good afternoon um my name is Brena dur I serve as special magistrate the city of Jacksonville Beach this of Wednesday June 26th of 2024 uh for the code enement agenda the um agenda has three items on it and we will hear those after the cler makes the general announcements thank you the purpose and function of the Jacksonville Beach special magistrate Hearing in accordance with Florida State CH 162 in the city of Jacksonville Beach quote of ordinances is to reach an equitable exp exp expedition to enforce codes the city presents the violation and the evidence to the special magistrate next the property owner is sworn in and responds to the violation and evidence both the city and the property owner may call witnesses to provide sworn testimony relevant to the case this is a quasi judicial hearing not a public forum individuals not called to sworn witnesses will not be heard thank you very much you will please identify yourself please raise your right hand and state your name and address Nikki beavers do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God I do all right um seeing that only one of the respondents is here today we're going to go ahead and follow the order of the agenda okay um we will be starting off with case number 23130 this is for 1121 north3r Street um the violation was outdoor display um prohibited use for Outdoor Advertising could you repeat those again please these 341 and 342k correct this was a continuance from our May hearing the City attorney and the Planning and Zoning director um the director is who um interprets the code and she's here to testify today um from the continu from our last year okay I have a I have a couple of questions okay um first um I just want to ask you about the notice of hearing that was sent on June 6 okay um in that notice it says that on September 1 2023 at 11 Third Street um that the respondent violated the city of Jacksonville code um it's my understanding that uh you have observed a violation sub during 2024 for the record could you please tell us what those dates were so um as you can see on the pictures the pictures are date stamped um the original case begin September 2 first um that was for um the initial violation and during that initial violation that case was brought before the special magistrate and it was ordered that they remain in compliance of not having any outdoor display so um this was a continuance of um repeat violations and that's why we're back here today I understand that but could you answer the question the subsequent observations yes so um this right here after that initial case was started in September um the next violation was observed after that hearing in magistrate order was on May 2nd 2024 as you can see is pictured um in these date stamp phot those okay and so um my final inspection which was on yesterday June 25th it shows that the um property owner was in compliance there was no um violation observed at that time okay that's very helpful thank you do you want the planning director to testify now we can go ahead and hear from the property owner first and then the um director can then interpret his questions okay thank you please raise your right hand and your name and address my name is Patrick Mr could you clarify for the record or state for the record who you're here on behalf of today yes my name pansion Patrick pill I'm an owner of T Gregory Imports T Gregory Imports is the business tenant at the subject property so I only represent T Gregory and ports the tenant at the subject property that the underlying alleged violation concerns there is a representative of 121 Street Inc who is the respondent and that is Rich Trindle he's right there there so that's the entity that is the owner and landlord of the property will both of you be speaking today um I I met he trendle was available to yeah if necessary okay thank you Mr Po do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth that will be gone yes I did so I'd like to back up a little a minute as I just explained I represent T Gregory Imports um and at the last hearing which will on May 22nd 2024 um we we went through the citation and presented some argument and then your honor asked continue the case with an instruction As I understood it for the parties to schedule a meeting in the interim prior to June 26 with uh with a with a um recommendation that the party's tried to um reach some sort of amicable agreement and I welcomed that approach and thought that we would have that meeting so I reached out to miss beavers on May 24th um and then I reached out again on June 11th and Miss beavers responded on June 11th and said that she was out of town until June 17th and that she would um when she got back on June 17th would figure out scheduling for that meeting and then I heard nothing um until we're here today and we seem to be moving forward as if that direction wasn't given and I think still that a meeting of that nature would be beneficial and I welcome that sort of meeting because I would like very much as I said in the first hearing to resolve this amicably I maintain the position and I know we talked about it a whole lot um but to sort of reiterate some some key points and maintain the position that the ordinance cited is not applicable to the circumstances in hand and we argued that and made the point that the ordinance says the business of outdoor advertising now whether or not uh a couple chairs in a Sign by the business of property constitutes advertising is a different question as to whether it constitutes the business of out advertising and it seems quite clear that the business of outdoor advertising is fly distinct the business of outdoor advertising would be selling advertising space such as Billboards and that sort of thing so we presented that argument and we said that the law does not apply if I um Mr Po um you referenced that it may constitute Outdoor Advertising what is that section that you're referring to no I'm I'm just saying well I'm not referring to a I'm saying well I'm talking I'm not referring to any section I'm saying that somebody might argue that somebody might argue that some things being outside might be advertising for the business I'm not referring to a section I'm saying someone might argue that I'm not saying it is or isn't but I'm saying clearly it is not the business of outdoor advertising because the prohibited act the ordinance that's cited the ordinance that is the basis of the violation says that it prohibits the business of outdoor advertising and that would mean that um there would be a situation where the where there's some sort of compens you know the business of outdo advertising means refers to receiving compensation from third parties for Billboards commercial advertising or other promotional media of that sort and it seems quite clear that that's all that the subject provision is intended to site now again my understanding was that we were going to have a meeting with the city and try see if we can come to some sort of under mutual understanding of things and I also understand that you had invited or asked M beers to invite somebody here to talk about the city's interpretation of the of the provision and with all due respect to everybody here because I know everybody's just trying the best the ordinance has to be strictly construed it said it says exactly what it says and no more and so whether or not fever explained that she believes that it encompasses the full gamut of anything that's outside that might be considered advertising and what is your basis for believing that the code has to be strictly conried I believe that's I believe that's pretty Bedrock I I didn't bring a case citation I think that's pretty Bedrock uh case law that that the code sections should be strictly conru most codes and I'm pretty sure this one probably the