[00:00:02]
          WE'LL CALL THE JUNE 11TH, 2025 CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING TO ORDER,
AND WE WILL BEGIN WITH SWEARING IN ANYBODY THAT 
          [CALL TO ORDER]
          [SWEARING IN]
WISHES TO SPEAK TODAY. PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND SO YOU CAN BE SWORN IN. 
          DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH,
SO HELP YOU GOD? THANK YOU. MAY BE SEATED. 
          ALL RIGHT. NEXT. NEXT IS THE ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES,
WHICH HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND ACCEPTED SO WE CAN MOVE ON TO REPORTS. 
          [ADOPTION OF MINUTES]
          [CODE COMPLIANCE REPORTS]
OUR FIRST CASE FOR REPORTS IS CB 2581625 AT 426 ALVARADO AVENUE SOUTHEAST. 
          THE CODE OFFICER FOR THIS ONE IS CHRISTOPHER ROBINSON. 
          THE OFFICER WILL TALK FIRST AND THEN YOU'LL. YOU'LL TALK SO YOU CAN JUST STAND BY. 
          OH. CHRIS ROBINSON. CITY OF PALM BAY CODE COMPLIANCE. 
          THIS IS A REFERENCE. A JUNK VEHICLE ON THE PROPERTY. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. SIR, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL ME WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          I'M SORRY, SIR. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND THEN TELL ME
TELL ME ABOUT YOUR CASE. 
          YEAH. RIGHT NOW, THE THE TRUCK IS STILL THERE,
BUT THE PEOPLE ARE STILL THERE, AND WE GOT EVICTION ON THE PEOPLE THAT LIVES THERE. 
          AND THEY SAY WE CAN'T GO ON THE PROPERTY OR HAVE IT TOWED OR NOTHING RIGHT NOW TILL THEY
GET GONE. 
          OKAY, SO IT'S NOT YOUR TRUCK. NO, IT'S NOT MY TRUCK. 
          AND I OWN THE PROPERTY. YOU OWN THE PROPERTY? BUT THESE ARE THE RENTERS, RIGHT? AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING FOR SIX MONTHS TO GET THEM OUT OF
THERE. 
          AND YOU KNOW HOW IT GOES. YOU JUST CAN'T. JUST. 
          NOBODY CAN DO IT. OKAY. AND SO HAVE YOU FILED AN EVICTION COMPLAINT? I'M PRETTY SURE. HAVE YOU FILED AN EVICTION COMPLAINT TO HAVE THEM REMOVED? YEAH, IT'S ALL BEEN DONE. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE THE DO YOU HAVE A WRIT OF EXECUTION? YES. SO ALL YOU REALLY NEED AT THIS POINT IS JUST TO HAVE THE SHERIFF COME IN AND REMOVE
THEM? YES, IT SHOULD BE THERE. DO YOU NEED THE PAPER TOMORROW OR THE NEXT DAY? THEY'LL BE POSTING IT ON THE DOOR. OKAY. SORRY. 
          FIRST. CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME? AND THEN CHARLES. 
          FRITZ. OKAY. AND IF YOU COULD SPEAK INTO THE MIC. 
          THEY WILL BE POSTING THE WRIT ON THE DOOR SOMETIME BETWEEN TODAY AND TOMORROW. 
          AND THEN THEY'LL HAVE 24 HOURS TO VACATE. AND THEN WHATEVER'S LEFT,
WE CAN GET RID OF IT. 
          OKAY. SO THAT'S THAT QUICK. BUT IT'S ALSO BEEN THAT LONG SINCE WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH IT. 
          OKAY. SO I'M GUESSING YOU'RE JUST LOOKING FOR AN EXTENSION? YEAH. I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG YOU GUYS GIVE, BUT WE'LL BE WILLING TO TOW IT,
LIKE, TWO WEEKS AGO. 
          BUT WE WERE TOLD THAT THAT'S ILLEGAL, SO. YEAH. 
          YEAH. WHICH I THOUGHT IT COULD BE CONSTRUED AS STEALING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          YEP. SO BUT ONCE, BUT ONCE THE WRIT OF EXECUTION IS ATTACHED,
THEN, YOU KNOW, THAT'S. 
          YEAH. WHAT? SHE'S BEEN PLANNING ON DOING THAT FOR A WHILE NOW,
BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE IT FREELY. 
          SO HAVE YOU HAD ANY HAS THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT MENTIONED LIKE HOW LONG IT'LL TAKE FOR
THEM TO ACTUALLY REMOVE IT? WHAT THEY SAID YESTERDAY IS THEY'LL BE FILING IT INTO THEIR,
THEIR ROTATION BECAUSE I ASSUME THAT THEY DO MORE THAN ONE EVICTION A DAY AND THAT THEY WOULD CALL US WHEN THEY WERE PUTTING IT ON THE DOOR. 
          ACTUALLY, SOMETIME TODAY OR TOMORROW. AND THEN FROM THAT POINT,
THEY WILL HAVE 24 HOURS TO REMOVE THAT AND REMOVE EVERYTHING. 
          AND WHATEVER THEY LEAVE, THEN WE CAN TAKE CARE OF. 
          WE WENT WE WENT BY THERE THIS MORNING AND THE THE VEHICLE WAS STILL THERE SITTING IN THE
DRIVEWAY, AND HER CAR WAS STILL THERE. IT LOOKED LIKE THEIR LIGHTS WERE BACK ON AGAIN. 
          I DON'T KNOW. I TALKED TO A POLICE DEPARTMENT DAY BEFORE YESTERDAY AND SAID WE WENT BY
THERE AND THE LIGHTS AND AIR CONDITIONERS OFF, BUT WE SAID, THERE'S A DOG BARKING IN THERE. YOU NEED TO GO CHECK AND MAKE SURE THE DOGS
GOT WATER OR SOMETHING, YOU KNOW? NO FOOD, BUT THERE'S MORE. SO THEY MUST BE BACK THERE. 
          I THINK THEY'RE STAYING AS LONG AS YOU OKAY. WELL SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE DOING EVERYTHING YOU
CAN TO TO AFFECT THIS. 
          SO, DOES THE CITY HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO, LIKE,
A TWO WEEK EXTENSION? ABSOLUTELY NOT. OKAY, THEN WE WILL SET THE NEW DATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR JUNE 26TH,
2025. 
          [00:05:06]
OKAY. AND THEN IT WILL BE A $50 A DAY FINE FOR EVERY DAY AFTER THAT. 
          OKAY. AND IF WE GET IT DONE, DID WE COME BACK TO YOU? YEAH. AS SOON AS YOU GET IT DONE. CONTACT CODE. 
          AND THEN THEY'LL COME AND THEY'LL CLOSE OUT THE CASE. YEP. 
          THANK YOU SIR. NOW, AFTER TWO WEEKS, THEY'RE GOING TO FIND US $50 A DAY,
RIGHT? I NEED TO TALK TO JIMMY. AT THE BACK. 
          OF THE HOUSE. OUR NEXT CASE TO BE HEARD IS CEB 2571625 AT 1981 DANNER DRIVE NORTHEAST AND 2571725 AT 1965 DANNER DRIVE NORTHEAST. FILLING IN FOR VALERIE TODAY IS ANGELICA AND RODNEY. 
          OKAY. 
          ANGELICA, COMPLIANCE OFFICER, CITY OF PALM BAY. 
          THIS IS FOR THE PROPERTY AT. 1981 DANNER DRIVE NORTHEAST. 
          AND THE RESPONDENT IS HERE. VALERIE IS OUT ON VACATION,
SO I'M HANDLING IT FOR HER. 
          BUT I BELIEVE THERE WAS A MEETING ALREADY INVOLVED AND THEY HAVE THIS PRETTY MUCH
RESOLVED. 
          OR I BELIEVE WITH THE TIME I'M NOT SURE. OKAY. 
          YES, SIR. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAGISTRATE. I'M ALFRED AGUIRRE FROM 1680 MAIN STREET,
NORTHEAST PALM BAY. 
          I HAVE A COUPLE CASES HERE, AND I HAVE MY ATTORNEY HERE PRESENT,
MR. JACK BLACK ALSO. BASICALLY, I'M LOOKING FORWARD,
SO I'M TRYING MY BEST TO GET THIS THING RESOLVED. 
          WE HAD THREE CASES AND ONE CAME IN COMPLIANCE. 
          SO THAT ONE WAS CLOSED. THE OTHER TWO, WE'RE DOING A SITE PLAN ON IT. 
          AND AS YOU KNOW, THE SITE PLAN TAKES SOME TIME TO GET DONE,
BUT WE ARE DOING ALL THE BEST WE CAN TO TO RESOLVE THIS SITUATION. 
          SO I'M HERE DEFINITELY ASKING FOR SOME MORE TIME THAT I CAN USE THIS,
THIS MONEY TO FIX THE PROBLEM. 
          THANK YOU SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. MR. SCAGLIONE. 
          I'M HERE AS MUCH AS A FRIEND. I'M HIS ATTORNEY. 
          BUT AGAIN, ALL HE'S LOOKING FOR IS WE WERE REQUESTING A 90 DAY EXTENSION ON IMPOSITION OF
THE FINE. 
          WE HAVE. HE HAS CLEARED UP ONE. THE 1987 PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE. 
          WE'VE GOT PROOF OF THAT. THE OTHER TWO PROPERTIES HE HAS APPLIED FOR SUBMITTED A SITE
PLAN. 
          EVERYTHING HAS BEEN DONE. THE FEE HAS BEEN PAID FOR REVIEW OF THE SITE PLAN. 
          SO HE'S MAKING EFFORTS. AND THAT WAS $1,500 IN AND OF ITSELF. 
          AND SO HE'S MAKING EFFORTS. SO ALL HE'S DOING IS ASKING FOR A 90 DAY EXTENSION ON
IMPOSITION OF THE FINE TO ALLOW HIM TO GO FORWARD AND AND CLEAR THE AND BRING THE OTHER TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY IN COMPLIANCE. AND SO HOW IS THIS 90 DAYS CALCULATED? THE 90 DAYS IS CALCULATED BASED ON WHAT WE THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE FOR THEM,
FOR THE CITY TO BRING THE TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN. 
          IT'S BEEN SUBMITTED. THERE'S BEEN COMMENTS GIVEN BACK THEN. 
          HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE THE STEPS NECESSARY TO BRING THIS INTO COMPLIANCE. 
          SO WE'RE JUST THE 90 DAYS IS AN ESTIMATE ON HOW LONG WE THINK ALL OF THAT'S GOING TO TAKE. 
          NOTHING HAPPENS FAST. OKAY. NOW I REMEMBER THIS THIS PROPERTY FROM A WHILE AGO,
OR I THINK IT WAS, WAS ABOUT 90 DAYS AGO THAT WE HAD THE FIRST HEARING. 
          AND THERE'S BEEN HE'S ALREADY HAD A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES. 
          I MEAN, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY FROM HIS TESTIMONY,
IT WAS SOMETHING LIKE 20 YEARS THAT THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN BEEN KNOWN. 
          AND THEN THE CODE CASES WERE THE IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY,
THERE WERE TWO, ONE STARTED LIKE 4 OR 5 YEARS AGO. 
          AND THEN THIS OTHER ONE, THE CURRENT ONE STARTED I THINK A YEAR OR TWO AGO. 
          AND AND THEN HE GOT, HE GOT KIND OF A FREEBIE 30 DAY EXTENSION BECAUSE I SET THE WRONG
COMPLIANCE DATE. 
          SO WE HAD TO RESET THE HEARING. I MEAN, SO I HAVE A I HAVE A TOUGH TIME GIVING HIM ANY
KIND OF AN EXTENSION BECAUSE IT'S BEEN. SO IT'S HE'S ALREADY HAD SO MUCH TIME TO DO THIS. 
          [00:10:01]
AND LAST TIME, I MEAN, THE BIG ARGUMENT, THE BIG DISCUSSION WAS WHETHER OR NOT A SITE PLAN
WAS EVEN WAS EVEN NECESSARY. 
          THAT WAS HIS ARGUMENT THAT HE SHOULDN'T NEED A SITE PLAN. I MEAN,
IF IF THE COULD HAVE GONE DIFFERENTLY, IF IT WAS JUST IF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING NOW WAS WHAT WAS SAID 90 DAYS AGO,
YOU KNOW, WE'D BE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE, YOU KNOW, WE'D BE IN THAT 90 DAY TOWARDS THE END OF THAT 90 DAY EXTENSION. 
          SO I'M NOT I'M NOT SURE IF I'M, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THIS ONE. 
          IT THEN MY REQUEST WOULD BE TO GRANT MR. AGUIRRE. 
          A 30 DAY EXTENSION. RESET THIS FOR 30 DAYS FROM NOW AND HAVE HIM COME BEFORE THE COURT AND
PROVE THAT HE IS MAKING STEPS, TAKING STEPS, MAKING PROGRESS, DOING WHAT HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. 
          BUT I WANT TO BRING SOMETHING UP. THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR SEVERAL YEARS,
EXCEPT HE'S ALWAYS BROUGHT IT IN COMPLIANCE, OR HE'S BEEN TOLD BY A REPRESENTATIVE AND HE PROVIDED COPIES OF DOCUMENTS SHOWING THAT
HE'S BEEN TOLD HE DIDN'T HAVE TO PROVIDE A SITE PLAN, OR HE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO X, Y, OR Z, WHATEVER THAT WAS. 
          SO IT'S NOT LIKE HE'S BEEN IGNORING EVERYTHING. 
          MR. AGUIRRE IS VERY INVOLVED IN THE CITY, AND HE HAS COME TO THE CITY EVERY SINGLE TIME,
EITHER TO CITY MANAGER'S CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICERS, WHOEVER IT IS. SO HE IS VERY, VERY HE DOESN'T IGNORE IT. 
          HE IT'S NOT THAT HE'S IGNORING EVERYTHING HE'S TRYING TO DO WHAT'S BEEN ASKED OF HIM. 
          SO IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO. IF THE COURT IS NOT INCLINED TO GIVE US THE OR,
THE BOARD IS NOT INCLINED TO GIVE US THE 90 DAYS, THEN I WOULD ASK FOR A 30 DAY EXTENSION AND LET HIM COME BACK IN FRONT OF THIS,
THIS COURT AND SHOW YOU THAT, YES, HE'S MADE THESE STEPS TOWARDS GETTING THIS DONE. 
          AND AGAIN SINCE THE LAST TIME HE HAS BROUGHT ONE OF THEM IN COMPLIANCE. 
          SO THERE WAS THREE PROPERTIES. SO HE'S TAKING STEPS. 
          HE'S SUBMITTED THE SITE PLAN NOW HE'S PAID THE MONEY. 
          LET HIM EVEN IF IT'S 30 DAYS, MOVE FORWARD AND AND SHOW YOU AGAIN IN 30 DAYS. 
          EITHER THAT HE'S DONE IT AND HE'S IN COMPLIANCE OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE. 
          I'VE TAKEN ALL OF THESE STEPS AND THIS IS WHY I HAVEN'T DONE IT. 
          I'M STILL WAITING ON THE CITY. I'M STILL WAITING ON A ON AN ENGINEER BECAUSE THEY'RE
REQUIRING ENGINEERING PLANS, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, BUT THAT HE'S MADE SUBSTANTIAL PROGRESS TOWARDS GETTING THIS
DONE. 
          OKAY. DOES THE CITY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? THANK YOU. 
          I MEAN, I THINK THE CITY HAS. WE'VE WE'VE WE'VE CONDUCTED MEETINGS BASED ON MR. GARVEY'S REQUEST. AND RIGHT NOW, IT'S PRETTY MUCH A PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUE. 
          AND THEY ARE THE ONES THAT ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE WITH THE
PROPERTY. 
          WE'VE HAD A MEETING, AS HE STATED. I THINK THE ISSUE HAS BEEN THAT THEY'VE BEEN WE'VE BEEN
GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH VARIOUS LEADERS WITHIN THE CITY IN THE PAST, FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS TO CITY MANAGERS. 
          BUT I THINK AT THIS POINT, THE, THE CITY HAS ASKED THAT,
YOU KNOW, THIS GO INTO YOUR HANDS AS THE MAGISTRATE AND THEY WISH TO PROCEED FORWARD. OKAY. AND THERE WAS SOME THERE'S BEEN THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THE
CITY HAD TOLD HIM HE WAS IN COMPLIANCE. 
          VARIOUS. AT VARIOUS TIMES. ANY RESPONSE TO THAT? I DON'T RECALL THAT BEING SO. I THINK THAT THAT'S ANOTHER THAT'S PART OF THE PROBLEM AS
WELL. 
          AND SPEAKING WITH THE NEW LEADERSHIP, THEY THEY ARE LOOKING TO GO AWAY FROM THAT. 
          BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN PROBLEMS IN THE PAST WHERE WE HAVE GONE INTO MEETINGS AND THEN
WE'VE SET TIMES TO GO AND DO SITE VISITATIONS AND SITE PLANS, AND THEN SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY,
EVERYTHING JUST GOES DORMANT. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE WHERE YOU HAD THE CASES THAT
WERE FIVE YEARS FROM FIVE YEARS AGO. 
          AND SO AT THIS POINT MR. GARY'S COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN HEARD BY THE CITY MANAGER AND VARIOUS
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND AS HE SAYS THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF CONFUSION AND BACK AND FORTH. 
          AND AT THIS POINT, THE COUNCIL AND THE CITY MANAGER ARE SAYING THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE
THAT ANYMORE. 
          SO IT NEEDS TO BE A CLEAR MESSAGE PUT FORWARD TO TRY TO CLEAR UP THE ISSUES. 
          SO AT THIS POINT, WE DON'T HAVE A BOARD ANYMORE. 
          THE CITY WENT TO A MAGISTRATE FOR A MAGISTRATE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. 
          [00:15:01]
AND SO THEY'RE LEAVING THAT DECISION MAKING TO THE MAGISTRATE. 
          OKAY, ANGELICA, IT LOOKED LIKE YOU HAD SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO SAY. 
          TO ADDRESS. OF COURSE. I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON WHAT MR. EDWARDS SAID IS THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONFUSION OVER THE YEARS. 
          AND THERE IS, YOU KNOW, HE WOULD TALK TO A CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY MANAGER WOULD SAY,
DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. 
          AND I THINK THE CITY WOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE WAS SOME OF THAT OVER THE YEARS. 
          BUT WE'RE NOT DISPUTING THE FINDINGS OF THE COURT. 
          WE ARE. WE ARE ASKING THAT THIS SIMPLY NOT BE A A FINANCIAL BE BECOME FINANCIALLY OVER OVERWHELMING FOR MR. AGUIRRE WHEN ALL HE'S TRYING TO DO IS GET IN
COMPLIANCE. 
          HE'S DOING WHAT YOU'RE TELLING HIM TO DO. HE UNDERSTANDS THAT THE CITY IS IN A HAS TAKEN A
FIRM POSITION, AND, YOUR HONOR, IS MAJOR RULING. SO WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR TIME TO BRING EVERYTHING IN
COMPLIANCE NOW. 
          AND WE'LL DO IT. I MEAN, MR. AGUERO WILL GET IT DONE. 
          HE'S AGAIN. HE'S COMPLETED ONE PIECE. WE JUST NEED TO BRING THE OTHER TWO UP. 
          AND THE OTHER TWO ARE. WE'RE SORT OF AT THE AT THE WHIM OR THE MERCY OF THE CITY IN,
IN REVIEWING SITE PLANS, ETCETERA. WELL I'M SORRY. OH, YEAH. 
          GO AHEAD. THE. MISS SOPHIA, CAN YOU COME TO THE MIC? SHE'S THE INDIVIDUAL THAT IS WORKING DIRECTLY WITH MR. GARY. OKAY. FROM OUR DEPARTMENT. GOOD AFTERNOON,
SIR. 
          THEY NEED TO BE SWORN IN FIRST, RIGHT? DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH,
THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? I DO, THANK YOU. DID YOU WANT AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE ARE AT THIS POINT? WITH THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL? YEAH. I MEAN, IF YOU COULD,
IF YOU CAN GIVE ME AN UPDATE ON ON HOW THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL IS GOING, BUT I'VE GOT SOME OTHER QUESTIONS THAT I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S NECESSARY TO ANSWER AFTER
THAT. 
