Dec 18, 2019 Special Magistrate Hearing

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:13]

>>> GOOD MORNING. YOU NEED TO KNOW THAT EVERYTHING WE DO IS BEING RECORDED LIFE ON THE LOCAL CITY OF FORT PIERCE TELEVISION STATION.

THE OTHER THING IS YOU ARE HERE BECAUSE YOU EITHER GOT A TRAFFIC CITATION OR YOU WANT CONTESTED OR YOU RECEIVED NOTICE THAT YOUR PROPERTY WAS POSSIBLY VIOLATION OF A CITY CODE OR ORDINANCE. YOU ARE GIVEN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME TO CORRECT IT IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SO AND WISH TO BE HEARD. FOR THOSE WISH TO BE HEARD WE WILL CALL YOUR CASE SHORTLY.

IN THE MEANTIME, PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR

ALL. >> ARE POLICE OFFICERS PLEASE

[A. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH TO DEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES]

>>THE CLERK: PLEASE RATE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

(THE PARTIES WERE SWORN.). >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: CALL

[B. IDENTIFICATION OF CASES IN COMPLIANCE OR RESCHEDULED]

CASE 5 J, 19-1859 IS A COMPLIANCE.

CASE 5 M, 19-2570 IS IN COMPLIANCE.

CASE 5 R 19-2029, IS IN COMPLIANCE.

CASE FIVE CASE 5U 19-1826 IS IN

COMPLIANCE. THAT IS IT. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU. OKAY. YOU CAN CALL THE CASES FOR THE PARTIES THAT ARE PRESENT. THE.

>> IF WE COULD HANDLE OFFICER MONTGOMERY'S CASES FIRST?

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: NO PROBLEM. ACTUALLY, I SHOULD DO THEM LAST. (LAUGHING)

[B. 19-1917 PK cont. from 12/11 Jaycee Park Shealy, Lisa Anne #4919 Montgomery]

>>THE CLERK: THIS IS CASE 19 1917 IS JC PARK. SHEALY.

>> HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW YOUR FILE IN CASE NO.: 19-1917?

>> YES I HAVE. >> REVIEW THE OFFICER WHO ISSUED THE CITATION IN THAT CASE NO.:?

>> I WAS. >> WHAT DID YOU ISSUE THE

CITATION. >> 7/14/ 2019.

>> OKAY. WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE VIOLATION YOU OBSERVED?

>> 12-204, PARKING VIOLATION. >> HOW WAS THE VEHICLE PARKED

IMPROPERLY? >> IT WAS PARKED ON A, MORE OR

LESS, A CROSSWALK. >> AND DID YOU TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS

OF THAT. >> I DID.

>> AND IS IT MORE THAN ONE PHOTOGRAPH OR SUGGEST ONE.

>> JUST ONE. >> DOES THAT PHOTOGRAPHS DEPICT

WHICH IS ON THAT DAY? >> YES, IT DOES.

>> OKAY. SPECIAL MAGISTRATE NOTING NO RESPONDENT PRESENT WE WOULD MOVE THE PHOTOGRAPHING AS

CITY'S COMPOSITE 1. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: I

WILL ACCEPT IT. >> IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT

TO SAY ABOUT THE PHOTOGRAPH? >> NO.

>> OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD?

>> NO. >> I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

[00:05:15]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THERE BEING NO FURTHER EVIDENCE, AND LISA AND SHEALY OR A REPRESENTATIVE FOR HER IS NOT PRESENT, BASED ON THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED, I FIND THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THAT LISA AND SHEALY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION.

I WILL FIND HER $78, WHICH INCLUDES A $50 FINE, A $10 ADMIN FAN AND A LATE FEE OF $18 FOR A TOTAL OF $70. SHE HAS 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. SHE NEEDS TO BE ADVISED THAT FAILURE TO PAY THAT TICKET MAY RESULT IN A TICKET BEING TRANSFERRED OVER TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE WHERE SHE COULD INCUR ADDITIONAL FEES AND COSTS.

[C. 19-1912 PK cont. from 12/11 South Causeway Park Perez, Susana & Pedro #4919 Montgomery]

>>THE CLERK: THIS IS CASE 19-1912 THE INCIDENT WAS SOUTH CAUSEWAY PARK.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OFFICER MONTGOMERY HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO RECEIPT -- REVIEW YOUR FILE IN CASE NO.: 19-19 12.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: DO NEED INVOLVEMENT?

>> ALL RIGHT. >>MS. DEBEVEC: YOU READY?

>> YES. >> DID YOU ISSUE THE CITATION

IN CASE NO.: 19-1912? >> I DID.

>> WHAT DATE. >> 1014 2019.

>> WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE VIOLATION.

>>. >> A PARKING VIOLATION.

>> HOW WAS IT PARKED IN -- ILLEGALLY?

>> IT WAS PARKED IN THE GRASS BY THE HANDICAP AREA.

>>. >> OKAY. DID YOU TAKE ANY

PHOTOGRAPHS A DAY? >> YES, HE DID.

>> MORE THAN ONE? >> THERE ARE TWO. THERE IS ONE

THAT I BLEW UP OF THE TAG. >> OKAY. IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT YOU HAVE THERE, DO THEY DEPICT WHAT YOU SAW THE DAY?

>> YES. >> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, NOTING THAT THERE APPEARS TO BE NO RESPONDENT PRESENT, WE WOULD MOVE THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND AS

CITY'S COMPOSITE 1. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: IT WILL BE ADMITTED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE 1.

>> IS THERE ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR YOU WANT TO SAY ABOUT THE PICTURES?

>> NOW. >> ANYTHING ELSE WANT TO ADD?

>> NOW. >> NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: SUZEANNA PEREZ NOR PEDRO PEREZ IS PRESENT BASED ON EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY PRESENTED, I FIND THAT THEY ARE IN VIOLATION OF CODE SECTION 10 - 23 COREL PARKING VIOLATION. I WILL FIND THEM THE $50 FINE PLUS $10 ADMINISTRATIVE FEE, PLUS A LATE FEE IN THE AMOUNT OF $18 FOR A TOTAL OF $70.

THEY HAVE 30 DAYS TO PAY. THE PARTY SHOULD ADVISE I SHOULD THEY FAIL TO PAY THIS AMOUNT, THAT THIS MATTER COULD BE TRANSFERRED OVER TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE WHERE THEY COULD INCUR ADDITIONAL FEES AND COSTS. THANK YOU. 30 DAYS TO APPEAL.

>> THANK YOU. >> MERRY CHRISTMAS.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: MERRY CHRISTMAS. NEXT CASE IS A NUISANCE ABATEMENT APPEAL.

[A. 19-2413 Nuis.Abatement Appeal 907 Avenue I M & D Property Professionals Chad Dawson ]

>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, WILL BE PRESENTING THIS CASE. THIS IS AN APPEAL. IT'S CASE NO.: 19-2413, 907 AVENUE I. THIS IS FOR A NUISANCE ABATEMENT. MR. HARRIS IS HERE ACTUALLY TO PRESENT HIS CASE. SO WE -- THIS OFFICER, CODE OFFICER CHAD DAWSON, HE SENT A LETTER SEPTEMBER 10, 2019 IN REFERENCE TO A VACANT HOME THAT NEEDED TO BE SECURED. THE PROPERTY WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE. SO WE WENT AHEAD AND DID THE JOB TO ONE OF OUR CONTRACTORS TO DO THE WORK.

BASICALLY, MR. HARRIS IS GOING TO CONTINUE WITH THIS CASE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. SIR, WOULD YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, STATE YOUR NAME AND

BE SWORN. >> BRUCE HARRIS.

>>THE CLERK: (THE RESPONDENT WAS SWORN IN.).

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THE ALLEGATIONS?

>> WELL, THERE'S A LITTLE BUILDUP OF WHAT HAPPENED HERE. AFTER THE HURRICANE CAME ABOUT, I WENT TO GO CHECK ON THE HOUSE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: WHICH HURRICANE?

>> THE ONE A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. THE MOST RECENT ONE.

I WENT TO GO CHECK ON THE HOUSE AND I FOUND THAT IT HAD BEEN BURGLARIZED. THE FRONT WINDOW WAS BROKEN AND SOMEBODY HAD ENTERED THE HOUSE TO WORK WRECKS IN THE WINDOW. -- IN

[00:10:07]

I FILED A POLICE REPORT. SO WHEN I WAS THERE, A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE OF THE OFFICERS TOLD ME -- HE SAID I WOULD NOT FIX THE WINDOW AND TO GET THE TENANT BACK IN THEIR BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE BROKEN BACK -- BROKEN AGAIN.

>> THAT'S WHAT WE DID. WE BOARDED UP THE WINDOW.

ALL RIGHT. THEN I GET A LETTER ABOUT -- FROM FORT PIERCE I KNOW SEAGRASS HAD NOT BEEN CUT.

IT WAS UP THERE. MY LANDSCAPER USUALLY TAKES CARE OF THAT. SO THE GRASS WAS TALL. I GET A LETTER FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT FROM FORT PIERCE. I MISUNDERSTOOD THE ACTUAL LETTER. I JUST ASSUMED -- A LOOK AT A FAST ASSUMED IT WAS FOR HIGH GRASS.

SO I SET MY -- I CALL MY LANDSCAPER AND SAID PLEASE CUT THE GRASS. IT'S GOTTA BE DONE BY THIS WEEKEND. I FORGOT THE EXACT DATE BUT IT WAS THAT FOLLOWING MONDAY.

SO WE WENT AND TOOK CARE OF THE GRASS. THEN I GET THE LETTER BACK SAYING THAT WE FILED A $700 LIEN ON YOUR PROPERTY AND I CALLED UP AND SAID I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

WHAT NEEDS TO BE SECURED? AND THEY SAID THE HOUSE WASN'T SECURED.

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THAT IS POSSIBLE. I'VE GOT -- ON EVERY WINDOW OF THE HOUSE THERE ARE BARS ON EXCEPT FOR THREE OF THEM. THOSE WINDOWS ARE FINE. THE FRONT DOOR AND THE TWO DOORS WE CHANGE THE LOCKS ON BECAUSE SOMEONE TRIED TO BREAK INTO THE LOCKBOX. THE FRONT AND SIDE DOORS WERE FINE. THEY HAD NO LOCKS ON IT.

THE WINDOW THAT WAS BROKE IN THE BURGLARY WAS BOARDED UP. AND SO, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW IT IS NOT A SECURE RESIDENCE. SO WHEN I RECEIVED THIS, I BASICALLY WAS ARGUING THE FACT I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS NOT A SECURE RESIDENCE. HE LEFT THE HOUSE YOU LOCK YOUR DOORS AND WINDOWS USE ASSUME IT'S SECURE. THERE WAS NOTHING UNSECURE ABOUT THE HOUSE. FOR THEM TO DO WHAT THEY DID.

I LEFT ALONE TO THE SEARING AND WENT TO LOOK AT IT. THEY HAVE SECURED THE HOUSE TO THE POINT WHERE I CAN'T GET IN MY OWN HOUSE ANYMORE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: WHO IS THEY?

>> I DON'T KNOW. HOWEVER THE CITY HIRED. I CAN EVEN GET IN MY OWN HOUSE NOW. I WAS IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING IT READY TO GET A TAN IN THERE I WANTED TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE HEARING, BUT I CAN'T GET IN THE HOUSE. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT TOOL I HAVE TO FIND TO UNSCREW WHAT THEY HAVE ON MY FRONT DOOR. IT'S A PERFECTLY GOOD FRONT DOOR. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR HAVING TO GO AND DO WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO MY HOUSE TO THE POINT WHERE I CAN EVEN

GET IN MY OWN HOUSE NOW. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE:

ANYTHING FURTHER? >> I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENT OF SAYING IT'S NOT A SECURE HOUSE. I KNOW YOU WILL BOARD UP YOUR WINDOWS AND DOORS WHEN YOU LEAVE EVERY MORNING. I DO NOT KNOW WHY I SHOULD BE EXPECTED TO DO THE SAME THING.

IT'S A SECURE, LOCKED HOUSE. WHAT THEY TOLD ME THAT THEY SAID IT WAS A SAFETY ISSUE. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THAT IS A SAFETY ISSUE UNLESS IT'S A BURGLAR TRYING TO BREAK INTO MY HOUSE. THAT'S NOT REALLY -- IT SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE OR A CONCERN OF A HOMEOWNER IN FORT PIERCE. IT'S A CRIME ISSUE, I DON'T SEE IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER THE QUESTION OF A, WHAT WAS THE INITIAL ISSUE WITH THE HOUSE AND B, WHY REMEDIAL ACTION WAS TAKEN.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. SO SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, WE DO HAVE AN ORDINANCE, WHICH IS 1646- 46 AND 48. IT'S A NUISANCE ORDINANCE. IT SAYS ANY BUILDING OR STRUCTURES, ANY VACANT, NEEDS TO BE SECURED. SO THERE WAS A COUPLE OF BROKEN WINDOWS AND I THINK ONE BROKEN WINDOW. AND BASICALLY, THE DOORS JUDGMENT PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO GET THROUGH THE DOORS. I MEAN THE FRONT AND BACK DOOR. SO WE DID SEND A LETTER, SEPTEMBER 10, 2019. AND WE DID NOT GET A RESPONSE FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER. SO WE WENT AHEAD AND PLACED AT THE CASE ON A BID AND WAS SECURED BY ONE OF OUR CONTRACTORS.

AT THAT POINT, YOU KNOW, YES, WE CHARGE THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR OUR EXPENSES. BUT WE NEVER HAD ANY -- HAD ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER AFTER THE FACT.

>> CAN I RESPOND TO THAT? >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YOU NEED TO HOLD ON. ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> I'M SORRY? NO. I WAS TRYING TO GO AHEAD AND LOOK AT THE PHOTOS. HOPEFULLY,

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOS.

