Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:02]

OKAY. LET'S CALL THE CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MAGISTRATE MEETING FOR JUNE 8TH, 2022.

YOUR ORDER. IT IS ONE 0:08 P.M..

AND JUST AS A REMINDER TO EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING.

[SWEARING IN]

SO ANY DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE WILL HAVE TO BE BASED ON THE RECORD OR ANY SWORN TESTIMONY.

SO AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO SWEAR IN ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK OR PLANS ON SPEAKING FOR.

YOU COULD PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD.

JUST THINK YOU MAY BE SEATED.

UH, NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS ADOPTION OF LAST THE LAST MEETING'S MINUTES.

[ADOPTION OF MINUTES]

I HAVE REVIEWED THOSE AND SIGN THEM.

THEY'VE BEEN. THEY HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED.

[REPORTS]

REPORTS. YOU DO NOT HAVE ANYONE, UM, PRESENT ON THE AUTHORIZATION TO IMPOSE FINES LIST SO WE CAN GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THAT LIST. JUST FOR SECTION ONE AUTHORIZATION TO IMPOSE FINES.

THERE'S NO COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE THEN.

I FIND THAT ALL THE RESPONDENTS IN THE CASES LISTED IN THE AGENDA ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SET FORTH IN VIOLATIONS.

OPPONENTS IN THE CASES HAVE UNTIL JUNE 23RD.

THEY WERE FOUND IN VIOLATION LAST MONTH.

SO WE'RE JUST APPROVING THE FINE AS WRITTEN.

ALL RIGHT. YEAH. THEN I APPROVE THE FINES AS WRITTEN.

ONTO OLD BUSINESS.

[OLD BUSINESS]

VERY OLD BUSINESS CASE TO BE HEARD IS CB 2280222 AT 1061 CABLE NORTHEAST IN PALM BAY.

THIS CASE WAS READ IN LAST MONTH AS A FLAT FINE.

IT WAS FOUND IN VIOLATION AND GIVEN A FLAT FINE.

BUT WE NEEDED TO HAVE A DAILY FINE.

PLEASE. THEN I FIND THAT WE ARE GOING TO REPLACE THE.

BUT YOU SAID FLAT FINE FROM LAST TIME WITH THE DAILY FINES.

SO THE FINE WILL BE $50 PER DAY UNTIL THE PROPERTY.

[HEARINGS]

DRINKS. OUR FIRST CASE TO BE HEARD OFF THE HEARINGS IS.

YOU NUMBER 61 ON THE AGENDA IT'S SEB 2292822.

AT 520 TO PICO ROAD SOUTHWEST, THE CODE OFFICER IS LISA WEGMAN.

BUT AFTER AT LEAST ONE ISLAND CITY OF PALM BAY, THE VIOLATIONS STILL EXIST AND THE RESPONDENT IS ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL 60 DAYS TO STRAIGHTEN OUT THE CONTRACT AND BILL WITH THE UTILITIES DEPARTMENT.

UM THE RESPONDENT HERE TODAY SHE IS NOT OR SHE ATTEMPTED A COM BUT SHE'S KIND OF REALLY SICK SO I'M PRESENTING IT ON HER BEHALF TO ASK FOR MORE TIME.

AND SO DO YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT? OKAY. THANK YOU.

MY NEXT CASE TO BE HEARD IS ITEM NUMBER TWO UNDER HEARINGS AND THAT CB 2287022

[00:05:04]

AT 2565 MARIETTA STREET NORTHEAST AND THE CODE OFFICER IS VALID PRESENTS.

VALERIE SAENZ, CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER, CITY OF BOMBAY.

THE VIOLATIONS THAT EXIST ON 2565 MARIETTA STREET NORTHEAST REMAIN THE SAME.

THIS WAS A COMPLAINT THAT WAS RECEIVED FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT THAT THERE WAS ORIGINALLY NO PERMIT PULLED FOR THE SHED.

AND THE RESPONDENT IS HERE.

UM. HOW LONG HAS THIS BEEN ACTIVE? I GOT THE COMPLAINT ON MARCH 17TH, 2022.

THE COURTESY NOTICE WAS SENT OUT ON THE SAME DAY, MARCH 17TH.

AND THEN A FOLLOW UP INSPECTION WAS DONE TO FIND THAT A PERMIT STILL WAS NOT PULLED.

SO THE STATEMENT OF VIOLATION WAS SENT OUT APRIL 19TH.

WITH A CORRECTION DATE OF MAY 4TH AND UPON EMAILING THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT PERMIT STILL HAS NOT BEEN OBTAINED.