          SO HE DID MOVE FORWARD WITH HIS PRE-APPLICATION MEETING,
WHICH WAS THE WEEK AFTER THE LAST HEARING. 
          YOU HEARD THIS, AND THAT WENT WELL. STAFF GAVE HIM COMMENTS ON HOW TO ADDRESS DRESS ALL OF
THE PROPERTIES, ONE BEING 1987 DAN-AIR, WHICH IS NOT PART OF THE SITE PLAN. 
          BUT HE HAS RESOLVED THAT. WE RECEIVED LAST THURSDAY OR FRIDAY HIS OFFICIAL APPLICATION FOR
THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL. 
          AND SO WITH THAT IS 30 DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST ROUND OF COMMENTS ARE DUE FROM STAFF. 
          THAT'S JUST JUST NOT GROWTH MANAGEMENT. IT'S PUBLIC WORKS UTILITIES,
OTHER ENTITIES, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING. 
          SO IT'S SUBSTANTIAL REVIEW FOR SITE PLANS. THEY ARE ADMINISTRATIVE BUT THEY USUALLY DO
TAKE AT LEAST TWO ROUNDS. 
          IF IT GOES A THIRD ROUND, WE SIT WITH THE APPLICANT AND THEIR ENGINEER TO MAKE SURE THAT
THE ITEMS ARE FINALLY ADDRESSED IN THE THIRD SUBMITTAL, BUT WHICH WITH EACH SUBMITTAL, IT'S A 30 DAY STAFF REVIEW BEFORE ANY COMMENTS MINUTES ARE
ISSUED UNLESS EVERYONE DOES THEIR REVIEWS PRIOR TO THE 30 DAYS. EVERY SINGLE PERSON IS AUTOMATICALLY SENT OUT. 
          OKAY. SO I MEAN, SO TO AN EXTENT, YES, HE IS A SUBJECT TO THE WHIMS OF THE BUREAUCRACY,
HOW IT'S SET UP. 
          BUT ALSO, IF IT'S ALL DONE CORRECTLY THE FIRST TIME,
HE'S NOT GOING TO THE OTHER THE OTHER 30 DAYS. 
          YES. IT WOULDN'T EXIST. YES. THE WAY TO SHORTEN THE TIME FRAME IS FOR CHANGES TO BE MADE
WITHIN, YOU KNOW, ONE WEEK OR TEN BUSINESS DAYS AND GET IT BACK TO STAFF. 
          THE ONLY TIME IT'S NOT PREDICTABLE IS THE APPLICANT'S RESUBMITTAL. 
          HE. I BELIEVE IT WAS ABOUT 60 DAYS, ALMOST BETWEEN THE LAST HEARING AND THE RECEIPT OF THE
OFFICIAL APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. 
          ANGELICA, I THINK I'VE GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. OKAY,
SO THE THIRD PROPERTY WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE. I ONLY HAVE TWO HERE IN FRONT OF ME,
SO I'M GOING TO ASSUME. YES. DO WE DO YOU KNOW HOW I KNOW THIS WASN'T ORIGINALLY YOUR CASE? BUT DO YOU KNOW HOW THAT PROPERTY WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE? LIKE WHAT WAS DONE
TO. 
          OKAY, I CAN SPEAK TO THAT. OH, OKAY. SO. OR. ALTHEA,
YOU CAN. 
          DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO. ACTUALLY, WHY DON'T YOU SPEAK TO IT SINCE. SORRY. SINCE YOU WERE
SWORN IN? CERTAINLY. SO AT THE PRE-APPLICATION MEETING,
WE GAVE HIM DIRECTIONS TO GRADE AND SEED 
          [00:20:08]
THE LOT THAT WAS NOT TO BE USED TO REMOVE ALL EQUIPMENT APPARATUS,
VEHICLES. 
          NOTHING SHOULD BE THERE BUT GRASS AND DIRT. AND IS THAT THE SAME WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE
DONE TO BRING THESE OTHER TWO PROPERTIES INTO COMPLIANCE? NO, SIR. HE NEEDS THE APPROVED STAMPED SITE PLANS. 
          WELL, I'M SORRY, I SHOULD ASK IT DIFFERENTLY. 
          IN THE ABSENCE OF A SITE PLAN, IF WE WEREN'T EVEN TALKING ABOUT GETTING A SITE PLAN,
WHAT WOULD BE NEEDED TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE? I BELIEVE THAT IS WHAT HE WAS CITED FOR. HAVING A BUSINESS OPERATION WITH NO SITE PLAN AND
NO. 
          WELL THE BETTER. I'M NOT CERTAIN HE WAS CITED FOR,
BUT HE CANNOT OBTAIN A BTR UNTIL SUCH TIME AS HE HAS AN APPROVED SITE PLAN. 
          SO WE'VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO APPROVE HIS BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT. 
          OKAY. SO IT'S NOT LIKE LIKE IN IN THE DESCRIPTION HERE IT SAYS LAND BEING USED FOR STORAGE
PURPOSES WITHOUT A SITE PLAN APPROVAL. 
          IF HE WERE JUST TO REMOVE THE STUFF THAT'S BEING STORED ON THE LAND. 
          HE WOULDN'T NEED A SITE PLAN. AND THEN EVERYTHING THE BUSINESS,
ANYTHING THAT'S RELATED TO A BUSINESS OR BEING STORED ON THAT PROPERTY WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED. OKAY. AND SO YES,
YOU'RE RIGHT. 
          HE COULD DO WHAT HE DID WITH 1987 AND BE OKAY. 
          OKAY. AND THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD APPLY TO BOTH OF THESE PROPERTIES. 
          YES. THE TWO THAT HE HAS SINCE TIED, OR AT LEAST HE PUT IN A REQUEST FOR A LOT TIE. 
          AND AGAIN, WE CAN'T APPROVE THE LOT TIE UNTIL WE HAVE AN APPROVED SITE PLAN MOVING
FORWARD. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. OKAY. 
          SIR, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND. OKAY, SO NOW MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE TO REMOVE EVERYTHING SO THAT WE'RE YOU'RE PURSUING THE SITE PLAN
WHILE THE PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE. 
          WELL, IT'S GOING TO BE A BIG DEAL, SIR. AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS I'VE BEEN THERE FOR
ABOUT 25 YEARS OR MORE, AND WE'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, HAVING, LIKE, TRUCKS THAT WE USE DUMP TRUCKS FOR,
FOR OUR BUSINESS. 
          I'M TALKING WE USE A LOT OF DUMP TRUCKS, AND WE HAVE EQUIPMENT,
AND THEN WE HAVE A FEW SPOTS WHERE WE BRING MATERIAL IN, AND, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WITH THE TRUCK AND WE TAKE IT BACK UP. 
          BUT BASICALLY THE QUESTION YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT THE SITE PLAN,
SIR YOU KNOW, WHEN WHEN A SITE PLAN ENTAILS BUNCH OF SWALES AND WATER RETAINING HERE FOR THE RUNOFF. AND YOU HAVE TO YOU HAVE TO PUT A HARD SURFACE WHERE
YOU PARK. 
          SO THESE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS YOU HAVE TO DO WITH A SITE PLAN IS CONCERNED AND THE
ENGINEER INVOLVED. 
          AND THAT ENGINEER TAKES SOME TIME, SIR. AND,
YOU KNOW, AS IT WAS SAID, ENGINEERING IS ONE THING. 
          THEN WE HAVE TO WAIT ON THE CITY FOR A MONTH FOR COMMENT. 
          THEN IF THEY IF WE DO HAVE A FEW MORE COMMENTS WE HAVE TO ADDRESS,
THEN WE NEED ANOTHER MONTH, YOU KNOW, TWO WEEKS TO GET THAT RESOLVE AGAIN AND SO ON. 
          SO IT TAKES TIME, SIR. AND ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT I'M WILLING 100% TO GET THIS THING
RESOLVED. 
          I AM VERY EMBARRASSED OF THIS SITUATION. AND,
YOU KNOW, LET'S BYGONES BE BYGONES, SIR. 
          LET ME JUST TRY TO GET IT FIXED AND GET IT OVER WITH. 
          AND I'M JUST ASKING FOR SOME TIME THAT I CAN USE THE MONEY. 
          THIS ENGINEER COSTS A LOT. THEN WE HAVE TO SPEND SOME MONEY DOING THE SITE TO ACCOMMODATE
WHATEVER THE ENGINEER DISPLAY. 
          SO I'M JUST ASKING FOR SOME TIME. OKAY. I, I,
I UNDERSTAND THAT AND BUT I'M NOT INCLINED TO GIVE ANY KIND OF AN EXTENSION TO DEAL WITH THE CITY'S PROCESSES,
BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN CARE OF YEARS AGO. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, EVEN JUST IN THE MOST I GUESS IN THE MOST GENERAL GENEROUS TERMS TO YOU
COULD HAVE BEEN THE PROCESS COULD HAVE BEEN STARTED ON MARCH 12TH. SO, I MEAN, WE'RE ALREADY WE'RE ALREADY 90 DAYS INTO WHAT,
YOU KNOW, WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN USED TO GET THESE SITE PLANS. 
          IF YOU COULD BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE WITHOUT SO THAT IT'S IN COMPLIANCE,
EVEN WITHOUT THE SITE PLAN, SUCH AS MOVING ALL OF THE EQUIPMENT NOT USING,
I COULD I COULD CONSIDER GIVING AN EXTENSION FOR THAT BECAUSE, I MEAN, THIS IS JUST THIS HAS JUST BEEN GOING ON FOR TOO LONG. 
          [00:25:02]
AND I, I DON'T SEE BEING ABLE IF I GAVE YOU A 30 DAY EXTENSION,
LIKE, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU'VE ASKED FOR I'M DEFINITELY NOT GOING TO GIVE A 90 DAY EXTENSION, BUT IF I WERE TO GIVE YOU A 30 DAY EXTENSION EVEN IF EVERYTHING GOES EXACTLY,
EXACTLY AS IT'S SUPPOSED TO GO, IT'S STILL NOT. YOU'RE STILL NOT DONE. AND I'M AT THIS POINT I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE
EXTENSION AFTER EXTENSION AFTER EXTENSION JUST TO SATISFY THE CITY'S PROCESSES. I MEAN, THE CITY'S PROCESSES ARE WHAT THEY ARE. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, YOU KNEW THAT LONG AGO WHEN THIS STARTED. 
