[00:00:03]
I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER. SPECIAL MAGISTRATE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 18TH, 2026.
[CALL TO ORDER]
IT'S 1:00 PM. MY NAME IS JAMES BEADLE. I'M THE PERSON THAT WAS APPOINTED BY THE CITY OF PALM BAY TO CONSIDER APPLICATIONS FOR THE REDUCTION IN CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS.THE GENERAL PROCEDURE IS, IS THAT THE CLERK WILL INTRODUCE YOU OR INTRODUCE THE CASE, AND THE APPLICANT WILL COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE AND PRESENT THEIR CASE, IDENTIFY THEMSELVES FOR THE RECORD ALSO. AND AFTER THE APPLICANT IS PRESENTED THEIR CASE, THE CITY WILL THEN RESPOND AND THE APPLICANT WILL THEN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO WHATEVER THE CITY PRESENTED.
[SWEARING IN]
IF YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE TESTIMONY, CAN YOU PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND? YES, PLEASE.OUR FIRST CASE CASE SET OF CASES TO BE HEARD TODAY ARE CB 2535424 AND 2603925
[PETITION FOR RELIEF]
AT 2824 SHAUN AVENUE NORTHEAST.A RV MOVED NEXT DOOR AND WE KNEW IT WASN'T ALLOWED.
AT THAT POINT, I WAS ABLE TO GET ANOTHER TENANT MOVED BACK INTO THE PROPERTY.
BUT AS THINGS WENT ON, THE GUY WHO OWNED THE PROPERTY LIVED THERE WITH SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE.
BUT HE SAYS, I JUST CAN'T DO IT ANYMORE. SO AT THAT POINT, I'VE TALKED TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY SEVERAL TIMES ABOUT, HEY, YOU REALLY CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING ON THIS.
YOU CAN'T HAVE AN RV. WHY DON'T YOU JUST SELL IT TO ME? NO, NO, NO. SO I THINK IT GOT TO A POINT THAT A YEAR AND A HALF LATER, WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT INVOLVED AND SEVERAL PHONE CALLS TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, HE FINALLY SAID, OKAY, I WILL SELL IT TO YOU.
AT THAT POINT I WENT TO SETTLEMENT WITH THEM, AND THEY WERE ABLE TO CLEAR SOME OF THEIR THINGS OUT. BUT IN MY DEFENSE, I WANTED TO TRY TO GET THEM OUT AS SOON AS I CAN.
I SAID, LOOK, JUST LEAVE WHAT YOU WANT TO LEAVE.
AND THEN LIVING ON THE PROPERTY, 4 OR 5 PEOPLE FOR, I GUESS, A YEAR AND A HALF.
NO FACILITIES. OF COURSE, THERE WAS A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WERE LEFT BEHIND LARGE DUMPSTERS AND A LOT OF MANPOWER. WE'RE ABLE TO CLEAN IT UP. WE DID IT WITHIN THE FIRST WEEK OF ME OWNING THE PROPERTY.
AND AT THAT POINT, JUST RECENTLY, I WAS ABLE TO RE RENT MY PROPERTY, OF COURSE, BECAUSE IT JUST NOBODY WOULDN'T EVEN REALLY DIDN'T EVEN WANT TO LOOK AT IT AT THAT POINT. IT WAS JUST IT WAS PRETTY BAD.
SO I THINK I'M IN GOOD SHAPE. AND I TRIED TO CALL.
YOU KNOW, I WAS IN CORRESPONDENCE WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT THE WHOLE TIME AND ALSO THE POLICE OFFICER, BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT THE POINT THAT I TOOK IT OVER THAT I WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THAT INVOLVED TO HELP ME GET PEOPLE OUT OF THE TENTS.
SO I GAVE HIM A FEW EXTRA DAYS AND THEY WERE ABLE TO CLEAR EVERYBODY OUT OF THERE WITHOUT THE POLICE BEING INVOLVED AGAIN, WHICH THEY WENT THERE. THERE'S SEVERAL TIMES, I THINK IT WAS A DOZEN TIMES AND CODE ENFORCEMENT A NUMBER OF TIMES.
SO THERE WERE SEVERAL THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF LOSS.
AND OF COURSE, ALL THE CLEANING UP, EVERYTHING WAS, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS TO.
SO I'M JUST ASKING IF THERE CAN BE A REDUCTION TO THE 750, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE.
OKAY. AND WHAT'S THE CITY'S POSITION? CAN YOU PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF TOO, PLEASE?