AND, YOU KNOW, FOR PERMITS BEEN APPLIED FOR? NOT AT THIS TIME.

IT'S FINE. I WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK.

IS YOUR MIC ON? I CAN'T HEAR YOU. YEAH, I'LL TRY TO STAND A LITTLE CLOSER TO IT.

CAN YOU PLEASE SAY YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? SORRY. CAN YOU PLEASE SAY YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? YES. MY NAME IS YASIEL SINGH KARAMCHAND.

GO AHEAD. UH.

THE PREVIOUS OFFICER CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER WAS VALERIE CARTER.

I THOUGHT MAYBE IT WAS A BATTERY CAR.

I THOUGHT MAYBE SHE GOT MARRIED.

OH. YOU KNOW.

A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DEJA VU FOR THIS ONE.

VALERIE, IF I MAY CALL YOU VALERIE.

IF YOU COULD PLEASE DIRECT ALL ALL YOUR COMMENTS TO OC.

AS I SAY, THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DEJA VU HERE IN 2015.

I WAS CITED FOR THE SAME INFRACTION.

AND. THEY SENT ME A LETTER SAYING THAT IT'S HEREBY.

THIS IS 2015.

IT'S HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE VIOLATION CITED IN THE ABOVE COMPLAINT.

AS. SOME IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY CODE.

NOW, SEVEN YEARS LATER, IT'S BROUGHT AGAIN.

SO. I CAN UNDERSTAND IT IN 20.

IN 2015.

CAN YOU? SO IN 2015, WAS THIS VIOLATION FOR JED? YES. BY THE NUMBERS ON THERE, YOU CAN SEE IT.

AND DID YOU GET A PERMIT FOR THAT SHED? IT WAS NOT REQUIRED.

UM. AND THIS CURRENT VIOLATION IS, AGAIN, FOR A SHED THAT'S NOT PERMITTED.

CORRECT? THIS IS SUCH AN OLD HOUSE.

I DON'T THINK PERMITS WERE ISSUED THEN.

OKAY. HOW LONG HAS THE SHED BEEN ON THE PROPERTY? AT LEAST SINCE 1958.

1958, YES.

OKAY. UM.

AND WHEN YOU WHEN YOU WERE GIVEN NOTICE THIS MOST RECENT TIME, DID YOU MAKE ANY EFFORT TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT? NO. WHY NOT? BECAUSE IT'S NOT REQUIRED.

AND WHERE DID YOU.

WHO DID YOU TALK TO? WHERE DID YOU FIND OUT? THAT INFORMATION IS NOT REQUIRED.

WAS SEVERAL OFFICES, BUILDING DEPARTMENT, ETC..

UM. VALERIE IN.

VALERIE, WOULD YOU MIND COMING BACK UP? I JUST WANT TO I JUST WANT TO CLEAR UP THIS ISSUE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT A SHELL OR A PERMIT IS REQUIRED.

[00:10:03]

ACCORDING TO MYRON TAYLOR ON AN EMAIL HE SENT ME.

HE VISITED THE PROPERTY AND CONFIRMED NO PERMIT WAS ISSUED FOR THE SHED INSTALLED ON THE LEFT REAR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

SO A PERMIT IS REQUIRED ACCORDING TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR.

DO WE HAVE A.

HOWEVER, ANY PORTION OF THE CITY CODE THAT'S CITED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR STATING THAT A SHED IS REQUIRED THAT PROPERTY.

NO, WE CITED IT FOR NOT HAVING THE PERMIT, WHICH IS THE SECTION ONE 85.1 81 A.

AT THE TIME, THE BUILDING INSPECTORS, WHEN THIS WAS SITED, THEY WERE NOT ENTERING CASES.

WE WERE ENTERING CASES ON BEHALF OF THEM.

OKAY. AND BUT DID THEY CITE ANY ANY PARTICULAR CODE THAT SAYS THAT? NO, IT WAS JUST CITED FOR WITHOUT HAVING THE PERMIT.

OKAY. UM.

WELL. I'M A LITTLE HESITANT TO UPHOLD THIS IF IF I DON'T HAVE A PORTION OF A CODE THAT'S CITED TO ME SAYING THAT THERE HAS TO BE A WELL, THAT'S WHAT HE CITED FOR NOT HAVING THE PERMIT.

AND THEN HE HAS TO GET WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO OBTAIN THAT PERMIT.

WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT I MEAN, IF THERE'S NOTHING IN THE CITY CODE THAT SAYS HE HAS TO HAVE A PERMIT.