saying will have a provision in it that will say that they'll be liberally ConEd and I would expect that this development code also has a similar provision if it does I didn't see that I'm not saying it does or does not I'm not aware of this I'm not aware of whether this code provision has that so I would argue that it should be strictly construed and I'm not aware of whether it has a separate provision that it should be liberally construed um but even Li construed it it it it goes beyond the bounds of liberal construction to interpret that the business of outdoor advertising means a couple of chairs and a flag outside and that's what the citation is for the citation is for having a couple of chairs and a flag outside and the suggestion that that constitutes the business of outdoor advertising is is beyond liberal construction the business of or advertising that means something completely different okay thank you um there were a few other points that i' would like to make if I could um is it a repeat of no I'm G to try out to be repetitive no I I would also like to point out that we um as as Miss beers indicated um since and as I said I would since the um May 22 hearing we have uh essentially complied with the demands of the city regarding not putting items outside at all and it has been I took I took a clear note of that thank you um but I would also add that it has been substantially detrimental to our business we have customers coming in asking if we're closed saying wow I didn't even I I drove by and wasn't sure that you were open and they because have you actually had somebody say that to you directly I did not that is that you've been told that so and I understand that this is a fairly informal hearing I have been told that so if you want to strike it on a hearsay basis then I suppose you I just want to be clear yes my manager told the manager of the store told me that several people have come in and pointed out that uh they thought the place was they thought the business might have been closed because it looks so different because forc have you tried other ways to make sure that to try to tell people or advise people as they're driving down Third Street that you're actually open so um that's an interesting question I'm not sure what other ways there might be um but the store has been in operation in that location for over 20 years and has functioned essentially that way with having items outside for over 20 years and it's had absolutely no problem um or has not been accused of violating any ordinance as a result until last September um and then again I suppose uh the violation that is an issue here on May for that that uh May 2nd um but set to answer your question um sure we have other we have we have um we have social media we have a sign in the window that says open um we have other ways that folks could be aware that our store is open we have our hours posted on the door but as a historical practice this store has regularly had things outside indicating that it's open and looking welcoming and again I and and as a matter of brand this is one of four stores we have a store in St Augustine we have a store in Fern new beach and we have a store in Orman Beach at all four locations and I have pictures which I'll be glad to show you we we we have some furniture outside and that's kind of here's here's the brand now if there's needs to be a conversation or if there could be a conversation about how much is too much I was hoping that would be the discussion as part of the meeting that you had recommended and happy to have that sort of a discussion as a matter of of some sort of compromise but to the extent we're here as a matter of law on a citation for a violation of a provision that says prohibition against the business of outdoor advertising then again it is our our position that that laa is not applicable and no violation has happened and it's not fair to start looking for other laws that we might have violated if that's the citation that's the citation I um I want to make sure you understand why I'm not going to accept into evidence the pictures of your other businesses locations because really it's not part and parcel to what we're here on today if you have pictures of your current business that additional pictures that we want to submit that's fine but I don't think it's appropriate or relevant then I will submit I may have shown this picture to you before well here let me argue why it's relevant I think it's relevant because again um the alleged violation is about the business about door advertising and my position is that this is not ation of the business about we advertising and further um it is being true to the brand which is not the business of outdoor advertising having a couple few chairs outside having a welcome sign um that that invites people in is part of the storage brand and is not the business of door advertising and so that's why I think that those pictures would be relevant and it's my understanding you purchased the business assets in late December of 23 correct so is this a when you say that this is part of the brand um and you also earlier testified that they've been doing this for 20 years is did You observe any times before you purchased uh the assets um Did You observe the outdoor let me put it this Did You observe the merchandise on it outside of the building yes I mean we obviously as part of the process of from the time we decided to buy the business through the many months it took to get to the stage of actually buying the business um we went byy all four of the stores many times and many times there would be furniture at least some items outside sorry and were you advised that there had been a code enforcement action regarding the the furniture Outdoors or the merchandise Outdoors um as far as I recall not prior to purchasing the business and when were you first advised about the um I the furniture I don't recall exactly I I think I I don't recall exactly I think it was sometime in the mid to late spring but I don't recall exactly and was that through your manager correct and was the manager the continuation from from the prior owner of yes and so that manager was apparently aware of he's been the manager of the store for many years for how long for many years for many years and just for the record could you remind remind us what his name is or her name yeah um his name is Chris Craig Chris Chris do you know his last name yes call and I do recall from reading the prior special magistrates orders uh that Chris mc mc correct yes was in attendance representing land owner business owner at time he was not representing the land owner he was repres he was there on B re as I understand it I I wasn't there I don't know anything about it other than what he sold me did you purchase the business assets from 1121 thir Street no no okay just again for the record um it wasn't clear to me that there was a separation between the landowner and in the last from the prior hearings um can you tell me who you purchased the assets yeah oh yes I can there's an absolute and clear separation I purchased the assets from T Gregory Imports which is the company that was owned or that still is as I understand it um and has been for decades owned by Todd Gregory Whitten and T Gregory Imports Inc was a tenant in the building um for many many years I don't know when 1121 North Third Street purchased the property or how long they've owned it or any of that but as far as I know T Gregory Imports has always been nothing but a tenant in that property has never been um in any legal way associated with the um owner of the property other than as a tenant and just that's my understand I didn't quite catch the name operator of the owner of T Gregory Imports no was it t Gregory Imports correct owner yes of the business not not of