445 Investigating Officer: Heather Debevec Violation Location: 208 Maple Ave] DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> OUR NEXT CASE IS CE-2025-445 AT 208 MAPLE AVENUE. >> THIS IS CASE NUMBER CE-445, 208 MAPLE AVENUE. STANDARD CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE. NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED ON JULY 23 OF THIS YEAR. D.O. MULTIPLE SERVICES, LLC, IT'S VIOLATION 24-19, SUBSECTION 14, NUANCE, PARKING ON OTHER THAN PAVEMENT. I DO HAVE PHOTOS IN WHICH TO SUBMIT. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY SEVERAL TIMES THE TENANTS ARE IN THE PROCESS OF BEING EVICTED. I ALSO SPOKE WITH THE TENANTS. THEY WERE IN THE PROCESS OF MOVING OUT. WHEN I WENT TO POST THE [00:55:04] PROPERTY AND TAKE SOME FINAL PHOTOS, THEY WERE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF MOVING OUT. OH, I'LL BE OUT ON MONDAY. I SAID GREAT, WHEN I COME BY TO GET MY FINAL PHOTO, THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANYTHING HERE. AS YOU'LL SEE FROM THE PHOTOS, THEY WERE STILL IN PROCESS OF MOVING OUT, IT APPEARS. >> I THINK YOU PROVIDED THE NOTICE, THAT WENT OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN JULY 22, AUGUST 11, OCTOBER 6, AND OCTOBER 13. THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> AT THIS TIME, THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> AND OFFICER DEBEVEC, IS IT THE TRAILER THAT NEEDS TO BE MOVED OUT OF THE WAY? WHAT IS THE NUANCE HERE? >> IN THIS PHOTO, YES, THE TRAILER THAT STILL NEEDED TO BE MOVED. THAT'S THE BIG -- >> ALL RIGHT. IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE FOLLOWING BE ORDERED. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN TEN DAYS TO REFRAIN FROM PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? [5. Case Number: CE-2025-355 Investigating Officer: Heather Debevec Violation Location: 1305 Orange Ave] >> OUR NEXT CASE IS CE-2025-355 AT 1305 ORANGE AVENUE. >> YOUR HONOR, THIS IS CASE NUMBER CE-2025-355, 1305 ORANGE AVENUE. AGAIN, FOR CERTIFICATE OF USE. NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED ON JUNE 3 OF 2025. THE OWNER OF THE BUSINESS, VIOLATION 22-20, SUBSECTION A, CERTIFICATE OF USE REQUIRED. THESE FOLKS DO HAVE AN APPLICATION IN. THEY STILL NEED TO GET WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO FINISH UP THE APPLICATION AND PROCEED PROPERLY. >> PROVIDED A COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHERS PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN. THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> YOU ALSO PROVIDED A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT WENT OUT TO THE OWNER AND ADDITIONAL PARTIES? HAD >> YES, MA'AM. >> THE CITY MOVES INTO EVIDENCE, CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT, IT IS THE COURT'S FINDING AN ISSUE EXIST. GIVEN 20 DAYS TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF USE OR CEASE ALL BUSINESS ACTIVITIES. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITHIN THE TIME PROVIDED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY, BEING ASSESSED, AND PER CITY ORDINANCE, SECTION 22-28. ALL UTILITIES SERVICES TO THE BUSINESS PREMISES WILL BE [6. Case Number: CE-2025-301 Investigating Officer: Heather Debevec Violation Location: 2050 S US Highway 1] SUSPENDED WHILE THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> OUR NEXT CASE IS CE-2025-301 AT 2050 SOUTH US HIGHWAY 1. >> YOUR HONOR, THIS IS CASE NUMBER CE-2025-301, 2050 SOUTH US HIGHWAY ONE. IT IS A CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE. NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED ON APRIL 30 OF THIS YEAR. IT IS TWO LARGE AVENUE, DB4, LLC. NUANCE OUT STORAGE, TRASH AND RUBBISH. 117-3, SUBSECTION B, SIGN MAINTENANCE. I'VE HAD NO CONTACT WITH ANYBODY FOR THE PROPERTY, AND IT THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES AT THE PROPERTY. [01:00:04] >> YOU PROVIDED PHOTOGRAPHS DATED APRIL 30 OF THIS YEAR, JULY 7, SEPTEMBER 8, OCTOBER 6. A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WENT OUT TO THE OWNER ON OCTOBER 13. ALL THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU'VE OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> THIS TIME THE CITY WOULD MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, CITY COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> THE TRASH AND RUBBISH, IS THAT IN SOME LOCATION OF THE BUILDING? >> IT IS AROUND THE BUILDING. IT IS IN THE FOLIAGE. IT'S OVERFLOWING TRASH CANS. THE FOLIAGE DEBRIS IS THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY AS WELL. BUT THERE IS TRASH INTO THE BUSHES, INTO THE WEEDS, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS PICTURE, BUT THERE'S SOME LEANING OUTSIDE THE BUILDING IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS. THE TRASH DOES TEND TO MIGRATE WHERE SOMETIMES SOME OF IT GETS A LITTLE PICKED UP, THEN OTHER TIMES THERE'S QUITE A BIT LAYING AROUND. NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. >> IT IS THE COURT'S FINDING A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE FOLLOWING BE ORDERED. