e e e e e e e just and I think the best I right you I don't want to go because it's not the when it's red it's on that seems backwards thank you okay are you all is the city ready I'm ready okay everybody are you ready yes thank you very much okay we'll go ahead and get started good afternoon um I'm calling to order the city of Titusville code enforcement special magistrate hearings for July 8th 2024 at 2 p.m. my name is Jennifer Nicks um these are public hearings for code enforcement violations these hearings are Quasi judicial and I'm the special magistrate appointed to hear these cases formal Rules of Evidence do not apply but fundamental due process shall be observed everyone who has a case today will have an opportunity to present testimony you may present evidence Andor witnesses to testify on your behalf I'm there's no public comment portion of these proceedings you must be a respondent or be called as a witness in order to speak on a specific case everything today is being recorded and all testimony will be under oath when you are sworn in please provide your current mailing address so any orders get to the correct address um the city will present its case first and information will be displayed on the screen documents may be provided by the city as evidence City PowerPoint presentation will be entered into evidence unless objections are made after the evidence I will make a ruling the ruling will be reduced to writing and mailed to you um if we could swear in the witnesses at this time if you think that you if you're a person that'll be speaking on a case today and please stand to be sworn in I don't know if they are or not okay thank you um do you hereby testify excuse me do you hereby swear or affirm that the testimony that you'll give this afternoon is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth okay thank you okay good afternoon good afternoon m'am and will we be proceeding with the agenda as provided uh the one that I provided for you the most updated thank you okay it should start with case number 2470 okay that's with 701 South Delon Avenue owned by sua wall Massy hearing thank you and officer Frank okay what am I doing wrong ah here we got oh no went back to me am I supposed to dance me either ah here we go good afternoon ma'am uh first off I'd like to enter into uh as evidence the notice of hearing and the previous order from the June hearing June 10th hearing okay and both of those are accepted thank thank you thank you okay this is case 24-70 uh for property located at 701 South delion Avenue uh respondent is uh sua W there uh it was mailed to address 1404 Provence Road Lakeland Florida 33805 uh the uh violation was section 30-35 a the Titusville codee of ordinances continuing land M landscape maintenance required uh the notice of hearing was posted at City Hall and on the property for of violation exists on June 24 certified In First Class letters were mailed on June 24th 2024 also uh again case was originally heard on June 10th 24 uh the respondents who uh on the property were were present provided testimony uh they were ordered to correct the violation on before July 5th 2024 uh the correct violations they were ordered to Cedar saw the lot the lot area south of the business structure to establish a ground cover uh the area was seated but today the ground cover is not sufficient it's not been established uh if compliance was not achieved to find an amount of1 of $100 per day commencing on July 5th 2024 and we continuing daily until the violation is corrected uh would be imposed uh administrative cost in the amount of6 $63.75 Cent were imposed uh this is a picture that was taken July the 5th you can see it's very very very little cover uh another picture of a different angle uh those pretty much look that way today they have um placed a fence around the area to keep uh traffic off of it but there has been no more cover established no side laid anything uh so the conclusion is the ground cover required has not been established and the property is not in compliance uh the um one of the property owners did contact me uh Friday morning and said that they had had some saw ordered and that they did not know if it would get here in time to bring it into compliance uh uh I've checked it twice today as of 13 this afternoon it was still in violation um when you spoke with the owner did they I'm sorry did you say when the sod was supposed to get here did uh he said he said hopefully it was going to get here this morning but evidently it did not okay okay and let's see that was July 5th was the at noon was the time for compliance and then those photos taken July 5th were after okay thank you and okay I could certainly see that um there seem to be some sprigs of green but not by any means a uh suff amount of coverage yes' they had actually they had actually seated that area before before or around the time of the first hearing but it has not a matter of fact a lot of it today did not look good at all very Brown from lack of water okay um and I recall testimony about it being seated before but yes ma'am um okay U let's see is there a res did you have anything further Mr leis uh no ma'am not from my end that this could be them okay yes it is okay all right um we're in the middle of the hearing for 701 South dilon Avenue so if there's um a respondent here that would like to testify we've already had the code enforcement officer testify um I'll swear you in since we had done that previously um do you hereby swear or affirm that the testimony that you'll give this afternoon is the whole truth yes ma'am thank you and can you please give your name and address for the record fad Salem address is 701 South dilon okay um and Mr Salem we had looked at um pictures two pictures from July 5th that the code enforcement officer officer had shown and I'm sure we can put on the screen again at some point but um anything that you would like to say in regards to um the at this time actually we came in here to ask for an extension just by a couple days we're about to install in the grass