the property it that it's always been a tenant of the property okay thank you Mr Mr Mr tringle here would know better about the property I don't know any of that history that that that's um helpful to me the business has always been a tenant and the owner of bus has not been the same as far as I've ever done sure so I'd like to present these two pictures and I would also like to present um pictures of our other business this is our store with a sign welcome sign and a shair actually I said the last weeks I'm sorry these two pictures were taken just prior to show one what the store looks like with aair sign and flag show without CP chairsside it's the this is our a same thing couple of chairs and a sign people sit in these chairs sometimes um spes will sit in the chair while somebody else is inside shopping it's convenience for our customers it's welcome it's convenience I want to ask you not to testify while you're up here okay because I need you to picking upic thank let me check my notes real quick if I could I made this point before but I want to reiterate that when enforcement is based on excuse me these are not marked um I can mark them in some way I just want to I'm glad to mark them I just need to know which stores which I can come up there do that for so I've written in the bottom right corner of each of the pictures that you hand me back FB for fernandino Beach OB for Orman Beach and sa for St Augustine so one of the things I said while I was up there to the extent it would be considered um the impact of the of of complying with the demand about having nothing outside has been observably detrimental to our business um with a significant drop in in in people coming in and in Revenue um and it is inconsistent with our brand and so again it's not just it's not advertising is is is not a primary purpose or a single purpose it is also convenience it is also Aller to people let the stores open and also U being welcoming and and showing that we're openis as I just said um I made this argument before and I know that you're honor didn't love this argument but I think this argument is correct and should be on the record that um when enforcement is based on complaints alone it leads to arbitrary enforcement that doesn't mean that anyone's necessarily being targeted but it means that if there's a VI if there's a set of circumstances that constitute a violation and those set of circumstances are rampant throughout the the throughout the city but only one um entity or a few are being complained of than it is only being enforced against those few and that's arbitrary and it's arbitrary uh for many reasons but it's particularly arbitrary because it's neighbors that are deciding when and how the city enforces ordinances as opposed to some sort of regular inspections and those sorts of things and believe me I'm not trying to call out other businesses that are acting in a way that I believe is not in violation of the ordinance in the first place um but it is correct that if you drive up and down Third Street there are many sandwich boards and many items of furniture out and about and many signs and many Advertising Signs all of which I don't think are in violation of this ordinance because the ordinance is about the business about to advertis you have any evidence of that other than um an allegation your Mist I would like to state that during our last hearing could you just hold okay hold the comment hold all your comments I'm going to try to do this in order if you don't mind I have S phots um I do not know exactly when these photographs were taken but they were taken at some point I believe prior to or they were they were taken at some point by um by Chris who we spoke to or who we spoke of before at some point um prior to the was it September hearing or the November hearing one the hearing that happened in the fall in the fall corre the I believe these pictures were taken in the fall but if you drive up and down the street um this is consist exactly what you would see today so if you want and again we're not interested at all in calling out other businesses or flagging other businesses and suggesting that they're violating an ordinance that we don't believe is being violated um but the circumstances of which um there's an accusation that there's a violation are to be found sort of up and down and I can show you some let see are they identified with addresses and um they are not they're not identified with addresses but again I think that um it's my understanding that these were all taken this was not this is it is my understanding that these locations are in uh the Jacksonville Beach area and subject to the same ordinance if they're not I'm sure miss beavers could could explain which ones are not for I think you should try to identify what you a St it is pictures it is a stack of pictures of storefronts that have similar or or other things outside the store which presumably would be considered all different locations that you say are in the ja Beach area my understanding is these are in the Jack Beach area I'm not prepared to testify which one of these are in the Jack Beach area but I would ask that Nikki beavers is certainly welcome to take a look and if she thinks one of these is not in the Jack be area she's super familiar with it um and she's certainly welcome to point that out well it does seem this is what you're offering to as evidence of you know arbitrary enforcement um it would seem and quite frankly taken in the fall of 2023 I'm not sure that it's really how influential persuasive that evidence is I'm not going to tell you toing it's a little th in that we don't know exactly who took them we don't know exactly if they're in the area and we don't know when they were taken your honor I'm I'm going to do this instead of instead of presenting those because again really have no interest in in bringing other businesses into this mix and I don't mean to do that so I'm just with your allegation of selective enforcement you either are bringing that allegation or you're not and if you are then I think it's appropriate to have evidence and testimony to support that so I want to be I want to be clear I'm not making an allegation enforcement I believe that selecting enforcement is a defense and raising it as a defense and I'm saying that I believe that the circumstances whereby which is what Miss beers explained enforcement is predicated on complaints um leads to arbitrary enforcement because um that means that neighbors can simply complain against one neighbor or a select few and those are the entities that will be enforced against so I'm making the argument that the process that was explained to us which is that this enforcement is not on a complaint by complaint basis is is is an arbitrary process that's the argument I'm making so I'm I I couple things on evidence backing up and I really don't want to glaze over this because I was hoping that the meeting would that the meeting would happen I thought that we were going to have a meeting between 20 I'm not going to stop you from testifying so you get to decide when you're you know you said enough so you know you have said now to me three times I don't really want to go into this but then you do so I'm I'm a little you know you're you're sending me mixed messages about what your position is what you want to use to defend your position and um I think you need to be absolutely clear so that I can take evidence that you want to present testimony that you want to present and make an ultimate decision but going back and forth I'm not really making this allegation that's not helpful to me in my position ESP special magistrate I need to understand what you to tell me specifically um if there's you know what your position is now it's very clear to me that you don't think that this particular