AND. THERE'S ERIC DOESN'T NEED TO GET.

I'D LIKE TO IF I COULD JUST.

IT'S SOMEONE TO SHOW ME THAT.

THAT CODE, MIKE.

WHAT IF I MAKE THIS WHEN I WAS, LIKE, IN 2015 BY.

BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT IF IF A PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND HE DOESN'T HAVE A PERMIT, THEN HE'S VIOLATED THAT PORTION OF THE CODE THAT SAYS HE HAS TO HAVE A PERMIT.

BUT IF THERE'S NO.

BUT WHEN WE WHEN WE CITE FOR NOT HAVING A PERMIT, WE DON'T CITE THE ORDINANCE THAT STATES WHY THEY NEED A PERMIT.

WE STATE CITE IT UNDER THEY DIDN'T OBTAIN THE PERMIT.

ACCORDING TO 185 181 IS THIS BUILDING OR STRUCTURE RECORD ERECTED, MOVED OR ADDED TO OR ALTERED WITHOUT REQUIRED PERMIT? AND THEN WE DO THE TO IT SHED.

SO THERE'S NOTHING ADDITIONAL TO THAT THAT GETS SENT TO THE OWNERS WHEN THEY RECEIVE THIS NOTIFICATION.

THEY HAVE TO CONTACT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO FIND OUT WHAT IT IS THEY NEED TO OBTAIN PAPERWORK WISE TO HAVE THE PERMIT.

RIGHT. RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND. I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT FOR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO SAY THAT THEY THAT HE PUT THE SHED ON THE PROP OR SOMEBODY PUT THE SHED ON THE PROPERTY WITHOUT A PERMIT, THERE NEEDS TO BE THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME AUTHORIZING STATUTE THAT SAYS YOU CAN REQUIRE A PERMIT, BECAUSE WE'VE NEVER DONE THIS THAT WAY EVER.

ANY TIME WE'VE CITED FOR WITHOUT A PERMIT, WE HAVE CITED UNDER THIS SECTION CODE.

AND THEN DONE A TO WIN.

IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THAT WAY.

SO I'M GOING TO LET THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BECAUSE I SEE WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE CITING FOR.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IF YOU NEED A PERMIT AND YOU DO SOMETHING WITHOUT THE PERMIT, YOU'RE VIOLATING THAT SECTION.

BUT I WANT TO KNOW IS IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES LIKE WHAT REQUIRES THE PERMIT? BECAUSE, I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE, IF IF I WANTED TO PUT UP A NEW FRONT DOOR.

AND THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT DECIDED, WELL, YOU NEED A PERMIT FOR THAT.

WHY DO I NEED A PERMIT FOR THAT? AND I, I.

I THINK I KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING WITH HAVING TO PUT A PERMIT FOR A STRUCTURE ON THE LAND, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN IF YOU WANTED TO PAINT YOUR ROOM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE SOME SORT OF GUIDANCE WHERE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT SAYS THAT THIS PORTION OF THE CODE SAYS YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT, THEN WE COULD JUST ANYBODY COULD JUST SAY, YOU NEED A PERMIT.

THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT CAN SAY YOU NEED A PERMIT FOR ANYTHING.

SO IT'S NOT REALLY IT'S NOT CODE COMPLIANCE THAT I WHERE THE DISCONNECT IS IN MY HEAD RIGHT NOW, IT'S WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? THE CITY ATTORNEY. I GUESS I'M PERHAPS NOT UNDERSTANDING.

I BELIEVE I HEARD HIM SAY THE FED HAS BEEN HERE SINCE 50.

SO I'M QUITE. BUT HAS HE BEEN CITED FOR WHAT'S.

THE THE ISSUE IS HE'S BEEN CITED FOR NOT HAVING A PERMIT.

AND HE DOESN'T HAVE A PERMIT FOR THAT SHED.

SO I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT MY QUESTION IS.

YEAH. WHY DOES HE HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT? WHERE IS THE RULE THAT SAYS HE HAS TO HAVE A PERMIT?

[00:15:03]

THIS IS A QUESTION THAT I GUESS WE TABLE UNTIL.

OKAY. I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE BEST.

AND I ASK YOU AGAIN, SIR? YES, PLEASE COME UP. THIS.

THIS THE BUILDING.

THESE. LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT HAPPENED TO MY NEIGHBOR.

THE HOUSE ALSO WAS BUILT IN THE FIFTIES.