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN TEN DAYS TO REMOVE ALL TRASH AND FOLIAGE DEBRIS, COVER UP OPEN SIGN BOARDS WITH WHITE OR PAINT COVERINGS, AND FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? [8. Case Number: CE-2025-336 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: 6000 Orange Ave] >> OUR NEXT CASE IS CE-2025-336 AT 6000 ORANGE AVENUE. >> YOUR HONOR, THIS IS CASE NUMBER CE-2025-3336 . VIOLATION LOCATION, 6000 ORANGE AVENUE. THIS IS A REGULAR CASE. ISSUE DATE WAS MAY 30, 2025. NTA ISSUED DATE WAS 2025 BY CERTIFIED MAIL. THE GREEN CARD WAS RECEIVED. LAST INSPECTION DATE WAS OCTOBER 11, 2025. OWNER IS SECP-FTP-LLC. THE VIOLATION IS 117-3, SUBSECTION B, SIGNS, MAINTENANCE. I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS I WITNESSED IT. ALSO A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION, AND ALSO AN INVOICE FROM REGISTERED PARTY SAYING THEY PURCHASED THE SIGN. >> YOU PROVIDED THOSE NOTICE OF VIOLATIONS TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, AS WELL AS A COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE NEW SIGN. AND THEN PHOTOGRAPHS DATED OCTOBER 2, AND OCTOBER 11 OF THIS YEAR. THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. THEY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> THEY DO. >> AT THIS TIME, THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> AND OFFICER KIRKLAND, I THINK ONE OF OUR FIRST HEARINGS TODAY INVOLVE THE SAME BUSINESS. IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> THE SIGNS THAT WERE TORN DOWN FROM A TORNADO? >> YES. THE FIRST CASE WERE TWO DIFFERENT ADDITIONAL PARTIES, REGISTERED AGENTS. SO THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE REGISTERED AGENT CONTACTED ME YESTERDAY AND SAID THEY INSTALLED -- THEY GOT THE SIGN, BUT THE SIGN WAS TOO BIG, SO THEY ARE SUPPOSE TO COME OUT TODAY TO REINSTALL THE CORRECT SIGN. BUT I DID ADVISE HIM THAT THE CASE IS GOING TO MOVE FORWARD, AND I'LL REQUEST [01:05:05] ADDITIONAL SEVEN DAYS TO COMPLY IT. >> OKAY. WERE THEY IN A SITUATION WHERE THEY NEEDED A PERMIT LIKE THE OTHER CASE? >> HE DID NOT MENTION A PERMIT SITUATION WITH ME. >> THAT WOULD BE, I GUESS A BUILDING ISSUE, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. >> YOU'RE ASKING FOR 14 DAYS? >> YES, MA'AM. >> OKAY. NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. IT'S THIS COURT'S FINDING THAT A VIOLATION EXIST AND THE FOLLOWING BE ORDERED. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN 14 DAYS TO REPAIR BUSINESS SIGNS WHERE DISREPAIR HAS OCCURRED. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED WITH 30 [9. Case Number: CE-2025-381 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: 1607 N 23rd St ] DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> OUR NEXT CASE IS CE-2025-3381 AT 1607 NORTH 23RD STREET. >> YOUR HONOR, THIS IS CASE NUMBER CE-2025-381, VIOLATION LOCATION, 1607 NORTH 23RD STREET. THIS IS A REGULAR CE CASE. ISSUE DATE WAS JUNE 25, 2025. CERTIFIED MAIL, REGULAR MAIL. NTA ISSUE DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 23, 2025. NCA SERVICE MET WAS BY CERTIFIED MAIL. GREEN CARD WAS RECEIVED. LAST INSPECTION DATE WAS OCTOBER 10, 2025. THE OWNER IS JUNIOR A. ALIAS. VIOLATIONS ARE 125-322 SUBSECTION C, SUBSECTION 1, FENCES HIGHER RESTRICTION AND OUTSIDE STORAGE. I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS I WITNESSED IT. >> THANK YOU. HOPEFULLY YOU PROVIDED THOSE NOTICE OF VIOLATIONS WERE STATED AUGUST 14, OCTOBER 4, OCTOBER 11. WERE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED THEM? >> YES, THEY DO. >> THIS TIME THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> OFFICER, HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONTACT WITH THESE OWNERS? >> I HAD NO CONTACT WITH THE OWNERS, BUT IT IS A RENTAL PROPERTY. I'VE SPOKEN WITH -- INITIALLY I THOUGHT IT WAS THE RENTER, BUT HE WAS THE BROTHER OF THE RENTER. THERE WERE SEVERAL OTHER VIOLATIONS THAT WERE COMPLIED, BUT THE REMAINING VIOLATIONS LISTED HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLIED. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THE FOLLOWING BE ORDERED. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN SEVEN DAYS AS IT HAS NOT BEEN DONE, CUT AND TRIM ALL HEDGES IN THE FRONT YARD TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE, AND REMOVE ALL TRASH AND WOOD BOARD FROM THE FRONT YARD. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $250 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? [1. Case Number: NOOP-2025-217 Investigating Officer: Manuel Fernandez Jr. Violation Location: 1505 Citrus Ave ] >> OUR NEXT CASE IS NON-OPERATIVE VEHICLE CASE. THIS IS NOOP-2025-217 AT 1505 CITRUS AVENUE. >> GOOD MORNING, I'M EMPLOYED WITH THE CITY. TODAY BEFORE YOU, I HAVE NOOP-2025-217 AT 1505 CITRUS AVENUE. THIS IS A NON-OPERATIVE VEHICLE. THE NTA WERE ISSUED ON SEPTEMBER 18, 2025. THEY WERE SENT VIA REGULAR AND CERTIFIED MAILING, AS WELL AS POSTED AT THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS I HAVE HAS QUIZ. THEY WERE CITED FOR SUBSECTION 15 AND C, NUANCES AND NON-OPERATIVE VEHICLES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS INTRODUCED AS WELL AS THE COPY OF NOTICE OF VIOLATION SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. >> AND MR. HERNANDEZ, YOU PROVIDED A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATIONS AS WELL AS [01:10:04] PHOTOGRAPHS DATED SEPTEMBER 18, OCTOBER 6, AND OCTOBER 13. THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> AT THIS TIME, THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER? >> NO, MA'AM, I HAVE NOT. THE CERTIFIED MAILING THAT I SENT OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS RETURNED UNSIGNED ON SEPTEMBER 30 OF THIS YEAR. >> HOWEVER, IT WAS POSTED? >> YES, MA'AM. IT WAS POSTED ON THE TRAILER. >> I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER. >> THANK YOU. IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING A NUANCE CONDITION EXISTS AND VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. AND THAT SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. THE NUANCE BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITY'S NUANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN SEVEN DAYS PER NOTICE OF VIOLATION, AND ENSURE THE BLACK TRAILER IS ROAD SAFE AND LEGAL. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN THE CITY TAKING NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUANCE CONDITION AND HAVE THE VEHICLE TOWED OFF THE PROPERTY WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? [2. Case Number: LTCL-2025-294 Investigating Officer: Manuel Fernandez Jr. Violation Location: 613 N 21st ST ] >> OUR NEXT CASE IS LOT CLEARING 2025-294 AT 163 NORTH 21ST STREET. IT >> THIS IS LTCL-2025-294 AT 613 NORTH 21ST STREET. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND NOTICE TO APPEAR WERE ISSUED ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2025. THEY WERE SENT OUT VIA REGULAR AND CERTIFIED MAILING, AS WELL AS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS BRIGO PROPERTY. THEY WERE CITED 24-19 SUBSECTIONS 11A AND B. NUANCES, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS INTRODUCED AS WELL AS A COPY OF THE NOTICE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. >> MR. HERNANDEZ, YOU PROVIDED A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHS DATED SEPTEMBER 29, OCTOBER 6, AND OCTOBER 13 OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS. WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> THE CITY MOVES INTO EVIDENCE, COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE OF CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> MR. HERNANDEZ, HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER? >> I HAVE NOT HAD ANY CONTACT, BUT I DID RECEIVE A SIGNED GREEN CARD ON OCTOBER 6 OF THIS YEAR. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. IT'S THIS COURT'S FINDING A NUANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. AND THAT THE NUANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITY'S NUANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN SEVEN DAYS TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND BUSHES TO THE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED IN NOTICE OF VIOLATION. AND REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS INCLUDING LANDSCAPED DEBRIS GENERATED FROM BRINGING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE THE NECESSARY CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. WITH 30 DAYS TO [4. Case Number: LTCL-2025-257 Investigating Officer: Heather Debevec Violation Location: 2608 S US Highway 1] APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> OUR NEXT CASE IS LOT CLEARING 2025-257 AT 2608 SOUTH US HIGHWAY 1. TRILLION >> YOUR HONOR, THIS IS LOT CLEARING 2025-257, 2608 SOUTH U.S. 1. IT'S A LOT CLEARING, NOTICE VIOLATION WAS ISSUED AUGUST 15, 2025. NOTICE TO APPEAR ON POSTING AUGUST 21, 2025. OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. VIOLATIONS 24-19, SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A AND B. NUANCE, LANDSCAPING, REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE-ACRE PROPERTIES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS IN WHICH TO SUBMIT. I HAVE HAD NO CONTACT WITH THE OWNERS AND THE PROPERTY IS NOT CHANGING OTHER THAN THE GRASS IS GROWING MORE. >> I THINK YOU PROVIDED [01:15:04] PHOTOGRAPHS DATED AUGUST 15, A NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT WAS SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND PHOTOGRAPHS DATED AUGUST 21, OCTOBER 6, AND OCTOBER 13. THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO COMPOSITE 1. >> THANK YOU. >> I'LL ACCEPT IT HAD INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> QUESTION, THIS OWNER, IS IT A GOVERNMENT ENTITY? >> IT IS, I WOULD BELIEVE SO. THERE IS NOTHING. >> I GUESS MY QUESTION IS ARE PROCEDURES DIFFERENT FOR GOVERNMENT ENTITIES THAN IT WOULD BE FOR PRIVATE CITIZEN? >> AS FAR AS WE KNOW, IT'S STATE STATUTE GOES. I'LL TAKE SOME TESTIMONY FROM THIS. THIS PROPERTY WAS NOT ALWAYS OWNED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF FLORIDA, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. IT SWITCHED OVER IN AUGUST ONCE IT SWITCHED OVER IS WHEN I CITED IT AGAIN. IT WAS A PRIVATE OWNER BEFORE. AND WE HAD CITED THEM AND THEY KEPT INSISTING THEY DIDN'T OWN IT THAT THE STATE HAD TAKEN IT OVER. I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE WHOLE ISSUE WAS WITH THAT. I DON'T RECALL THAT. >> I DO. I'M NOT A WITNESS TO THIS CASE. BUT YOU'RE AWARE THAT THIS WAS OWNED BY ANOTHER ENTITY OR PRIVATE COMPANY AND THIS WAS TAKEN OVER BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA AT THE TIME OF THAT PREVIOUS VIOLATION? BASICALLY FOR THE SAME ISSUE, IS THAT CORRECT? >> I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE ISSUE WAS EXACTLY. WHERE THE WHOLE INTERMINGLINGS OF ALL OF THAT WAS, BUT THERE WAS SOMETHING WHERE THE STATE HAD TAKEN THE PROPERTY. >> AND SO WAS THAT CASE CLOSED OUT TO ALLOW FOR THE STATE TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT THEY ARE NOW THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY? >> CORRECT. IT WAS WAITING FOR THE TRANSITION OF OWNERSHIP, BUT IT WAS CITED FOR THE EXACT SAME THINGS THAT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY. >> SO THE STATE OF FLORIDA AT THAT TIME, SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, THEY KNEW THESE VIOLATIONS WERE PENDING, CORRECT? >> I HAVE NO IDEA. >> I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER. >> OKAY. IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING THAT A NUANCE CONDITION EXIST IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND THAT SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. THAT IT WILL BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITY'S NUANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. IT WILL BE GIVEN SEVEN DAYS TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED 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 AND FOR EACH DAY THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUANCE CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, [5. Case Number: NUIS-2025-23 Investigating Officer: Heather Debevec Violation Location: 2608 S US Highway 1] PLEASE? >> OUR NEXT CASE IS A NUANCE CASE NUIS-2025-23 AT 2608 SOUTH US HIGHWAY 1. SAME LOCATION. >> YOUR HONOR, THIS IS NUANCE CASE 2025-23. 206 SOUTH U.S. ONE. THIS IS FOR A BOARD UP CASE. NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED ON AUGUST 15. NOTICE TO APPEAR POSTING DATES ARE BOTH AUGUST 21 OF 2025. THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND THE TRUST FUND OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. VIOLATION 103-341, VIE CANT BUILDINGS BOARD UP REQUIRED. DOW HAVE PHOTOS IN WHICH TO SUBMIT. OFFICER, YOU PROVIDED A COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHERS TAKEN AUGUST 15. A NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT WENT TO THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER AND PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN OCTOBER 6 AND OCTOBER 13. DID YOU TAKE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> AT THIS TIME, THE CITY MOVES INTO EVIDENCE, COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE [01:20:05] ONE. >> OFFICER, THERE IS NO BUSINESS OR ANYONE LIVING IN THIS BUILDING, CORRECT? >> THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANYBODY IN THE BUILDING, NO MA'AM. IT'S BEEN VACANT. IT WAS A CAR DEALERSHIP FOR A SHORT WHILE. AND THEN THEY HAD RELOCATED. THERE IS A SEPARATE CODE CASE FOR THAT. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING A NUANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. AND THE NUANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITY'S NUANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN TEN DAYS TO RESECURE ALL OPENINGS INCLUDING ALL INDOOR -- ALL DOORS AND WINDOWS WITH PAINTED EXTERIOR GRATE, PLYWOOD, OR OTHER SIMILARLY COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE DESIGNED FOR THIS INTENDED USE, INSTALL IN A WORKMANLIKE MANNER. FAILURE TO COMPLY BY THE DATE ORDERED WILL RESULT IN A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BEING ASSESSED. FOR EACH DATE THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUANCE CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. WITH 30 DAYS TO [6. Case Number: LTCL-2025-220 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: 1314 N 25th St] APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> THANK YOU. >> NEXT CASE IS LOT CLEARING 2025-220 AT 1314 NORTH 25TH STREET. >> CASE NUMBER LTCL-2025-220, VIOLATION LOCATION, 1314 NORTH 25TH STREET. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING. ISSUED DATE SEPTEMBER 17, 2025. REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, POSTED AT PROPERTY. ISSUE DATE, SEPTEMBER 18, 2025. SERVICE MET BY REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, POSTED AT PROPERTY. POSTING DATE, SEPTEMBER 18, 2025. THE LAST INSPECTION DATE WAS OCTOBER 11, 2025. THE OWNERS ARE BETTY J. BROWN, HARIETTA MARYWEATHER. NUANCE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENT FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS DEPICTING THE VIOLATION AS I WITNESSED IT AND ALSO A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE VIOLATION. >> YOU PROVIDED THAT NOTICE OF VIOLATION AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHS DATED SEPTEMBER 18, SEPTEMBER 13, OCTOBER 11. THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, THEY DO. >> THIS TIME THE CITY MOVES INTO EVIDENCE, CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> AND OFFICER KIRKLAND, HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONTACT WITH ANY OF THE LISTED OWNERS? >> I DID TAKE THE INITIATIVE TO GO TO MS. BROWN'S HOUSE, AND SHE HAD ADVISED ME SHE HAS BEEN IN THE PROPERTY, AND SHE ALSO ADVISED ME THAT HER NEPHEW, DARREN D. SIMMONS SR. IS THE REGISTERED OWNER. AND SHE SAID HE LIVES IN WASHINGTON, AND SHE HAS NO CONTACT INFORMATION FOR HIM. >> ARE ALL THESE INDIVIDUALS LISTED ON THE PROPERTY CURRENT WITH THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE THOUGH? >> YES, MA'AM. >> OKAY, THAT'S WHY THEY ALL GOT NOTICE? >> YES, MA'AM. >> AND THE GREEN CARD DID COME BACK UNSIGNED. >> DID YOU MAKE MS. BROWN AWARE OF THE VIOLATION THAT NEEDED TO BE CORRECTED? >> YES, MA'AM. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. >> A NUANCE CONDITION EXIST IN THE VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. THAT THE NUANCE BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITY'S NUANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN SEVEN DAYS TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED. 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 DATE THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUANCE CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST [7. Case Number: LTCL-2025-286 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: 107 S 23rd St ] [01:25:03] THE PROPERTY, WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> NEXT CASE IS LOT CLEARING 2025-286 AT 107 SOUTH 23RD STREET. CASE NUMBER LTCL, 107 SOUTH 23RD STREET. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING. NOTICE OF VIOLATION ISSUED DATE, SEPTEMBER 13, 2025 BY REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, POSTED AT PROPERTY. SERVICE MET THERE WAS REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, AND POSTED AT PROPERTY. THE POSTING DATE WAS SEPTEMBR 16, 2025. THE LAST INSPECTION DATE WAS OCTOBER 11, 2025. AND LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES, AND I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS WITNESSED IT. DO THEY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> THEY DO. >> THIS TIME THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, CITY COMPOSITE ONE. >> THANK YOU. I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> OFFICER, HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONTACT WITH EITHER OF THE OWNERS? >> NO, MA'AM. AND THE MAIL CAME BACK UNCLAIMED AND -- I'M SORRY. IT CAME BACK UNCLAIMED AND THE ADDRESS CHANGE. THERE WAS AN ADDRESS CHANGE TO A DIFFERENT LOCATION. >> HOWEVER, THE ADDRESS THAT YOU USED IS THE ONE THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S WEBSITE? >> YES, MA'AM. >> AND THIS IS ALSO POSTED ON THE PROPERTY AS WELL? >> YES, MA'AM. >> I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING A NUANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. THAT SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. AND NUANCE BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE CITY'S ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN SEVEN DAYS TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, 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 NUANCE CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. WITH 30 DAYS TO [8. Case Number: LTCL-2025-221 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: N 25th St (2404-708-0007-000-8)] APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> NEXT CASE IS LOT CLEARING 2025-221 AT NORTH 25TH STREET. >> THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2025-221. VIOLATION LOCATION, NORTH 25TH STREET. PARCEL I.D. NUMBER, 2404-708-0007-000-8. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING. SEPTEMBER 17, 2025. SERVICE MET WERE REGULAR MAILED, POSTED AT PROPERTY. THE NTA ISSUED DATE, SEPTEMBER 18, 2025. NTA SERVICE MET THE REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, AND POSTED AT PROPERTY. POSTING DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 18, 2025. LAST INSPECTION DATE WAS OCTOBER 11, 2025. THE OWNER IS BETTY J. BROWN, DARREN D. SIMMONS SR., HENRIETTA. SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION A, B. NUANCES, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTY. I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS I WITNESSED IT. >> YOU PROVIDED A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT WENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN SEPTEMBER 18. AUGUST 8, SEPTEMBER 13, OCTOBER 11. THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, THEY DO. >> THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, CITY COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> AND OFFICER, ONE OF THE LAST CASES WE DEALT WITH, THIS ONE AND THE ONE BEFORE, DEALT WITH THE SAME INDIVIDUALS. IS THIS [01:30:03] LIKE AN ADJOINING LOT? >> YES, IT IS. IT IS ADJOINING RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER. >> AND THIS ONE JUST INVOLVES TRIMMING UP THE GRASSES AND TRIMMING TREES UP? IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> THE SAME SITUATION WHERE YOU SPOKE TO MS. BROWN? >> YES. >> BUT SHE STATES SHE DOESN'T LIVE THERE. IT'S HER NEPHEW, DARREN WHO DOES? >> WELL, IT'S A VACANT LOT. SHE'S SAYING HER NEPHEW IS THE OWNER, AND I ADVISE HER ALL THREE INDIVIDUALS ARE THE OWNERS AND SHE'S ONE OF THE OWNERS, BUT SHE INSISTS SHE IS NOT THE OWNER. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING A NUANCE CONDITION EXIST IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCE. SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. THE NUANCE BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE CITY'S ABATEMENT PROGRAM. VIOLATORS WILL BE GINN SEVEN DAYS TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED, AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, 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 DATE THE VIOLATION CONTINUES. THE CITY IS TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUANCE CONDITION. COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. WITH 30 DAYS TO [9. Case Number: LTCL-2025-273 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: 1822 S 32nd St] APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> NEXT CASE IS LOT CLEARING 2025-273 AT 1822 SOUTH 32ND STREET. >> THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2025-273. THE VIOLATION LOCATION, 1822 SOUTH 32ND STREET. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING. ISSUE DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 11, 2025. SERVICE MET THE REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, POSTED AT PROPERTY. THE ISSUE DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 12, 2025. BY REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, AND POSTED AT PROPERTY. POSTING DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 12, 2025. LAST INSPECTION DATE WAS OCTOBER 11, 2025. THE OWNER IS -- NUANCES, LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS I WITNESSED IT. >> OFFICER, YOU PROVIDED THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION TO THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN SEPTEMBER 12, OCTOBER 2, OCTOBER 11. OF THIS YEAR, AND A COPY OF THE GREEN CARD. THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> THEY DO. >> IT THIS TIME THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> THANK YOU. I'LL -- I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE WITH THIS CASE? >> CAN WE TAKE A BRIEF RECESS? >> ARE THESE THE REST, THE REST OF HER CASES? WE HAVE ONE MORE WITH MS. DEBEVEC. CAN WE CALL THAT ONE UP? IF YOU DON'T MIND, THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE JUST PASSING THIS CASE? >> THAT'S FINE. >> SURE. >> OKAY. SO WE DIDN'T FINISH 273 YET? >> WE HAVE NOT FINISHED THAT. >> NO, WE HAVE NOT FINISHED THAT. SO WE'RE GOING TO JUMP TO HEATHER'S CASE? [1. Case Number: NOOP-2025-184 Investigating Officer: Heather Debevec Violation Location: 118 Maple Ave ] >> YES? >> OKAY. SO OUR NEXT CASE IS GOING TO BE NON-OP, NOOP-2025-184, AND THIS IS FOR 118 MAPLE AVENUE. THIS IS JUST A SIMPLE MOTION TO VACATE. >> OKAY, WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE MOTION TO VACATE? >> IN THIS CASE, THE CITY IS JUST REQUESTING THE CITY MAGISTRATE VACATE THE ORDER DETERMINING VIOLATION THAT WAS SIGNED AT THE PREVIOUS HEARING ON OCTOBER 1. >> DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE VACATION IS? OR MS. DEBEVEC? WAS THERE AN ERROR IN THE ORIGINAL -- >> WE'RE REQUESTING THE VACATE DUE TO THE FACT I NOTICED IN ONE [01:35:01] OF THE SIGNS OR ONE OF THE PHOTOS AFTER THE FACT THERE IS A NO TRESPASSING SIGN. THAT NO