>> AT -- DO YOU WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE PHOTOS WE HAVE, SIR? QUICK SURE. THE BROKEN GLASS ONE -- IT WAS BURGLARIZED. I UNDERSTAND THAT. I DON'T SEE HOW ANYONE

[00:15:02]

>> PAGE 2 ALL OF THEM THEM WILL PUT THEM IN EVIDENCE AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT EACH ONE, OKAY?

>> ALL RIGHT. THAT WINDOW THERE WAS NOT BROKEN BEFORE. SO THAT HAS BEEN BURGLARIZED AGAIN WHICH I'M NOT AWARE OF. I COULDN'T TELL YOU BECAUSE I CAN'T GET BACK INTO MY OWN

HOUSE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> WE MARKED THE PHOTOS AS CITY'S COMPOSITE 1.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. I'LL ADMIT THEM.

(AWAY FROM MIC) QUICK SINCE WE ONLY HAVE ONE COPY, IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT THE PARTIES WOULD LIKE TO SAY ABOUT IT, I ASKED THAT THEY STAND NEXT TO THE RESPONDENT.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THAT'S FINE. I NOTED THAT THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT DATES ON THE PHOTOGRAPH. WHEN YOU TALK TO HIM ABOUT IT, THESE IDENTIFY THE DATES.

>> YES, MA'AM. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> FROM OVER THERE? YOU WANT

TO -- >> WE WILL COME TO YOU.

>> CAN WE HAVE A MOMENT TO LOOK THROUGH? (COUNSEL SPEAKING TO ONE ANOTHER.)

>> SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, I AM ALSO GOING TO ASK CODE OFFICER CHAD DAWSON, BECAUSE HE WAS THE ONE THAT DID THE INITIAL INSPECTION.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

>> YOU WANT CHAD TO TALK ABOUT THE PICTURES?

>> YES. HE WAS ONE THAT TOOK THE PHOTOS.

(WHEREUPON, OFFICER DAWSON ENTERED THE COURTROOM.). P

>>MS. DEBEVEC: I'M GOING TO TRY TO SPLIT THE PHOTOS BETWEEN TWO PARTIES AND WE WILL GO DATE BY

DATE. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

THANK YOU. >>MS. DEBEVEC: OFFICER DAWSON, FIRST OF ALL, WERE YOU THE INITIAL CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER ASSIGNED TO THIS CASE

PRIOR TO THE APPEAL? >>MR. DAWSON: YES, MA'AM.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: DID YOU INVESTIGATE THE CASE FROM THE BEGINNING.

>>MR. DAWSON: YES, MA'AM. >>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. DID YOU TAKE THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT ARE COUNSCITY'S COMPOSITE 1?

>>MR. DAWSON: YES, MA'AM. >>MS. DEBEVEC: I'M GOING TO START WITH THE AUTOGRAPHS ON THE 18TH. WALK THROUGH THE PHOTOS AND TELL US WHAT YOU IDENTIFIED AS A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.

>>MR. DAWSON: IN THE STATE WE WERE GOING AROUND THE BUILDINGS TO SEE FOR VACANT BUILDINGS.

WHEN I GOT TO THIS WHEN I NOTICED THE GRASS WAS HIGH BUT ALSO, AS IT SHOWS IN THE PICTURE, THE WINDOW WAS OUT. LIKE I SAY, WITH THE CITY ORDINANCE, IF ANY BUILDING IS VACANT THE CITY REQUIRES IT TO BE SECURED.

>> YOU SAID AUGUST 18. THIS PICTURE IS AUGUST 15.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: EXCUSE ME. AUGUST 15.

>> THE 15TH IS CORRECT? >>MS. DEBEVEC: FOR CLARITY, THE

[00:20:01]

>>MR. DAWSON: YES, MA'AM. >>MS. DEBEVEC: WERE THOSE DATES

ACCURATE? X YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE AUGUST 15 PHOTOGRAPHS?

>>MR. DAWSON: YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: PLEASE PROCEED.

>>MR. DAWSON: SOME WINDOWS AT THE BARS ON THEM WHICH WERE SECURED. SO I FOUND THREE WINDOWS THAT WASN'T SECURED AND I CITED TO BE SECURED.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: THE THREE WINDOWS THAT WERE NOT SECURED, WHAT ABOUT THE MADE THEM NOT SECURE? WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THEM?

>>MR. DAWSON: THE OTHER ONES HAD BARS ON THEM THEY DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING BUT JUST THE GLASS AND JUST LIKE HE STATED AS FAR AS THE WINDOW IN FRONT THEY COULD EASILY BUSTED OUT AND GET THEM. SO BY THOSE NOT BEING SECURED TO THAT STANDARD THAT'S WHY WE CITED THE PROPERTY BECAUSE SOMEONE COULD EASILY BREAK IN BECAUSE IT'S NOT SECURED.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: WAS THERE DAMAGE THE WINDOWS?

>>MR. DAWSON: THE ONLY DAMAGE WINDOW WAS TO THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. WHAT KIND OF DAMAGE WAS DONE TO THAT WINDOW?

>> IT LOOKS LIKE SOMEONE BUSTED IT OUT WITH A ROCK OR SOMETHING AN OBJECT, BUT IT WAS BUSTED

OUT. >>MS. DEBEVEC: THERE WAS AT LEAST ONE WINDOW TO THE HOUSE THAT WAS BROKEN.

>>MR. DAWSON: YES. >> CAN I RESPOND NOW.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: CAN I FINISH MY QUESTIONINGS?

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. SO HAVE YOU TALKED ABOUT ALL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE TAKEN IN AUGUST. HIS OR ANYTHING ELSE OF NOTE THAT YOU WANTED TO DISCUSS WITH US.

>> NO, MA'AM. >>MS. DEBEVEC: LET'S MOVE TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE TAKEN IN DECEMBER -- SEPTEMBER. CAN YOU TELL US THE PRECISE DATE THAT APPEARS ON THE PHOTOGRAPH?

>> THE FOURTH -- THIS IS NOT SEPTEMBER.

>> FOR ANY PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN IN SEPTEMBER?

>> THERE AT THE BOTTOM. I'M SORRY THERE. THERE WERE.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. WHAT IS THE DATE STAMP.

>> SEPTEMBER 23 OF 2019. >>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING OF NOTE IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH? WALK US THROUGH THAT ONE.

>>MR. DAWSON: THE WINDOW IN FRONT THAT WAS BUSTED OH, I DID SEE SOMEONE PUT PLYWOOD ON THE INSIDE OF THE HOUSE. THE OTHER WINDOWS WERE STILL THE SAME, BUT BASICALLY, THAT'S WHEN I SAW WHEN I WENT OUT AND PLAYED THAT -- REVIEW THAT IN SEPTEMBER.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. >> MAY I? SPECIAL MAGISTRATE WE DO REQUIRE WHEN SOMEONE IS SECURING A STRUCTURE, NOT BEHIND THE WINDOW OR INSIDE THE

WINDOWS. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: SO OFFICER DAWSON COMMONLY SEPTEMBER PHOTOGRAPH THAT YOU REFERENCE, THE PLYWOOD WAS ON THE INSIDE, NOT THE OUTSIDE?

>>MR. DAWSON: YES, MA'AM. THAT'S CORRECT.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: WHETHER ANY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN IN SEPTEMBER 2019 THAT ARE OF

NOTE? >>MR. DAWSON: YES, MA'AM.

THERE WAS. >>MS. DEBEVEC: TELL US ABOUT

THAT. >>MR. DAWSON: JUST AS THE WINDOW, WE ALSO REQUIRE THAT THE DOORS BE SECURED AS WELL. AND THE DOORS WASN'T SECURED.

BUT THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO PHOTOS -- THE ONLY PHOTOS THAT WE HAVE IN SEPTEMBER WAS A WINDOW. STILL NOT SECURED IN THE DOORS ON BOTH SIDE WERE SECURED.

>>MR. DAWSON: WHAT WAS THE ISSUE WITH THE DOORS?

>>MR. DAWSON: THE DOOR -- IT'S JUST LIKE THE WINDOW IT HAS TO BE BOARDED UP. IT'S JUST LIKE THE WINDOW ITSELF IT HAS TO BE BOARDED UP. EVERY ENTRY TO THAT PROPERTY HAS TO BE SECURED, DOORS, WINDOWS, EVERYTHIG.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. DID YOU TAKE THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE ALSO DATED IN OCTOBER?

>>MR. DAWSON: YES, MA'AM. I DID.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: CAN YOU TELL US THE DATE STAMPS THAT APPEAR ON THE OCTOBER PHOTOGRAPHS?

>>MR. DAWSON: OCTOBER 4 OF 2019.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. AND CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH THE OCTOBER PHOTOGRAPH OR PHOTOGRAPHS AND TELL US WHAT IS SIGNIFICANT ABOUT THOSE?

>>MR. DAWSON: THESE PHOTOS ARE WHEN OUR CONTRACT -- CONTRACTORS GO OUT THERE AND DO THE WORK AND THEY SEND US PICTURES BACK AND WE STILL GO OUT AND INSPECTED, JUST IN CASE, MAKE SURE THE WORK IS DONE CORRECTLY. SO THE PHOTOS THAT WERE TAKEN ON 4 OCTOBER SHOWS THAT THE WINDOW AND THE DOORS ARE PROPERLY SECURED BY THE CITY.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. WHY DID THE CITY HIRE A CONTRACTOR TO WORK ON THE HOUSE?

>>MR. DAWSON: SAY WHAT? >>MS. DEBEVEC: WHY DID THE CITY HIRE -- YOU DID NOT GO OUTBOARD OF THE HOUSE YOURSELF?

>>MR. DAWSON: NO. >>MS. DEBEVEC: WHY DID THE CITY

DO IT. >>MR. DAWSON: IF THE OWNER DOES NOT TAKE INITIATIVE AND DO WHAT THE CITY REQUEST WE HIRE SOMEONE TO GO OUT THERE CORRECT

THE VIOLATIONS. >>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. DID YOU

SEND A LETTER TO THE OWNER. >>MR. DAWSON: YES, MA'AM. I DI

. >>MS. DEBEVEC: FOR THE SECURING

OF THE HOUSE? >>MR. DAWSON: I DID. I POSTED IT AS WELL. I SAY THEY HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DAYS TO DO IT AND IF THEY DON'T DO IT THAN

THE CITY WILL MOVE FORWARD. >>MS. DEBEVEC: YOU DID NOT

[00:25:06]

RECEIVE A RESPONSE, CORRECT? >> THE ONLY INFORMATION I RECEIVED WAS THAT HE RECEIVED THE LETTER ADMITTED TO THE DESTINATION AND THAT WAS IT.

HE SIGNED IT AND LET US KNOW -- WHICH LET US KNOW THAT HE WAS AT THE -- HE KNEW ABOUT THE

VIOLATION. >>MS. DEBEVEC: RETURN RECEIPT?

>>MR. DAWSON: YES, MA'AM. >>MS. DEBEVEC: BUT YOU NEVER

GOT A LETTER OR A PHONE CALL. >>MR. DAWSON: NO, MA'AM.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: >>MS. DEBEVEC: IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU THINK IS IMPORTANT FOR THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE TO KNOW THAT I DID

NOT ASK ABOUT? >>MR. DAWSON: AND COUNT.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: CAN I ASK IF STAFF HAS ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS JUST ONE QUICK STATEMENT. LIKE OFFICER DAWSON STATED BEFORE, THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED WITH OUR SIGN AND NUISANCE SIGNS WHICH STATED WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH IT WAS BASICALLY TO SECURE THE STRUCTURE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

>>MR. JUL >> CAN I RESPOND TO THE

PHOTOGRAPHS NOW? >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YES

ONE SECOND. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: NOW

YOU MAY RESPOND. >> SO HE ADMITTED THAT THERE WAS ONE BROKEN WINDOW. THAT IS CORRECT THAT'S THE ONE I FOUND THAT HAD BEEN BURGLARIZED.

THAT'S IN HIS PREVIOUS PICTURE. NO QUESTION THAT WAS A BROKEN WINDOW. THAT'S WHAT THEY BROKEN. THERE WAS A ROCK AND A BRICK THAT YOU COULD SEE LAYING IN THERE. THAT'S CLEARLY WHERE THEY BROKEN UP. THE OUTSIDE OF THE HOUSE HAS LIKE A STONE FACDE AROUND IT. WE WENT TO GO PUT UP THE PLYWOOD -- THE OFFICER SAID JUST CLOSE UP THE HOLE SO THEY COULD NOT GO THROUGH THE WINDOW. THAT'S WHAT WE DID.

BUT 2 THERE'S NO WAY TO SECURE A PIECE OF SOME PLYWOOD WITHOUT TAPPING INTO STONE AND DOING DAMAGE THE HOUSE. SO WE PUT IT ON THE INSIDE. I WASN'T AWARE THAT THIS WAS EVEN GOING ON.

I DID RECEIVE THE LETTER. I ADMIT TO THAT BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS FOR DIGRESS. SO I DID NOT SEND A THING BACK SAYING THAT WAS SIGN ACKNOWLEDGING THIS BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS FOR HIGH GRASS. I WOULD NOT HAVE EVEN THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS AN ISSUE. AND FOR THEM TO SAY THAT I A PERFECTLY SOLID LOCKED DOOR IS NOT SECURE BAFFLES ME.

EVERYBODY LEAVES HER HOUSE AND LOCKED THE WINDOWS AND DOORS YOU EXPECT YOUR HOUSE TO BE SECURE. HOW IS THIS DIFFERENT? I UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE SAYING THAT THEY POSTED THE PROPERTY, BUT THERE'S NO ONE LIVING THERE SO NO ONE SAW. ALL THIS HAPPENED IN THE TIME FROM WHEN I RECEIVED THE NOTICE SAYING IT WAS FOR GRASS TO WHAT IT WAS DONE, BASICALLY.

SO THERE'S NO ARGUMENT ABOUT THE PICTURES EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT WHY DOES HOUSE THAT IS SECURE NEED TO BE FURTHER SECURED BY THE CITY? IT MAKES NO SENSE TO THE POINT WHERE I CAN EVEN LEAVE MY OWN HOUSE NOW.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: BIC THE LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO HIM REGARDING THE PROPERTY?