          SO IF YOU CAN GIVE ME IF YOU CAN TELL ME WHAT YOU NEED TO DO TO REMOVE ALL THE STUFF
THAT'S CAUSING, BECAUSE IT'S NOT THE IT'S NOT THE LACK OF A SITE PLAN. 
          THE WAY I SEE IT, IT'S NOT THE LACK OF A SITE PLAN THAT'S THE REAL PROBLEM. 
          IT'S USING THE PROPERTY WITHOUT THE PROPER SITE SITE PLAN. 
          SO IF YOU STOP USING THE PROPERTY IN, YOU KNOW,
IN THE WAY THAT'S A NEED SITE PLAN, THEN, LIKE IF YOU COULD JUST RETURN IT TO AN EMPTY LOT WITH GRASS AND ALL THAT. 
          I COULD SEE, GIVEN AN EXTENSION FOR THAT. BUT IF IT'S JUST LET ME CONTINUE OPERATING MY
BUSINESS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE WHILE I WAIT FOR THE CITY TO TO DO SOMETHING THAT I COULD HAVE ASKED FOR THREE MONTHS AGO, I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE AN EXTENSION FOR THAT. 
          DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YES, SIR. I UNDERSTAND DEFINITELY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          AND I, YOU KNOW, THIS THING BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS,
SIR, AND AND, YOU KNOW, IT JUST KIND OF BEEN BAD IN A SENSE. 
          WE INVOLVED WITH THIS PROPERTY. I, I WORK ALONG THE CITY WITH THE CITY. 
          I KNOW I DON'T WANT TO TAKE ANY TAKE UP ANYBODY ELSE'S TIME. 
          THE ONLY THING I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT IS WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO
COMPLIANCE IF THERE WAS NO SITE PLAN? THAT'S 30S. SURE, YOU CAN HAVE YES, RIGHT AS THE ANSWER TO MY QUESTION,
AND YOU CAN HAVE AS MUCH TIME AS YOU NEED. 
          WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT? 60. YEAH, THERE'S THAT MUCH STUFF. 
          YEAH, IT'S A LOT OF STUFF ON IT. MR. O'GARA IS TELLING ME IS REQUESTING 60 DAYS TO MOVE
EVERYTHING, BECAUSE THERE IS 25 YEARS WORTH OF ACCUMULATION OF THERE'S A LOT OF FILL THAT HE'S BEEN OR
MATERIAL THAT HE'S BEEN STORING THERE, ETC.. SO IF THE COURT WOULD BE INCLINED TO GIVE US 60 DAYS TO GET EVERYTHING OFF THE
PROPERTY, BRING IT IN COMPLIANCE, THEN HE CAN WORK ON THE SITE PLAN WHILE THE PROPERTY IS VACANT. 
          I WAS REALLY HOPING YOU'D SAY LESS THAN 30. I KNOW YOU WERE,
BECAUSE I JUST. 
          I THINK ANYTHING MORE THAN A MONTH IS JUST EXCESSIVE,
CONSIDERING IT'S BEEN YEARS. 
          THE ONLY THING I WOULD TELL THE COURT IS THAT? MY CLIENT IS. HE'S A SMALL BUSINESS. HE'S A SMALL OPERATION. 
          HE'S STILL GOT A BUSINESS TO RUN. HE STILL HAS TO FEED A FAMILY. 
          SO THIS IS NOT. HE CAN'T SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING AND SAY,
OKAY, LET'S TAKE THE NEXT TWO WEEKS AND WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS, OR LET'S TAKE THE NEXT THREE WEEKS AND WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS. IT'S YOU'LL GET IT DONE. 
          I AM VERY, VERY CONFIDENT THAT THAT THAT YOU WILL NEVER SEE HIM AGAIN BECAUSE THERE WILL
BE A, A NOTICE OF CLOSURE OF THE CASES. BUT WE'RE REQUESTING 60 DAYS FOR THAT SO THAT WE CAN GET
THIS SO THAT HE CAN GET THIS THING IN COMPLIANCE AND THIS CAN BE OFF YOUR DESK AND AND OUT OF THE SYSTEM. OKAY. IT SOUNDS LIKE IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT WOULD JUST BE TOO
DISRUPTIVE TO THE BUSINESS. 
          I, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION. 
          AND I, YOU KNOW, THE FINES WILL START ACCRUING,
BUT YOU KNOW, YOU CAN ALWAYS TAKE IT UP WITH THE WITH THE OTHER SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CAN REDUCE CAN. CAN WE ASK, CAN WE HAVE THE 30 DAYS AT LEAST? LET US LET IT NOT START ACCRUING FOR 30 DAYS AND AT LEAST LET HIM TRY. 
          WELL, I MEAN, THE THE ISSUE IS THAT THE ISSUE IS THAT THE THERE'S,
IT WON'T BE DONE IN 30 DAYS FOR FOR SURE. WELL, HERE'S THE ALTERNATIVE THOUGH. 
          I MEAN, YOU'VE ALREADY IT SEEMS THAT YOU'VE ALREADY YOU WERE ALREADY INCLINED TO SAY,
OKAY, I'M GOING TO GIVE HIM SOME PERIOD OF TIME TO CLEAR OFF THE PROPERTY. 
          AND THAT PERIOD OF TIME YOU WERE HOPING WOULD BE LESS THAN 30 DAYS. 
          SO THE ONLY THING I'M GOING TO TELL YOU IS THAT IF THAT'S YOUR INCLINATION,
THEN GIVE HIM THE 30 DAYS AND LET HIM TRY. 
          IF HE CAN'T GET IT DONE, THEN THE FINE STARTS ACCRUING. 
          BUT HE KNOWS NOW YOU'VE GIVEN HIM DIRECTION. YOU'VE GIVEN HIM. 
          THIS IS WHAT YOU'VE GOT TO DO. YOU'VE GOT TO FORGET TRYING TO GET THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL. 
          FORGET TRYING TO BE IN COMPLIANCE. THAT WAY. YOU'VE GOT TO BE IN COMPLIANCE BY CLEARING
OFF THE PROPERTY. 
          [00:30:05]
YOU GOT 30 DAYS ON ON JULY 11TH, 2025. YOU'RE GOING TO START ACCRUING FINES. 
          PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION. DON'T COME BACK IN FRONT OF ME AND ASK AGAIN. 
          SO. SO I THINK WE NEED TO CLARIFY. HE'S ALREADY ACCRUING FINES. 
          OH, OKAY. WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TODAY IS FOR YOU TO IMPOSE THOSE FINES. 
          THOSE FINES ARE GOING TO GO BACK TO MARCH 12TH OR WHATEVER DATE IT WAS. 
          RIGHT. SO JUST LIKE YOU SAID, WITH 30 DAYS, THE NEXT COURT HEARING IS GOING TO BE AUGUST
15TH. 
          SO THAT MEANS NOT JULY. ISN'T IT JULY? NO. IF YOU GIVE HIM 30 DAYS,
HE WOULD MISS THE JULY HEARING. 
          HE WOULDN'T COME BACK UNTIL AUGUST 13TH. SO REALLY,
HE WOULD BE GETTING 60 DAYS BECAUSE IN JULY WE WOULD HAVE TO SEND HIM ANOTHER NOTICE OF HEARING AND SAY, YOU'RE SET FOR THE AUGUST HEARING. 
          GOTCHA. SO YOU WOULD REALLY BE GIVING HIM 60 DAYS? TRUE. THE FINES WOULD STILL GO BACK TO YOUR ORIGINAL DATE,
WHICH I THINK WAS MARCH OR APRIL. 
          MARCH 12TH. SO THEY WOULD STILL GO BACK TO THAT POINT,
BUT YOU WOULD JUST BE BASICALLY GIVING HIM THE FULL AMOUNT OF TIME. 
          AND THEN YOU WOULD NEED TO MAKE CLEAR, ARE WE STILL GOING FOR THE SITE PLAN,
OR ARE WE FORGETTING THE SITE PLAN AND JUST REMOVING EVERYTHING OFF THE PROPERTY? THAT'S WHAT WOULD NEED TO BE CLEAR SO THAT THERE'S NO BACK AND FORTH THEN GOING FORWARD. 
          WELL, I THINK WE'RE DOING BOTH. I THINK THAT HE'S GOING TO CLEAN OFF THE PROPERTY TO COME, BECAUSE FROM WHAT I HEAR, HE'S GOING TO BE IN COMPLIANCE IF HE CLEANS OFF THE PROPERTY AND
THEN HE CAN STILL PURSUE A SITE PLAN. 
          BUT EVERYONE HERE HAS ACKNOWLEDGED HE'S NOT GOING TO GET A SITE PLAN IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS,
EVEN 60 DAYS. 
          HE'S NOT GOING TO GET A SITE PLAN. SO THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE HE HAS IS TO CLEAR UP THE
PROPERTY. 
          OKAY, SO THEN THEY NEED TO CLEAR THE VIOLATION BECAUSE YOU CAN'T HAVE TWO THINGS GOING AT
THE SAME TIME. 
          HE'S IN VIOLATION RIGHT NOW FOR NOT HAVING A SITE PLAN. 
          SO THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE CORRECTED. EITHER HE'S GOING TO DROP THE BUSINESS AS SHE
STATED HE'S GOING TO DROP THE BUSINESS, OR HE'S GOING TO CONTINUE ON TO TRY TO GET A SITE PLAN. 
          WE CAN'T. AND THIS IS THIS IS THE THING THAT WE'RE FACING. 
          WE'RE WE'RE CUTTING THIS THING AND WE'RE CHOPPING IT SO MUCH THAT IT'S MAKING IT MORE
DIFFICULT. 
          EITHER HE'S IN VIOLATION NOW OF NOT HAVING A SITE PLAN OR WE HAVE TO LET IT GO. 
          SO WE CAN'T SAY HE'S GOING TO MOVE FORWARD ON BOTH SIDES. 
          HE'S EITHER GOING TO MOVE FORWARD TO GET A SITE PLAN OR AS HE DID WITH THE OTHER PROPERTY, HE'S GOING TO JUST CEDE IT AND LEAVE IT VACANT. 
          AND THAT'S HOW THAT THAT'S HOW THAT SITE PLAN OR THAT VIOLATION WAS CLEARED. 