pallets um we already got fixed with uh we already did the fencing for behind the property and next to the property um with we thing that we are still on Route is to get is the the grass did um okay so you say when you say the fencing's installed what kind of fencing are you speaking about um for I believe they needed to to be a cage around the property um just to block anyone from parking on it and then we needed to install grass oh was this just to help with the grass being installed perhaps I I don't know but we went for it either way just to make it double secure um around the whole area and then also we had to move back um I believe that some of our fencing behind the property was also on the cities that we also changed as well okay as far as the um so I understand has the saw that you all ordered been delivered no not yet and when is it supposed to get there a couple days I'm probably get you by three or four days um and how long as far as the extension you said a few days what is a few days three four days okay um okay and can I have the photos put back on the screen for a moment so Mr s can see them as well the special magistrate I'd like to remind the respondent that the compliance date was Friday July 5th and three days would put you to today okay thank you um Mr Sim is that what the property looks like at this time no okay no when were these photos taking um the code enforcement officer testified they were taken July 2nd July 2nd no um I believe I called Mr Frank um July 3rd if I'm not mistaken or July 4 July 3rd July 3rd um and I mentioned to him that we were going to have the fencing everything everything else done and he mentioned to me that on Monday there was supposed to be another new photos to be taken just to showcase the property to tell you that we are in progress of finishing everything um as far as the the fencing and then the grasses in route mhm okay so as far as the seedling and the kind of grass sprigs that it looks like there is that part of it essentially what it looks like right now no uh the seedling yes I'm sorry okay but the fening is all installed okay um okay if I could actually ask the city another question or two as far as the testimonial in regards to the fencing I know that for the compliance um my prior order had required for compliance um that the property would need to let's see you could come into compliance by S spotting or seating the lot to establish ground cover um in the subject properties lot area south of the business structure um was there any requirement about the fencing or is this just kind of no ma'am fencing wasn't even any part of the case okay it it's it's a great addition and it will stop everyone from traversing with their vehicles all day long but uh it was merely a a about because of the erosion and everything is entering the street and then into our storm waterer systems okay so that being said I was just curious you said it should be arriving do you have a contract where you've ordered um I saw required i h i have one I can probably send over to Mr Frank by today um it's with my father but I do have some that I've already been bought okay I haven't dropped me up an inv I can send it right over um let me ask as far as the so you have a contract but you didn't bring a copy of it here do you have any evidence to submit that I can review I can give it to you within a couple minutes um do you have it in an email or something like that no ma'am this is a contract just uh face to face whenever we came up the last time I believe I called Mr Frank on July 3rd and then I just had to put um I had to make they had to make the measurements that they needed to get done and then on Monday they came up and got everything else sorted so they said listen we'll probably have it in Rite within a cple few days I said all right cool when he gets here I'll make sure to pay off everything else who's this contract with um one of the locals knows them from the tenant that we have on 701 Deon he know someone around he said my brother knows him so I said all right listen you can get a contact I can get everything out and while I appreciate your testimony about that there's nothing for me to actually review to see anything about confirming that okay um as far as um okay do you have anything else to offer specifically at this time no ma'am okay thank you um as far as the city's position goes as to the requests to um extend the compliance date for a few days what is the city's position on that the city does not support that request um due to the fact that there should have been um progress shown prior to um the deadline of July 5th and the next step again will need to be maintained in order to survive and we would not be comfortable extending the case at this time okay thank you um okay okay I'll goad ahead and give my order now which will again be reduced to writing and provided um by mail to you all to the respondent um I've accepted and considered documentary evidence reviewing photographs um provided by the city and sworn testimony relating to this matter from both City staff as well as um the respondent I do find that the respondent is the owner of the subject property and that all notices um were provided in accordance with state law and the city code um I do find that a the property is not in compliance at this time and is not in compliance with the um previous order which required the violation to be corrected by either sting or seeding the lot to establish ground cover by noon on July 5th 2024 and um see so I find that the respondent either failed or refused to correct the violations by the previously ordered compliance date and therefore based upon the evidence testimony and photographs presented during the hearing today I find that the city has proven a violation um a continuing violation of section 30-35 A continuing maintenance required for landscaping of the city code and that a daily fine be imposed in the amount of $100 per day commencing on July 6th and continuing daily until the violations are corrected and again that future violations of