>> WHEN I WAS READING DOWN THROUGH THIS, -- WHEN I READ THROUGH IT I READ THROUGH QUICK ASSUMING IT WAS THE GRASS. SO, I DID -- I ADMIT, I RECEIVED THE LETTER. NO QUESTION ABOUT IT BUT AGAIN I THOUGHT HAD TO DO WITH THE TALL GRASS. I THOUGHT I SAW SOMETHING ABOUT A -- A POSSIBLE REASON TO GET A LETTER WOULD BE TALL GRASS. I'M NOT SEEING IT NOW. I MISUNDERSTOOD THE LETTER THINKING IT WAS ABOUT TALL GRASS AND THEN IT SAYS ON THEIR THAT THE PROPERTY IS A THREAT TO LIFE AND EVERYTHING ELSE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. HOW IS THAT? HOW IS THIS A THREAT TO ANY LIFE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD UNLESS IT'S ANOTHER CRIMINAL, AND A BREAK INTO MY HOUSE AGAIN. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE BASIS OF THIS NOT BEING A SECURE HOUSE.

>> CAN I SAY SOMETHING? >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: WAIT UNTIL HE FINISHED AND THEN OFFICER DAWSON WILL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

>> THE ONLY WAY TO GET INTO THAT HOUSE WAS TO BREAK INTO IT AGAIN SO I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW IT IS NOT A SECURE RESIDENCE. YOU HAVE TO TRUST WINDOWS AND DOORS YOU LOCK THEM OR NOT HAVE -- IT'S JUST A MATTER OF -- IT'S A CRIME ISSUE. IT'S NOT A SECURITY ISSUE. OR HOW IT IS A THREAT TO ANYONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

[00:30:02]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO HOLD ONTO THIS FOR A MINUTE. THANK YOU.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ANYTHING FURTHER SIR?

>> HAND THEM UP SIR. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE:

ANYTHING FURTHER? >> THAT'S ALL.

>> OFFICER DAWSON? >> I WAS JUST GOING TO REPLY TO WHAT HE SAID THAT WHEN HE SAW THAT IT WAS A SAFETY ISSUE TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, SO JUST AS HE STATED, WHEN IT IS BROKEN INTO HE HAS TO CALL THE POLICE TO GET SOMEONE TO GO IN THERE AND MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR. WE HAVE A LOT OF PLACES AND PROPERTIES THAT PEOPLE BREAK AND WHETHER HIS DRUG USE OR PEOPLE THAT DO NOT HAVE A HOME IN IT CAN CAUSE SOME TYPE OF SAFETY ISSUE BECAUSE THE HOUSE RIGHT BESIDE THAT ONE, THE GUY HAS LITTLE KIDS AND IF SOMEONE WENT IN THERE THAT WASN'T, YOU KNOW, A GOOD PERSON OR WHATEVER ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN. THAT'S TO ANSWER HIS QUESTION THAT'S THE REASON WE SAY THAT IS A SAFETY ISSUE TO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE ANYONE CAN GO IN THERE.

>> EXACTLY BUT IT'S NOT MY -- IS NOT MY PROBLEM THAT THE PARENTS OF THE KIDS COULD GO IN THERE. HOW IS THAT MY PROBLEM AND HOW IS THAT A SAFETY ISSUE WHEN MY HOUSE IS LOCKED AND SECURED? IF PEOPLE WANT TO BREAK IN YOUR HOUSE AND THEY GET CAUGHT DOING SO THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BROKEN IN. IF KIDS MESS AROUND THAT'S BAD PARENTING. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND

HOW THAT FALLS ON ME. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

ANYTHING FURTHER, SIR? >> NO, MA'AM.. THAT'S ALL.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: CITY?

>> NO, MA'AM. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ANY FURTHER EVIDENCE? HOW MUCH WAS THE BILL TO THE CONTRACTOR HIRED BY THE CITY?

>> CAN I HAVE JUST A MOMENT? >> TAKE YOUR TIME.

>> THE TOTAL WAS $750. >> 650 AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE OF

100. >> A WEEKEND SHOW THAT AS WELL TO THE APPELLANT AND PUT THAT IN EVIDENCE.

>> I'VE SEEN IT. YES. THANK YOU.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THIS WAS DATED 10/25/19, FOR THE RECORD. DO YOU WANT TO ADMIT THIS AS EXHIBIT -- THIS WILL BE 3, BELIEVERS YOUR NEXT EXHIBIT.

>> I THINK IT WOULD BE THREE. THANK YOU, HEATHER. ANYTHING FURTHER? IS.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: NO, MA'AM. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: BASED ON THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE -- I WILL CITE A FEW THINGS HERE, NOT MANY, BUT HOW LONG -- THE HOUSE IS VACANT. THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT. AND YOU DID GO OUT AND ATTEMPTED TO SECURE SOME OF THE WINDOWS AND DOORS.

>> THE ONLY WINDOW THAT WAS BROKEN, YES.

>> BUT YOU DID PICK A COMMENT STATING THAT SOMEBODY CALLED YOU AND SAID THE GRASS WAS A MILE HIGH. YOU WENT OUT AND TOOK CARE OF THE GRASS?

>> WHEN I WAS THERE FOR THE -- FOR THE POLICE REPORT. I WANTED TO CHECK ON IT THAT'S

WHEN I REALIZED IT WAS TALL. >> THAT'S NOT BEFORE THE COURT

BUT CERTAINLY, >> I DON'T THINK THAT EVER CAME INTO PLAY. THAT WAS MY ASSUMPTION WHEN I RECEIVED THE LETTER. THE TIMING WAS ALWAYS THERE IN TWO WEEKS LATER I GOT A LETTER FOR A CODE VIOLATION. I JUST ASSUMED IT WAS FOR TALL

GRASS. >> THIS TIES INTO YOUR COMMENT.

THIS IS FLORIDA. THIS KIND OF A RAINY SEASON. AND SO GRASS NEEDS TO BE CUT EVERY TWO WEEK . IF THAT'S THE CASE, YOU'VE GOT SOMEBODY MOWING THE GRASS, I WOULD ASSUME THAT WHOEVER TAKES CARE OF YOUR LAWN WOULD HAVE ALSO NOTIFIED YOU, QUITE POSSIBLY THAT THERE WAS SOME THINGS ON OR IN THE STRUCTURE THAT NEEDED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF.

>> I DON'T THINK HE HAD BEEN THERE SINCE THE TIME THIS HAPPENED BECAUSE THE GRASS WAS TALL. THIS HAPPENED BETWEEN THE TIME HE WAS THERE AND WHEN ALL THIS CAME ABOUT.

>> THE THING IS, AS A PROPERTY OWNER -- I SEE THIS ALL THE TIME, PEOPLE BUY HOUSES, RENTAL HOUSES ENDO, BASICALLY, KEEP UP WITH WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE HOUSES. THE HOUSES YOU WORSE.

THIS MATTER CAME TO MR. DAWSON ON AUGUST 15. THE CASE WAS INITIATED SEPTEMBER 10. A LETTER WAS SENT TO YOU, CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED. ON SEPTEMBER 10.

YOU SIGNED FOR IT. AND YOU STATED YOU THOUGHT IT WAS FOR GRASS, BUT THE LETTER CLEARLY

[00:35:06]

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> 16-48, ALSO HIGHLIGHTED THE NUISANCE DEFINITIONS. THEN THERE'S ANOTHER SECTION -- AND IT IS IN BOLD, BLACK CAPITAL LETTERS SAYING THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS MUST BE TAKEN TO REMEDY THESE VIOLATIONS. AND AGAIN, IN DETAILS WHAT YOU NEEDED TO DO. AND THEN THE PARAGRAPH UNDERNEATH THAT UNDERLINED, THE ENTIRE PARAGRAPH TELLS YOU WHAT YOU -- WHAT ACTIONS YOU NEED TO DO IF YOU WANTED TO CONTEST THIS. AND AGAIN, APPARENTLY, YOU DID NOT TAKE ANY ACTIONS, THE CITY -- AND YOURSELF CALL THE POLICE BECAUSE SOMEONE HAD THROWN A ROCK THROUGH ONE OF THE WINDOWS AND BROKEN IT. SO THE CITY THEN HIRED A PRIVATE CONTRACTOR TO CORRECT THE PROBLEMS AND ALSO TOLD YOU THAT WHAT -- WHAT THEY WOULD DO THAT IF YOU DID NOT TAKE ACTION TO CORRECT THIS MATTER. SO NOW, HERE WE ARE YOU ARE CONTESTING TO THE $750

-- THAT THE CITY HAS IMPOSED. >> CAN I SAY ONE MORE THING?

>> SURE. >> MY POINT IN ALL THIS IS SAYING THAT THE HOUSE IS NOT SECURE WHEN IT'S LOCKED. HOW IS THIS ANY DIFFERENT THAN YOU COMING TO WORK AND SOMEONE THROWS A ROCK THROUGH YOUR WINDOW AND SING YOUR HOUSES AND SECURE EITHER. THERE'S GOT TO BE ALIGNED SOMEWHERE BETWEEN CRIMINALITY AND DOING WHAT'S RIGHT. AND I JUST DON'T SEE HOW THIS IS ANY DIFFERENT FROM ME VERSUS ANYBODY ELSE SITTING IN THE ROOM HOW IF YOU DON'T BORE UP YOUR HOUSE --

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YOU RECEIVED THE LETTER.

>> UNDERSTAND THAT. I MISUNDERSTOOD.

>> IGNORANCE IS NO EXCUSE AND LAW.

>> OKAY. >> YOU RECEIVED THE LETTER DELINEATING THOSE ISSUES THAT NEEDED TO BE CORRECTED IN ORDER TO TAKE AWAY THE SO-CALLED NUISANCE DESIGNATION. THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED.

>> SO HOW CAN I -- IF I WILL WOULD HAVE KNOWN THIS WAS FOR WHAT IT WAS, HOW COULD I POSSIBLY FIX THIS PROBLEM? I HAD A POLICE OFFICER TOLD ME I WOULD NOT FIX THAT WINDOW INTO YOU HAVE THE TENANT COMING AND I BOARDED UP. THEY HAVE IT BOARDED IT UP SO TIGHT THAT I CAN'T WALK MY DOOR. I'VE GOT TO REMOVE WAS DONE TO WALK IN THE HOUSE.

>> YOU WORK WITH THE CITY. I THINK THEY'LL HELP YOU GET INSIDE THE HOUSE. BUT FIRST AND FOREMOST, WE LIVE IN A COUNTRY WHERE, IN GOVERNMENT, IN A COURT OF LAW, THAT NOTICE IS CRUCIAL TO ANY CASE PROCEEDING BEFORE ANY TRIBUNAL, NOTICE. YOU WERE GIVEN NOTICE.

THAT THERE WAS. >> YES I WAS. I AGREE THAT.

>> YOU WERE GIVEN NOTICE THAT THERE WAS A VIOLATION. AND WHAT YOU NEEDED TO DO AND YOU SIGNED FOR THAT AND DID NOTHIN . SO THE CITY HAD TO GO IN AND DO WHAT THEY NEEDED TO DO TO SECURE THE HOUSES. LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING, MANY YEARS AGO, -- AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS INVOLVED THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER THIS, BUT IT WAS SUMMERTIME. AND SOME KIDS ALL HANGING OUT TOGETHER, SMALL CHILDREN, ELEMENTARY AGE CHILDREN, AND THESE CHILDREN CLIMBED OVER A FENCE AND GOT INTO THE NEIGHBORS POOL AND SEVERAL OF THOSE CHILDREN DROWN. THE NEIGHBOR HAD TAKEN EVERY PRECAUTION HE OR SHE COULD HAVE, TO KEEP THOSE CHILDREN OUT OF THAT POOL. THE POINT OF MAKING THIS EVEN UNDER THE BEST OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE BEST INTENTIONS, ACCIDENT SOMETIMES, LIKE THE ONE I JUST MENTIONED, DEVASTATING PACCIDENTS HAPPEN. SO, IN YOUR CASE, YOU READ THE LETTER. THE ASSIGNED FORD AND YOU DID NOTHING. AND YOU SAID YOU THOUGHT IT WAS ABOUT THE GRASS.

>> I SURE DID. >> AND I'LL GO BACK TO MY SCHOOLDAYS, TO, I TOOK A TEST IN FIFTH GRADE, I'LL NEVER FORGET IT. THE TEACHER TOLD US BEFORE WE FINISHED -- BEFORE WE STARTED THE TEST, TO READ EVERY QUESTION. YOU KNOW WHAT? THOSE OF US WHO THOUGHT WE WERE SMART, WE STARTED ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS. AND GUESS WHAT? WHAT WE GOT TO THE LAST QUESTION, YOU KNOW WHAT IT SAID? DO NOT ANSWER ANY OF THE

ABOVE QUESTIONS. (LAUGHING). >> ONLY ONE STUDENT GOT IT

[00:40:07]

I FIND -- I WILL DENY YOUR REQUEST FOR THE ABATEMENT.

>> HOW DO I APPEAL IT? >> THAT THEY GET 30 DAYS.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YOU HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL IT.

>> THE SAME PEOPLE OR THROUGH DIFFERENT COURT.

>> IT WILL GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. IT WILL NOT COME BACK BEFORE ME.

>> CAN I GET INFORMATION ABOUT THAT.

>> THERE WILL BE IN ORDER. >> GREAT.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT CASE IS CASE NO.: 4D, 19-1646 117 N. 14TH STREET, GOMEZ.

[D. 19-1646 AC 117 N 14th Street Gomez- Soto, Sarah Ricardo Pellot]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING. >>MS. DEBEVEC: SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, CAN I PROCEED WITH THE OFFICER?

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YOU MAY.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW YOUR FILE?

>> YES, MA'AM. >>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. I KNOW YOU WERE SWORN IN BY CAN YOU TELL US AGAIN YOUR NAME AND OCCUPATION?