IT. CITY'S MARIETTA STREET IS ON THE CORNER LOT.

THE ROAD RUNNING. AND RIGHT ANGLES IS A SHORT ROAD OF 50 OR SO METERS.

MY NEIGHBOR.

ORGANELLES. WAS CITED BY SOME AUTHORITY.

AND THEY ASK HER TO EITHER MOVE HER HOUSE OR DEMOLISHES.

AND SHE COULDN'T MOVE IT BECAUSE IT HAS A BASEMENT.

HE HAD TO GO TO COURT.

OUR LAWYER GO TO COURT AND FIGHT WHATEVER WHICH AUTHORITY TOLD IT TO MOVE IT.

OR DEMOLISH IT.

AND SHE PREVAILED.

IN 2015, THERE WAS NO GENERAL MAGISTRATE HERE.

IT WAS A PANEL.

AS I'M SURE YOU'RE AWARE.

THEY LISTENED TO OUR ARGUMENT AND THEY DECIDED THAT I WAS IN COMPLIANCE.

AND I'VE BEEN IN COMPLIANCE AND I'M STILL IN COMPLIANCE.

AND I THINK THAT RULING SHOULD STAND.

OKAY. I UNDERSTAND.

AND YOU HAVE YOUR NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE HERE AND.

UM, BUT THAT'S OBVIOUSLY A DIFFERENT THAT YOU'VE BEEN THAT'S A DIFFERENT VIOLATION, AN OLDER VIOLATION.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT'S THE SAME VIOLATION.

EXCUSE ME. NO, NO.

WELL, IT MIGHT BE THEY MIGHT BE THEY MIGHT BE NOTICING YOU FOR VIOLATION AT THE SAME THING.

BUT IT'S A DIFFERENT NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN THIS TIME.

ISN'T THIS DOUBLE JEOPARDY? WELL, THAT'S WHAT.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE. WE'RE.

FINE. WE'RE GOING TO TABLE THIS AND WE'RE GOING TO DO IS WE'RE GOING TO FIND OUT WHAT CODE REQUIRES YOU TO HAVE A SHED.

SO HERE'S HERE'S THE DEAL.

YOU'RE. YOU DON'T HAVE A PERMIT FOR THE SHED.

THE. CODE DEPARTMENT HAS CITED YOU FOR NOT HAVING A PERMIT FOR THE SHED.

WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS IF YOU ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR THE SHED, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR THE SHED, THEN.

THE THE VIOLATION YOU NEED TO BE FOUND IN COMPLIANCE AND OF STORY.

IF THE IF THE CODE DOES REQUIRE YOU TO HAVE TO HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR YOUR SHED, THEN WE NEED TO GET THROUGH THAT PROCESS SO THAT YOU CAN GO SO THAT YOU CAN GET THAT PERMIT AND BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE THAT WAY.

I UNDERSTAND.

SO? SO THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT I WANT.

I WANT TO TABLE THIS FOR NOW.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO FIND YOU IN VIOLATION TODAY, BUT THE CITY CAN BRING THIS BACK UP ON THE NEXT FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

AND BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, I JUST NEED YOU TO GO TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, AND WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT SECTION OF THE CODE REQUIRES HIM TO HAVE A SHED OR HAVE A PERMIT FOR A SHED ON HIS PROPERTY BECAUSE.

TO BE HONEST, I THINK THERE PROBABLY IS SOMETHING IN THE CODE THAT SAYS IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT TO YOUR TO THE LAND, THAT YOU HAVE TO GET A PERMIT FOR IT. I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME RIGHT NOW TO SAY THAT YOU THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR YOUR SHED.

THERE COULD SINCE THIS THING'S ALSO BEEN AROUND SINCE 1958, THERE COULD BE SOMETHING IN THERE THAT SAYS ANY STRUCTURE THAT'S BEEN ON THE PROPERTY SINCE 1970, FOR EXAMPLE, DOESN'T NEED A DOESN'T NEED A PERMIT.

MAYBE THAT'S WHY YOU WERE FOUND IN COMPLIANCE LAST TIME.

ALL I HAVE IS THIS.

I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T HAVE I DON'T HAVE THE WHOLE STORY ON WHAT HAPPENED LAST TIME TO SAY THAT SINCE IT WAS DECIDED THIS WAY LAST TIME, I HAVE TO DECIDE IT THIS WAY, THIS TIME. SO WHAT AM I MAKING MYSELF CLEAR? THAT WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW IS, ARE YOU REQUIRED TO HAVE A PERMIT? IF YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE A PERMIT, THEN YOU'RE NOT IN VIOLATION.