the same section of the city code shall be classified to be repeat violations so a certified copy of the order can be recorded in the public records um to constitute a lean against a property so the respondent needs to um further ensure that the respondent provides notice to the code enforcement department as soon as the property is brought into compliance um such that code enforcement can come out and um confirm that the property is in compli um in the future so please keep in touch with the city in order to stop the daily fine once the property is brought into compliance okay and that concludes this particular item on the agenda right our next case 24-7 1710 South Washington Avenue again it's a Massi earing officer Flanigan and we do have the owner present today okay all right thank you okay I have a uh affida affidavit to notice a hearing for today's and your order okay thank you okay both of those as well as the PowerPoint presentation okay are hereby accepted as evidence thank you this is for Titusville Square 17 and 10 South Washington Washington uh again this was for the openable windows um everything else was brought in the complaints before the hearing from last month sorry got the wrong case in there for some reason I apologize yeah the notice and everything the affidavit everything was posted for the hearing uh I was contacted by the property manager last week about the windows she advised me to do to the fact that some of the windows were older and the latches were unavailable that they would have to replace the windows and they said that it would be no in um they wouldn't be able to get it done by today or by Friday the 5th um so there was no reinspection done um from what I understand it's still in violation uh the owner contacted me this morning um said that they removed the tape and other issues from the one window I explained to her that all the windows needed to be operable and that's what the reinspection is for and everything um and I explained to her she needed to get with the property manager to resolve whatever issue they were having between them since the property manager didn't request a reinspection and told me that they wouldn't be done as of Friday and they are not done as of today nobody's called me to do a reinspection um and the owners here today so okay that's about this is the one window that had the issue right that was visible and there was other windows on the property that still needed to be corrected per the property manager okay and per the prior order the cided violation could be corrected by repairing or replacing the affected windows and that correct to the city's knowledge correct to my knowledge it hasn't been done and per the arita the property manager she even stated it hadn't been done and it's not going to be done for several weeks until they can get the permits and get the windows ordered and everything okay okay and is there a respondent here that wants to speak as to this matter hi hi good afternoon if you could please say your name name and address for the record anyone that's speaking yes my name and this is my daughter chrisa far okay and the address is 1710 Washington Avenue okay um and could you spell your first name just so I have it correct m i and perfect okay thank you thank you okay and anything that you would like to um State now is your opportunity yeah so my daughter she can speak okay thank you thank you um so we went by the um this tenant and we talked to him to make sure that the windows were operable and that the we double check so we took out the sticks and the tape he and he told us that it was just for security purposes to make sure nobody can get in um but then he does just prefer to have the stick there we told him like to take off the tape because it just looks like it is broken so he has taken off the tape and then takes out the sticks so we have photos of the windows without that tape and sticks and it works fine um do I show you the photo um I don't think that I can look at the photos on your phone because that's something that needs to be entered in to the record so we need to have evidence that the city can hang on to um for the record which is public record um is there you can tell me about the windows but unless there's a way that the city is okay with accepting this evidence and getting that to the city now I don't know that I can um in the photos you can see that it looks like a normal window without the sticks without the tape um the screens and everything look okay with that um window both the windows actually you know yeah so just saying that he just wanted to leave it there for security purposes um if um from my recollection as well as the order just to mention while the I know that the windows as previously shown by the city and which could probably be shown again as far as the prior photos go um that the windows were depicted as being shut and taped off but also that they had broken latches and I remember there being more than one window to my recollection so I don't see that um just the pulling the tape off the windows would fix the problem I'm sure the city can speak to that um further um again like I said I have to go by what the property manager told me and she's saying that they weren't ready and windows had to be replaced and because they couldn't find latches to fix the windows so there was no reinspection done for me to do this until I got a phone call this morning her telling me that I haven't been out there she I mean this was like an hour ago okay let me understand everybody's role here to be clear as far as um Miss Fong are you all the owner of the property yes ma'am okay and who is the property manager that the city spoke with her property the property manager for that building yes the reason I asked her to order the um the the window company to come over to to check all the windows because that uh time when I received the letter from uh Cod gy enforcement and he said about the window so when I met him one time at the property and he uh showed me the um the tape around and the pole is was