>> RICARDO POE LOT FORT PIERCE ANIMAL CONTROL.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: DID YOU ISSUE A CITATION IN CONNECTION WITH THIS CASE?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES, MA'AM. >>MS. DEBEVEC: WHAT DID YOU

ISSUE THE CITATION? >>MR. PELLOT: JUNE 5, 2019.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. TELL US ABOUT YOUR INVESTIGATION?

>>MR. PELLOT: WE RECEIVED A CALL FROM 911 APPROXIMATE ABOUT 7:15 A.M. THAT THERE WERE THREE GERMAN SHEPHERDS RUNNING LOOSE. UPON ARRIVING AT 117 N. 14TH, I WITNESSED THE DOGS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. THEY RAN BACK IN THE HOUSE.

I HAVE PICTURES OF WHERE THE GATE IS OPEN AND ALSO, ONE OF THE DOGS IS CHAINED OUT AND HE'S OUT OF THE GATE AROUND THE MAILBOX.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. >>MR. PELLOT: I WROTE TWO

CITATIONS. >>MS. DEBEVEC: WHAT WERE THE

CITATIONS YOU WROTE? >>MR. PELLOT: ONE WAS FOR THE TETHERED DOG ON THE CHAIN AND THE OTHER CITATION WAS FOR THE THREE DOGS RUNNING LOOSE.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: DID YOU HAVE ANY CONVERSATION WITH THE OWNER OF THE DOGS?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES, DID. >>MS. DEBEVEC: WHAT WAS THE

NATURE OF THAT CONVERSATION? >>MR. PELLOT: I WAS JUST EXPLAINING TO HER ABOUT THE DOGS BEING LOOSE. SHE'S KIND OF A FREQUENT FLYER. WE GO TO HER SEVERAL TIMES. WE'VE GIVEN THE DOGS BACK TO HER AND GIVEN HER VERBAL WARNING SEVERAL

TIMES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: DOES SHE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE DOGS WERE LOOSE ON THIS OCCASION?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: DID YOU TAKE ANY

PHOTOGRAPHS? >>MR. PELLOT: YES. I HAVE THE

DO. >>MS. DEBEVEC: THEY DEPICT WHAT

YOU SAW THAT DAY? >>MR. PELLOT: YES.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: AT THIS TIME WE WOULD MOVE THE PHOTOS IN AS CITY'S COMPOSITE 1.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU. IS SARAH GOMEZ SOTO HERE?

THANK YOU. >>MS. DEBEVEC: NOTING THAT NO RESPONDENT IS PRESENT, CAN YOU TELL US, OFFICER, IS THERE ANYTHING SPECIFIC ABOUT THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT YOU WANT TO DRAW TO THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE'S ATTENTION?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. SHOWING THAT THE GATE IS WIDE OPEN OR I MEAN, IT'S ABOUT TWO FEET OPEN.

AND THE ONE DOG IS ON A CHAIN. THERE IS NO TETHERING ALLOWED. AND IT'S ALL THE WAY AROUND THE MAILBOX ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WANT TO SAY?

>>MR. PELLOT: NO. >>MS. DEBEVEC: NO FURTHER

QUESTIONS. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU. AND AGAIN, SARAH GOMEZ SOTO IS NOT HERE NEITHER IS THE REPRESENTATIVE HERE ON HER BEHALF. BASED ON THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED, I FIND THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS IN THAT MS. GOMEZ SOTO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR

[00:45:03]

SHE HAS 30 DAYS TO PAY, 30 DAYS TO APPEAL THIS MATTER. IF NOT, FOR THE RECORD, SHE IS TO BE ADVISED THAT THIS MATTER, IF NOT PAID, CAN BE TRANSFERRED OVER TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE WHERE SHE MAY OCCUR ADDITIONAL FEES AND COSTS.

THANK YOU. NEXT CASE IS 4 E, 19-2924 211 BOSTON AVENUE, LOMAX.

[E. 19-2924 AC 211 Boston Avenue Lomax, Tina Ricardo Pellot]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: WHEN YOU'RE READY.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OFFICER POLITE, HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW YOUR FILE?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES I HAVE. >>MS. DEBEVEC: ARE YOU READY TO

PROCEED. >>MR. PELLOT: YES.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: WERE YOU THE OFFICER THAT ISSUED THE CITATIONS IN THIS CASE?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES, I WAS. >>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT DAY YOU ISSUED THOSE DOCUMENTS?

>>MR. PELLOT: OCTOBER 16. >> OF 2019?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: AND TELL US

ABOUT YOUR INVESTIGATION. >>MR. PELLOT: WE CAME AT 7:00 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING AND AS SOON AS WE COME ON WE RECEIVED IT CALLED AT THREE PIT BULLS WERE CHASING A CAT. BY THE TIME I ARRIVED THERE, THE OWNER OF THE DOGS HAD PUT THE THREE DOGS INSIDE THE HOUSE, BUT THE CAT WAS STILL ALIVE, INJURED, RIGHT OUTSIDE THEIR GATE.

THE OWNER OF THE DOGS CAME OUT. SHE SAID SHE WANTED TO TURN INTO OF THE THREE DOGS, WHICH SHE DID. THE PARAGRAPH SO I WROTE HER THE CITATION FOR THE DOGS RUNNING LOOSE. AND I

CHECKED ON THE CAT. >>MS. DEBEVEC: DID SHE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE DOGS HAD BEEN LOOSE THAT DAY?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: AND IS THERE ANYTHING -- DID YOU TAKE ANY PHOTOS OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE?

>>MR. PELLOT: NO. BY THE TIME I GOT THERE, THE THREE DOGS WERE INSIDE THE HOUSE AND THE OWNER OF THE CAT HAD HER WRAPPED UP IN A TOWEL AND WAS RUSHING HER TO THE VET.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. DID THE OWNER OF THE CAN'T SPEAK TO YOU AT ALL?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. SEVERAL MEMBERS DO. THEY ALL SAID THAT THEY SAW WHEN THE DOGS WERE

ATTACKING THE CAT. >>MS. DEBEVEC: THEY SAID THE DOGS WRIST -- BELONG TO THE RESPONDENT?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: I WILL KNOW SHE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE HERE THIS MORNING, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: THE CITATION YOU WROTE WAS FOR RUNNING AT LARGE?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: IS OR ANYTHING ELSE WANT TO ADD WITH REGARD YOUR INVESTIGATION TO THE CITATION THAT YOU ISSUED?

>>MR. PELLOT: NO. >>MS. DEBEVEC: NO FURTHER

QUESTION. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU. YOU SAY SHE TURNED INTO OF THE DOGS? LATER?

>>MR. PELLOT: INITIALLY, SHE TURNED TO OF THE MEN AND THEN THE NEXT DAY, WANTED THEM BOTH BACK. BUT SHE SIGNED THE NO TI FORM AND ONE OF THE TWO DOGS THAT SHE TURNED AND WAS AGGRESSIVE, REALLY AGGRESSIVE. NOBODY COULD GET NEAR THE PEN. SO FOR A SAFETY ISSUE THE KENNEL CALLED US AND ASKED US TO EU THE DOG.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: EU, FOR THE RECORD MEANS?

>>MR. PELLOT: USE AND I. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ALL

RIGHT. ANYTHING FURTHER? >>MR. PELLOT: SHE ENDED UP GETTING ONE OF THE DOGS BACK, THE FEMALE DOG.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THEY WERE PIT BULLS, RIGHT?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: HOW

IS THE CAT? >>MR. PELLOT: I DO NOT BELIEVE

HE MADE IT. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: SORRY I ASKED. ALL RIGHT. BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY I FIND THAT TINA LOMAX IS RESPONSIBLE FOR HER DOGS RUNNING AT LARGE.

AND AS REQUESTED IN THE SUMMARY SHEET, I WILL FIND HER $50 PER VIOLATION OF THE CODE, A $10 ADMIN FEE, AND A FIVE DOLLAR SURCHARGE TO ANIMAL CONTROL. A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $65. I'LL GIVE HER 30 DAYS TO PAY. SHE HAS NO PAGE NEEDS TO BE NOTED THAT THIS MAY BE SENT OVER TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE WHERE SHE COULD INCUR ADDITIONAL FEES AND COSTS.

SHE HAS 30 DAYS TO APPEAL. THANK YOU.

[00:50:21]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, WE GAVE YOU A CORRECTED ONE ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WHERE THE FUNDS WERE DIFFERENT. AS

THAT WAS THE CLERK SPEAKING. ). >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: WHAT ARE THE FINES ON THE CORRECT AMOUNT?

>>THE CLERK: 4 E. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: I DO NOT SEE IT BUT TELL ME WHAT THOSE FINES ARE NOT CORRECTED.

>>THE CLERK: IT WAS THREE DOGS RUNNING LOOSE AT $50 EACH. IT CAME TO $165.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. THREE DOGS FOR 165?

>> I HAVE AN EXTRA COPY I CAN HAND OVER.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THAT'S RIGHT. I BELIEVE YOU. SO I WILL AMEND. THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS 165 WHICH INCLUDES THE THREE DOGS. I WILL CORRECT THAT TO REFLECT THAT THE FEE IS -- TOTAL DUE IS 165 AND ALL OF THE OTHER ORDERS REMAIN THE SAME. THANK YOU.

[F. 19-683 AC 3003 Rhode Island Avenue Altenhoff, Marvin Ricardo Pellot]

>>THE CLERK: NEXT WE HAVE CASE NO.: 4 F.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OFFICER PELLOT ARE YOU READY TO PROCEED.

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: CAN WE MAKE SURE THERE'S NO ONE HERE FOR THAT CASE?

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: IS A MARVIN ALTENHOFF IN THE BUILDING?

YOU MAY PROCEED. >>MS. DEBEVEC: DID YOU REVIEW

YOUR FILE. >>MR. PELLOT: YES, I DID.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: WERE YOU THE OFFICER ASSIGNED TO 19-683?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: WHEN WERE YOU

ASSIGNED TO THE CASE? >>MR. PELLOT: IT WAS ON MARCH

9, >>MR. PELLOT: IT WAS ON MARCH

9, 2019. >>MS. DEBEVEC: TELL US ABOUT

YOUR INVESTIGATION. >>MR. PELLOT: AGAIN, WE GOT A CALL THROUGH 911 THAT THREE PIT BULLS HAVE GOTTEN OUT AND KILLED THE CHIHUAHUA. SO UPON ARRIVING, WE FOUND THREE DOGS. THEY WERE PEOPLE FRIENDLY, BUT A LOT ARE PEOPLE FRIENDLY BUT ON ANIMAL AGGRESSIVE. WE IMPOUNDED THE DOGS AND LEFT THE DOOR HANGER FOR THE OWNER. AND HE DID CONTACT US. WHEN HE WENT TO THE PICKUP THE DOGS IS

WHEN I WROTE HIM A CITATION. >>MS. DEBEVEC: WERE THERE WITNESSES THAT SAW WHAT HAPPENED?

>>MR. PELLOT: THERE WERE SEVERAL WITNESSES INCLUDING THE DOG OWNER.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. DID THE OWNER OF -- WHEN YOU SAY DOG OWNER, ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE

RESPONDENT OR THE OWNER. >>MR. PELLOT: THE OWNER OF THE

CHIHUAHUA. >>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. AND DID THEY ALL ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE INJURY TO THE CHIHUAHUA WAS CAUSED BY THE RESPONDENT'S DOG?

>>MR. PELLOT: YES. >>MS. DEBEVEC: HOW SO.

>>MR. PELLOT: THEY EXPLAINED TO US AND TOLD US WHAT HAPPENED. WE GOT THERE, ONE OF THE OWNERS THAT LIVES IN THE HOUSEHOLD, THEY RUSHED THE DOG TO ANIMAL EMERGENCY, BUT IT WAS TOO LATE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THE DOG'S ACCOUNT?

>>MR. PELLOT: THIS IS A DOG. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THEY

KILL THE CHIHUAHUA? >>MR. PELLOT: YES.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: SO, THE OWNER, THE RESPONDENT, DID YOU TALK TO THE RESPONDENT AT ALL?

>>MR. PELLOT: JUST WHEN HE CAME TO -- HE CALLED ME ON THE PHONE. I TOLD HIM WHERE THE DOGS WERE. HE MET ME THERE. IT WAS AT THE HUMANE SOCIETY BACK THEN. I MET HIM THERE AND THAT'S WHY WROTE IN THE CITATION.

>>MR. PELLOT: >>MS. DEBEVEC: DID HE ACKNOWLEDGE THE ROLE OF HIS DOG IN THE INCIDENT?

>>MR. PELLOT: YEAH WE COME RUNNING LOOSE (LAUGHING).

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. IS OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU SO PERSONALLY THAT WOULD ASSIST THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IN MAKING A FINDING OF RESPONSIBILITY?

>>MR. PELLOT: OKAY. NO. I HAD WROTE HIM SEVERAL CITATIONS. REGISTRATION, RABIES, THAT HE

DID COMPLY I GOT THAT DONE. >>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. THE ONLY THING THAT IS BEFORE THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE THIS MORNING IS THE -- IN REGARD TO THE

KILLING OF THE CHIHUAHUA. >>MR. PELLOT: YES.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: BASED ON YOUR INVESTIGATION, WHAT ARE ALL OF THE FACTORS THAT POINT TO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE OWNER -- THE RESPONDENT IN THE CASE THAT HIS DOG IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE

KILLING? >>MR. PELLOT: WE HAD SEVERAL WITNESSES THAT SAW HIS THREE DOGS KILL THE CHIHUAHUA, PLUS, WHEN WE GOT THERE, THEY WERE

RUNNING LOOSE. >>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. I APOLOGIZE. IT'S DOGS. OKAY. AND AGAIN, WHEN YOU TALKED TO HIM, HE HAD NO -- HE DIDN'T

[00:55:07]

STATE ANY DEFENSE. >> NO.

>> HE DID NOT SAY THAT HIS DOGS ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE HE TOOK RESPONSIBILITY CORRECT.