TRESPASSING SIGN WAS NOT THERE WHEN I ORIGINALLY CITED THE PROPERTY. IT POPPED UP SOMEWHERE IN THERE. I MISSED IT BECAUSE I'M TAKING MY PHOTOS BACK FROM A DISTANCE. IT'S UP ON THE ROOF LINE ABOVE THE CARPORT. THE CARPORT IS WHERE THAT CAR IS LOCATED. >> I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED WITH US. BUT JUST FOR THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE'S CLARIFICATION. WHY IS THAT IMPORTANT TO VACATE THIS? >> WELL, WITH THE NO TRESPASSING SIGN? WE HAVE TO RESPECT THAT SIGN, SO I HAVE ISSUED, OPENED A WHOLE OTHER CASE AS A REGULAR CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE WHERE AT SOME POINT IF IT IS NOT TAKEN CARE OF, THAT CASE WOULD BECOME BEFORE ONE OF THE MAGISTRATES AND FINES COULD BE INITIATED. >> AND THIS ONE DOES NOT HAVE FINES INITIATED, CORRECT? >> THIS ONE HAS NOTHING INITIATED. I NOTICED IT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE MAGISTRATE HEARING. I BROUGHT IT UP TO ISAAC. AND THAT SAME DAY WE DISCUSSED HAVING IT VACATED. >> AN ORDER DOESN'T ALLOW IT FROM THIS UNWITH, CORRECT? BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE CASE? >> I'M SORRY, I'M CONFUSED WITH THE QUESTION. >> THE NON-OP THAT ORDER DOES NOT ALLOW FOR DAILY FINES TO ACCRUE, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. THAT ONE WOULD REQUEST THAT WE GO IN AND WITH THE NO TRESPASSING SIGN. PROBABLY NOT A GOOD IDEA. >> OKAY, SO IT IS THE CITY'S REQUEST TO VACATE THIS ORDER? >> OKAY. I FIND THAT VACATING THIS ORDER WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY. WE WILL ENTER AN ORDER VACATING THAT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> WE TAKE A MOMENT? >> SURE. WE ARE IN RECESS. >> WE PUT THESE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO EVIDENCE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THESE INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. OFFICER KIRKLAND, I SHOULD SAY, CONTACT YOU, THE PROPERTY OWNER? >> NO, MA'AM. THE MAIL CAME BACK AS VACANT. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> OKAY, IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING A NUANCE CONDITION EXIST IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. AND THE NUANCE BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE CITY'S NUANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN SEVEN DAYS TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, BUSHES IN NOTICE OF THE 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. THE CITY IS TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUANCE CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, PLEASE? [10. Case Number: LTCL-2025-285 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: Orange Ave (2408-510-00001-000-1)] >> NEXT CASE IS LOT CLEARING 2025-285 AT ORANGE AVENUE. >> THIS IS CASE NUMBER LTCL-2025-285. VIOLATION LOCATION, ORANGE AVENUE. PARCEL I.D.2408-510-00001-000-1. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING ISSUE DATE FOR SEPTEMBER 13, 2025. NOV SERVICE MET, REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, POSTED AT PROPERTY. THE NTA ISSUED DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 16, 2025. SERVICE MET, REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, AND POSTED AT PROPERTY. THE POSTING DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 16, 2025. LAST INSPECTION DATE WAS OCTOBER 11, 2025. OWNERS ARE HAROLD AND HINSON ESTATE. AND WYNONA B. MARTIN. I DO HAVE PROPERTIES DEPICTING THE VIOLATION AS I WITNESSED IT. >> AND OFFICER, YOU GAVE A NOTICE OF THE VIOLATION FOR THEO PROPERTY OWNERS AS WELL AS COPIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN SEPTEMBER 16 AND OCTOBER 11. THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? [01:40:02] >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> YES, THEY DO. >> THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE AS CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> ANY CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS, MS. KIRKLAND? >> NO, MA'AM. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. >> IT IS THE COURT'S FINDING THAT A NUANCE CONDITION EXIST IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. THAT SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. THAT THE NUANCE BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITY'S NUANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN SEVEN DAYS TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND BUSHES TO THE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED IN NOTICE OF 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. AND THE CITY IS TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ABATE THE NUANCE CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. NEXT CASE, [12. Case Number: LTCL-2025-287 Investigating Officer: Charmaine Kirkland Violation Location: S 23rd St (2409-707-0006-000-3)] PLEASE? >> OUR LAST CASE TODAY IS LOT CLEARING 2025-287 AT SOUTH 23RD STREET. >> CASE NUMBER LTCL-2025-287. 