[00:05:03]
YES. FOR THE RECORD, DENNIS BUNN, ACTING CODE COMPLIANCE MANAGER.AFTER REVIEWING THE FILE THE APPLICATION AND THE CASE, THE CITY HAS NO OBJECTION TO A REDUCTION TO THE AMOUNT OF ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS OF 750. OKAY. LET ME ASK A DIFFERENT QUESTION.
DO YOU HAVE ANY YOU HAVE ANOTHER CASE ALSO THAT'S GOING TO BE HEARD, WHICH IS 26039 DASH 25.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD REGARDING THAT VIOLATION, OR DID YOU THINK YOU WERE SPEAKING TO BOTH OF THEM? YEAH, I WAS SPEAKING TO BOTH OF THEM. I THOUGHT, I'M SORRY.
OKAY. NO, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR.
ALL RIGHT. AND WHAT'S THE CITY'S POSITION REGARDING THE OTHER CASE? THE SAME. AFTER REVIEWING AND BASED ON THE CONTACT THAT WE'VE HAD WITH THE RESPONDENT.
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS $751,500 TOTAL FOR BOTH CASES.
THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. OKAY. WELL, BASED ON WHAT YOUR REQUEST WAS AND WHAT THE CITY'S POSITION IS, I'LL ENTER AN ORDER. REDUCING THE FINE TO A TOTAL OF $1,500 WOULD BE $750 PER CASE.
NORMALLY, THE ORDER PROVIDES THAT IT TO BE PAID IN 30 DAYS.
IS THAT GOING TO BE AN ISSUE FOR YOU? I CAN DO IT TODAY.
OKAY. WELL, WE DO 30 DAYS AND YOU'LL HAVE TO CONTACT THE CODE COMPLIANCE DEPARTMENT.
OKAY. AFTER THE MEETING. OKAY. SO AFTERWARDS, JUST CALL YOU GUYS AND WE'LL COME.
OKAY. GREAT. AND YOU HAVE EVERYTHING. OKAY. THANK YOU.
YES, SIR. HAVE A GOOD DAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
OUR NEXT SET OF CASES TO BE HEARD IS CB 1747016 AND 1913318.
AND THIS IS AT 382 NOBLES AVENUE NORTHEAST. NOGALES.
MR.. GOT IT. YEAH, I'M PRETTY MUCH JUST GOING TO. YES, YES. I'LL READ IT FOR YOU.
OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JACK GRIFFIN.
I'VE BEEN. I'M A FAMILY FRIEND, AND I'VE BEEN HELPING THEM SELL THEIR HOUSE.
IF THAT'S OKAY, THAT'S FINE. YEAH. OKAY. SO JANET ACKER IS.
SHE'S 82 YEARS OLD AND SHE'S PARTIALLY DISABLED.
SHE RETIRED FROM THE INDIALANTIC POLICE DEPARTMENT.
HER HUSBAND, HARRY ACKER, SPENT 16 YEARS AS A POLICE OFFICER IN MICHIGAN.
AND HE ENDED HIS CAREER AS A SECURITY OFFICER AT HOLMES REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER.
HE UNEXPECTEDLY PASSED AWAY IN 2015. AFTER THIS DEVASTATING LOSS, MISS ACKER'S SON RICHARD ASSUMED RESPONSIBILITY FOR MANAGING THE HOME AND HER FINANCES. UNFORTUNATELY, DUE TO SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROBLEMS, HE DID NOT MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY.
PROPERTY PROPERLY OR RELATED OBLIGATIONS AND FINANCES.
HE RECENTLY PASSED AWAY OF A DRUG OVERDOSE, AND HE LEFT HER BANK ACCOUNTS EMPTY.
AS A RESULT, MISS ACKER, SHE FOUND HERSELF OVERWHELMED AND UNABLE TO CONTINUE MAINTAINING THE HOME.
SHE MADE THE DECISION TO SELL THE PROPERTY TO MOVE INTO A MORE MANAGEABLE LIVING SITUATION.
DURING THE SALES PROCESS, THE TITLE COMPANY. SHE FOUND OUT ABOUT THESE LIENS DURING THAT PROCESS.
IF HER SON WAS AWARE, SHE SHE WAS NOT DISCLOSED ANY OF THIS INFORMATION.
SHE HAS VERY LIMITED FUNDS, AND SHE SHE'S STILL TAKING CARE OF HER TWO UNDERAGE GRANDCHILDREN.
THE HOUSE NEEDS A LOT OF WORK, AND SHE'S JUST. THEY'RE JUST NOT UP FOR THE JOB AND STUFF.
SINCE THEN, THERE WAS WHEN THIS CAME UP, THE THE CODE WAS STILL THE THE.