>> YES. >> ANYTHING FURTHER THAT YOU

WANTED TO ADD? >> KNOW THAT'S RIGHT.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: I FIND THAT BASED ON THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS AND THAT MARVIN ALTENHOFF IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION. I WILL FIND HIM $315, $100 FOR EACH DOG THAT WAS RUNNING LOOSE AND ALSO FOR THE UNLAWFUL KILLING OF ANOTHER DOG. $10 ADMINISTRATIVE FEE AND A FIVE DOLLAR FEE TO ANIMAL CONTROL FOR A TOTAL OF $315.

JUST FOR MY OWN EDIFICATION, DID THE POLICE GET INVOLVED IN THIS?

>>MR. PELLOT: NOW. AND THE PREVIOUS CASE, DID THE POLICE GET INVOLVED IN THAT ONE?

>>MR. PELLOT: NO. IF WE ARE WORKING AN ANIMAL CASE THAT COMES DIRECTLY TO US, WE FEEL THAT WE WOULD HAVE: OFFICER WE DID.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: CAN WE JUST CLARIFY AS TO CASE NO.: 4 F. YOU SAID -- THE ONLY CITATION I'M SEEING ON MY SHEET IS IN REFERENCE TO FOUR Ã25.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THAT'S IT.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: AND THAT'S FOR ANIMAL INJURY, NOT FOR RUNNING AT LARGE, CORRECTED.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: CORRECT.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR THAT YOUR ANNOUNCEMENT IS TO THAT.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ANIMAL INJURY, UNLAWFUL KILLIN .

>>MS. DEBEVEC: TIMES THREE. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: TIMES

THREE. >>MS. DEBEVEC: THANK YOU MA'AM.

[G. 19-2334 AC 496 Maple Avenue Harper, Erica Kenneth Nelson]

>>THE CLERK: NEXT WE HAVE 4 G. 496 MAPLE AVENUE, HARPER.

>> GOOD MORNING. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: GOOD

MORNING. >>MS. DEBEVEC: GOOD MORNING, OFFICER. CAN YOU TELL US YOUR NAME AGAIN? GO AHEAD. STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR OCCUPATION.

>> KENNY NELSON, >>MS. DEBEVEC: WERE YOU

ASSIGNED TO THIS CASE? >> YES.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. IS A CASE FAMILIAR TO YOU?

>>. >>MS. DEBEVEC: DO YOU NEED A

SECOND TO REVIEW YOUR FILE. >> YES, MA'AM.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: CAN YOU TELL US WHAT DATE YOU ARE ASSIGNED?

>> ACTUALLY, ON 8/14 -- 8/13 IS THE FIRST NUMBER CALLED OUT THERE FOR BARKING DOGS BEING IN AN OFFICE. AND THAT WAS EARLY IN THE MORNING AND I WENT BACK BY AGAIN THAT AFTERNOON TO SEE IF ANYBODY SHOWED UP TO THE OFFICE THERE WERE THE DOGS WERE BARKING. NOBODY WAS THERE THEM. WE RECEIVED ANOTHER CALL THE FOLLOWING MORNING FROM THE OFFICE NEXT TO THIS ONE ABOUT THE DOGS CONSTANTLY BARKING ALL DAY LONG AND NOBODY BEING THERE TO EITHER FEED THEM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THE PARAGRAPH SO THAT AFTERNOON I WENT THROUGH THE PROPERTY APPRAISER AND GOT A HOLD OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS FROM MIAMI. THEY CAME UP HERE AND OPEN THE DOORS FOR US TO GET THE DOGS OUT.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: LET ME STOP YOU FOR A SECOND THERE. YOU RECEIVED SEVERAL CALLS REGARDING THE DOGS BEING LEFT ALONE AT THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION, CORRECT?

>> IT'S LIKE A STRIP MALL THAT HAS FOUR OR FIVE DIFFERENT OFFICES TOGETHER.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: YOU TESTIFIED TO A DATE IN AUGUST. THE KEY INITIATION DATE IS AUGUST 8. IS

THAT CORRECT? >> AUGUST 8?

>> YES, SIR. TAKE A SECOND AND REVIEW YOUR FILE. IF IS NOT CORRECT, JUST LET US KNOW.

>> I CHECKED WITH DISPATCH RIGHT BEFORE COMING TO COURT AND THEY GIVE ME THE DATES OF AUGUST 13 AND AUGUST 14 WHERE I CONFISCATED THE DOGS.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: OKAY. SO THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.

SO BASED ON YOUR INVESTIGATION, TELL US WHAT YOU WROTE A CITATION FOR ANIMAL NEGLECT?

>> OKAY. AFTER THE PROPERTY OWNER CAME IN AND LET US PICK THE DOGS OUT, THERE WAS FECES ALL OVER THE PLACE. THERE WERE BOWLS THERE FOR WATER AND FOOD, AND OR EMPTY CANS WERE I GUESS SOMEBODY HAD BEEN FEEDING THEM, ON AND OFF, BUT THERE WAS NO FOOD ON THE PREMISES ITSELF IN

[01:00:12]

>> OKAY. SO THE DOGS, BASED ON YOUR OBSERVATION, HAD NO -- THERE WAS NO WATER TO DRINK.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> AND THERE WAS NO FOOD IN THE

DOGS BOWLS, CORRECT. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> OKAY. DID THE OWNERS INDICATE TO YOU WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME ANYONE HAD BEEN THERE

TO CHECK ON THE DOGS? >> THE OWNERS SHOWED UP AT THE HUMANE SOCIETY TWO DAYS LATER. AT THE DOGS WERE IN VERY GOOD SHAPE. I MEAN SOMEBODY -- SHE SAID SHE BE GOING THERE LATE AT NIGHT TO FEED THEM IN STOCK.

>> WHO WAS GOING THERE? >> THE OWNER.

>> BUT YOU SAID THAT THEY CAME FROM MIAMI.

>> THAT'S THE PEOPLE THAT OWNED THE PROPERTY.

>> THEY ARE THE ONES THAT LET ME INTO GET THE DOGS.

>> BECAUSE WE COULD NOT FIND OUT WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF THE OFFICE. AND EVIDENTLY, THEY WERE BEING EVICTED AT THE TIME. AND THE OTHER REASON WE WENT IN IS BECAUSE IT WAS NO AIR-CONDITIONING WORKING AT THE TIME ON THE PREMISES.

>> SO WHEN YOU FOUND THE DOGS, THEY HAD NO FOOD, NO WATER AND NO AIR CONDITIONING.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> IN AUGUST IN FLORIDA X AND THE OWNER OF THE PLACE SAID THAT -- HE SAID THAT HE JUST REPLACE THE AIR CONDITIONING ABOUT TWO MONTHS BEFORE WITH A NEW ONE. THE LADY THAT WAS RENTING THE PROPERTY FROM THEM WAS SAYING THAT THE OWNER HAD THE POWER CUT FF ON HER. BEFORE THEY WERE TOTALLY EVICTED OUT. SO IT'S A HEARSAY BETWEEN BOTH OF THEM.

>> SO YOU TESTIFIED THAT THE ANIMALS DID NOT APPEAR TO BE EMACIATED OR.

>> NO, MA'AM.. THEY WERE IN GOOD SHAPE. BUT THEY WERE FOUND TO BE ALONE IN A LOCKED

OFFICE. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> WITH NO FOOD NO WATER NO AIR CONDITIONING.

>> SHE WAS ISSUED THE CITATION BECAUSE OF THE FECES AND STUFF ALL OVER THE OFFICE AND IT WAS TWO DAYS LATER AFTER SHE SHOWED UP.

>> AND FELT THE CONDITIONS IN ADDITION TO WHAT I SAID BEFORE.

>> I WOULD SAY MORE NEGLECT. >> OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WANT TO ADD? DID YOU TAKE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS, ETC.

>> WE DID, BUT AT THE TIME THE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN WITH SHE LEFT A FEW DAYS AFTER THAT.

>> OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD?

>> NO. >> ALL KNOW THAT NO RESPONDENT APPEARED TODAY. AND I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU. ÃTHE OTHER TENANTS IN THE COMPLEX CALLED ANIMAL

CONTROL? >> YES, MA'AM. THE OFFICE NEXT TO THEM ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE. THEY CALLED BOTH DAYS. THE 13TH AND THE 14TH ABOUT THE

DOGS NONSTOP BARKING. >> AND YOU SAID THERE WAS NO

POWER ON? >> WAS NO AIR-CONDITIONING ON AT THE TIME WHEN WE WENT IN THERE AND THEY TOLD ME -- AFTER SHE CAME A COUPLE DAYS AFTER WE PICK THEM UP SHE SAID THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY HAD THE POWER CUT OFF.

>> DID SHE SAY WHEN? SHE DID NOT GIVE ME THAT PART.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> NO. THERE BEING NO FURTHER EVIDENCE AND ERIC HARPER NOT BEING PRESENT I FIND THE VIOLATION EXISTS FOR ANIMAL NEGLECT AND ERICA HARPER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION.

I WILL FIND HER TOTAL TO $265 THE BREAKDOWN IS AS FOLLOWS A $250 FINE, $10 ADMIN FEE AND THEN FIVE DOLLAR ANIMAL SURCHARGE. SHE HAS 30 DAYS TO APPEAL AND/OR TO PAY THE FINE.

IF IT IS NOT PAID WITHIN THAT PERIOD OF TIME, THAT I NOTIFY HER THAT THIS MATTER WILL BE TRANSFERRED OVER TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE WHERE SHE COULD INCUR ADDITIONAL FEES AND COSTS.

THANK YOU. NEXT, WE HAVE 4I. 405 JERSEY

[I. 19-2616 CT 1405 Jersey Avenue Owens, Bobby and Linda Heather Debevec]

AVENUE, OWENS. >> BEFORE WE START, BIG QUESTION. YESTERDAY WE DISCUSSED THAT IF THESE FOLKS DID NOT SHOW UP THAT WE WERE

WAITING ON, >>MS. DEBEVEC: I HAVE A NOTE THAT THERE WAS COMPLIANCE WITH THIS CASE. DO YOU WANT TO PULL IT THIS MORNING? GO AHEAD AND

DO THAT. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

THANK YOU. >>THE CLERK: CASE 19- -- CASE

[J. 19-2589 CT 1907 S 8th Street Alouption, Emilie Heather Debevec]

19-2616 SOLUTION. >>MS. DEBEVEC: I APOLOGIZE,

YOUR HONOR. COMPLIED. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: NO

PROBLEM. >>THE CLERK: OKAY. WE HAVE

[G. 19-1191 CE cont. from 12/11 1124 Colonial Road Lima, Docius Chad Dawson]

[01:05:06]

CASE 5G 19-11. >> OFFICER DAWSON, ARE YOU

READY TO PROCEED? >> CHAD DAWSON CITY OF FORT PIERCE CODE ENFORCEMENT. THIS IS CASE NO.: 19-1191. 1124 COLONIAL ROAD OWNED BY DOC HE IS SALIMA. THE CASE WAS INITIATED MAY 17, 2019. THE PROPERTY WAS FOUND IN VIOLATION FOR SECTION 16-25, SUBSECTION C, RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTAINERS. IPMC 304.2. THE CITY REQUESTS THAT IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR WILL BE GIVEN FIVE DAYS TO BUY OR A $50 FINE PER DAY WILL BE ASSESSED.

I SPOKE WITH THE OWNER LAST WEEK. MY SUPERVISOR ACKNOWLEDGED HIM AND TOLD HIM WE WILL CONTINUE THE CASE AND THAT IT WAS TO COME IN COMPLIANCE THAT HE WILL NOT HAVE TO COME. WHEN I DID MY INSPECTIONS -- I HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT FOR EVIDENCE COMPOSITE 1 AND COMPOSITE TWO. WHEN I DID MY INSPECTIONS, THE PROPERTY REMAINS THE SAME. AND THAT'S WHY WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS

CASE. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

THANK YOU. >>MS. DEBEVEC: YOU REFERENCED PHOTOS. REMEMBER WHAT DATES THEY WERE TAKEN? LIKE WHERE THEY TAKEN OUT ON SEPARATE

DATES? >>MR. DAWSON: YES, MA'AM.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: 6/20/2018 IS WHAT I HAVE. THAT WILL BE ADMITTED AS COMPOSITE . ANYTHING FURTHER?

>>MR. DAWSON: NO, MA'AM. >>MS. DEBEVEC: I WILL NOTED ÃI WILL NOTE THAT THERE IS NO RESPONDENT PRESENT.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: BASED ON THE EVIDENCE IN PERSON -- TESTIMONY FIND THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS. THAT DOES SEE IS LIMA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION. BECAUSE OF THE HOLIDAY, AND THE WEEK BREAKING UP LIKE IT IS ALL GIVE HIM 10 DAYS TO COMPLY OR BE FINED $50 PER DAY UNTIL THE VIOLATION IS CURED.

HE HAS 30 DAYS TO APPEAL MY DECISION.

>>MR. DAWSON: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YOU'RE WELCOME.

[H. 19-2807 CE 510 Means Court Holmes, Shade DAJED Inc Heather Debevec]

>>THE CLERK: WE HAVE CASE FIVE 5H. 19-2807, 510 MEANS COURT, HOLMES, SHADE. DAJED, INC.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YOU MAY PROCEED.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: THIS IS CASE NO.: 19-2807, 510 MEANS COURT. THE PROPERTY IS OWNED BY SHADE HOMES, DAJED. THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON NOVEMBER 5, 2019. THIS CASE WILL BE APPEALED BY THE TENANT, MR. WILLIAMS. IT'S FOR SECTION 15 -- 16-46, 4748 SUBSECTION 10 AND D WERE NOT OPERABLE VEHICLE. IT'S REQUESTED THAT SHE REGISTER THE MERCURY MINIVAN ON THE SIDE OF THE HOME. THE CITY REQUESTS THAT IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THAT THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN FIVE DAYS TO COMPLYING OR HUNDRED QUALIFYING TO BE ASSESSED. IF THE VIOLATION IS NOT CORRECTED, THE CITY IS TO TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO REMEDY THE VIOLATIONS.

I HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH MS. WILLIAMS ON AND OFF OVER THE SITUATION. I KNOW THAT SHE HAS BEEN ATTEMPTING TO DO THINGS BUT I WILL LET HER EXPLAIN HER SITUATION TO YOU, YOUR HONOR.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. GOOD MORNING. WOULD YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND BE SWORN,

PLEASE? >>THE CLERK: STATE YOUR NAME

FOR THE RECORD. >> MY NAME IS JOCELYN WILLIAMS?

(THE RESPONDENT WAS SWORN IN.). >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THE ALLEGATIONS?

>> THE ONLY THING WRONG WITH THE VAN IS THAT MY TAG -- MY DRIVERS LICENSE HAS BEEN SUSPENDED. I WORK PART-TIME. I'M HAVING A STRUGGLE RIGHT NOW. SO MASKING FOR MORE TIME TO BE ABLE TO GET MY TAG. MY BIRTHDAY IS IN JANUARY. SO, IF THE -- IF YOU WOULD ALLOW ME AT LEAST ANOTHER 60 DAYS OR 30 DAYS TO GET IN COMPLIANCE, THAT'S WHY I AM HERE.

[01:10:06]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: I DO NOT THINK THAT WE HAVE AN OBJECTION TO THAT.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YOU LOOK FAMILIAR.

>> YOU TOO. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE:

DOLLAR TREE? >> YES, MA'AM.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ALL RIGHT. I KNOW HER FROM DOLLAR TREE (LAUGHING) HE.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: THANK YOU FOR DISCLOSING THAT. SHE'S ALWAYS HAD A NICE HAIRCUT. I ALWAYS COMPLEMENT HER ON HER HAIRCUT. ALL RIGHT. THAT BEING SAID, I FIND THAT JUDGMENT WILL ONLY DO THIS. YOU THINK YOU COULD HAVE THIS DONE IN 60 DAYS.

>> YES, SIR. >> 60 WERE -- I WOULD DEFTLY HAVE IT DONE. I WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: CONTINUE THIS FOR 60 DAYS TO GET YOU TIME TO COME IN FOR

COMPLIANCE. >> YES, MA'AM.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: I THINK RIGHT NOW YOU'RE TAKING PUBLIC TRANSIT?

>> YES, MA'AM. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: I SAW

YOU ONE DAY WALKING. >> YES.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: WILL CONTINUE IT SINCE YOU WORK WITH CODING ON NOT SHOWING FAVORITISM BECAUSE I SHOP AT DOLLAR TREE BUT I KNOW HER. SHE IS TRYING. I'LL GIVE HER 60 DAYS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. MERRY CHRISTMAS. >>THE CLERK: CASE 5 I, 904 S.

[I. 19-1863 CE 904 S 11th Street Morales, Enoc Heather Debevec]

11TH STREET, MORALIS. >>MS. DEBEVEC: HEATHER -- THIS IS CASE NO.: 19-1863 904 S. 11TH STREET, MR. MORALIS. THE CASE WAS INITIATED AT JULY 22, 2019. IT WAS FOR IPMC 304.1 AND 304.2. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THEY OBTAIN A PERMIT FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND REPAIR THE ROOF AND TRIM OF THE CARPORT. PAINT APPEALING AREA ON THE WALL OF THE NORTH SIDE OF THE CARPORT.

THE CITY REQUESTED OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS A VIOLATION EXISTS, THAT THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT AND COMPLY WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS OR A FINE OF $50 PER DAY CAN BE ASSESSED.

I SPOKE WITH THE HOMEOWNER AND HIS ATTORNEY STATING THAT THEY WERE HAVING TROUBLE WITH THE INSURANCE COMPANY AND THAT THEY WERE WORKING ON IT. HOWEVER, I HAVE RECEIVED ZERO PAPERWORK FROM EITHER PARTY. FOR ANY FURTHER INFORMATION WITH IT. AND AT THIS TIME THERE IS STILL NO PERMITS ISSUED. THEY HAD SAID THAT THEY WERE WORKING WITH A CONTRACTOR AND THAT A PERMIT WOULD BE ISSUED THIS PAST THURSDAY OR MONDAY.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> NO, MA'AM. >> I HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT.

>> SORRY. >> THAT'S OKAY.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: I'VE SEEN THEM ON THE SCREEN SO ADMIT THAT IS CITY'S COMPOSITE

1. >>MS. DEBEVEC: TECHNICALLY THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADMITTED BEFORE PUBLICATION. I WILL NOTE THAT THERE WAS NO

RESPONDENT HERE TO OBJECT. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY FIND THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS AND THAT HE NECK ALICE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION. I'LL GIVE THEM 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT AND COMPLY WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS OR FINE OF $50 A DAY BE ASSESSED. HE'S GOT 30 DAYS

[K. 19-2726 CE 1800 Oleander Avenue Curtis, Adrian Heather Debevec]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THE NEXT CASES FIVE NUM K, 19-2726. 1800 OLEANDER AVENUE, CURTIS.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ARE YOU READY?

>>MS. DEBEVEC: THIS IS CASE NO.: 19-2726. THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON OCTOBER 18, 2019.

THE VIOLATION FOR SIX -- SECTION 16-46, 47 AND 48. REMOVE OR BRING IN HER PLACE IN THE SHED STACK OF BOARDS IN THE BACKYARD WOOD, BRICKS, SHEET-METAL, SCRAPS. THE CITY REQUESTED OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 10 DAYS TO COMPLY OR A FINE OF $50 PER DAY BE ASSESSED.

I'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH HER ONCE SHE SAID -- (AUDIO LOST) -- (INDISCERNIBLE).

>>MS. DEBEVEC: THERE IS NO RESPONDENT HERE THIS MORNING.

[01:15:28]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. THESE WILL BE ADMITTED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE 1. ANYTHING

FURTHER? >>MS. DEBEVEC: NO, MA'AM.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY IN THE FACT THAT ADRIAN CURTIS OR THE REPRESENTATIVE ARE NOT PRESENT, FIND THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS. IN THE THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN -- ALSO 15 DAYS TO COMPLY OR A FINE OF $50 PER DAY BE ASSESSED.

AND AGAIN, GIVING THE EXTENSION ONLY DAYS BECAUSE OF THE HOLIDAY. I KNOW SOME OFFICERS -- SOME OFFICES ARE CLOSED. NEXT CASE.

[L. 19-1804 CE 218 Hialeah Avenue Romo (EST), Estella Heather Debevec]

>>THE CLERK: 5 L, 19-1804, HIALEAH AVENUE, ROMO.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: WHEN YOU'RE READY.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: CASE NO.: 19-1804, 2018 HIALEAH AVENUE, ESTELLA ROMO. THE CASE WAS INITIATED JULY 24 OF THIS YEAR. IT WAS FOR IPMC 304.1, EXTERIOR STRUCTURE AND THROUGH 4.2 PROJECTIVE TREATMENT. IT WAS AS THAT THEY REPAIR THE WEST GABLE TRIM AS IT WAS RUNNING.

PAINT THE WEST GABLE WHERE THE WOOD IS A DIFFERENT COLOR.

THE CITY REQUESTED OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTS AT THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 30 DAYS TO COMPLY OR A FINE OF $50 PER DAY TO BE ASSESSED.

I HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT AND I HAVE HAD ZERO CONTACT WITH ANYBODY AT THE RESIDENCE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: IS IT OCCUPIED?

>>THE CLE. >>MS. DEBEVEC: YES, MA'AM. AND WE MOVED THE PHOTOS AS CITY'S COMPOSITE 1.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

ANYTHING FURTHER? >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY PRESENTED, I WILL STAY FOR THE RECORD THAT ALECIA WAS NOT PRESIDENT. ÃPRESENT. I FIND A VIOLATION EXISTS AND SHE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION.

I WILL GIVE HER 30 DAYS TO COMPLY. OR BE FINED $50 PER DAY. 30 DAYS TO APPEAL.

[N. 19-2586 CE 3245 Vernon Street Hatfield, James Heather Debevec]

>>THE CLERK: 5 N, 19- 2586, 3245 VERNON STREET, JAMES HATFIELD.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: THIS IS CASE NO.: 19-2586, 3245 VERNON STREET OWNED BY JAMES HATFIELD.

THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON OCTOBER 24 OF THIS YEAR. IT WAS FOR SECTION 16-25 SUBSECTION C RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTAINERS, IPMC 304.14, INSECT SCREENS, SECTION 16-46, 47, 48, OUTSIDE STORAGE. WE ARE REQUESTING R&D FOR THAT ONE. SECTION 16-46, 47, 48, OUTSIDE STORAGE OF INDOOR FURNITURE. AGAIN REQUESTING R&D FOR THAT ONE. SECTION 22-187 SUBSECTION 13, LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE. IT'S REQUESTED TO STORE TRASH, RECYCLE AND YARD BINS TO THE SIDE OR REAR OF THE HOME. REPLACE MISSING SCREENS FOR THE WINDOWS. OBTAIN A PERMIT TO REMOVE THE DEAD PINE TREE FROM THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF THE HOME.

THE CITY REQUESTED OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS A VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 10 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT AND COMPLY WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS OR FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT. I HAVE NOT HAD CONTACT WITH ANYBODY EXCEPT FOR ONE OF THE TENANTS. THE YOUNG LADY WHO WAS PRESENT TODAY. I ASKED IF SHE'D LIKE TO SEE THE PHOTOS OR SPEAK WITH ME THIS MORNING AND SHE SAID NO. BUT I STILL WISH TO SUBMIT THE PHOTOS.

[01:20:05]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: DO YOU WANT TO SEE THEM NOW? YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE

PROPERTY? >> YES, MA'AM.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THESE WILL BE ADMITTED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE 1.

>>THE CLERK: (THE RESPONDENT WAS SWORN IN.).

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: HOW DO YOU RESPOND?

>> I DO RECOGNIZE THAT SOME OF THESE VIOLATIONS STILL TO EXIST. I DEAD HAVE A PERMIT SO THAT WE CAN GET THE DEAD PINE TRAIN REMOVE. I'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE TENANTS AS FAR AS REMOVING THE GARBAGE, RECEPTACLES TO THE SIDE OF THE HOME. ABOUT THEIR OUTSIDE FURNITURE. THAT THEY CAN'T HAVE IT OUT THERE AND THEY HAVE NOT HAD THE INDOOR FURNITURE INSIDE. AS FAR AS NOT BEING IN TOUCH WITH HEATHER, I AM STILL LEARNING THE PROCESS. I WASN'T SURE THAT I HAD THE ADDRESS AND I'M TRYING TO GET THINGS RIGHT.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ANYTHING FURTHER? I WILL NOTE FOR THE RECORD, MS. LEONE DID APPEAR LAST MONTH OR SOMETIME YOUR SOMEBODY SOMEBODY WAS MANAGING THE BUSINESS AND IT FELL INTO YOUR LAP. YOU'RE MAKING PROGRESS.

>> SHE WAS HERE YESTERDAY FOR BUILDING CODE VIOLATION. SO ANYTHING YOU LIKE TO SAY?

>> NO, MA'AM.. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO TRY TO GET AN EXTENSION SO THAT WE HAVE TIME TO GET THE PERMITS. I BELIEVE RIGHT AFTER WE LEFT THE HEARING WE WENT UPSTAIRS AND FILED THEM OR TURNED THEM IN SO WE COULD TRY TO GET IT AND THE ONLY THING HOLDING US BACK WAS THE PINE TREE I HAVE TO GET THE SCREENS BUT EVERYTHING OTHER THAN THAT SHOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE.

>> OKAY. BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY PRESENTED, I FIND A VIOLATION EXISTS AT 3245 VERNON STREET AND THAT JAMES HATFIELD IS RESPONSIBLE. I'LL GIVE YOU 15 DAYS IN LIGHT OF THE HOLIDAYS -- ARE YOU TRYING TO GET SOME THINGS DONE YESTERDAY AND COMPLY WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS. AND IF NOT DONE WITHIN THE 15 DAY PERIOD, YOU'LL BE FINED $100 PER DAY.

I WILL POINT OUT SOMETHING TO YOU. IF YOU'RE HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THIS, DO GET IN TOUCH WITH

MS. DEVEREAUX. >> NO PROBLEM.

[O. 19-1838 CE 202 Roselyn Avenue Roselyn Holdings LLC Heather Debevec]

>> THIS IS FIVE 5 O. 19-1838. 202 ROSLYN AVENUE.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: THIS IS CASE NO.: 19-1838, 202 ROSLYN AVENUE. THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON JULY 24 OF THIS YEAR. AS FOR SECTION 1646, 47, 48 SUBSECTION FOR PARKING AND OTHER THAN PAVEMENT. SECTION 16-46, 47, 48 SUBSECTIONS ONE AND FIVE WERE OUTSIDE STORAGE.

AS REQUESTED THAT THEY PARKED VEHICLES IN THE DRIVEWAY TO THE SIDE OR REAR HOME. REMOVE OR REPLACE IN A SHED THE SCRAP METAL IN THE BACKYARD WHICH HAS BEEN -- WE REQUEST R&D FOR THAT. THE CITY IS REQUESTING THAT OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS A VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 10 DAYS TO COMPLY OR A FINE OF $50 PER DAY BE ASSESSED.

I HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: THERE BEING NO RESPONDENT PRESENTLY WOULD MOVE THE PHOTOS AND AS CITY'S

COMPOSITE 1. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: IT WILL BE ACCEPTED. CITY'S COMPOSITE 1.

QUICK SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YES.

>> WE DID RECEIVE A MESSAGE FROM MS. MELANIE STATING THAT SHE IS IN COMPLIANCE IN REFERENCE TO THE VEHICLE. BUT WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GO OUT FOR AN INSPECTION.