AND WE JUST.

EVERYBODY GOES A SEPARATE WAY.

IF YOU ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A PERMIT, THEN YOU JUST HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS TO GET THE PERMIT OR OTHERWISE YOU'LL BE IN VIOLATION.

[00:20:03]

SO WE'LL TABLE IT UNTIL NEXT TIME.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YOU UNDERSTAND? NO, NOT TO ME. IT MAKES SENSE.

BUT IT'S NOT.

I HAVE SOMETHING THEY'RE SAYING I'M IN COMPLIANCE.

DOES. I HAVE A SELL BY DATE.

I UNDERSTAND.

I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE THIS DOCUMENT THAT SAYS THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE AND.

IT SAYS BREVARD COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER ID, AND I'M ASSUMING THAT'S THE ID FOR YOUR PROPERTY.

IT GIVES IT HAS A CASE NUMBER.

I DON'T HAVE THE CASE IN FRONT OF ME.

IF YOU COULD, IF YOU HAVE THIS CASE, NUMBER 15, DASH 4864.

IF YOU HAVE ALL THE.

YOU HAVE ALL THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU WERE GIVEN WITH THAT NOTICE OF VIOLATION.

THEN MAYBE WE COULD.

I'D BE ABLE TO LOOK AT IT.

BUT FOR THIS, ALL I HAVE IS THIS.

THIS NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS.

NO. YOU HAVE THE PIECE OF PAPER I GAVE YOU.

THAT MAY HELP. WHAT OTHER PIECE OF PAPER DID YOU GIVE ME HERE? THIS IS THE SAME THING.

BOTTOM LINE IS WE JUST NEED TO KNOW.

WE JUST NEED TO KNOW IF YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR YOUR SHED.

AND IF YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED, THEN YOU'RE THEN YOU'RE STILL IN COMPLIANCE.

IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL.

IF YOU ARE REQUIRED, THEN JUST GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND GET YOU PERMITTED.

I PLAY, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO FIND YOU.

I'M NOT GOING TO FIND YOU IN VIOLATION TODAY, THOUGH, THAT PLACES ME IN DOUBLE JEOPARDY BECAUSE THEY ALREADY CITED THAT I AM COMPLIANCE.

I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR YOUR OPINION ON THAT.

AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE MY RULING, YOU CAN.

YOU KNOW, THERE ARE THERE ARE WAYS OF APPEALING.

THERE ARE WAYS OF APPEALING IT.

I THINK THE EASIEST COURSE OF ACTION WOULD JUST BE TO GET TO THE GO TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND FIGURE OUT I'VE BEEN TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

I BELIEVE THEY'RE THERE IN THEIR WINN-DIXIE RIGHT NOW.

YES, I'VE BEEN THERE.

AND THEY DON'T KNOW.

I'VE BEEN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

I'VE BEEN TO VERA TO WHERE ALL THE LANDS ARE ABOUT THAT AREA.

THESE WERE THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.

TWO HOUSES WERE BUILT IN THE FIFTIES.

IN THAT AREA.

NOW TO TELL MY NEIGHBOR THAT SHE HAS TO DEMOLISH HER HOUSE SHOWS THAT SOMEBODY DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

OKAY. AND THAT HAS THAT THAT THAT LITTLE STORY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WITH WHAT WE'RE WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY.

SO, UM. NEXT TIME WHEN WE BRING THIS.

CAN CAN WE HAVE BOTH? CAN I HAVE BOTH CASES IN FRONT OF ME? WE HAVE THE 2015 CASE AS WELL.

RIGHT. BECAUSE ALL I MEAN, ALL I KNOW IS THAT THERE WAS A 2015 CASE.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE SAME NOTICE OF VIOLATION.

I DON'T KNOW.

I JUST KNOW THERE WERE TWO DIFFERENT CASES.

IT COULD BE.

IT COULD BE. YOU WERE CITED UNDER ONE SECTION OF THE CODE IN 2015 AND YOU WERE CITED UNDER A SUBSECTION OF THE SAME YOU KNOW, SAME SAME CODE PORTION OF THE CODE.

EXACTLY THE SAME WORDING.

OKAY. WELL, I JUST BEFORE I MAKE A RULING, EITHER WAY, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO COMPARE BOTH BOTH CASES, BECAUSE IF IT'S THE SAME, THEN YES, YOU'RE IN COMPLIANCE, YOU HAVE YOUR NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE AND WE'RE DONE.