I'M SORRY. THE THE CASE WAS STILL OPEN, AND THE PROSPECTIVE HOME BUYER HAS SINCE WE FOUND OUT.
AND HE ACTUALLY TOOK THE INITIATIVE AND JUST WENT AHEAD AND KEPT CLEANING IT UP AND GOT THE GOT THE CASE CLOSED SO THAT WE COULD COME BEFORE YOU, BEFORE YOU AND AND SEE WHAT COULD BE DONE FOR HER.
[00:10:10]
DO YOU WANT TO STAND SIDEWAYS? MAYBE. CAN YOU JUST IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD? MY NAME IS JANET RAY ACKER. OKAY. AND YOU HEARD MR. GRIFFIN READ A LETTER. IS THAT CORRECT? EXCUSE ME.DID YOU JUST HEAR MR. GRIFFIN READ THE LETTER? YES. DO YOU CONFIRM ALL THE INFORMATION THAT'S IN THAT LETTER IS CORRECT AND ACCURATE.
OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. I JUST WANTED HER TO CONFIRM WHAT WAS IN THE LETTER.
ANYONE. WHAT'S THE CITY'S POSITION REGARDING THIS? AFTER REVIEWING THE FILE, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION ALL THE FACTORS AND THE APPLICATION OF THE APPLICANT, THE CITY ON THE FIRST CASE IS REQUESTING A REDUCTION OF FINE TO AND $0.39.
AND WHAT ABOUT THE SECOND CASE? AND ON THE SECOND CASE, WE'RE ASKING FOR A REDUCTION OF $7,002.75.
AND WHAT'S THE BREAKDOWN FOR THE AMOUNTS FOR BOTH OF THOSE? SO THE FIRST CASE HAS AN AMOUNT OF $13,259.96.
WE'VE REDUCED THAT TO A 14%. AND THEN OF COURSE THE $750 ADMIN FEE.
AND THAT GIVES US THE $2,606.39. OKAY. AND WHAT ABOUT THE SECOND CASE? AND ON THE SECOND CASE, THAT FINE IS ACTUALLY $208,425, WITH A 3% REDUCTION AND THE 750 ADMIN COSTS. THAT BRINGS IT TO $7,002.75. THANK YOU.
OKAY. SO, MR. GRIFFIN, YOU HEARD THE CITY'S POSITION.
WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE TO THE CITY'S POSITION? I'M SURE SHE'S HAPPY WITH THAT. I MEAN, COMPARED TO HERE, WE'RE HOPING FOR A COMPLETE.
YEAH. WE'RE TRYING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR ANYTHING.
BUT SHE WAS HOPING FOR. SHE DIDN'T KNOW AT ALL.
BUT, I MEAN, IF THAT'S THE BEST YOU CAN DO, SHE'S.
I'M SURE SHE'S HAPPY. WELL, I MEAN, I CAN TELL YOU THAT JUST JUST AS A MATTER OF PRACTICE, UNLESS THERE'S SOME REALLY EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ARE ALMOST ALWAYS IMPOSED OF THE 750.
SO THAT'D BE PER CASE ANYWAY. SO. SO IS IT 9000 ALTOGETHER? DID I UNDERSTAND THAT IT WOULD BE 9600? I HAVEN'T DECIDED WHAT I'M GOING TO DO YET.
LET ME ASK ONE QUESTION THAT I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT.
I MEAN, WAS MISS ACKER RESIDING IN THE HOUSE DURING THIS ENTIRE PERIOD OF TIME? SHE WAS. BUT SHE HER HER SON WAS TAKING CARE OF EVERYTHING, LIKE.
AND SHE'S BEEN DISABLED. AND SHE WAS, BECAUSE HE WAS DISABLED, SHE WAS TAKING CARE OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS, AND SHE HAD NO CLUE OF THIS. AND THEN, OF COURSE, HE HE WAS USING HE WAS A HE HAD AN ADDICTION ISSUES.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. I JUST I MEAN, SHE RESIDED IN THE HOUSE WHEN.
YEAH. ALL THE ALL THE ALL THE STUFF WAS OVERGROWN.
THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT WAS. SO.
THE. SHE OWN THE HOUSE. FREE AND CLEAR. SHE DOES, YOUR HONOR.
YES. THE HOUSE IS. NEEDS A LOT OF WORK. I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING THE PLUMBING, AND THERE'S ROOF ISSUES, TERMITE ISSUES, SEPTIC ISSUES. NOT TO MENTION, THERE WAS THE THE SON AND HIS WIFE WERE HOARDERS.
IT'S IT'S IT NEEDS TO BE CLEANED OUT. LIKE, YOU CAN'T EVEN WALK THROUGH THE GARAGE AND WHATNOT.