like stick inside the window so um I come to the tenant and ask him why this one is broken or why he put the pole and the tape around he say he just want to protect the people not to get into the room into the his property into the the apartment so that's why he put it in there so I tell him please if you not if it not uh uh broken window or something could you please take it off up so he did take it up and I took the picture and I sent for uh me the gy on June 10 but I probably sent for you not in your um one of the um number that you gave me so I think I I sent you the wrong one to make sure that I already correct it with um picture and I send you a note but right now I think this morning I try to find out the number probably I sent you with the different number so that why you must be not receip this see the number I didn't I didn't say I didn't get the I I I will say I got the pictures and the tape is removed off the window but I'm going by what Rita told me last week that they would not be corrected as of Friday the 5th and they would be several weeks before they got the parts to get the rest of the windows fixed not just that window you see this is the one that I sent you on the training uing that and I just stated I got those pictures yes I'm saying all the other windows on the property that Rita told me still needed to be fixed and it was not going to be fixed because they have to order windows and permits to get it done correctly is what Rita told me yes I think and I told her this morning get with Rita and get this resolved I can't get in the middle of that but there was like I said there was no reinspection because there's other windows on the property that haven't been corrected yet according to Rita I recall there being multiple windows not just one window at issue um that that's correct and I think it would have been more beneficial had they brought their property manager here to testify whether they are or they aren't because we would have to enter each department to see that they are indeed operable by locking mechanisms which they said aren't there um I do wish that there was more evidence for me to actually review in order to evaluate that as you're stting the windows to be in compliance because I'm not I don't have something before me that is showing the windows to be in compliance and I I'm hearing testimony that the tape has been removed and that maybe a stick was taken out of the window which it sounds like somebody used to prop you know so so the window can't be opened but just taking a stick out of the window doesn't fix a broken latch which was also part of the problem um as shown in the prior hearing so um I we able to get um some sort of extension so that we can talk to Rita about this and get it figured out and sorted out maybe like 30 days I mean the the issue was there was already you know the hearing about this and the compliance date was already given as July 5th I mean as far as an extension goes I mean the um the order provided for a compliance date and that it's respondent's responsibility to contact code enforcement to request an inspect to verify compliance so I'm not particularly inclined I don't find it very compelling for me to give an extension um when it was pretty clear what needed to be done um by the compliance date that was previously ordered if I mean I'll ask the city what their position is on that but I I don't know that they were going to agree to an extension of any sort um no ma'am I didn't think so um I'm respectfully I'm going to deny the request for the extension of time um and I would suggest that you all immediately do whatever needs to be done or speak with the property manager as to when that um when the windows can be ordered I mean I'm not even sure if they've been ordered yet and I don't have any evidence about that um I so is there any additional information that you can give me evidence that I can actually review or not so much yes because I know I go all over the uh unit so I asked if any uh isue and you know so far I don't have the isue but uh like I I asked R to order the company the window company to come to check all the window to see anything that need to be fixed or anything need to be replay but she did order a few weeks ago but she told me I just want to make sure it's you know done right so she told me that it take the company she called it takes some you know a a a certain time to um to have the schedule so yes so that uh um I do wish that your property manager was here to testify us to this today try I try very you know because she her responsibility and see not here so it's a problem that uh you know I try to do all my best to ask her to do the correct thing but she say I did call a couple company to come to you know check all around if anything we need to be done and it just take a you know time to get the schedule for them to come so I just wish if R are here so it will be here um no that would be best then respectfully that is your responsibility as a property owner and respondent to bring her or have her come to this to testify because from what I'm hearing she's called around a little bit but it doesn't sound like she's got you guys on the schedule or actually ordered necessarily any Windows correct yes ma'am okay um okay was there anything else that you haven't stated already that you would like to say or any additional evidence to offer okay is that a no okay um okay then I'm going to go ahead and um enter my order which I'll do verbally here and then it will be written and provided to you by mail um see I've accepted and considered evidence um documentary evidence as far as the notices and sworn test Tony in regards to um this matter I do find that the respondent is the owner of the subject properties um addressed by these proceedings um I do find that the notices were provided in accordance with the city code and state law for this matter um and that notice requirements were met for these proceedings um I find that a violation of section it's 6-19 of the city code AS as well as um which incorporates the 