[01:25:07]

>> YES. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: LET'S CONTINUE THIS TO THE NEXT DOCKET. IF SHE'S IN COMPLIANCE AND YOU DO WHATEVER YOU NEED TO

DO. >> THANK YOU.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS CASE THAT WAS CALLED. MR. HATFIELD, THAT IS CASE NO.: 19-2586. MY RULING STANDS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF R&D. FOR SECTION 16-Ã46, 47, 48 PARAGRAPH FIVE OUTSIDE STORAGE AND ALSO 16-Ã46, 4748 SUBPARAGRAPH 11 OUTSIDE STORAGE INDOOR FURNITURE. I FIND THAT THOSE VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN CURED. SO THE VIOLATIONS ARE FOR THE REMAINING VIOLATIONS LISTED IN THE CODE.

>> OKAY. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: IS AT

CLEAR MADAME CLERK? >> YES.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: X CASE.

[P. 19-2165 CE 722 S US Highway 1 Costa Seafood & Grill Heather Debevec]

>>THE CLERK: THIS IS 5P. CASE NO.: 19-2165.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: THIS IS CASE NO.: 19-2165, 722 S. US HIGHWAY ONE, COSTA SEAFOOD AND GROW. THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON OCTOBER 2 OF 2019. IT'S FOR SECTION 15-3 SUBSECTION B, 1, 3, REMOVAL OF SIGNS. MR. COSTA WAS REQUESTED TO MOVE ALL SIGNS AND BANNERS FROM THE BUSINESS.

THE CITY REQUESTED OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS A VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN FIVE DAYS TO COMPLY OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. IF THE VIOLATION IS NOT CORRECTED WITHIN THE TIME GIVEN, THE CITY WILL TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO REMEDY THE VIOLATION, THE COST OF WHICH IS TO BE ASSESSED AS A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LIEN AGAINST THE PROPERTY. I HAVE HAD PHOTOGRAPHS TO SUBMIT. I HAVE NO CONTACT WITH THE CON WITH THE OWNER AND ALL LETTERS HAVE BEEN RETURNED AS

WELL. >> WAS OR SOMETHING POSTED ON THE PROPERTY? WAS I POSTED THE PROPERTY WITH A NOTICE TO THE DOOR.

>> AT THIS TIME WE WOULD MOVE THE PHOTO IN AND I WILL NOTE THAT THERE IS NO RESPONDENT

PRESENT. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK

YOU. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: IS A PICTURE OF THE POSTING IN HERE? (AWAY FROM MIC) BUT IT'S IN THE FILE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. THANK YOU.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THIS WILL BE ADMITTED AS COMPOSITE 1. ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> NO, MA'AM.. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ,IF YOU COULD, JUST FOR THE RECORD GET A COPY OF THE POSTING. IF I CAN SEE IT? AND THEN I'LL ASK THAT YOU PLACE IT IN THE FILE AS EVIDENCE. FOR THE RECORD.

>> NO, MA'AM. >> SO WITH THIS COMING AS

CITIES 2 COMPOSITE THEN? IS. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YES.

AND I'LL GIVE YOU TIME TO MAKE A COPY OF THAT TO GIVE TO THE CLERK SO THE RECORD IS COMPLETE. THANK YOU. THAT CITIES COMPOSITE 2. ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> NO, MA'AM. >> THERE BEING NOTHING FURTHER NO REPRESENTATIVE HERE ON BEHALF OF COSTA SEAFOOD AND GRILL, THE REGISTERED AGENT IS LUIS RODRIGUEZ. HE IS NOT PRESENT. I FIND A VIOLATION EXISTS. I'LL GIVE YOU 10 DAYS TO COMPLY OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED. IF THE VIOLATION IS NOT CORRECTED WITHIN THE TIME GIVEN, THE CITY WILL TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO REMEDY THE VIOLATIONS, THE COST OF WHICH WILL BE ASSESSED AS A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LIEN AGAINST THE PROPERTY. THE

[Q. 19-2466 CE 1815 Melaleuca Drive Celentano, Frank Heather Debevec]

>> NEXT CASE. >>THE CLERK: WE HAVE FIVE

>> NEXT CASE. >>THE CLERK: WE HAVE 5Q 19-2466, 1815 MELALEUCA DRIVE, FRANK CELENTANO.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YOU

MAY PROCEED. >>MS. DEBEVEC: .THIS IS CASE NO.: 19-2466, 1815 MELALEUCA DRIVE ON -- THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON OCTOBER 1, 2019.

IT WAS FOR IPMC, 304.2 PREDICTIVE TREATMENT, 304.7 ROOFS AND DRAINAGE, 304.10

[01:30:08]

IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THEY PAINT THE BARE WOOD ON THE STAIRWAY RAILINGS. OBTAIN A PERMIT BILLING TO REPAIR THE ROOF AND SOFFIT SAMPLES LEVELS OF THE HOME. OBTAIN A BURDEN TO REPAIR OR REPLACE MISSING, DAMAGED, RUNNING RAILINGS ON THE STAIRWAYS AND UPPER DECK AREAS. THE CITY REQUEST THAT IF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS A VIOLATION EXISTS, THE VIOLATOR BE GIVEN 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED.

I DO HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT AND I DID HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH MR. CELENTANO YESTERDAY AS HE WAS AT THE PROPERTY ATTEMPTING TO DO WORK.

HIS UNDERSTANDING IS THAT HE WAS TRYING TO GET A HOLD OF SOME OTHER PERMITS. I'LL LET HIM EXPLAIN AS HE RAN INTO SOME ISUES.

>> HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE PHOTOS YET THIS MORNING?

>> NO. HE DID NOT. I ASKED HIM IF HE WAS OKAY WHEN I SPOKE WITH HIM YESTERDAY I EXPLAINED HOW THE PROCESS WORKS AND HE STATED THAT HE WAS NOT WORRY ABOUT LOOKING AT THE PHOTOS AS

IS BEEN WORKING AT THE PHOTOS. >> YOU WANT A CHANCE TO LOOK AT

THEM NOW? >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: MR. CELENTANO, WOULD YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND BE SWORN?

>> COMPLY ACT (THE RESPONDENT WAS SWORN IN.).

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE HERE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO LOOK AT THEM.

OKAY. THANK YOU. I WILL TAKE A LOOK AT THEM.

>> THIS WILL BE ADMITTED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE EXHIBIT. THANK YOU. UH-HUH (AFFIRMATIVE).

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> NO, MA'AM. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: MR. CELENTANO, HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THE ALLEGATIONS?

>> NO CONTEST. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY.

HOW LONG DO YOU THINK IT WOULD TAKE YOU TO GET A PERMIT? THE CITY IS ASKING THAT YOU BE GIVEN 30 DAYS. JUST TO PULL THE PERMIT. NOW ONCE YOU PULL THE PERMIT, YOU HAVE 180 DAYS TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. I THINK YOU KNOW THE ROUTINE, RIGHT?

>> YES. >> OKAY. HOW DO YOU RESPOND?

>> YOU MEAN FOR PERMITS? >> YES.

>> I'M GOING TO GO UP THERE RIGHT NOW AND SEE WHAT THEY SAY.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY?

>> NO. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THEN BASED ON THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED, I FIND A VIOLATION EXISTS AT 1815 MELALEUCA DRIVE AND THAT FRANK CELENTANO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION. I ORDER THAT YOU BRING THIS PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE BY PULLING A PERMIT WITHIN 30 DAYS OF TODAY'S DATE, COMPLY WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS. IF NOT YOU WILL BE FINED $100 PER DAY. LET ME ADD THAT ONCE YOU PULL THE PERMIT, YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. IF YOU RUN INTO PROBLEMS, PLEASE STAY IN TOUCH WITH MISS DEB EPIC SO IF THERE'S ANY STAIRS OR SNAP USE

SHE CAN ASSIST YOU. >> OKAY. HAVE A GOOD HOLIDAY.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YOU TOO.

>>THE CLERK: WE HAVE 5 S. CASE NO.:, 19-2986, 701 PARKWAY DRIVE, EBERHARDT.

[S. 19-2986 CE 701 Parkway Drive Eberhart, Charles Heather Debevec]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. YOU MAY PROCEED.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: CASE NO.: 19-298671 PARKWAY DRIVE, CHARLES EBERHARDT.

THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON NOVEMBER 7, 2019. IT WAS FOR SECTION 5-1.104.5 -UNSAFE BUILDING, COVERED WINDOWS. IT'S REQUESTED THEY REMOVE THE BOARDS FROM THE WINDOWS. THE CITY REQUEST THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINDS A VIOLATION EXISTS, THE FATHER BE GIVEN -- AS WE DISCUSSED YESTERDAY -- 30 DAYS TO COMPLY OR A FINE OF $100 PER DAY BE ASSESSED.

I HAVE PHOTOS TO SUBMIT. I SPOKE TO MR. EBERHARDT THIS MORNING THERE WAS ONE BOARD LEFT ON ONE WINDOW. AND I EXPLAINED THAT THE BOARD NEEDED TO BE REMOVED. HE STATED THAT THE WINDOW WAS BROKEN. IT'S AN OLD STYLE WINDOW. HE IS GOING TO REMOVE THE BIG PIECE OF PLYWOOD AND PUT A SMALLER BOARD UP TO COVER JUST THE BROKEN SPOT. HIS INTENTION IS TO REPAIR THE WINDOW BY JANUARY, THE BEGINNING OF JANUARY. HE IS HAVING TROUBLE FINDING THE

PIECE TO FIT IT. >> OKAY. BUT OTHER THAN THAT

[01:35:07]

STRIP OF WINDOW -- >> YES, MA'AM.

>> CAN WE JUST CONTINUE THIS UNTIL THE NEXT DOCKET SINCE IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PRETTY MUCH IN SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE BUT FOR THAT ONE WINDOW?

>> YES, MA'AM. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ALL RIGHT. LET'S CONTINUE THIS UNTIL THE NEXT DOCKET. THANK YOU.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: FOR THE RECORD, MR. EBERHARDT WAS NOT PRESENT.

>> IT WAS THIS MORNING AND THAT WAS MY FAULT. I LOOK AT MY NOTES WRONG. I HAD STILL SPOKEN WITH HIM AND EXPLAIN THE SITUATION, BUT HE DID SHOW UP THIS MORNING I MISSED HIM DUE TO AN ERROR IN MY NOTES BUT I DID EXPLAIN THE SITUATION.

>> THANK YOU. THAT WILL BE NOTED FOR THE RECORD. NEXT CASE, MADAME CLARK.

[T. 19-2991 VR 211 Orange Avenue Gibbons, Derrick & Kristina Heather Debevec]

>>THE CLERK: CASE 19- 1921. GIBBONS.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: WHEN YOU'RE READY. HEATHER DEBEVEC CITY OF FORT PIERCE CODE ENFORCEMENT. THIS IS CASE NO.: 19-2991, 21 -- 211 ORANGE AVENUE. THIS CASE WAS INITIATED NOVEMBER 7, 2019. IT WAS FOR DOING BUSINESS WITHOUT ATTACKS.

IT'S REQUESTED THAT THEY ADJUST THE ADVERTISEMENT AND RENTALS TO MATCH THE RESTRICTIONS OF THE BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT OF 30 DAYS OR MORE.

THE CITY REQUEST A FINE OF ONE MONTH RENTAL OR $5000 BE ASSESSED. THE CITY REQUEST AN IMMEDIATE CEASE AND DESIST ORDER BE IMPOSED IN FUTURE RENTALS BE TERMINATED IMMEDIATELY. ALL ADVERTISEMENTS FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE TO BE REMOVED AND PROOF OF CANCELLATION FOR PENDING RESERVATIONS BE PROVIDED.

I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH MS. GIBBONS EXPLAINING THAT IN THE AD IT IS SHOWING THAT THIS PERSON DOES WEEKLY -- A DISCOUNT FOR WEEKLY RENTALS NEEDED TO BE REMOVED. AND SHE STATED THAT SHE HAD A RENTAL SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY, WHICH WAS LESS THAN THE 30 DAYS. AND WE EXPLAINED THAT THAT NEEDED TO BE CANCELED WITH PROOF OF CANCELLATION THAT EVERYTHING HAD TO BE 30 DAYS OR MORE BASED ON HER VALID TAX RECEIPT.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. THANK YOU. AND MA'AM, WOULD YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND

STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. >> CHRISTINA GIBBONS

(THE RESPONDENT WAS SWORN IN.). >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: HOW

YOU RESPOND TO THE ALLEGATIONS. >> THE INITIAL REQUEST FOR THE BUSINESS LICENSE RENEWAL WAS SENT TO MY OLD ADDRESS AND I DID NOT RECEIVE IT. MY HUSBAND HAD A TERRIBLE BRAIN INJURY THIS YEAR AND I HAVE NOT BEEN HOME STUDY. AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR WE WERE UP IN JACKSONVILLE IN THE HOSPITAL FOR SEVERAL WEEKS. SO, I MISSED THE FORM THAT CAME. OR I DIDN'T GET IT. I GOT IT AND I IMMEDIATELY CAME HERE AND GOT MY BUSINESS TAX CERTIFICATE ON NOVEMBER 2 BECAUSE SOMEHOW, IN THE MAIL I GOT THIS LETTER AFTER I HAD ALREADY INITIATED BY BUSINESS TAX LICENSE. I CALLED HEATHER IMMEDIATELY AND SHE WAS LIKE YES. I SEE THAT IT HAS BEEN DONE NO PROBLEM. MAKE SURE THAT YOUR ADVERTISEMENTS MATCH AND I SAID NO PROBLEM. I GOT ONLINE AND I REALIZED THAT BACK IN FEBRUARY I HAD CHANGED IT, WHICH I DID -- I OBVIOUSLY DID NOT UNDERSTAND THAT IT WAS A BREAK IN WHATEVER THAT FEBRUARY ONLY HAS 28 DAYS AND I HAD A RENTER THAT WAS COMING FROM JANUARY 1 TO THE 31ST AND SOMEBODY THAT WAS COMING FROM MARCH 1 AT THE 31ST. AND SHE WAS COMING BETWEEN FEBRUARY 1 AND THE 28TH. SO I HAD TO ALLEVIATE THE 30 DAYS TO LET HER HAVE THE RENTAL THERE. AND THEN I GUESS -- AND ALL OF THIS MASS CHAOS THIS YEAR, I DID NOT FLIP IT BACK. IN THE MEANTIME, THESE OTHER PEOPLE HAD DONE SHORTER RENTALS. SO AS SOON AS POSSIBLE LET ME KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON, I OBVIOUSLY CHANGED IT. THIS MORNING I WAS TALKING TO -- I APOLOGIZE I CAN'T REMEMBER YOUR NAME.