ordinance that was cited in the and the notice of hearing um is applicable to what you what your business is doing by putting merchandise outoors I you need to tell me whether you want to make selective enforcement part of your EV and you know because we've now spent quite a bit of time talking about this particular isue and and I'll I'll try to and if I haven't been clear I'll try to be really clear it's the s i do I am making the that the process that Miss beavers has raised of enforcing this provision on a complaint only basis is arbitrary enforcement I am not presenting evidence that there has been arbitrary enforcement at this time in order to do that I believe actual Discovery would be necessary um to see what has and has not been done by the city so I had hoped that would have the meeting that your honor had recommended and that we might get this thing resolved without having to dig into to that sort of Discovery but in order to really present evidence of that I probably would need to have that sort of discovery which is not which has not been part of the process so far so I'm presenting the argument that the process described on this fever I believe leads to arbitrary enforcement because it's complaint based I not presenting evidence that they've actually been arbitrary because they would need Discovery to gather that evidence so to Circle back I think that the burden of proof is on the C to show that this ordinance is applicable um and that there's been a violation based on the strict language of of the and I would ask two things maybe it's three one I would ask the citation be dismissed I I believe the citation I'm asking that the citation be dismissed because there has not been a violation of the cited provision regarding prohibition against the business about prioritizing um if not dismissed then I'm asking that the matter be continued so that the parties can have the meeting that your honor had previously recommended um because again we would like to get this uh matter resolved in an amicable fashion in an amicable fashion if we're un able to do that then I would ask that um we be granted an opportunity at time period for Discovery um what was the last one if we're not able to to reach resolution then I would ask that we' be granted some time period for Discovery um and if you continue the case I think we should be allowed to resume having some items outside because another delay in the case is is is hurtful to our business and I think we've shown that the violation is or that the provision is not applicable um but again I won't myself thank you and with that third one actually I guess um request because the first one was citation be dismissed yes second matter we continue to allow for the meeting with staff is this correct yes three allow a time period for Discovery in the event we're unable to resolve it through an meeting that's right I I don't want to no resolution meeting and presume having a merchandise Outdoors um with that begin when do you when do you think would that should begin I would request that it begin right away um we've we've paused out of respect for the process and then what merchandise would you say the chair along the lines of the photograph that I showed you yes a chair maybe two chairs a chair a a welcome sign and a w and the welcome flag I think this is what we talked about last time so what what you mentioned the photograph the photograph shows one chair it shows a sandwich board shows a welcome I don't know I call that a welcome banner and then it looks like some wreath flowers on the FR door I think M Bieber said last time that the wreaths were not a violation so it would be those other items and I think so would be the three things it would bean yes and while I don't think we should be constrained in that way I think that would be an acceptable compromise um in the interum until this is resolved with the hope that we reach some an resolution before we have to come back again step one I think the cation should be dismissed for the reasons I said but if not then we should have an opportunity for that meeting under the circumstances that we just described okay I think that covers what I want to present I guess I'll hear what else um I'll hear what else the city has thank you to you thank you um you you earlier had a comment yes my comment was going to refer to the photographs that um he has if you go down Third Street the reason why none of those businesses have been here or here today is because all of them were cited and have all come into compliance so the bicycle shops the MOs store I'm looking at the pictures that he was going through them in every single one of those distances were cited and those were the pictures that Chris presented back in the fall when he was initially cited in September and they all have come into compliance so that's that's all I was going to say okay the in regards to the meeting the meeting um I was told would not be necessary it would be heard today and that's why the director um and the planning department they all here today to testify to explain why the city has that ordinance and interpret that ordinance okay you ready yes for that yes yes Heather and Christian both are here please raise your right hand and state your name an address Heather Ireland planning and development director 11 North Third Street do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you out I do thank you your honor may I approach and provide you with a copy of this memo before I discuss it uh yes um and do you have a copy for Mr Po no but I will give I give him my other copy after I'm done talking to it if I can bring it to you I I wanted to say thank you very much for being here today I do appreciate the C's minutes great thank you um I would like to just start by talking a little bit about our code enforcement program we've got almost 3,000 businesses in the city and 12,000 plus properties and one code enforcement officer officer beavers is very efficient and very effective but she does not have the capacity to drive the city and look for violations all day every day she responds to complaints and she if she notices something while out in the field she will address it at that point in time I'll give you an example if she sees a flutter flag she's all a going to see 20 flutter Flags CU it's now something that's in in her mind um so kind of wanted to point that out that it's there's certainly not selective enforcement it's um as she can get to it since she is a party of one and very good at her job at that uh this memo that I've put together to present to you uh I drafted uh in coordination with our City attorney um essentially what it says is that our zoning code and our zoning districts um if you see kind of halfway down the page section 34316 states that the exclusivity of uses in zoning districts the permitted and conditional uses in the zoning districts established in article 7 zoning districts are exclusive you'll see that in bold and are permitted subject to the other standards in the Land Development code what this is interpreted by myself and the previous two directors is that in our zoning districts if it is listed you can do it if it is not you cannot so in all of our commercial zoning districts the use of outdoor display and sale of retail merch merchandise is not permitted there's no negotiating that fact any more than there's negotiating that a bar can be allowed in a residential zoning District if it's not listed or doesn't fall under a use that's listed and we're able to put it put it in a box if you will it's not allowed um and so that's where we fall into it's not listed in C1 zoning it's not allowed there are some exceptions in our commercial planned unit development zoning uh namly the ones that contain uh Ace Hardware and Home Depot those are specific