2018 ipmc code so it's specifically section 30413 point2 of property maintenance code which is openable Windows um that a violation of that section continues to exist and that the respondent was provided a date for compliance of July 5th um by noon and I find that the respondent either failed or refused to correct the violation prior to the previously ordered compliance date and that's based upon the evidence and testimony presented today um therefore as was previously um determined I will order that a daily fine um be entered in the amount of $100 perday commencing starting on July 6th 2024 and continuing daily until that until the violations are corrected and um and additionally that the respondent if any permits are necessary you need to make sure that permits are obtained to put in the windows if there are any replacement windows in order to come into compliance um also the future violations of the same section of the city code will be classified to be repeat violations and um a certified copy of the order can be recorded in the public records then then that is a lean against the property um it's very important that as soon as you get the property into compliance that you contact the code inspection uh the code inspectors at the code enforcement department to let them know because they're not going to just consistently come by to check and see whether or not it's in compliance that's the respondent the property owner's responsibility to let them know so they can come do the inspection so I um I wish you well with getting that done and please let them know once you've come into compliance and you'll get your order in the mail so that's the end of this proceeding today thank you thank you for okay thank you yes ma'am case number is 24-72 195 Roosevelt there is no uh respondent here today and Jim Flanigan is the officer in this matter I do again have the Affidavit of notice of hearing and the magistrate order from last month thank you and those are accepted as evidence thank you okay okay uh again this will be 195 Roosevelt Street uh the violation original charges refer to dead trees on the property along with overgrowth and weeds uh per the city code we abated that problem and cut the grass and lean the property on that one uh this case was originally heard on June 10th the owner was given till July 5th to resolve the violation the overgrowth again was debate um I'm sorry evaded the trees remain on the property and as of an hour ago they're still there uh there's been no contact with the owner uh or any indications that anything's going to be done to get it cleaned up uh these are I believe the original pctures and these are the same pictures as of today they're in the same condition they're still there they haven't moved other than the grass has been cut and taken care of by us the trees dead trees are still remaining on the property okay so as far as a um violation it is just the dead tree violation that exists correct there's um all right okay and just for purposes of the record is there any respondent here today in the audience and there is not um and did you say that you had communicated with them at all that communicated with you all no in the past this property's had several violations there previously was a house on the property that was removed I don't know it was before me so I don't know if there was a fire or what happened to it okay um but there has been no communication with the owner on any of the violations which previously had other um overgrowth issues as well okay um how many do we know how many dead trees are on the property I believe before I I don't know if we had a number and it seemed to be all dead and Fallen trees needed to be removed but I didn't know if there was a specific number of them I think there's one that actually still standing that's dead the rest of them have fallen and they're laying on the property yeah okay I think maybe two or three that have fallen okay I don't have the exact number sorry all right doesn't sound very safe no um okay all right as there's no respondent um present today for the hearing unless this city has anything further I'll go ahead with my order okay okay having accepted and considered documentary evidence and sworn testimony relating to this matter I do find that the respondent is the owner of the subject property and that all notices were provided in accordance with state law and the city code and that notice was met for these proceedings today um I do find that a violation of section 13-28 public nuisance violations um for the dead tree of the city code continues to exist in that compliance was not obtained um by the respondent they either failed or refused to correct the violation by the previously ordered compliance date and therefore I find that the city has proven the violation continues to exist um a fine of $100 per day is hereby imposed commencing on July 6th 2024 and continuing daily until the property is brought into compliance um and further respondent is of course responsible for obtaining any required permits and immediately contacting the city's code enforcement department to request an inspection to verify compliance once the respondent states that same has been obtained okay and we'll I will get that order written and we will get that to the respondent and that's the end of that hearing all right okay this one will be case number 2474 3945 Ridgewood Drive and it'll be our last Massy hearing today and officer FL okay I said 3945 R Ridgewood Drive uh was for accessory structure of the fence the swimming pool and the pool enclosure I'm happy to report it this is in compliance and it was done before the date of the hearing great or I'm sorry the compliance date of July 5th um what was it June 27th actually when I went out there this is a better picture of the pool which is no longer there he got the proper permits the pools removed which means he does not need the fence or the pool enclosure anymore so it's all in compliance and he is aware of the costs that we're imposed so okay do you need I'm sorry my apology