          SO IF HE'S GOING TO NOW IN FRONT OF THE COURT,
SAY THAT HE'S NO LONGER GOING TO GO FOR A SITE PLAN. 
          THE ONLY WAY THAT WE CAN GET RID OF THAT VIOLATION IS FOR HIM TO SEE THE WHOLE PROPERTY
AND GET IT ALL GONE. 
          OKAY. SO THAT MEANS HE CAN'T COME BACK LATER AND SAY,
I'M GOING TO DO A BUSINESS IN 30 DAYS BECAUSE HE'S ALREADY SAID, GET RID OF THAT VIOLATION, BECAUSE I'M JUST GOING TO TAKE THIS BACK TO A VACANT PROPERTY. 
          SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THE CITY IS THE CITY'S POSITION IS HE CAN'T,
ON THE ONE HAND, CLEAR THE PROPERTY TO GET THE TO CLEAR THE VIOLATION AND PURSUE THE SITE PLAN AT THE SAME TIME. CORRECT. BECAUSE HE'D HAVE TO JUST DROP VIOLATION IS FOR THE SITE
PLAN. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. ON THE VIOLATION. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO
HIM, IS THAT EVEN THOUGH YOU IMPOSE THE FINE, THE ONLY THING THAT IT DOES IS IT'S JUST SITTING OUT THERE SOMEWHERE,
ACCRUING EVERY DAY BY EVERY DAY. 
          ONCE HE DOES EVERYTHING THAT HE DOES NEEDS TO DO TO FULFILL,
THE SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND ALL THAT. 
          ONLY THING HE HAS TO DO IS COME BACK TO THE COURT AND SAY,
I'M IN COMPLIANCE, GET RID OF THE VIOLATIONS, GET RID OF THE FINES. BUT I THINK THAT AT THIS POINT,
THE CITY'S THE CITY'S POSITION IS WITHOUT THE FINES BEING IN PLACE. 
          THEY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS VIOLATION IS GOING TO BE TAKEN CARE OF. 
          OKAY, BUT BUT WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO WASTE THE COURT'S TIME. 
          WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, HE COULD CLEAN OFF THE PROPERTY TOMORROW AND THEN FILE FOR A SITE
PLAN TO TURN THIS INTO A BUSINESS. 
          SO HE'S IN VIOLATION RIGHT NOW. EVERYONE IS IN AGREEMENT THAT HE'S IN VIOLATION RIGHT NOW. 
          EVERYONE IS ALSO IN AGREEMENT THAT HE HAS FILED FOR A SITE PLAN. 
          SO CLEARLY HE CAN DO BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. AND AGAIN,
I'M NOT ARGUING WITH MR. EDWARDS. HE KNOWS WAY MORE THAN THIS ABOUT THIS THAN I DO WAY MORE. 
          BUT HE'S DOING BOTH RIGHT NOW. HE'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE AND HE'S FILING FOR A SITE PLAN. 
          SO ALL I'M SAYING IS, IS THAT HE'S GOING TO WALK OUT OF HERE TODAY,
AND HE'S GOING TO PUT IN PLACE A METHOD BY WHICH HE IS GOING TO REMOVE EVERYTHING FROM THE PROPERTY, WHETHER THAT BRINGS HIM IN COMPLIANCE OR NOT. 
          EVERYONE HAS SAID IT WILL, THAT HE'S NOT IN VIOLATION OF ANYTHING IF HE TAKES EVERYTHING
OFF THE PROPERTY. 
          [00:35:06]
WELL, AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SAYING. SO WHAT WHAT MR. PLATT IS SAYING IS EXACTLY RIGHT. IF MR. AGUIRRE WANTS TO CLEAR OFF HIS ENTIRE PROPERTY,
HE CAN CLEAR THE ENTIRE PROPERTY. HE CAN CALL CODE COMPLIANCE, CO COMPLIANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. 
          ECONOMIC GROWTH WILL GO TO THE PROPERTY, SEE THAT IT IS VACANT. 
          IT'S BACK SEATED, AND THEY WILL CLOSE THE CASE. 
          THAT'S HOW THE CASES WORK, RIGHT? BUT BUT THAT DOESN'T PREVENT HIM FROM MOVING FORWARD ON
A SITE PLAN IF THAT'S WHAT HE CHOOSES TO DO AT A LATER TIME. IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T. IT DOESN'T. 
          BUT WE'RE HERE FOR THE VIOLATION, RIGHT? THAT'S ALL I'M TRYING TO DO,
IS. 
          AND I AM. WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO RIGHT NOW IS BEFORE THE AUGUST 11TH HEARING. 
          13TH HEARING THAT HE COME BACK, THAT HE GET THIS IN COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE AUGUST 13TH
HEARING. 
          AND YOU'RE EITHER GOING TO SAY NO, YOU'RE BACK TO MARCH 12TH,
OR YOU'RE GOING TO ADDRESS EVERYTHING AND SAY, YES, YOU'RE IN COMPLIANCE. I'M GOING TO WAIVE THE FINES,
WHATEVER IT IS YOU'RE GOING TO DO. 
          I DON'T I DON'T EVEN KNOW, TO BE HONEST. WELL,
THAT'S A THAT'S A DIFFERENT MAGISTRATE. 
          I UNDERSTAND. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT WHAT THAT PROCESS IS. 
          WHAT I'M ASKING TODAY IS THAT YOU SUSPEND UNTIL AUGUST 13TH AND GIVE HIM UNTIL AUGUST
13TH, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, THE ONLY OPTION HE'S GOING TO HAVE IS TO CLEAN THE PROPERTY OFF. WELL,
OKAY. 
          I'M. I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE HIM A 60 DAY EXTENSION. 
          IF I GAVE A 30 DAY EXTENSION TO CLEAN OFF THE PROPERTY. 
          HE WOULD STILL HAVE TO HAVE EVERYTHING CLEANED OFF BY JULY 11TH. 
          GREAT. AND THEN IF THERE'S ANYTHING, IF THE PROPERTY IS STILL NOT IN COMPLIANCE,
EVEN IF YOU GOT IT INTO COMPLIANCE BY THE AUGUST DATE, THE FINES ARE STILL GOING TO BE IMPOSED. THEY WOULD JUST. 
          WELL, THIS IS THIS IS THE ISSUE. THE FINES ARE THE FINES ARE HAVE ALREADY STARTED
ACCRUING. 
          SO IF HE BROUGHT THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE TODAY,
THE FINES ARE STILL GOING TO BE IMPOSED GOING BACK TO MARCH. 
          YES. UNDERSTOOD. SO IF HE BROUGHT THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE TODAY,
WE WOULD NOT IMPOSE THOSE FINES. 
          WE WOULD CLOSE IT OUT BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T IMPOSED THOSE FINES. THAT'S WHAT THIS HEARING IS
FOR TODAY. 
          SO. SO IF HE COMES BACK, IF YOU GIVE HIM 30 DAYS,
HE COMES BACK IN JULY AND IT'S OR HIS JULY COMPLIANCE DATE CODE OR LAND DEVELOPMENT GOES OUT AND SAYS YES, HE'S IN COMPLIANCE,
THE CASE WOULD JUST BE CLOSED AND THAT WOULD BE THE END OF IT. 
          IF HE'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE, WE WOULD HAVE TO SEND HIM ANOTHER NOTICE,
GIVE HIM DUE PROCESS TO COME TO ANOTHER HEARING WHERE THEN YOU WOULD IMPOSE THOSE FINES. 
          SO THAT'S THAT'S WHERE THAT AUGUST DATE WOULD COME INTO PLAY,
BECAUSE HE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A PROPER NOTICE THAT HE'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE AND COMING BACK TO ANOTHER HEARING. BUT THAT DOESN'T GIVE HIM 60 DAYS. 
          THE RULING IS GOING TO BE THAT HE HAS TO GET IN COMPLIANCE BY JULY 11TH. 
          BY CLEARING OFF THE PROPERTY. AND SO IF HE CAME BACK AT THE AUGUST 13TH HEARING IT,
YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT HIM AND SAYING, WAS IT BY JULY 11TH, NOT WAS IT BY AUGUST 13TH? WAS IT BY JULY 11TH? DO YOU HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FROM THE CITY? AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. OKAY. SO JUST CLARIFICATION, RODNEY FROM THE CITY, DOES THIS MEAN IF I. 
          IF I GAVE HIM THE 30 DAYS TO CLEAR THE PROPERTY,
WOULD HE ALSO HAVE TO DROP THE SITE PLAN REQUEST AND THEN RESTART THAT WHEN IT'S ALL CLEARED UP? NO, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. YOU DON'T HAVE TO STOP A SITE PLAN REQUEST. 
          BUT WHAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS HE'S HERE FOR A VIOLATION OF NOT HAVING A SITE PLAN REQUEST. 
          THEY'RE SAYING THEY'RE GOING TO CLEAR THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO CURE THE NEED FOR THE SITE
PLAN REQUEST. 
          WELL, THE WAY I SEE THIS DESCRIPTION, THOUGH,
IT SAYS THE LAND IS BEING USED FOR STORAGE PURPOSES WITHOUT A SITE PLAN REQUEST. 
          SO IF IT'S JUST NOT USED FOR STORAGE PURPOSES,
CORRECT. 
          THEN WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A SITE PLAN IS IRRELEVANT. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. HOWEVER, IT'S BEING USED AT THIS TIME AND THAT'S WHAT HE'S BEEN CITED FOR. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SAYING. IF HE'S GOING TO TAKE ALL OF THE THINGS OFF OF THE PROPERTY
BY JULY 1ST, THAT STILL WOULD NOT AFFECT WHAT'S GOING ON HERE,
BECAUSE AS SOON AS HE WOULD BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE AND THERE'S NOTHING ELSE THERE. THE CASE WOULD BE CLOSED, WOULD BE NOTHING FURTHER TO TO TO PURSUE,
BECAUSE NOW THERE'S NOTHING ON THE ON THE PROPERTY. 
          IT'S VACANT LAND. THERE'S NO NEED FOR A SITE PLAN. 
          HOWEVER, IF HE CONTINUES TO RUN THE BUSINESS OFF OF THE OUT OF THAT FACILITY,
HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A SITE PLAN, 
          [00:40:04]
RIGHT? AND SO IF WE COME BACK, AS SHE'S SAYING,
IF WE COME BACK IN JULY, IF YOU SAY YOU HAVE, I'LL GIVE YOU 30 DAYS TO CLEAR THE PROPERTY AND YOU HAVE UNTIL JULY,
WHATEVER. 