zoning districts for those properties they do allow outdoor display of retail merchandise um with some limitations in both commercial um shopping plazas uh so they do have them we do hear from other people a lot saying why can Home Depot have it they have a special Zoning for their property and they're allowed to do it same with Ace Hardware uh same goes for seasonal items such as fireworks I'm looking at our clerk over here because she probably knows better than I do but fireworks I think pumpkins Christmas trees and firewood are seasonal they're allowed to be outside and right and then businesses are allowed to get six Tent Event permits per year to do you know special uh sportsmania for example does it for Florida Georgia weekend and some of the Jaguar gam so we do allow special events to go on for special Sal special things like that uh but essentially what it boils down to is if the use isn't listed which in this case it's not and again there's no negotiating that it's listed or it's not uh it's not allowed it's it's really as simple as that I appreciate that very much um the the issue that Mr Po has presented is that the notice of hearing CES to a very different ordinance provision yeah does not it does not exite to um you 34- 3116 um it does not site to outdoor display and storage of merchandise it's is a citation it's a violation because the language in the code that's referenced in 342 is the business of outdoor advertising right um I I definitely let me ask you this is there a provision in the code that speaks specifically to the use of outdoor display and storage of merchandise there was an original citation and we were told that that [Music] was I can't okay back and forth I'm talking to Miss Ireland right now you're welcome to talk with her if you wish but I while I totally understand the memorandum where is provision that says that outdoor display or maybe there isn't one are you saying there's not there isn't that's exactly what I'm saying there isn't one because it's not a listed permitted or conditional use it's not allowed so I don't I can't speak to the apprpriate for theing to that it's outdo display in storage of merchandise that that is not pered use in C perhaps yes therefore it's a violation and and site to 34- 316 I have not seen the notice but yes I would agree with your assessment of that that that is that is the provision like I I use the reference or example of a bar in a residential district not a listed use that's allowed can't do it um since it's not listed you can't do it same thing with outdoor display of merchandise right and and maybe there's even a section in the CPO description that says these are the only permitted uses I don't know I haven't read your code that is that is how our zoning District Works in every zoning District there's list of permitted uses and a list of conditional uses and those are the only uses that are allowed in that zoning District there's no there's no real wiggle room with a few exceptions business office for example it might L several different types of business offices right right um you know I'm concern that if I find that there's a violation 34 342k that says outdoor business the business of outdoor advertising have you looked at at your interpretation of what that means um Mr Po presented quite a bit of evidence about what that phrase means and I he from f for instance you know of course they're very familiar with outdoor advertising if you will in the sense of billboards and um and I would be interested to know whether you believe whether you agree with mr's interpretation of what the business of outo advertising is but um he he did present some compelling evidence I wanted I would like to know what is the city's position in regards to what that means and and it is historical um one of the things that Mr Po presented last time was the 2015 sign code um ordinance 2015- 865 I think that in that ordinance that's where the language for the prohibition against outo ading to zoning do you have an opinion on that or are you prepared to yes I do and I do agree with Mr Poe that is my interpretation of the intent of that section of the code um unfortunately our code have a definition of outdoor advertising uh for some reason but that is my understanding of the intent of that when that code that section of the code was Rewritten it does not negate the fact that outdoor retail displayed um or display of retail merchandise is not an allowed use it's not that it's prohibited it's strictly not allowed since it's not a listed use so so would you is there anything I think you wanted to say something no I'm there's nothing else you're okay now yes okay um I'm presented with a Comm I have a notice hearing that sites just two Provisions the general provision onp and which is 34341 and then CPO 34342 prohibit use the bus outo this is a I understand that the city's outdoor display and storage merch is not permissible but I don't think that that is what I think there's two ways to go about this we could we could the city could withdraw this noce um and I could then issue an order that says that the city has withdrawn and the case is closed we could I could also you an order that says that something along the lines of explaining that outdoor storage is not a permissible excuse me outdoor display and Stage merchandise is not however of hearing and I'm dismissing or you could meet with and try to come to a resolution and not uh you know whether Mr would be willing to get one of those specials the tent permit that's six times a year that would be my only recommendation that was recommended during our last hearing um I could continue until our July hearing um youve heard what Mr Po has suggested would like to initially and probably his favor position would be the citation would be dismissed because it's not technically a violation of the of the provision that was cited to in the notice he is will he did that could be continued to have that meeting I don't know that this should rise to the LEL time period for Discovery and I'm not just resum having even a limited bis is is the right outcome for the city frankly I'd be concerned about selective enforcement doing it in in that context so you know I'm more than willing to have you you know confer in a corner if that's what you'd like to do you'd like to take a five minute recess that's me um but I am in a I would I want to find a resolution that you know puts the city in and and quite frankly both parties but puts you in the best position of moving forward it could be that you need to withdraw this and then proceed to is if the behavior continues issue a notice of hearing a violation based on the correct code so that's where I am right now you tell me if you'd like to you know take a five minute recess I'm fine with that and so that you can discuss this and then i' appreciate if you come back and let me know your thought icome separ what I'm going to rec let's take a five minute recess let the city confirm and then we come I it's up to it for I for abely go through five or six of them for me won't talk to any I'm sure I'll be glad to wait for you no I will to no I understand I trust that for for for for for for okay we're back in session thank you very much thank you your honor um okay after Consulting um with my colleagues we would like to request if we can amend the notice uh to properly cite the code okay thank you very much mrud i' ask questions and then I will well I would have preferred you questions would have asked them before for one thing it was my understanding when we just broke that there was some expectation that the parties were going to confirm but um they I was not conferred with at all I'd like to just ask a couple quick questions of to understand that I think shed the light on to the request they just made if I may yes