21:35A focal point of the meeting was the property on South Orlando Avenue, managed by Michael Sarco. The property, comprising six vacation rental units, was found lacking the necessary registrations and business tax receipts. Despite multiple notices and a scheduled hearing, Sarco failed to address these violations. The magistrate, in response, mandated compliance by August 9, 2025, with penalties set for non-compliance. These included a daily fine starting at $100 for the first day and $50 for subsequent days, as well as a one-time penalty of $250 for the business tax violation.

27:46Attention then turned to the property on Sunset Drive, owned by Kathleen Berman. This case revealed a series of unresolved issues, including open roof permits, missing inspections, foundation cracks, and electrical concerns. The magistrate acknowledged progress on some fronts, such as the completion of a final roof inspection, but noted that significant challenges remained, particularly regarding the pool’s condition and delayed window installations. Despite efforts to resolve these issues, difficulties in securing reliable contractors and obtaining necessary materials hindered compliance. The city emphasized safety concerns, especially with the pool, which remained a hazard due to visibility issues.

The meeting also brought to light the financial and logistical struggles faced by property owners like Kathy Rene Noel, who addressed the commission regarding the uninhabitable condition of her property on Sunset. She outlined a new proposal to secure the property, including installing a pool cover and a lockable gate. However, the city staff highlighted continued violations of the magistrate’s order, advocating for fines retroactive to June 20, 2025, due to persisting safety risks associated with the pool. The city stressed the importance of maintaining a clear pool for safety, citing the need to ensure visibility to prevent accidents.

During discussions, the property owner questioned alternative solutions, such as maintaining a drained pool. However, city representatives clarified that draining could lead to structural issues, emphasizing the necessity of a clean and compliant pool. The magistrate ultimately ruled in favor of imposing fines while expressing openness to reconsider penalties upon achieving compliance, balancing the enforcement of regulations with an understanding of the challenges faced by the property owner.

06:23Another case involved property owner Michael D. Lithicum, whose property on Bahama Boulevard was under scrutiny for a missing pool enclosure and an inoperable boat. Despite efforts to address these issues, including the removal of the boat, the property remained in non-compliance due to the absence of a necessary fence permit. Lithicum expressed frustration over difficulties in obtaining a new survey and engaging fence companies, citing delays in the process. The magistrate highlighted the potential liability issues.