          WHEN WE COME BACK IN JULY, WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING TO HIM BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH DUE
PROCESS AGAIN. 
          WE HAVE TO SEND HIM A LETTER, TELL HIM THAT HE'S OUT OF COMPLIANCE,
GO BACK THROUGH THAT THING AGAIN. 
          AND THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I THINK WE KEEP GETTING INTO THIS PROLONGED SITUATION WITH THE
VIOLATION, BECAUSE EVERY TIME SOMETHING HAPPENS, IF YOU GIVE THEM 30 DAYS,
THAT MEANS WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO GIVE HIM AN ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GIVE HIM DUE PROCESS AND TELL HIM THAT WE WENT OUT ON SUCH AND SUCH
DATE. 
          THE PROPERTY IS STILL NOT IN COMPLIANCE. PLEASE REPORT TO AUGUST 14TH MEETING. 
          OKAY, I'LL GIVE YOU THE LAST WORD. AND THE ONLY THING I DISAGREE WITH WITH MR. EDWARDS IS IF HE'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE ON JULY,
IF HE'S IN COMPLIANCE ON JULY 11TH, IT CLOSES. 
          AND I KEEP PICKING JULY 11TH BECAUSE I'M ASKING YOU FOR 30 DAYS. 
          IF HE'S IN COMPLIANCE BY JULY 11TH, THE CASE IS CLOSED. 
          IF HE'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE BY JULY 11TH, THEY GIVE HIM DUE PROCESS NOTICE. 
          AUGUST 13TH, HE COMES BACK BEFORE YOU AND NOTHING IS CLOSED AND THERE IS NO EXTENSION. 
          THE IMPOSITION GOES BACK TO MARCH 12TH BECAUSE THE CASE WAS NEVER CLOSED. 
          SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE WE'RE TRYING TO EXTEND AND BUY AND DELAY. 
          DELAYING DOES US NO GOOD. DELAYING DOES NO GOOD WHATSOEVER. 
          HE'S GOT TO GET IT DONE BY JULY 11TH. DUE PROCESS OR NOT. 
          IT'S DID THE VIOLATION OCCUR AND DID YOU FIX IT BY THE DEADLINE THAT I GAVE YOU? THAT'S IT. END OF DISCUSSION. I DON'T CARE WHEN THE HEARING IS. 
          THE HEARING COULD BE IN NOVEMBER. IT WOULD STILL GO BACKWARDS. 
          BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE'RE ASKING FOR THE COURT TO GIVE HIM UNTIL JULY 11TH TO EITHER COME IN COMPLIANCE. HE'S NOT GOING TO GET A SITE PLAN. 
          EVERYONE AGREES WITH HIM TO TO GET RID OF THE VIOLATION,
BECAUSE HE'S NOT GOING TO REALLY BE IN COMPLIANCE BY REMOVING EVERYTHING AND STOPPING RUNNING A BUSINESS OFF THE PROPERTY. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING. 
          SO WHERE WOULD EVERYTHING OKAY, SO SO THIS IS WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. 
          WE WANT A CLEAR STATEMENT. AND SINCE IT'S HIS COUNSEL. 
          WE WANT A CLEAR STATEMENT FROM HIS COUNSEL AS TO WHAT SPECIFICALLY MR. AGUIRRE IS GOING TO DO BY JULY 11TH. IS HE GOING TO REMOVE EVERYTHING FROM THE PROPERTY
AND REMOVE AND RESOLVE THE CASE IN THAT MANNER, OR IS HE GOING TO REMOVE PARTIAL AND TRY TO GET A SITE PLAN AGREEMENT? I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW. WHAT SPECIFICALLY IS GOING TO BE REQUESTED TO BE
REVIEWED AT THIS JULY MEETING? OKAY. HE IS NOT. WELL, I'LL LET HIM SPEAK. HE IS NOT GOING TO TRY TO COME IN COMPLIANCE BY
GETTING A SITE PLAN BY JULY 11TH. THEY AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN. WHAT HE'S GOING TO DO IS CLEAR THE PROPERTY. 
          OKAY. SO BY JULY 11TH, HIS PROPERTY WILL BE CLEARED OF ALL DUMP TRUCKS OF ALL OTHER WASTE
THAT HAS BEEN DEPOSITED THERE. TRUCKS, CARS, VEHICLES,
EVERYTHING AND RESEATED. 
          CORRECT? YES. OKAY. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. IS HE OKAY WITH THAT? THE. THE CODE IS OKAY WITH THAT. IT'S UP TO. YOU. 
          I WASN'T AT THE MEETING. BUT I DO HAVE SOME KNOWLEDGE FROM JEANNIE THAT WAS IN THE MEETING
AS WELL. 
          AND VALERIE, THAT BASICALLY IT IS THE DIRECTIVE OF THE CITY MANAGER TO GO AHEAD AND
PROCEED WITH THE FINES. 
          HE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND GO TO THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE AND GET THIS WORKED OUT LATER IN
REGARDS TO WHAT NEEDS TO GET DONE. 
          I KNOW MR. AJA, IN MY OPINION, I DON'T WANT HIM TO BE UPSET AT ME. 
          I KNOW HIM FOR A VERY LONG TIME. I'VE DEALT WITH HIM IN THE PAST,
BUT I HAVE TO GO BY THE DIRECTIVE OF THE CITY MANAGER. 
          IT IS WHAT IT IS. I ALSO JUST BRIEFLY SPOKE TO THE ALTHEA AND I DON'T REALLY THINK IT'S
FEASIBLE TO HIM ACTUALLY EVEN CLEAR THE LOT IN 30 DAYS, BECAUSE A LOT OF IT HERE SAYS HE CLEARED IT. DAMAGING,
LET'S SAY TREES OR WHATEVER HE DID CLEAR THE PROPERTY. 
          HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO RE SOD THE PROPERTY AS WELL. 
          I DON'T THINK HE CAN DO THAT IN 30 DAYS. SO WHY ARE WE EVEN PLAYING AROUND WITH THE IDEA
OF THAT? HE WOULD HAVE TO CLEAR ALL THAT AND PROBABLY GO BY MANAGEMENT BY GROWTH MANAGEMENT TO FIND
OUT WHAT DO THEY WANT FOR IT TO BE IN COMPLIANCE, WHETHER IT'S PLANT TREES OR HOW THEY WANT IT SORTED. 
          CAN HE DO THAT IN 30 DAYS? I DON'T KNOW. SO HE DOES HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO WITH THE
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE LATER. 
          AND IT CAN GET WORKED OUT OKAY. AND FOR THE PROPERTY THAT WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE,
HOW LONG? 
          [00:45:06]
HOW LONG DID THAT TAKE? WHAT WAS INVOLVED WITH WHAT? THE THIRD PROPERTY. I SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE THIRD PROPERTY,
BUT I KNOW THAT HE DID. 
          WELL, HE OR SHE KNOWS WHAT HE DID, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT TOOK WHAT WAS ON THERE. 
          BUT WHAT? I DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS ON THERE. OKAY,
SO IT TOOK THREE MONTHS AND BUT WHAT WAS ON THERE WAS, WAS IT AS BAD AS THESE OTHER TWO OR WAS IT EASIER? THERE IS FAR MORE STUFF ON THE ONE THAT REQUIRES THE SITE PLAN. 
          BUT THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT APPARATUS EQUIPMENT LARGE DRAINAGE PIPES VEHICLES. IT WAS A LOT OF STUFF ON THAT PROPERTY. 
          THE THE ONE THAT'S IN QUESTION NOW IS PROBABLY SIX TIMES MORE. 
          YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S THAT'S NOT THE THE THE THE THE CITY SAYS
HE CAN'T GET IT DONE. THAT'S HIS BURDEN. IF YOU GIVE HIM 30 DAYS,
HE HAS NO CHOICE. 
          AND SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE. SORRY. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ISSUE IS ABOUT. 
          HE CAN'T GET IT DONE. SO LET'S NOT GIVE HIM 30 DAYS. 
          THAT'S. THAT'S HIS JOB. WELL, THE ISSUE IS FOR ME IS THAT THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR
DECADES. 
          AND IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO TO PROLONG IT IF WE'RE NOT,
IF WE CAN'T COME TO IF THERE'S NOT A SOLUTION THAT WILL ALLOW IT TO ACTUALLY BE SOLVED. I MEAN, IF 30 DAYS IS JUST IF WE'RE JUST BUYING TIME TO PAY
LESS, PAY LESS IN FINES I'M NOT I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. 
          I MEAN, IF IT COULD ACTUALLY, IF IT'S PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE TO DO IT IN 30 DAYS,
THAT'S ONE THING. 
          BUT I MEAN, IT'S REALLY LIKE 20 YEARS IN 30 DAYS AT THIS POINT. 
          IT'LL BE IT'LL BE DONE IN 30 DAYS. IT'LL BE IT'LL BE CLEANED OFF IN 30 DAYS. 
          THAT WHATEVER THAT TAKES, IF HE'S GOT TO CALL IN OTHER TRUCKING COMPANIES TO COME IN AND
HELP HIM IF HE'S GOT TO CALL IN EXCAVATORS TO COME IN AND HELP HIM. 
          IT'LL GET DONE IN 30 DAYS. OKAY. I MEAN, I, I KNOW YOU'RE SKEPTICAL. WE COME BACK, I AM SKEPTICAL,
AND WHAT I'M WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS MAKE HIM GO THROUGH THIS EXERCISE OF GETTING IT 80%, 99% OF THE WAY COMPLETE. AND THEN I STILL IMPOSE THE FINES,
MADE HIM GO THROUGH ALL THAT TROUBLE AND THEN IMPOSE THE FINES, AND THEN HE STILL GETS THE SITE PLAN. AND, YOU KNOW,
FOUR MONTHS FROM NOW, ALL WE REALLY DID WAS CAUSE HIM TO SPEND ALL THAT MONEY TO. 
          THAT'S THAT'S HIS. THAT'S HIS JOB. THAT'S HIS JOB IS TO GET IT DONE. 