nice to me you and I have met before is that right no I don't think so I can't tell you how sorry am we're meeting under these circumstances to four yeah understood be very quick um this is amendment is that correct you this number on June 20th did you start it on June 20th or how long you think it's okay you oh I can't give you an exact after after and I'll speak into M so it's on the record after the last hearing so sometime between that date and after the May 24th is that correct and that email from Nikki Beaver says please see the request below from Mr Po is that correct yes and that is Nikki beaver's forwarding to you the email that I sent on May 24th that same day asking for the meeting that the judge had instructed us to have isn't that correct yes that's what I'm reading she recommended I'd like to present that to the judge sure I'm not exactly clear why it's relevant at this point I'll try I'll try one email that I want to ask you about one other email I want to ask you about this is an email also from Nikki Bieber is that correct correct and this email is dated November 14th 2023 is that correct yes and this email is to a Laura marah I'm not sure I'm saying that right and your CC on this email is that right yes did you receive this email I received it doesn't mean I read it okay do you recall that this was a l so this was an email concerning the subject case back in November of 2023 right and what it says is it's from Lauren saying I was looking over the notice of hearing for 1121 North Third Street and noticed that the code sections violated are different from the last agenda C below did they change and then Nikki beavers responded on that same day and said if you agre yes it says this from nickon November 14th uh it said this particular case has been unique and challenging at the same time due to the wording of the existing code I sat down with Heather and I think meant to say Christian but I apologize she called and it was determined that this was more appropriate violation to S it was more appropriate a more appropriate violation to site and this was concerning the hearing that we've been talking about that led to the prior order is that right I I assume so I can't speak to that because I don't I don't recall any of the emails okay so this would have been the P email is that right yes it appears to be this is the correct case number is that correct I don't know no I haven't seen the agenda I don't know the case number on the top of my head 130 that's correct the code enforcement officer that's correct that's my that's my questions at this time may I may may I appro oh let me ask you as far as you know there hasn't been a notice um to the land owner or to two Imports the provisions that mentioned in this def to off leaders what are the provisions approach I'll present this to and your honor my argument on this is Excuse me yes i' oh absolutely sorry okay the argument I'd like to present based on on what I just presented is this in in response to the request to amend um the CIT the notice of citation one we have not received until today notice of citation that they're talking about in the memo two theyve what is the reason oh okay let me I'm sorry if that's not clear I object and disagree with their request to amend their notice of citation and instead I believe the liation should be dismissed here's why there's been no notice up until today of the provision that they now contend they're relying on two as that email makes clear as far back as November 2023 they were aware that there was trouble I think was the word I you know um with the language of the provision that they're relying on three on May 24th your honor instructed SL suggested that parties confirm and try to work this out I reached out to miss beavers as that email shows within two days and she immediately forwarded it to um the other city Folk the other the other folks um including this Ireland my email asked me for that meeting instead of having that meeting they began preparing this memo which they concluded six days ago uh on June 20th I I never got contact I reached out to miss beavers twice and never got contacted it's not that they didn't know they had the email that I requested the hearing and it's not that they weren't thinking about it they were visibly preparing the memo and so now here we are the day of and I've presented what your honor I think recognizes is a is a correct argument that what they've cited is not applicable M Ireland has acknowledged that what they cited is not applicable it should simply be dismissed and then hopefully the parties can get together and work out whatever we need to work out without the hammer of an order or an amended citation hanging over our heads we spent enough time on this I present I presented very good arguments basically acknowledged arguments that the citation that issue is not applicable that citation should be dismissed and to allow amending it now simply prolongs this process which we could deal with without a citation hanging over over the heads well um I think the city has the right to amend citation um and I think quite frankly that's probably the best option based upon what I've heard there's no there's nothing that prohibits them from amending the citation yes they could dismiss it or they could withdraw it I could dismiss it but actually dismissing it um doesn't really um address the issue at hand and the issue at hand is that you have outdoor display of of merchandise that is not an allowed use and according to the photographs that you subed that's merise then welcome Banner then I would expect to see something on that also but as far as that you know it does appear and I'll let you make your case um that it's not outdoor display and storage of merchandise um if that's you these items are for sale um it may that there's also additional you know that they have the right to amend it and ask me for a continu um it would maybe be continued for instead of just one month in order to give you to prepare maybe it would be that we would end up continuing this to give the city shall issue an amended notice within you know a twoe period um and then we'll go from there and see what you know I'll I'll I will listen carefully just as I have today and just as I asked the hard questions about this particular notice appearing just like in a court of law a plaintiff has a right to amend a complaint and I can't see any I've heard nothing no testimony that would lead me to believe that the city is prohibited from doing that and so I think that that is right outcome here I think that whether it turns out to be that it's not outdoor display and storage merchandise or there's not some other provision that they're going to site to I don't know their code as well as they do and you wouldn't want me to quite I don't want to but the fact is that they they have said to you that they agree that it's not the outdoor excuse me the business of outdo ading they they should have a right to get it right and look at the um look at what evidence is and then look at their code and be more specific just like I I don't know a judge in the world that doesn't OPP to so I don't recall because it's been a while since I practiced in Florida the exact rule on when it's permissible to permissible to a amend a complain I have to do research on that but my understanding my recollection is and if this is wrong I'm sure to honorable correct me is that that is that it's permissible up until the time of trial we're here at trial I think it's too late to do that and I think that of the circumstances when you know quite frankly um they were aware of this issue and could have met with me and given me notice of what they intended to present today and didn't give any notice of what they intended to present today that this matter should be dismissed