>> TO CHARLENE ABOUT IT AND SHE SAID JUST BECAUSE IT SAYS HERE THAT -- I MEAN -- IVAN PRACTICE LAST NIGHT TO SEE IF I COULD EVEN GET A RENTAL WITH MY PROPERTY FOR LESS THAN 30 DAYS AND IT DOES NOT ALLOW IT. BUT APPARENTLY ON ANOTHER SCREEN IT SHOWS THAT THERE IS A DISCOUNT FOR WEEKLY, WHICH IS -- YOU CAN'T EVEN DO A WEEKLY RENTAL. SO I SPOKE WITH HER THIS MORNING AND GEARED OUT ALL I DID WAS JUST A RAISE THE DISCOUNT WHICH HOPEFULLY IT

[01:40:04]

>> THERE'S ONLY SO MANY THINGS THAT I CAN CHANGE ON THERE. BUT CURRENTLY, YOU CAN'T EVEN SEARCH THE PROPERTY IF YOU DO IT WILL LET YOU CLICK ON DATES UNLESS YOU CLICK ON EXACTLY 30 DAYS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO ABOUT THAT.

>> I'M SORRY TO CUT YOU OFF. I APOLOGIZE. WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WANTED TO SAY

BEFORE INTERRUPTED? >> I THINK THAT SAID AS FAR AS I KNOW I'M IN COMPLIANCE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE I CAN DO BESIDES CANCELING THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING IN. BUT THOSE DATES THAT ARE IN THERE, THERE'S FAMILY MEMBERS THAT COME. I HAVE TO BLOCK OUT THOSE SPECIFIC DATES SO THEY CAN'T GET RENTED OUT. EVEN THOUGH IT SHOWS THAT THERE ARE SHORTER DATES IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THE RENTED IT MEANS THAT THERE -- BEING UTILIZED BY MY HUSBAND HERSELF HER FRIENDS AND FAMILY THAT ARE IN TOWN. ALL OF THOSE THINGS COME IN PLAY WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE CALENDAR.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. ANYTHING FURTHER? I GUESS THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

>> I GUESS THAT'S IT FOR NOW. >> GOOD MORNING. WERE YOU

SWORN. >> YES, I WAS.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: YOUR TURN.

>> YES. SO I WORKED WITH MS. GIBBONS THIS MORNING. AND I CAN VERIFY THAT WE DID, TOGETHER, FIGURE OUT HOW TO REMOVE THE WEEKLY DISCOUNT. I'M SHOWING THIS TO HEATHER RIGHT NOW. SO, THAT WORKED FINE. IT SHOWS A MONTHLY DISCOUNT AMOUNT. AND SO FAR AS THAT GOES, JUST TO HELP HER OUT, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

>> I DO NOT MIND AT ALL. I APPRECIATE YOUR BEING HERE TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH.

>> YOU MIGHT REALLY DO BETTER JUST PROMOTING A SMALLER MONTHLY RENTAL PRICE, WHICH

WILL THEN AIRBNB WILL SHOW. >> OKAY.

>> JUST FOR YOUR OWN MARKETING. ALSO LISTING YOUR BTR, YOUR LICENSE IS A COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE IN TOWN NOW BECAUSE THAT SHOWS YOU'VE DONE EVERYTHING RIGHT. SO THOSE ARE JUST ADVICE TO YOU AND TO SAY 30 DAY MINIMUM IN THEIR BEFORE THEY GO IN AND TRY TO DO ANY RENTING IS HELPFUL FOR PEOPLE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING WHICH I KNOW YOU'RE DOING.

>> AND THERE ARE SOME SHORT RENTALS SHOWN. SO ANY OF THOSE THAT ARE NOT FOR PERSONAL USE, THAT YOU'RE GETTING RENTAL FOR WOULD NEED TO BE VERIFIED. WITH HEATHER.

>> IS SHE OTHERWISE IN COMPLIANCE?

>> YES. >> I'M SORRY. WITH WHAT MS. ADAIR HAD SHOWN, IT WOULD MAKE COMPLIANCE. THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE IS WHERE MS. GIBBONS HAD SAID SOMETHING ABOUT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL IN JANUARY. FOR BEING LESS THAN THE 30 DAYS. THAT'S ONLY ONE HAVING QUESTION.

>> OIL HAVE TO EITHER EXTEND THAT TO 30 DAYS OR CANCEL IT. THERE'S ONE THAT'S 28 DAYS. I MIGHT JUST GIVE THEM TWO DAYS FOR FREE JUST I WOULD HATE TO CANCEL A WHOLE MONTH, YOU KNOW.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> I'M GOING TO ADDRESS THAT.

HOLD ON. >> I'M GOING TO LEAVE THAT UP

TO MAGISTRATE. >>.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: GO AHEAD, CHARLENE.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT YOU MIGHT JUST NEED TO UPDATE YOUR CALENDAR BECAUSE IT

SHOWING. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: NOW, I HAVE A QUESTION. FEBRUARY HAS 28 OR 29 DAYS. HOW DO WE GET AROUND -- WHEN YOU SAY MONTHLY RENTALS, IF WE DO THE MONTH IS ONLY 28 DAYS AND 29 IS THE EXCEPTION FOR THE FEBRUARY MONTH?

>> THE BUSINESS TAX RECEIPTS THAT ARE ISSUED SAY 30 DAYS OR MORE. IT DOESN'T SAY MONTHLY.

IT SAYS 30 DAYS OR MORE. SO YOU COULD GO FROM THE MIDDLE OF ONE MONTH TO THE MIDDLE OF ANOTHER MONTH AS LONG AS IT'S 30 DAYS OR MORE. IT'S THE NUMBER OF DAYS, NOT THE MONTH.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: I KNOW. BUT I'M JUST THROWING OUT THERE THE CITY COUNCIL.

>> GOING BY THE EXACT LITTLE Ã LITERAL READING FOR SOMETHING THAT APPEARS TO BE AN AMBIGUOUS I THINK THE RESULTS WOULD BE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO RENTED FOR THE EXTRA DAYS BEYOND THE END OF FEBRUARY IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE 30 DAY REQUIREMENT.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. I WOULD ASK THAT WHOEVER REGULATES I TAKE A LOOK AT THAT

MONTHLY, CHARLENE? >> YES, MA'AM. THAT'S A STATE ROLLING IF IT'S 30 DAYS OR LESS, OR LESS THAN 30 DAYS, DEPENDING ON WHAT THE LOOK AT THE HOTELS, STATUTES WERE THE BUILDING STATUTES. SINCE WE ARE INTO THE RENTAL, WE LOOK AT

[01:45:03]

TO THE CITY. >> I WAS JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE

-- ARE YOU WITH ME. >> I AM TOTALLY WITH YOU.

THAT'S WHY DID NOT THINK THERE WAS ANY PROBLEM WITH IT. I DO HAVE A QUESTION. SO -- IN THE EVENT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO HELP THE DOWNTOWN AREA -- OBVIOUSLY, I AM TRIED AND TRUE DOWNTOWN LEVER. SO IF THERE WAS SOME WAY TO PUT THAT IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, IS THAT SOME WAY THAT WE CAN DO THAT SO THAT IT COULD BE 28 DAYS OR DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF TIME? IS THERE SOMETHING THAT CAN -- A WAY -- A WAY THAT WE CAN CHANGE THAT?

>> I DO NOT HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT RIGHT NOW. THERE IS A STATE STATUTE ONPOINT THAT VERY MUCH A FAX WHAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CAN DO IN REGARD TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS.

ALL I CAN SAY IS WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LAWS THE WAY THAT THE WRITTEN RIGHT NOW.

>> OKAY. >> OKAY. I JUST QUESTION THAT BECAUSE MONTHLY WOULD BE GENERALLY THINK ABOUT 30 DAYS, BUT IF IT SAYS MONTHLY, IT'S AMBIGUOUS INSOFAR AS IT COMES TO THE 28 DAY RENTAL. SHE SAYS I'M RENTING IT FOR THE MONTH.

SHE DOEN'T GET CITED BECAUSE IS LESS THAN THE 30 DAYS. AS OPPOSED TO MONTHLY BY

DEFINITION. >> THERE ARE SOME OTHER SHORTER RENTALS, RESERVATION SHOWN ON THE CALENDAR THAT ARE.

>> CONSIDERABLY SHORTER AS WELL.

>> RIGHT. >> WE'VE DISCUSSED THOSE.

>> SO, ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING FURTHER?

>> NOW. >> ALL TREAT THIS AS AN R&D AND A VIOLATION DID EXIST BUT HAS BEEN CURED AS OF TODAY'S DATE. STAY IN TOUCH WITH THIS OFFICE.

MS. ADAIR KNOWS EVERYTHING ABOUT THE -- I MEAN THE RENTAL , ACCORDING TO OUR STATUTE, CITY ORDINANCE. SHE BE THE PERFECT PERSON AND MR. BEVAN ABOUT HOW TO STAY OUT OF THIS

TRIBUNAL. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> HAVE A QUESTION. IF SHE REQUIRED TO CANCEL THE SHORTER ONES WITH PROOF OF CANCELLATION OR ARE YOU JUST ARE ENDING

THEM. >> I WANT TO RND IT WITH THE CAVEAT THAT GET WITH THEM AND MAKE SURE THOSE ARE CANCEL BECAUSE YOU DO NOT WANT TO COME

BACK IN YOUR. >> RIGHT.

>> OKAY. >> YES, MA'AM. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT I AM JUST A VOLUNTEER RESEARCHER. SO COMMUNICATION SHOULD GO WITH

THE CODE OFFICER. >> OKAY.

>> I'M NOT ALLOWED. >> WE DID SIT HERE IN MAGISTRATE COURT AND KIND OF HELPED HER, YOU KNOW, FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THIS, BUT I'M NOT REALLY SUPPOSED TO WORK DIRECTLY WITH CITIZENS.

>> OKAY. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT.

>> BUT SHE IS THE GURU (LAUGHING).

>> THANK YOU. GOOD LUCK. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: NEXT

[V. 19-1017 CE cont.from 12/11 1205 Avenue M Moore, Sam Heather Debevec]

CASE. >>THE CLERK: THIS IS OUR LAST

CASE. 5 D, -- 5 V. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: V AS

IN VICTOR. OKAY. >>MS. DEBEVEC: THIS IS CASE NO.: 19-1017. IT WAS A CONTINUATION FROM LAST HEARING OF DECEMBER 11. IT IS 1205 AVENUE M OWNED BY SAM MOORE. THE CASE WAS INITIATED ON APRIL 20 OF THIS YEAR. IT WAS FOR SECTION 1646, 47, 48 SUBSECTION 1 AND FIVE OF OUTSIDE STORAGE. SECTION 16-46, 47, 48, SUBSECTION 11 OUTSIDE STORAGE INDOOR FURNITURE. IT'S REQUESTED TO REMOVE ITEMS ALONG THE FENCE IN THE WEST YARD, REMOVE BUCKETS JUGS CONTAINERS FROM THE FRONT YARD, REMOVE INDOOR OFFICE CAFETERIA CHAIR FROM THE FRONT YARD.

THE CITY REQUESTED OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE BINDS THE VIOLATION EXISTED, THE VIOLATOR BE PUT ON NOTICE THAT PER STATE STATUE OF 162.06 (3) THAT A REPEAT OF THE VIOLATIONS WILL BE ÃRESULT IN ADDITIONAL COSTS AND PENALTIES BEING ASSESSED.

I HAVE PHOTOS TO PRESENT. NOTICING THAT NO RESPONDENT IS PRESENT, I WILL MOVE THAT THE PHOTOS BE MARKED AS CITY'S COMPOSITE 1.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. IT WILL BE ADMITTED.

[01:50:18]

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: COMPOSITE 1, CITY

ANYTHING FURTHER? >> NO, MA'AM.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: SAM MOORE IS NOT HERE DOORS ARE REPRESENTATIVE ON HIS BEHALF.

I FIND THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS. AND SAM MOORE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION. I WOULD

GIVE HIM. >> EXCUSE ME, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A REVIEW AND DETERMINATION.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: OKAY. I'M SORRY. OKAY. THANK YOU. I WILL FIND THAT THE VIOLATION EXISTS BUT HAS BEEN CURED AS OF TODAY'S DATE. THEY NEED TO BE NOTIFIED THAT IF THIS MATTER COMES AGAIN THEY COULD BE NOTED AS A ANOTHER VIOLATION IN THE PENALTIES ARE STIPULATED

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: ANYTHING ELSE? THEN WE ARE ADJOURNED.

>>MS. DEBEVEC: JUST NOTICE, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE.

>>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: HOW ARE THEY NOTIFIED.

>>THE CLERK: THEY WERE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE VIOLATOR CERTIFIED MAIL. IF THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED SIGNS, IT IS PLACED IN THE FILE. IF THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED UNSIGNED OR UNCLAIMED AN AFFIDAVIT WITH THE NOTICE HEARING IS SENT TO THE VIOLATOR REGULAR U.S. MAIL. 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING A NOTICE IS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD IN CITY HALL.

A NOTICE OF HEARING HIS POST AT THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WITH AN AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING.

IF THE GREEN CARD IS NOT RETURNED TO CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING THE POSTING IS COMPLETED IN THE SAME MANNER AS IF THE CARD WAS RETURNED UNCLAIMED. YOUR CASE IS NOT MANDATED BY STATE STATUTE, THE MAILING OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING ARE HANDLED IN THE SAME MANNER STATED PRIOR. AT THE GREEN CARD IS RETURNED UNSIGNED, UNCLAIMED OR NOT RETURNED A NOTICE OF HEARING IS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD IN

CITY HALL. >>THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: THANK YOU. ANYTHING

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.