do you still need your order from last mon um let's see I mean as far as the order that the city is requesting then are you just looking for an order finding the property in compliance and no fine to be imposed in the costs were already previously imposed so we're not looking for them to be imposed now yes like additional okay great all right so ordered thank you that was a great update okay and we're on to the initial violation hearings yes ma'am okay 24- 83 874 D Lane and officer May Wright will be the officer good afternoon all right I have uh four items uh to submit uh the first is the affidavit and notice of violation uh the second is the affidavit for the notice of hearing uh the cost recovery statement in the amount of $234 19 and then a copy of the uh violation section for you okay okay thank you that okay thank you all of these are accepted into evidence so once again this is the initial hearing for case number 24- 83 our respondent is genetic Janette uh mcquiston our violation address and mailing address are the same 874 Dow Lane Titusville Florida 32780 and we just have one violation at this time it's going to be section 6-19 the 2018 property maintenance code subsection 102.2 maintenance so the initial inspection was completed in uh December 20th of 2023 uh upon my return on the 4th of January the the notice of violation was issued and they were given until uh January 18th uh 2024 to come into compliance um on the January 4th violation notices were mailed certified in first class and the certified mail was returned um unclaimed unable to forward as of February 1st of 2024 the notice of hearing was mailed on May 30th 2024 uh the certified mail um to the listed owner has not been signed for nor it was returned um the notice of hearing was posted at City Hall and on the property June 26 2024 so we received the complaint from the Titusville water department in reference to an outstanding bill in the disconnection of service at this town home an inspection of the property found that the uh unit was occupied and the town home lacked the proper premise identification and an unlicensed motorcycle was parked in the assigned parking so as of January 4th they notice of uh well in December I posted an orange card asking them to call and make contact with me so the owner did call me um honor around um the end of December I don't have that exact date with me um um and she was going to work on making a payment arrangement with the water department and she was working on correcting the rest of the violations so I did confirm with water Department's staff um that in January she did the owner called them to discuss what she needed to do to get water reestablished as of the re inspection Friday um the unit remains occupied there's been no payment made and the water has not been reestablished um so in section 102.2 for maintenance it just states that the property owner is required to maintain Services uh to the uh unit this includes Power and Water right so long as it's occupied I was curious to hear if it was still occupied and you testified as to that so it's owner occupied yes right okay so this is a a picture of the notice of hearing being posted on June 26 2024 um again the owner vehicles have been there they've been moved around the the property um there's dogs barking inside um I've seen the trash can move around personal items so I can confirm that it's been occupied this entire time so for the conclusion of uh fact in this case uh the town home is occupied and there's no water service at this time so we are I guess there's no compliance State we are ordering um or we are requesting that the water service be reestablished um and administrative cost being assessed in the amount of $234 in 19 cents okay but the city is not asking for the imposition of a daily fine just that the water connection be reestablished so they actually have running water as the code requires yes okay or be vacated right thank you okay and the just to look at the cost recovery Alid it then that was $234 19 for the cost recovery that you're looking for requesting okay and is there for purposes of the record is there anyone present here on behalf of respondent who would wish to testify in this matter hearing none um okay then I'll go ahead and enter my order which will be reduced to writing um I've accepted and considered documentary evidence photographs and sworn testimony relating to this matter I find that the respondent Janette Cheryl macquisition um is the owner of the subject property which is about which we're here for in these proceedings today I do find that the notices were provided in accordance with the city code as well as the state law pertaining to notices and that notice was meant for these proceedings and um upon reviewing the testimony and evidence I do find that a violation of 102.2 to maintenance of the 2018 International property maintenance code um which is incorporated by section 6-19 of the city code um that a violation of that does exist um in that the respondent was provided a reasonable amount of time prior to the hearing to correct the violations um and I'll also specifically find that um you know this having gone on from December January through now we're in July that clearly that is not a um temporary interruption in Services um in regards to the Water Services of the property okay okay and respondent either failed or refused to correct the violations within a time period provided prior to the hearing by the city's code enforcement department and um I will grant the city's request and ordering that the respondent um either reestablish water to the occupied premises um or vacate the Prem premises such that it is not occupied any longer um and I will also Grant the city's request um for cost to be imposed in the mountain of $34.19 thank you okay thank you and sorry as to to um the date that the city had requested was that August 8th uh August 9th is the Friday before the August um hearing okay okay then I had after review by the um city attorney's office we had taken off the request for