Mr Po it was I encouraged the parties that was it there was no instruction on my part there was no mandate on my I that would quite frankly be outside of my opinion outside of my role I don't have the right to force mediation like a court of law know I agree so it was a simple encouragement so this idea about how you know even the emails you know I want to meet and somehow I've been um you know hurt because or disadvantaged because me you know I can't I believe that they probably have an incredible incredibly busy schedule and if they think that they can address an issue it's not mandatory that they need even if I encourage it it's not mandatory so you know I'm not going to say because you didn't me no I'm not going to do that so so I I I am going to rule that this matter is going to be continued I'm going to continue it for 60 days I'm going to allow the city to amend their notice of hearing and um and and site to the provisions that they think are applicable if you have similar arguments about those new code Provisions I think you know that I will listen to you and I will listen carefully and I will pay attention to the very specific language in those Cod Provisions so I it's it's an appropriate and a fair outcome and um I appreciate everybody's time I I feel um that this a tremendous amount of resources mine yours Mr trenle you got four major city staff five City staff people here this is not a you know the city's not you know taking this lightly so I I believe that it's an appropriate outcome and um I will issue an order along the lines of what I've said publicly today and I appreciate it and thank you very much hold on Mr TR is raising his J I ask a question yes you may Mr just come to microphone to in okay sorry Rich trenle property manager please raise your right hand do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so be go yes and can you please State your address for the record uh 471 atlan Beach thank you um and you're here on behalf of the property owner correct correct uh and this this uh is directed to the property owner uh is that are we going to amend that portion too for it to be to the tenant or do I have to be involved I I think that's a very fair question um I know that the well rather than saying I um I know that Miss bie um I I believe that the rule is that it has to go to the property owner and the Tenant it would both are sighted say again both are sighted the property owner and the Tenant and could you would um would you be thinking that you would be doing it to the property owner and the ten this time for the yeah that's always the that both property owner and tenant are cited for the violation okay well then I know that this one was just addressed toer both well we cite who is on the tax appraisers um website we and that is 1121 right um North Third Street LLC so they get properly noticed as well as the actual business itself and the address well I think that it would be important to that's our to name both entities in the amended in the amended notice specific well both get a notice both are one gets um a notice one notice goes to 11:21 and then the notice also goes to T Gregory Imports so both are noticed on the um notice a hearing that they get but you're saying they both should be listed on each noce I've never for inst in the information that I receive which is the notice of hearing yes the only notice of hearing I have received is the one that is addressed to 1121 North Third Street Inc which I believe iser property cor cor T Gregory also gets one I I always do to both so we'll get that I can get that copy to you okay and in this case since we know that who the business owner actually is is the pain so the name that he stated earlier there's nothing on the property appraiser website that list that name right as the registered own there but we have have SW testimony that he did purchase it that pink moon Imports LLC yeah that's well on the propy of Appraiser's website it does not list thatone listed because the tenant it's on the lease Imports is just the tenant it wouldn't be he bought the business but for the property the property is well this is a good coners good discuss what about your business license the business license um does not have the complete name because there was a space construct I don't remember exactly what it got like shr down to but it doesn't have the complete name of the business because Monica was very nice and help remember I don't remember exactly what it is pink mooned on at all I think it says I actually think it says T Gregory Imports DBA I think it say DBS because it is Imports DBS but if I may that's yet another reason that instead of Mr I'm so sorry T may have you just step a bit closer to the microphone again your honor I would say that's yet another reason instead of doubling down on this mess it should it should be dismissed and they can start over and do it right if we put something out there that they think's a violation they can issue a violation correctly with the right citation I I understand your position yes please raise your right hand and state your name and address uh Christian P senior planner 11th thirr Street do you swear affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth be I do thank you I just wanted to offer a quick clarification the um section of our code dealing with code enforcement specifically states that notice a violation uh will be mail to the of record and the person responsible for the violation which in this case would be the property owner and the Tenant uh our notice requirements under the general code specifi that we will use the current address as listed on the U property appraiser so if that hasn't been updated it's going to go to that address when whenever we issue uh anything under our notice requirements okay what I would suggest is that it um that in light of the sworn testimony we know and you know that and you have a business license that says pink moon blah blah blah doing business I think it doesn't I think it says d That's My Rec me just for is it pink moon you've already testified that pink moon is is the is the tenant is the operator of the business and you're doing business as T Imports Imports L okay so based upon that we can certainly over notice to make sure we capture everything thank you um and then just as a a final Point um any fines that are occurred through action can turn into leans which are subject to the property owners so ultimately the property owner is going to be the responsible which is why we have to name property owner so the city will I say we I mean the city the city will have to Contin name own no problem not paid right then would be responsible yeah got thank you um last point for me is with this being retail of a like the furniture and housing finishes type I I would say in terms of the constent of what is actually advertising because if it is a couple seats that end up being seats that are out there that they don't sell in the store they do sell in the store but those are the ones for their customers and some vases of flowers and that are outside that are useful that in my opinion that shouldn't be construed as advertising if it's still providing a service to the customer it's just like a bike shop having a bike rack out front and saying you cannot have bikes in the bike rck out front because that's advertising there's a fine line here where I feel like you guys need to get to um that's my two cents I don't know just want I to say that on right so that's all I got thank you very much Miss I just wanted to um offer that I will send directly to you U Mr Po our policy um I know officer beevers has mentioned the city policy where you can do six events a year we have a lot of businesses that use that um I will be happy to send that directly to you and a copy of the permit that's