[00:15:02]
HOW MUCH WAS THE CONTRACT FOR THE CONTRACT FOR 110.THERE WAS OTHER. OTHER? IT'S A IT'S A COMPLETE INVESTOR PROPERTY.
WELL, BASED UPON ALL THE EVIDENCE I'M GOING TO REDUCE THE FINE.
TO 6000 $6,500 TOTAL. THANK YOU, THANK YOU SIR.
DID YOU HEAR THAT? YOU UNDERSTAND? JANET. OKAY.
AND WHEN CAN THIS AMOUNT BE PAID? IT CAN BE PAID WITHIN THE NEXT 30 DAYS.
OKAY. JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, IF IT'S NOT PAID WITHIN 30 DAYS, THE CURRENT FINES GET REINSTATED.
IT WILL BE, SIR. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THERE'LL BE AN ORDER ENTERED TO THAT EFFECT.
OKAY, EXCELLENT. I DO HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU.
I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU UNDERSTAND. SO LET'S SAY THAT THEY DO SELL THE HOUSE.
DOES THIS GO ON TO THE THE OFFICIAL RECORDS ALMOST IMMEDIATELY SO THAT THAT CAN BE PICKED UP BY TITLE COMPANIES OR HOW DOES THAT WORK? ONCE IT'S PAID, YOU CAN ASK YOUR TITLE COMPANY.
OKAY. BECAUSE THERE'LL BE AN ORDER ENTERED AND EITHER THE CITY CAN GIVE IT TO THE TITLE COMPANY.
I CAN SEND IT TO THE TITLE COMPANY IF THEY NEED TO.
OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. I APPRECIATE YOU TODAY.
OUR NEXT SET OF CASES IS CEB 1985319 AND 2440924.
AND THIS IS AT 1011 POPE STREET NORTHWEST. THANK YOU. SORRY.
SHE NEEDS TO BE SWORN IN. SHE DIDN'T STAND UP TO GET SWORN IN EARLIER.
MISS WELDON, I JUST NEED TO SWEAR YOU IN, OKAY? CAN YOU PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND? DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? I DO THANK YOU. MY NAME IS GILLETTE WALLED IN AND HAVE A PROPERTY AT THE 1011 POPE STREET.
I RECENTLY LEARNED OF THE VIOLATION WHEN MY PROPERTY WAS GETTING READY TO BE CLOSED.
SHE SAID, YEAH, THERE'S AN ABANDONED VEHICLE AND DEBRIS ON THE PROPERTY.
AND I TOLD HER THERE'S THIS PROPERTY IS COMPLETELY CLEAR.
THERE'S NOTHING ON IT. BUT WHAT I UNDERSTAND, IT WAS ANOTHER PROPERTY THAT SHE WAS REFERRING TO.
SHE WASN'T REFERRING TO THE PROPERTY THAT I WAS SELLING.
SO I JUST, LIKE, I'M LIKE, WELL, MAYBE THEY HAVE THE WRONG INFORMATION.
SO WHEN I SPOKE TO HER AGAIN, SHE SAID IT'S A PROPERTY AT 1011 POPE STREET.
AND THAT'S WHEN IT HIT ME. I WAS LIKE, OH, THAT'S A RENTAL PROPERTY.
SO THE PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE THEY NEVER SAID ANYTHING TO ME ABOUT ANYTHING THAT WAS BROUGHT, YOU KNOW, BY THE CITY, A NOTICE OR ANYTHING THAT THERE WAS AN ABANDONED VEHICLE ON THE PROPERTY OR DEBRIS ON THE PROPERTY.
I WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY OF THOSE THINGS. THE THE PROPERTY NOW IS CLEANED UP.
THERE'S NO ABANDONED VEHICLE, NO DEBRIS, NOTHING.
AND THIS WAS CLEARED UP BEFORE I EVEN FOUND OUT ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON.
SO I'M ASKING IF WE CAN REDUCE THE FINE, BECAUSE IF THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT I WAS AWARE OF, IT WOULD HAVE DEALT WITH INSTANTLY. IT WOULDN'T HAVE GONE FOR YEARS AND NOT KNOWING WHAT WAS GOING ON.
AND NO ONE HAS MENTIONED IT TO ME. AND OF COURSE, I DON'T GO BY THE PROPERTY OFTEN AND I DON'T GET THE MAIL, SO I WOULDN'T KNOW THAT THIS WAS GOING ON. OKAY.
LET ME LET ME EXPLAIN TO YOU IN CASE YOU ULTIMATELY GET OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.