daily fines but that was left that was left in the in the order so no I just needed and I understand that no fine would be imposed but I do want to give them a date to do it by so um the order will include that that's to be done honor before August 9th that is the Friday before thank you yes ma'am okay okay all right and it looks like 24- 84 is the last and officer right will also be on this Cas okay thank you officer right please go ahead so I've got four items to submit the first one is the affidavit and the notice of violation uh the second is the affidavit for the notice of today's hearing the third is going to be the cost recovery statement in the amount of $18.97 and then the fourth will be a copy of the uh codes being referenced in today's hearing okay thank you for okay and all of these are accepted into evidence thank you thank you so once again this is the initial hearing for case number 24- 84 so the respondents Philip M Kirkland is the listed property owner uh Christopher Kirkland is the next to Kin for philli and is also the listed vehicle owners our violation address is 4760 Winchester Drive Titusville Florida 327 80 the official mailing address is 223 lady Aster place and that's Danville Virginia 24541 uh also not copies of all the notices were sent to the violation address of 4760 Winchester Drive Titusville Florida so there's two code sections in violation um for this hearing it is section 13 -73 for inoperable and unlicensed vehicles and then section 6-19 2018 property maintenance code section two uh 302.4 for the overgrowth okay and just to verify there is no um asserted violation of 20- 58e that from the hearing notice yes that was actually a part of a uh separate Case by a different code officer okay um and when I sent out the notice of violation I was just addressing these two sections okay so these are the only two that we bringing for violation at this time okay thank you I wanted to check because I didn't see them on the notice of violation and I just wanted to confirm that that's what was happen going forward thank you so my initial inspection took place April 5th of 2024 uh the owner was given until April 25th 2024 to come into compliance certified and first class uh mail was sent to the Virginia address on May or April 8th 20124 the certified mail was returned forwarding expired on April 24th of 2024 the notice of hearing was mailed first class and certified on uh May 31st 2024 the certified mail uh sent to the listed owner in Virginia was returned unclaimed unable to forward uh on June 4th 2004 the notice of VI or the notice of hearing was posted at City Hall and on the property where the violation existed on June 26 2024 so the initial inspection was completed after I had received a uh complaint via the phone concerning a cargo trailer blocking the sidewalk in front of this residence um so I did find a trailer blocking the sidewalk as well as an RV a red Corvette that that appeared to be inoperable we also had overgrowth um all over the property and then a uh trailer containing two personal watercrafts uh jet skis were also on the property that appeared to be in a inoperable condition uh photos were taken to the violation while on site uh tenant uh tenant exited the house I spoke with Clayton uh Cento concerning the violations what he needed to do to correct each of those issues uh I have met with not only Clayton Cento who lives at the property but on May 13 2024 during one of my re inspections uh Christopher Kirkland um was at the property he had mentioned he had just arrived from Virginia couple days prior we discussed all the violations what he needed to do to correct those as of the reinspection I did one Friday I also did one this morning um the vehicles all remain on the property in the same conditions as originally viewed um and the overgrowth um weeds and grass over 12 in do remain on the property um these are the code sections you have in front of you this is section able Vehicles prohibited and then this is section uh 302.4 for weeds and grass all of my photos in today's um exhibit is were taken on June 26th of 2024 and they do reflect what I saw today so these are we have the RV on starting on the leftand side um which is inoperable you cannot see the Corvette behind the minivan this is the uh RV and we've got high weeds and grass in the sidey yard and in the rear yard uh this is on the right hand side of the house um there are weeds and grass and in back is our um two personal motor crafts uh our watercrafts they've moved back and the weeds and grass are growing up and around the boat in the sidey yard so uh for the conclusions of fact section in section 302.4 um there are grass and weeds over 12 in in height on the property so we are asking the respond to be ordered to correct the violations honored before August 9th of 20124 to correct the violations we are asking that proof of current registration and valid plates for each of the vehicles the RV the car the watercrafts be provided and that um um the owner demonstrates that each of the vehicles are operational and then for overgrowth we are asking that the yard be mowed and trimmed we also are asking that the administrative costs in the amount of $98.99 be assessed and if the respondant does not comply by Friday August 9th 2024 that a fine of $50 per day per violation be imposed until the violations are corrected and to call the code officer when the violations have been corrected okay thank you I have I have some questions as to just how the um how each of the the RV the car and then the watercrafts the two jet skis um how are they considered to be inoperable so both uh Clayton um who is the T tenant and um Christopher who is the vehicle owners both stated in conversations with me that they do not work as far as the RV and the car I was told it was battery issues but they weren't able to start them they weren't specific as to what's what the issues were with the personal water crafts and the vehicles have remained the RV at least the RV and the um Corvette have remained in the exact same spot