required to do that a lot of businesses take advantage of that it's not in our code it's a policy so Council has kind of it and so we're going to continue with it it's basically again six events a year uh it works really well for some business businesses to have these special events when they're doing what whatever it is might be related to something else going on might not be um but that is the path forward if they want to move some merchandise outside a few times a year to have these special sales or events or what have you um I'll be happy to provide that information so that they'll know what they need to do it's a it's a really simple process okay thank you very much um I think R say just want to clarify that we're we're coming back in 60 days yes and and and what I believe needs to happen is that the city needs to promptly and I might say you know within 21 days issue the amended noce hearing Mr that would give you about 40 days to prepare is that acceptable L said 60 so I would like more time well remember what I was saying 60 days from you know two months now so if I give them 21 days to issue that you0 39 days to you know approximately not exactly 60 days are you oh so when so 21 days to send a notice to me and then from that point I would have approximately 40 days before the I think it boils down to I can either say we're going to have another hearing and 60 days or I can say we're going to have another hearing in 90 it's it's you know I I want to be sure that you know that you feel that you have enough time either with because I think 21 days is probably appropriate for the city you tell me do you can make a suggestion I I'm I'm fine with the 21 days for them to issue a new amended notice I I'll say this I disagree with it being amended at all I think it should best but I'm just on record saying that but as far as to the extent you're doing that I'm fine with the 21 days and then I would say that that heing would be had you know not less than 40 days after the issuance of the amended is that well I'm going to set you're set a the 21st so actually maybe we should just do the September because August 21 is is less than 60 days from now today the 26 I would say instead of saying 60 days I would say the August hearing well but that's that becomes even less than the 40 days you know if I give you 21 then I'm trying to be very fair to Mr Po to prepare whatever he thinks in whatever passion he thinks that he needs to prepare in light of the fact that we are I am going to allow the city to amend and he should have time so I think we should just set it for September that way um there's no question my anyway that there's time um when is the September dat the 25th SE what other comment it's a request it's my understanding that you're going to continue the hearing you're order continuing the hearing allowing them a certain amount of time to issue an amend and then it's going to schedu the continued hearing I would ask that the order not um make any findings of law or fact but just continue with those you know instructions because that this is the first I'm seeing of this provision and it's only a partial quote of the provision I don't think it would be appropriate for the order to include any findings of our fact and there may be others that they sure I mean I'm not limiting them to what they're going to them at all so there could be others I'm 21 to am and then have hearing on 25th and I will I'm sure that I'll I'll probably make some findings based upon today's discussion and testimony but and then I'll conclude that the don't think there's any other questions I appreciate everyone's attention and time I'm sorry I'm just looking very quickly at my schedule if that's okay to see if there's something on the 25th did you say you were looking at I'm sorry I didn't I was looking down at my phone and I wanted to let you know what I was doing I was trying to make sure that the 25th was clear is it it looks like it is okay great and I think this matter is concluded the hearing's not done we still have two but um but thank you very much and we'll go on to the next item EXC thank you your excuse EXC okay moving on to next on the agenda this is case number 232 violation of address for North Streetsville Beach um this case was a continu for um not obtaining a building permit for a outdoor shed that was constructed Mr M Brooks was present today but he had to leave um we did have a discussion um during our brief um break and um once his final inspection is completed will then come back so he's done everything that he was supposed to do in regards to obtaining um the permit getting the structure moved so once everything is finished and his final um inspection in the certificate of occupancy has been obtained will then come back to close the case do you want I know that our last order was that he had until today to obtain the final inspection and a certific on the city right so I was advised by the building department that with his active permit that he does have8 days from the Daye that the permit was obtained so um we do the city has to allow that and when will that expire Mr I don't have the exact date Mr middle Brooks will he was going to stop by the um planning and zoning department and get that exact date and make sure that everything is completed um and the final is completed at that time by that time but he's on the rooll and I'm I'm sure he'll have everything done is there I'd like to have the order reflect that instead of every month like this no we're not coming back we're not going to come back every month we're going to come back once the final has been completed but there should be a deadline the deadline is 180 days okay but we don't know right um I don't remember if I had it in the not from our last hearing it's 180 days from the that he obtain the permit and let me see I no I didn't write it on here I probably had some notes in the office and so he he wasn't sure of when those 180 days fire so he was stopping by to get that information before he left okay I'm looking but I will put it in the before the um order is completed I will get that to the clerk's office um and then they can pour that information to you okay I will uh okay um okay I can I can dra the yes I'll get that to the cler office today if you can if you can get the clk's office dat that would be great okay we're done with ACA yes and our next um case is um case number 20 one more thing if for any reason he did not have the final inspection and is it a certificate of completion cic certificate of completion okay um if he didn't have that in this order the ORD going to say he has to have it by whatever 180 days is um I believe he would have it because everything else has been done is just a a matter of scheduling now okay so um because he's he's done everything else he's gotten it moved and it's just more so a matter of I think I will put in a provision that says that in the event that it's not completed he would he could file for an extension to yes I guess what he would be doing would be would be setting it foring again okay thank you and okay moving to case number 22 22603 um this was in regards to no Act of permit for a shed that was built at 620 South First Street um this was the initial shed and as you can see there was it's in between the two the leaves and the tree but that was the remaining of the shed I think there it is this right here is the remaining of the shed um and as of June 7th that shed has been removed it's no longer so we get close this case it's it's closed so he didn't take it down yes yes everything is in compliance then I'm not going to you retract $100 day between 22 wonderful yes and that conclud end hearings today yes that concludes the hearing for today is there anything else okay without further Ado close the thank you very thank you