[00:20:02]
RENTAL PROPERTY FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT. DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER IT'S A CITY OR ANY OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT, THEY THEIR OBLIGATION IS TO PROVIDE NOTICE TO THE ADDRESS, THE PERSON AND ADDRESS THAT ARE LISTED WITH THE PROPERTY APPRAISER AND OR THE TAX COLLECTOR. SO LOOKING AT THE PAPERWORK THAT'S IN THE FILE, THE YOUR MAILING ADDRESS WAS THIS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY ADDRESS.SO ALL THE NOTICES THAT THE CITY IS OBLIGATED TO FORWARD ARE TO THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.
THEY DON'T HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO TRY AND TRACK YOU DOWN, SO TO SPEAK, TO DO THAT.
SO I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT IF YOU HAVE OTHER RENTAL PROPERTY, YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE YOUR ADDRESS WHERE YOU WANT YOUR MAIL GOING, AND SO THAT SITUATIONS LIKE THIS ARE AVOIDED IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE INVARIABLY A INVARIABLY ATTENDANTS NOT GOING TO TELL THE LANDLORD THAT THEY GOT A NOTICE OF A CODE VIOLATION. THERE'S YOUR VERY FEW TENANTS THAT ARE GOING TO DO THAT.
JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE. YES.
AND WHAT'S THE CITY'S POSITION AFTER REVIEWING THE CASE AND THE APPLICATION AND THE SEVERITY OF THE VIOLATION AND LENGTH OF TIME FOR CORRECTION? THE CITY IS ASKING THAT THE FINE OF $18,681.89 GET A 14% REDUCTION, PLUS A 750 ADMIN FEE, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $3,365.46.
AND WHAT ABOUT THE SECOND CASE? AND ON THE SECOND CASE, WE ARE ASKING THE FINE OF $36,593.75, RECEIVE A 12% REDUCTION PLUS 750 ADMIN FEE FOR $5,141.25.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION OF THE CITY? IS THE BOTH OF THE VIOLATIONS OR PART OF ONE VIOLATION AND THE OTHER VIOLATION RELATE TO INOPERABLE MOTOR VEHICLE. IS THAT THE SAME MOTOR VEHICLE THAT WAS THE BASIS FOR BOTH OF THE.
BOTH OF THE ISSUES IN EACH CASE, OR I SHOULD SAY THE ISSUE IN EACH CASE.
YES, IT APPEARS TO BE THAT WAY. OKAY.
MISS WALDEN, WHEN YOU SAID THAT YOU REMOVED THE VEHICLE OR CLEANED UP THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO YOUR DISCOVERING THIS ISSUE, WHEN DID YOU DISCOVER THE ISSUE? DISCOVER IT? I'D SAY ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO. OKAY. BECAUSE I, I'M NOW LIVING IN THAT PROPERTY AFTER SELLING THE OTHER ONE.
HE ALSO INDICATED THAT YOU CLEANED THE PROPERTY UP PRIOR TO YOU FINDING OUT.
WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN? I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE QUESTION.
NO. YOU HAD INDICATED THAT YOU FOUND OUT ABOUT THE VIOLATION ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO.
NO, I FOUND OUT ABOUT THE VIOLATION TWO DAYS BEFORE CLOSING OF MY OTHER OF THE PROPERTY.
AND WHEN WAS THAT? WHICH WAS CLOSING WAS JANUARY.
18TH, I BELIEVE. OKAY. WHEN YOU CLEANED IT UP ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO.
AND WHAT'S YOUR POSITION REGARDING THE CITY'S STATEMENTS? I WAS HOPING THAT I COULD GET A MUCH MORE REDUCTION, YOU KNOW, OF THE FINE.
[00:25:46]
ONE MORE QUESTION FOR THE CITY. WITH RESPECT TO THE VEHICLE, WAS THE VEHICLE IN THE SAME PLACE? IN BOTH THE SAME PLACE ON THE PROPERTY? NO, A VEHICLE WAS IN THE DRIVEWAY ON ONE CASE AND OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE ON ANOTHER. OKAY.I'M GOING TO REDUCE THE TOTAL FINE TO.
$6,000. I'LL SET FORTH THE BASIS FOR IT IN MY ORDER.
BUT AGAIN, NORMALLY IT'S DONE WITHIN, WITHIN 30 DAYS.
IS THAT GOING TO BE A PROBLEM? NO IT WON'T. OKAY.
OKAY. THE CITY WILL FORWARD YOU AN ORDER WHEN IT'S DONE.
OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES, MA'AM. APPRECIATE IT.
[ADOPTION OF MINUTES]
I WILL SIGN THE MINUTES FOR THE LAST MEETING.AND THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED AT 127.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.