          NOT 99%, NOT 20%, NOT 80%. 100%. YES, SIR. OKAY, I'LL GIVE HIM 30 DAYS TO CLEAR THE LAND AND BUT SO COMPLIANCE IS NOT IT'S NOT GETTING A
SITE PLAN. 
          IT IS THE THE IT IS CLEARED THE LAND. THERE'S NOTHING ON THE PROPERTY. 
          IT'S BEEN RESODDED WHATEVER THE CITY SAYS HE NEEDS TO DO TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO
COMPLIANCE, WHETHER IT'S PLANTING TREES OR, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER. 
          IT'S IT'S ALL OF THAT. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. SIR. 
          MAY I BE EXCUSED? YES. THANK YOU SIR. 
          ARE YOU DONE SIR? YEAH. YOU CAN. YOU KNOW, WE'RE I'M DONE WITH YOU. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE DONE AS WELL. YEAH. NO. 
          THANK YOU AGAIN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. 
          OUR NEXT CASE IS CV 2579825 AT 976 ELMONT STREET NORTHWEST. 
          THE CODE OFFICER IS ANGELICA SNEED. 
          ANGELICA, COMPLIANCE OFFICER, CITY OF PALM BAY,
AND THE VIOLATIONS AT 976 BELMONT STREET NORTHWEST STILL EXIST, AND THIS IS IN REGARDS TO THE PARKING AND AN HOUR PARKING IN FRONT OF THE DOOR ON THE
GRASS. 
          AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE AN RV THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S BEING LIVED IN BECAUSE IT'S OPEN. 
          AND SO I JUST SPOKE TO HER. SHE'S HERE. WE ACTUALLY SHE SHOWED ME A PICTURE AND WE
ACTUALLY CLARIFIED EXACTLY WHERE THE 
          [00:50:04]
CAR IS THAT WE'RE MOSTLY TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE I THINK SHE WAS UNDER THE WRONG IMPRESSION
OF THE VEHICLE. 
          AND I WENT OVER ABOUT THE RV WHEN IT NEEDS TO BE CLOSED,
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE LIGHTS ARE ON AT NIGHT. 
          AND THE COMPLAINANT IS BASICALLY ADVISING THAT IT LOOKS LIKE PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN IT AT
NIGHT. 
          SO WE DID GO OVER THAT AND I THINK SHE JUST WANTS A COUPLE OF DAYS,
BUT WE'RE GOING TO COME IN AND SHE SHE'S HERE. 
          OKAY. HELLO. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME HILDA RODRIGUEZ. OKAY. AND SO YOU'RE JUST LOOKING FOR A FEW DAYS EXTENSION. 
          WHAT? YEAH. FIVE DAYS. OKAY. AND. BUT I WANT TO CLARIFY TODAY THE STUFF THAT I ASKED FOR
FIVE DAYS. 
          OKAY. THAT'S. THAT SEEMS FINE. FIVE DAYS IS ALL YOU'RE ASKING FOR. 
          THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. SO WE'LL SET THE NEW COMPLIANCE DATE FOR JUNE 16TH,
AND THEN IT'S $50 A DAY AFTER THAT. 
          OKAY. I AGREE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. NO PROBLEM. 
          OKAY. WE DO HAVE ONE CASE ON THE AUTHORIZATION TO IMPOSE FINES THAT HAS COME INTO VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE. 
          THAT IS (258) 062-5473 HOLLAND AVENUE SOUTHWEST. 
          SO ALL THE OTHER CASES THE CITY IS REQUESTING THE CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MAGISTRATE.
FIND ALL RESPONDENTS OR CASES LISTED IN THE AUTHORIZATION TO IMPOSE FINES, REPORT AND NONCOMPLIANCE FOR THE PERIOD STATED ON THE REPORT AND IMPOSE THE FINES AS
LISTED ON THE REPORT. 
          I FIND THAT ALL THE RESPONDENTS AND CASES LISTED ON THE AUTHORIZATION TO IMPOSE FINES,
REPORT IN NONCOMPLIANCE FOR THE PERIOD STATED ON THE REPORT AND IMPOSE THE FINES AS LISTED ON THE REPORT DATED JULY 11TH, 2025. MOVING ON TO THE HEARINGS. 
          [CODE COMPLIANCE HEARINGS]
OUR CASE IS 259022544 13 HAMMOND STREET SOUTHWEST,
AND THE CODE OFFICER IS LETITIA DEAN. 
          TESTING CODE COMPLIANCE. THE VIOLATIONS THAT STILL EXIST ON THE PROPERTY ARE NO OR
INOPERABLE VEHICLES. 
          ALLOWED. OKAY. THANK YOU. PROPERTY OWNERS HERE. 
          AND TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL TIME. OKAY. SIR,
IF YOU PLEASE STEP UP, SAY, STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL ME WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          HAROLD. NICHOLAS, WHAT ELSE YOU NEED? OH, JUST TELL ME WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          OKAY, WELL I WAS HAVING PROBLEM WITH SOME OF THE VEHICLES,
AND I END UP PARKING IT ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, AND MONEY'S KIND OF TIGHT RIGHT NOW WITH FAMILY AND STUFF,
SO, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T HAVE FUNDS TO FIX IT AT ALL, YOU KNOW? SO I'M JUST REQUESTING TIME SO I COULD GET TIME TO FIX IT UP,
BUT TWO TO START MY OWN BUSINESS. 
          BUT UNFORTUNATELY, IT TAKES MONEY TO, YOU SO I SEE THREE CARS OR THREE VEHICLES IN THIS
PICTURE. 
          IS THAT HOW MANY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? IS THAT NOT. 
          YEAH. THE TREE ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE? YEAH. YES. 
          OKAY. AND ARE THEY ALL JUNK VEHICLES OR ARE THEY NOT JUNK? THEY OPERATE. IT'S JUST THAT WHEN I USED TO USE BEFORE. 
          AND THEN IT DEVELOPED A PROBLEM. SO I DIDN'T HAVE MONEY TO FIX IT AT THE TIME,
SO I STARTED USING THE NEXT ONE. 
          BUT THE OTHER TWO, I HAVE TWO VANS THERE THAT I BOUGHT TO START MY BUSINESS. 
          BUT UNFORTUNATELY EVENTS GOING ON IN LIFE THAT I CAN. 
          OKAY. START IT YET. YOU KNOW SO. BUT ALL OF THE VEHICLES RUN. 
          CORRECT? YES, CORRECT. OKAY. SO THE THE ISSUE I HAVE IS THAT IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER WHAT
YOU DO WITH THE VEHICLES. THEY JUST CAN'T BE WHERE THEY ARE. THEY GOT TO BE SOMEWHERE ELSE. 
          IS THAT. IS THAT ACCURATE? YES, SIR. OKAY. SO HE'S GOING TO UTILIZE THEM AND TRY TO MOVE
THEM ON THE DRIVEWAY. 
          AND THEN HE CAN HAVE ONE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE. 
          SO HE HAS TO FINAGLE SOME THINGS TO MAKE THAT ADJUSTMENT. 
          OKAY. SO WE'RE SO I MEAN AS FAR AS FIXING THE PROBLEM,
WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT JUMPING IN THE CARS AND MOVING THEM AROUND. 
          WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN BEFORE HE CAN FINISH. 
          OKAY. AND WHAT ARE THOSE OTHER WHAT ARE THOSE OTHER THINGS? WELL MY SON IN THE PROCESS OF
MOVING. 
          SO HE WILL BE MOVING OUT. SO I WOULD HAVE SPACE IN THE DRIVEWAY TO ACTUALLY THINK,
BECAUSE MY SON, MY WIFE, YOU KNOW, AND I HAVE AN EXTRA CAR JUST IN CASE ONE BREAKS DOWN. 
          WE HAVE A NEXT ONE THAT, YOU KNOW, ONE OF US COULD USE. 
          OKAY. SO WHAT ABOUT ON STREET PARKING? IS THAT AN OPTION IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AT ALL? WELL, HAD ISSUE BEFORE WHERE SOMEBODY HIT THE VEHICLE AND NEVER,
NEVER STOPPED OKAY. 
          [00:55:06]
SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S TAKING A RISK. PARKING ON THE STREET. 
          OKAY. SO HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED TO GET THAT DRIVEWAY CLEARED OFF SO THAT YOU CAN START
SECURING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE? WELL, I'M TRYING TO START THE BUSINESS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY,
RIGHT NOW, THE MONEY'S TIGHT. I MEAN, IF IF YOU COULD GIVE ME SIX MONTHS TO GET EVERYTHING TOGETHER IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW. WELL,
THE TESTIMONY SO FAR HAS BEEN THAT YOU CAN BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE BY CLEARING THE STUFF OFF THE DRIVEWAY. NO, BUT I WANT TO PUT PLATES ON ALL THE ON THE TWO VEHICLES
THAT THAT'S THERE. 
          THE VAN. OKAY. AND THAT ALL THAT ALSO NEEDS TO BE DONE. 
          CORRECT? YES. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO. SO I'M TRYING TO GET IT REGISTERED. 
          BUT YOU GOT TO HAVE A COMMERCIAL, YOU KNOW, INSURANCE AND ALL THAT STUFF TO DO THE
BUSINESS. 
          SO WHAT IS INVOLVED IN GETTING THE VEHICLES? SET UP. 
          GET THE TAGS AND EVERYTHING. GET THEM ALL PROPERLY REGISTERED. WELL,
THE INSURANCE THAT I NEED FOR THE FOR THE VEHICLE, IT'S COMMERCIAL INSURANCE. AND THAT'S VERY EXPENSIVE,
YOU KNOW. 
          SO AND IT'S FOR, YOU KNOW AND IT'S FOR THE TWO TWO VANS. 
          AND RIGHT NOW I'M GOING THROUGH A LOT OF BILLS. 
          RIGHT NOW I JUST NEED A ROOF. I JUST DID THE AC YOU KNOW. 
          SO IT'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT'S GOING ON AND I'M TRYING TO PAY OFF THE ROOF. 
          SO I HAD TO PUT THAT ON HOLD, MY BUSINESS ON HOLD BECAUSE THE INSURANCE TOLD ME THAT I
NEED TO GET A NEW ROOF, OTHERWISE THEY WOULD CANCEL ME. SO I HAD TO. OKAY. 