IF IT'S NOT, THEN WE HAVE TO CONTINUE ON WITH THE NORMAL PROCESS.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? WELL, WE'LL TABLE IT UNTIL JULY 13, SO I'LL SEND YOU A NOTICE THAT ON JULY 13TH YOU'LL COME BACK HERE AT 1:00.

AND IF I'M NOT AVAILABLE.

AND HE'LL MAKE A RULING WITHOUT YOU PRESENT.

HMM. HE WOULD MAKE HIS DECISION WITHOUT YOU PRESENT.

WHICH WILL PREJUDICE MY.

YOU HAVE A REASON.

DO YOU HAVE A REASON RIGHT NOW? YES. I'M GOING TO UNITED KINGDOM FOR SIX MONTHS.

OKAY. FOR SIX MONTHS? YES. MEDICAL.

AND DO YOU KNOW WHEN? WHAT DAY YOU'LL BE BACK? NO. THAT MAKES IT A LITTLE LITTLE TO.

[00:25:06]

YEAH, WELL.

BUT RIGHT NOW, LET'S JUST PLAN ON TABLING THIS UNTIL.

UNTIL YOU GET BACK. SO SIX MONTHS FROM NOW WOULD BE THE DECEMBER MEETING.

DO YOU THINK YOU'LL BE BACK BY THEN? JANUARY AFTER JANUARY THE FOURTH.

JANUARY AFTER JANUARY THE FOURTH.

OKAY. UM, I THINK.

I THINK WE'RE BEING.

I THINK WE'RE BEING VERY LENIENT HERE AND SAYING THAT WE'LL TABLE IT TILL UNTIL THE JANUARY MEETING.

IF YOU CAN'T MAKE THE JANUARY MEETING OR BECAUSE YOU'RE STILL OUT OF THE COUNTRY, YOU NEED TO CONTACT THE CITY AND LET THEM KNOW SO WE CAN WE CAN ARRANGE TO MOVE IT AGAIN.

IF IF YOU'RE NOT HERE, THEN WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE THE HEARING WITHOUT YOU.

HEY. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.

IN THE MEANTIME, WE COULD SAVE EVERYBODY A LOT OF TROUBLE IF YOU COULD JUST.

TALK WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND MAYBE WORK IT OUT WITH THEM.

DONE. THEY TOLD ME YOU DON'T NEED A PERMIT.

OKAY. UM. HAVE HIM TELL YOU AGAIN.

WHAT CAN I DO IF THEY TELL ME I DON'T NEED A PERMIT BECAUSE IT'S GRANDFATHERED IN? WHAT CAN I DO? I GO AGAIN AND KEEP GOING.

IF. IF THEY TELL YOU IT'S BEEN GRANDFATHERED IN, THEN I'M SURE CODE COMPLIANCE WILL TAKE THIS OFF THE OFF THE AGENDA.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SIMPLY UNTIL JANUARY 4TH.

JANUARY 11 IN THE JANUARY 11TH MEETING.

OKAY. THE FOLLOWING CASE.

UM. SEB 2294022446 WARWICK STREET SOUTHEAST HAS BEEN CLOSED BY THE CITY.

THE FOLLOWING CASES HAVE COME INTO VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE.

SEB 22872222748.

DRIVE NORTHEAST 2287422 AT 686 NORTH STREET SOUTH NORTHWEST 2287522875 JARA AVENUE NORTHWEST 2288222 1401.

MAIN STREET NORTHEAST 2288322 2201 ROBERT J.

CONDON BOULEVARD NORTHEAST 2288422 1318 EARLY AVENUE NORTHWEST 22906221340. VANDA AVENUE SOUTHEAST 2290922 3243 HAYNSWORTH AVENUE SOUTHEAST 2291022 1619 HAYWORTH CIRCLE NORTHWEST 2292322438 JTC STREET SOUTHWEST.

THE FOLLOWING CASES ON THE AGENDA WILL BE HEARD ON CONSENT WITHOUT FURTHER TESTIMONY, AND THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IS REQUESTED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED UPON THE FILES PRESENTED. THE CITY REPRESENTS THE ALL RESPONDENTS HAVE BEEN SERVED AND ARE NOTICED.

ACCORDING TO CHAPTER 162 OF THE FLORIDA STATE STATUTES AND THE PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES.

THE RESPONDENTS ARE NOT PRESENT TO BE HEARD IN THE CASES HAVE NOT COME INTO COMPLIANCE.