since the first time I was there till this morning when I went okay for um just as to the definition for an operative vehicle that's provided um in the notice of violation um I understand of course that the RV and the car if they've never moved in their vehicles designed for highway travel that don't currently have a current tag or registration that they would be um considered to fall into that definition so the jet skis are also titled and registered thank you that's what I was going to ask yeah they they each have their own registration the trailer has its own Tag and Title that's what I thought about the that it would need to have the Yes trailer tag and title because it's not as though the highway right but a vehicle is defined um to be self-propelled under um if I can in the notice of violation I did pull in um the portion of the uh definitions yes um from chapter and it does kind of Define what a vehicle is thank you and that's why I felt the watercraft fell under that as well okay thank you I hadn't the way that my page was folded I didn't see the vehicle definition I was only looking at the um inoperative vehicle so thank you okay great okay okay and then sorry just to revisit um as to your conversations with the Clayton Kento and Christopher uh Kirkland Kirkland thank you um and they stated that they that they're trying to fix these things or new battery I'm just curious as to what their intent is since I don't they did and I didn't put a picture of the closeup um so on the Corvette this morning the hood was up there was a battery charger uh attached to it um they did not answer the door um I did speak to Clayton um by phone reminding him of the hearing today um he said he would talk to Christopher and have him um remind him of today's hearing but they had not gotten any of the vehicles running and he wasn't sure what Christopher's decision as to what they were going to do um is the Christopher Kirkland person also an occupant of the yes um from May 13th um um forward he's been on site um his listed address in Virginia is the same as Philip Kirkland's the 224 lady Aster do they have a garage there that they could store those in they do have a garage I mean not that the RV would probably fit in there but I will be honest the door was open this morning there isn't a whole lot of room in there it's one of their options anyways yes that is an option um for storage of the vehicles mhm um okay okay and then just to mention specifically as I know I haven't mentioned much as to the yard I Can See Clearly that the Wheats are very high and grown up around the jet skis um which are on a elevated on a trailer no less so I think it's pretty clear from the um photo evidence that those Wheats are 12 in yes um and again you can't see it here but the the front bumper of the RV you can't see the weeds are were up a that High um they did mow this little side yard that they got to um but the backyard remains as high as the sidey yard um where the jet skis are right um and I'm uh with my own eyes it's hard for me to tell how tall that the bumper of the RV is um as opposed to the jet ski which I think it's even more obvious as to the height yeah the jet skis do sit higher than than the the bumper of the uh RV okay okay all right so um for the record it does not appear that any respondent is present or a witness on their behalf so um that said I will go ahead with my order thank you officer R all right okay I've accepted and considered documentary evidence including photographs and sworn testimony relating to this matter from City staff um the respondent is not present at this hearing I do find that the respondent is the owner of the property which is the subject of these proceedings um I further find that all required notices were provided in accordance with the city code and state law bless you um I find that violations of sections see it's section 6-19 which incorporates the 2018 ipmc into the city code um I find that there is a section of the a violation of section 32.4 um of the ipmc which is weeds um which is shown by the photographs provided by staff and confirmed by the the related testimony I also find that there's a violation of section Red Corvette car and the jet skis um which are shown in the photos to not have moved and as testified by City staff um they are not working per the property owners okay to correct the violations the respondent must provide proof of current registrations or valid plates for the interoperable vehicles which includes again the RV the car and the two jet skis um further in order to correct the weeds violation the yard must be mowed and trimmed and I will impose a um well I will provide for a compliance date of August 9th 2024 um that is the date by which the respondents need to correct the violations did you have something to mention before for uh section 1373 can you include in the order that they need to demonstrate each of those vehicles are operational by contacting me yes thank you you're welcome okay yes so included in the order will be that in order to correct the violation the respondent must contact the code enforcement department specifically to demonstrate that the inoperable vehicles are actually operational um the respondent will have until August 9th to correct the violations upon the property and if that is not done then on August 10th let's see August 9th at noon to be specific um if the violations are not corrected by that time then on August 10th a $50 per day per violation may be imposed and per violation meaning one violation being the weeds violation and the other violation being the inoperable Vehicles just collectively okay um also to note future violations of the same sections of the city code shall be classified to be repeat violations and that concludes this hearing so ordered um and that concludes all of the actual hearings for today correct yes ma'am okay thank you and then um is there a code enforcement manager's report I have no report this month ma'am okay thank you um all right then we will stand adjourned at 3:25 p.m. thank you e