          SO EVERY TIME I WANT TO START MY BUSINESS, IT'S ALWAYS SOMETHING. NOW WHAT ABOUT LIKE,
MOVING THEM INTO THE GARAGE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? COULDN'T FIT IN THE GARAGE? THE VAN DOES. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER TWO? THERE'S NO GARAGE
IS VERY SMALL. 
          I MEAN, WHEN I SAY SMALL WITH THE AC IN THERE AND ALL THIS STUFF IN THERE,
YOU COULD ONLY FIT A SMALL CAR IN COIN. 
          OKAY. HAVE YOU LOOKED INTO ANY, LIKE, PARKING LOTS OR ANYTHING WHERE YOU CAN STORE THEM
OUTSIDE OF THIS? OUTSIDE. BECAUSE, I MEAN, I JUST IT SEEMS LIKE SIX MONTHS. 
          SEEMS LIKE A LONG TIME TO LET YOU JUST CONTINUE TO HAVE THE PROPERTY. 
          NOT IN COMPLIANCE. I'M TRYING TO GET THE BUSINESS STARTED. 
          I'M TRYING TO GET EVERYTHING GOING PROPERLY. I DON'T WANT,
YOU KNOW, SO IT'S THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR THE TIME. SO I KNOW BY THAT TIME I COULD HAVE EVERYTHING SITUATED, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I, I,
I AS FAR AS MONEY AND FUNDS, YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING TO SAVE AS LITTLE AS I COULD SAVE. 
          SO I KNOW BY SIX MONTHS I SHOULD HAVE ENOUGH TO START MY BUSINESS AND HAVE MY STUFF GOING
BECAUSE I NEED. 
          IT'S SOMETHING I'M PLANNING TO DO. I'M TRYING TO DO,
YOU KNOW? SO WHAT ABOUT JUST GETTING REGULAR, REGULAR INSURANCE ON THE VEHICLES SO THAT YOU CAN JUST
SO YOU CAN GET THEM REGISTERED AND HAVE THEM HAVE THEM LEGAL? I MEAN, YOU'RE NOT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE DRIVING THEM IF IT'S IF YOU'RE NOT OPERATING THE
BUSINESS YET. JUST WELL, I MEAN TO PUT REGULAR THING AND THEN GO PUT THING ONCE I ALREADY SAID I JUST WANTED TO
JUST DO THE THE INSURANCE. 
          I COULD BE USING THE VEHICLE INSTEAD OF JUST PUTTING THE INSURANCE JUST TO HAVE IT
SITTING. 
          I'M LOSING MONEY, YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE IT'S SITTING THERE. 
          WELL, YEAH, I UNDERSTAND, BUT WE ALSO NEED TO TRY TO GET THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE IN A
REASONABLE TIME. 
          IT'S JUST SIX MONTHS. JUST WHEN IT'S WHEN IT'S I KNOW IT'S I KNOW YOU'RE HAVING ISSUES AND
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THIS IT'S NOT NECESSARILY EASY,
BUT WHEN IT'S AS SIMPLE AS MOVING THE CARS TO A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THEY CAN BE, THEY CAN BE WHERE THEY'RE ALLOWED AND GETTING REGISTRATION. 
          MY SON IS STILL LIVING THERE WITH HIS CARS AND STUFF,
SO I DON'T HAVE SPACE IN THE DRIVEWAY. 
          THE VAN TRYING TO FIT THE VAN IN THE DRIVEWAY. 
          THE VAN IS VERY LONG, SO TRYING TO PUT IT IN THE DRIVEWAY. 
          THEN I HAVE TO LEAVE A VEHICLE ON THE STREET OR SOMETHING,
YOU KNOW, TO IF IT WAS JUST A REGULAR CAR. 
          IT'S TWO BIG VANS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO START A NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION
SERVICE. 
          SO THE BIG VANS, WHEN YOU PUT IN THE DRIVEWAY,
I DON'T KNOW THE LENGTH OF THE DRIVEWAY. 
          THEN WHEN I TRY TO PARK ONE BEHIND IT, IT'S ALL LIKE STICKING OUT TOWARDS THE ROAD. 
          SO I WAS HOPING WHEN MY SON. WELL, HE'S GETTING A PLACE AND EVERYTHING,
SO HE'S MOVING. 
          SO ONCE HE MOVED, I COULD ABLE TO DO THAT. AND WHEN IS WHEN IS HE MOVING? WELL, HE TOLD ME HE'S HE'S MOVING IN WITHIN 4 TO 5 MONTHS. 
          BUT I SAID SIX MONTHS JUST TO GIVE ME ENOUGH TIME BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SAY YES. 
          AND THEN HE MOVES IN SIX MONTHS AND I'M STUCK SAYING FOUR MONTHS OR FIVE MONTHS,
YOU KNOW. 
          SO THAT'S WHY I ASKED FOR SIX MONTHS. HE MAY NOT TAKE SIX MONTHS. 
          I'M JUST ASKING FOR SIX MONTHS. JUST TO COVER MYSELF,
YOU KNOW? 
          [01:00:01]
THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. OKAY. I. I'M JUST HAVING TROUBLE SEEING SIX MONTHS OF WORK,
YOU KNOW? WELL, I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH THE CITY BEFORE. 
          THIS IS MY FIRST TIME HAVING A PROBLEM WITH THE CITY. 
          I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I TRY TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH EVERYTHING. 
          IT'S JUST, UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW. YOU KNOW,
THIS IS THE SITUATION HERE. 
          SO IT'S NOT LIKE I CAME BEFORE YOU TO. YOU KNOW,
I I'M JUST ASKING FOR THAT TIME. 
          IF YOU COULD GRANT ME THAT TIME, I'LL RESOLVE THE PROBLEM. 
          OKAY. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE DOES THIS. DOES THE CITY HAVE A DIFFERENT IDEA OF HOW MUCH TIME? LIKE, THEY WOULD LIKE FOR AN EXTENSION? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I GUESS WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GIVE YOU A SIX MONTH EXTENSION. 
          THEN WE'LL SET THE NEW DATE OF COMPLIANCE. I THINK. 
          I LOST MY CHEAT SHEET. SET THE NEW DATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR DECEMBER 8TH,
2025, AND THEN $50 A DAY FOR EVERY DAY AFTER THAT. THAT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE. 
          OKAY. THE FOLLOWING CASES ON THE AGENDA ITEMS ONE THROUGH 24 UNLESS PREVIOUS. OH SORRY I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF COMPLIED CASES. 
          THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE BROUGHT INTO VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE. 
          28 60 FELDER AVENUE SOUTHEAST. (592) 425-8255 SANTA MARIA STREET, SOUTHWEST. 2592525 AT 142 TUCSON ROAD,
SOUTHWEST. 
          2593525 AT 951 ZAMORA STREET SOUTHEAST AND 2593725 AT 906 RALEIGH AVENUE SOUTHEAST. THE FOLLOWING CASES ON THE PURIFYING AGENDA ITEMS ONE THROUGH 24, UNLESS PREVIOUSLY HEARD,
WILL BE HEARD ON CONSENT WITHOUT FURTHER TESTIMONY IN THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IS REQUESTED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED UPON THE FILES PRESENTED. 
          THE CITY REPRESENTS THE ALL RESPONDENTS HAVE BEEN SERVED OR NOTICE TO APPEAR IN CHAPTER
ONE 60 TWO 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 REQUESTED THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FINED THE RESPONDENTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SET FORTH IN THE
STATEMENTS OF VIOLATION THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE SENT A REASONABLE TIME FOR COMPLIANCE AND SET A DAILY FINE TO BE IMPOSED IF THE RESPONDENTS FAILED TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. 
          I FIND THAT ALL THE RESPONDENTS IN THE CASES 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 26TH,
2025, WHICH IS 15 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THIS ORDER TO BRING THE 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. 
          THE FOLLOWING CASES ON THE SET FINE AGENDA ITEMS ONE THROUGH 23,
UNLESS PREVIOUSLY HEARD, WILL BE HEARD ON CONSENT WITHOUT FURTHER TESTIMONY IN THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IS REQUESTED
TO MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED UPON THE FILES PRESENTED THE CITY REPRESENTS. ALL RESPONDENTS HAVE BEEN SERVED OR NOTICED. ACCORDING TO CHAPTER 162 OF THE FLORIDA STATE
STATUTES IN 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 REQUESTED THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FIND THE RESPONDENTS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SET FORTH IN THE STATEMENTS OF VIOLATION THAT THE
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE SENT A REASONABLE TIME FOR COMPLIANCE AND IMPOSE A SET FINE IF THE RESPONDENTS FAIL 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 DATE. I FIND THAT ALL THE RESPONDENTS IN THE CASES 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 21ST,
2025, WHICH IS TEN DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THIS ORDER, TO BRING THEIR RESPECTIVE PROPERTIES INTO COMPLIANCE OR PAY A SET FINE OF $200,
I AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO TAKE ALL REASONABLE ACTIONS TO BRING THE PROPERTIES INTO COMPLIANCE AND CHARGE THE PROPERTY OWNER WITH THE REASONABLE COST OF THE ACTIONS,
ALONG WITH THE IMPOSED FINE. 
          THE FOLLOWING CASE ON THE SET FINE AGENDA ITEM 24 WILL BE HEARD ON CONSENT WITHOUT FURTHER
TESTIMONY. 
          THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IS REQUESTED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED UPON THE FILE PRESENTED.
THE CITY REPRESENTS THE. ALL RESPONDENTS HAVE BEEN SERVED IN CHAPTER 162 OF THE FOUR STATE STATUTES AND THE PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES. 
          THE RESPONDENT IS NOT PRESENT TO BE HEARD IN THE CASE HAS NOT COME INTO COMPLIANCE. 
          THE CITY IS SUBMITTING ALL EXHIBITS AND AFFIDAVITS INTO EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE,
AND REQUESTS THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FIND THE RESPONDENT IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SET 
          [01:05:02]
FORTH IN THE STATEMENTS OF VIOLATION THAT THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE SET A REASONABLE TIME FOR
COMPLIANCE. 
          IMPOSE A SET FINE IF THE RESPONDENT FAILS TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE BY THE COMPLIANCE DATE. 
          I FIND THAT ALL THE RESPONDENTS IN THE CASES 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 21ST,
2025, 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 SET FINE OF $200 FOR VIOLATION. 
          ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S NO OTHER BUSINESS, WE'LL ADJOURN.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.