THE CITY IS SUBMITTING ALL EXHIBITS AND AFFIDAVITS INTO EVIDENCE IN THESE CASES AND REQUESTS THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FIND THE RESPONDENTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SET FORTH IN THE STATEMENTS OF VIOLATION THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE SET A REASONABLE TIME FOR COMPLIANCE AND SET A DAILY FINE TO BE IMPOSED IF THE RESPONDENTS FAILED TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. CB 2286922 2532.

HOWEVER, HILL ROAD NORTHEAST 2287122 813 BADGER DRIVE NORTHEAST 2287622 1079 LAMPLIGHTER DRIVE NORTHWEST 2287722 294 AVON'S ROAD NORTHEAST 2287822 749.

FAIRHAVEN STREET NORTHEAST 2287922626.

FAIRHAVEN STREET NORTHEAST 2288022 160 MILE ROAD SOUTHWEST AND 22879228 466 SAN PEDRO AVENUE SOUTHWEST.

THAT IT? ALL RIGHT.

I FIND THAT ALL THE RESPONDENTS IN THE CASE IS LISTED BY THE SECRETARY ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SET FORTH IN THE STATEMENTS OF VIOLATION.

THE RESPONDENTS IN THE CASES LISTED HAVE UNTIL JUNE 23RD, WHICH IS 15 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THIS ORDER TO BRING THEIR PROPERTIES INTO COMPLIANCE.

THE CITY IS AUTHORIZED TO IMPOSE A FINE OF $50 PER DAY FOR EACH AND EVERY VIOLATION THAT CONTINUES PAST THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE.

[00:30:13]

FOLLOWING CASES ON THE AGENDA WILL BE HEARD AND CONSENT WITHOUT FURTHER TESTIMONY.

AND THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IS REQUESTED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED UPON THE FILES PRESENTED.

THE CITY REPRESENTS THE ALL RESPONDENTS HAVE BEEN SERVED AND ARE NOTICED.

ACCORDING TO CHAPTER 162, THE FOREST STATE STATUTES AND THE PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES.

THE RESPONDENTS ARE NOT PRESENT TO BE HEARD IN THE CASES HAVE NOT COME INTO COMPLIANCE.

THE CITY IS SUBMITTING ALL EXHIBITS AND AFFIDAVITS INTO EVIDENCE IN THESE CASES AND REQUESTS THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FIND THE RESPONDENTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SET FORTH IN THE STATEMENTS OF VIOLATION THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE SET A REASONABLE TIME FOR COMPLIANCE AND IMPOSE A FLAT FINE OF $200 IF THE RESPONDENTS FAILED TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. THE CITY ALSO REQUESTS THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO TAKE ALL REASONABLE ACTIONS TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE AND CHARGE THE PROPERTY OWNER WITH A REASONABLE COST OF THE ACTIONS, ALONG WITH THE FINE IMPOSED IF NOT IN COMPLIANCE BY THE COMPLIANCE STATE.

THE EB2288122 2565 AMBERLEY ROAD NORTHEAST 2288522 1194 PACE DRIVE NORTHWEST 2288622250 UMBER STREET NORTHWEST 22887221399 PACE DRIVE NORTHWEST 2288822 1401 HARTWELL STREET NORTHWEST 2288922 242.

CRAFTSMAN DRIVE NORTHWEST 2287322 AT 1078 GALENA AVENUE NORTHWEST 2294122 841 ROSTOCK CIRCLE NORTHWEST 2289022 386 IRA AVENUE NORTHWEST 2289122 681 KAPTUR STREET NORTHWEST 2289222 1255 SABLE SIEBOLD ROAD SOUTHWEST 2289322 543 TARR AVENUE SOUTHWEST 2289422 615 DEGROOTE ROAD SOUTHWEST 2289522331 CANOLA STREET SOUTHWEST 22896222888 SAGE AVENUE SOUTHWEST 2289822 1880 SARACEN AVENUE SOUTHEAST 2289922 1968 RADCLIFF AVENUE SOUTHEAST 2290022 1968 RADCLIFFE AVENUE SOUTHEAST 2290122 2631 PERALTA DRIVE SOUTHEAST 2290222 3250 MAINLAND AVENUE SOUTHEAST 2290322 2598 RAMSDALE DRIVE SOUTHEAST 2290422 1591 TAC ROAD SOUTHEAST 2290522 1391 WACO BOULEVARD SOUTHEAST 2290722 934 OR MORE STREET SOUTHEAST 2290822 AT 966 BRICKELL STREET SOUTHEAST.