287, I'M SORRY. CASE NUMBER LTCL-2025-287. VIOLATION LOCATION, SOUTH 23RD STREET. PARCEL I.D. NUMBER 2409-707-0006-000-3. THIS IS A LOT CLEARING. ISSUE DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 13, 2025. NOV SERVICE METHOD, REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, POSTED AT PROPERTY. THE NTA ISSUE DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 16, 2025. NTA SERVICE METHOD, REGULAR MAIL, CERTIFIED MAIL, POSTED AT PROPERTY. THE POSTING DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 16, 2025. THE LAST INSPECTION DATE WAS OCTOBER 11, 2025. THE OWNER IS MICHELLE DIAZ. VIOLATION IS 24-19, SUBSECTION 11, SUBSECTION B. LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR LESS THAN THREE ACRE PROPERTIES. I DO HAVE PHOTOS DEPICTING THE VIOLATION AS I WITNESSED IT. >> OFFICER, YOU PROVIDED THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN, SEPTEMBER 16, OCTOBER 2, AND OCTOBER 11. THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WERE THEY TAKEN BY YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> DO THEY TRULY DEPICT THE VIOLATION AS YOU OBSERVED IT? >> THEY DO. >> THIS TIME THE CITY WILL MOVE INTO EVIDENCE, CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> I'LL ACCEPT THIS INTO EVIDENCE OF CITY'S COMPOSITE ONE. >> OFFICER, HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONTACT WITH THE OWNER? >> NO, MA'AM. >> NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. IT IS THIS COURT'S FINDING A NUANCE CONDITION EXISTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. SUCH NUANCE CONDITION POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. AND THAT THE NUANCE BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITY'S NUANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN SEVEN DAYS TO CUT ALL GRASS AND WEEDS AS NEEDED AND TRIM ALL TREES, SHRUBS, BUSHES TO THE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED IN A 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 NUANCE CONDITION. THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE PROPERTY WITH 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. [a. IDENTIFICATION OF CASES IN COMPLIANCE OR RESCHEDULED] >> ALL RIGHT. SO FOR CASES AND COMPLIANCE, WE'RE RESCHEDULED. WE HAD CASE CE-2025-250 AT 815 ATLANTIC AVENUE. CE-2025-352 AT 1403 ORANGE AVENUE. CE-2025-386 AT 1205 SEAWAY DRIVE. CE-2025-356 AT 1311 ORANGE AVENUE. CE-2025-357 AT 5045 SOUTH US HIGHWAY 1. CE-2025-428, 103 MAPLE AVENUE. CE-2025-442 AT 203 MAPLE AVENUE. CE-2025-431 AT 109 MAPLE AVENUE. NON-ON, [01:45:05] 2025-196 AT 126 GARDEN AVENUE. NOOP-2025-261, 221 CITRUS AVENUE. 2025-212 AT 1505 CITRUS AVENUE. LOT CLEARINGS, 2025-295 AT 119 NORTH 11TH STREET. 2025-271 AT LOUISIANA AVENUE. 2025-240 AT A TO BE DETERMINED PARCEL. PARCEL NUMBER 2407-241-0001-000-3. COLD CASE, AT 1905 COLONIAL ROAD. NOOP-2025-AT 1505 CITRUS AVENUE. LOT CLEARING 2025-236 AT 1450 BELL AVENUE. LOT CLEARING 2025-281 AT NORTH 18TH STREET. LOT CLEARING 2025-282 AT 904 NORTH 18TH STREET. LOT CLEARING 2025-283 AT 908 NORTH 18TH STREET. CODE CASES, 2025-341 AT 1301 ORANGE AVENUE. 2025-410 AT 1006 SOUTH US HIGHWAY 1. 2025-351 AT 1901 ORANGE AVENUE. 2025-339 AT 2512 ORANGE AVENUE, UNIT A. 2025-340 AT 2512 ORANGE AVENUE UNIT B. LOT CLEARING 2025-259 AT 711 AVENUE B. NON-ON CASES, 2025-211 AT 1505 CITRUS AVENUE. AND 2025-219 AT 107 SOUTH 23RD STREET. FOR CASES REQUIRING A HEARING PER STATE STATUTE 162.12, NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE VIOLATORS CERTIFIED MAIL. IF THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED SIGNED, IT'S PLACED IN THE FILE. IF THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED UNSIGNED OR UNCLAIMED, AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE MAILING WITH THE NOTICE OF HEARING AND CLOSE IS SENT TO THE VIOLATOR REGULAR U.S. MAIL. 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A NOTICE OF HEARING IS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD IN CITY HALL. NOTICE OF HEARING IS POSTED AT THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WITH THE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING. IF THE GREEN CARD IS NOT RETURNED TO THE CODE ENFORCE WANT DEPARTMENT WITHIN TEN DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING, THE POSTING IS COMPLETED IN THE SAME MANNER AS IF THE CARD WAS RETURNED UNCLAIMED. FOR CASES NOT MANDATED BY STATE STATUTE, MAILING OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING ARE HANDLED IN THE SAME MANNER, STATED PRIOR. IF THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED UNSIGNED, UNCLAIMED, OR NOT RETURNED WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THE HEARING, A NOTICE OF HEARING IS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD IN CITY HALL. >> WE * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.