I FIND THAT ALL THE RESPONDENTS IN THE CASE IS LISTED BY THE SECRETARY ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SET FORTH IN THE STATEMENTS OF VIOLATION.

RESPONDENTS IN THESE CASES HAVE UNTIL JUNE 18TH, WHICH IS TEN DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THIS ORDER TO BRING THEIR RESPECTIVE PROPERTIES INTO COMPLIANCE OR PAY A FLAT FINE OF $200. I ALSO AUTHORIZED THE CITY TO TAKE ALL REASONABLE ACTIONS TO BRING THE PROPERTIES INTO COMPLIANCE AND CHARGE THE PROPERTY OWNER WITH WITH THE REASONABLE COST OF THE ACTIONS ALONG WITH THE IMPOSED FINE.

FILING CASES ON THE AGENDA WILL BE HEARD AND CONSENT WITHOUT FURTHER TESTIMONY.

AND THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IS REQUESTED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED UPON THE FILES PRESENTED.

THE CITY REPRESENTS THE ALL RESPONDENTS HAVE BEEN SERVED AND ARE NOTICED.

ACCORDING TO CHAPTER 162 OF THE FLORIDA STATE STATUTES IN THE PALM BAY CODE OF LAWRENCE'S PRESENCE BE HEARD IN THE CASES HAVE NOT COME INTO COMPLIANCE.

THE CITY IS SUBMITTING ALL EXHIBITS AND AFFIDAVITS INTO EVIDENCE IN THESE CASES AND REQUESTS THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FIND THE RESPONSE IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SET FORTH IN THE STATEMENTS OF VIOLATION THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE SAID A REASONABLE TIME FOR COMPLIANCE AND IMPOSE A FLAT FINE OF $200 IF THE RESPONDENTS FAILED TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE BY THE COMPLIANCE STATE.

TB 2291122460.

AVENUE NORTHWEST 2291222 426 FOUR.

CLAW AVENUE NORTHWEST 2291322 481.

FIRESTONE STREET NORTHEAST 2291422 480 DILEO STREET NORTHEAST 2291522

[00:35:04]

327 CRASH CENTER DRIVE NORTHWEST 2291622 1560 AGENTS G SINGER COURT NORTHWEST 22917223380 ARNOLD AVENUE SOUTHWEST 2291822 521.

DARIEN AVENUE SOUTHWEST 2291922 3851 FITZPATRICK AVENUE SOUTHWEST 2292022 476 TAUBMAN STREET SOUTHWEST 2292122 818 EADS STREET SOUTHWEST 2292222446F ART STREET SOUTHWEST 2292422 2372 JUPITER BOULEVARD SOUTHWEST 2292522336 SANSOM AND SEVEN DOE AVENUE SOUTHWEST 2292622 1267 SCHUYLER STREET SOUTHWEST 2292722 582 SEACREST AVENUE SOUTHWEST 2292922 542 WHITE PLAINS AVENUE SOUTHWEST 2293022 241.

WESTWOOD STREET SOUTHWEST 2293122 1421 TRAVERSE STREET SOUTHEAST 2293222123. CAMERON STREET SOUTHEAST 2293322 1426 DIAMOND ROAD SOUTHEAST 2293422 1388 JORGENSEN ROAD SOUTHEAST 2293522 1351 VAN DIKE AVENUE SOUTHEAST 2293622 865 READING STREET SOUTHEAST 22937221231 VANDALIA AVENUE SOUTHEAST 2293822 2654 DAISY AVENUE SOUTHEAST AND 2293922 324.

CARVALHO STREET SOUTHEAST.

AT ALL. ALL RIGHT.

I FIND THAT THE RESPONDENTS IN THE CASE IS LISTED BY THE SECRETARY ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SET FORTH IN THE STATEMENTS OF VIOLATION.

THE RESPONDENTS IN THE CASE IS LISTED HAVE UNTIL JUNE 18TH, WHICH IS TEN DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THIS ORDER TO BRING THEIR RESPECTIVE PROPERTIES INTO COMPLIANCE.

OR THE CITY IS AUTHORIZED TO IMPOSE A FLAT FINE OF $200 FOR THE VIOLATION.

ANYTHING ELSE ON THE AGENDA? LIKE, UM, THE ONLY THING ON HERE IS TO ANNOUNCE THAT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING OR THE NEXT, UH, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE MEETING WILL BE JULY 13.

ANYTHING FROM THE CITY, THE CITY, ANYTHING FROM THE CODE COMPLIANCE.

ALL RIGHT. I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE PUBLIC, SO WE'LL ADJOURN AT 146.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.