The meeting opened with a focus on Lantana Holdings LLC, located at 16169 Southern Boulevard, which is subject to violations under code section 87-030 regarding removal permits and section 20-017 on prohibited use. The town attorney provided evidence of proper service to the property owner, evidenced by a signed green card, and categorized the case as a fine assessment/status conference. The potential fines were substantial, with an accumulation rate of $250 per day over approximately 786 days, totaling $196,500. However, it was noted that an affidavit of non-compliance, necessary to enforce these fines, was not yet filed.

The respondent’s counsel, Mr. German, argued that items previously deemed non-compliant were nearing compliance, and communication with the landowner was ongoing. It was confirmed that the landowner waived certain procedural rights, a key element in assessing the town’s legal sufficiency in service for the hearing. Mr. German expressed surprise at the mention of terminating property use, stating his client was not prepared to agree on any fines until compliance was achieved. This highlighted the ongoing communication gap between the parties.

The magistrate pointed out the stipulation’s provision that termination due to material non-compliance would require the property owner to cease property use and remove unpermitted improvements within 90 days. This stipulation had been agreed upon by both parties. The magistrate emphasized the importance of the stipulation’s language, noting that repeated continuances had been counterproductive, leading to unresolved fines that could have been addressed earlier.

The town’s representative underscored the need to dissolve the agreement due to compliance issues, estimating penalties for one case at $196,500, with a separate case involving a tree violation accumulating even larger fines. The representative referenced a prior finding of violation dating back to 2023.

The magistrate acknowledged the severity of the stipulation. The discussion revealed that despite the lengthy proceedings, an affidavit of non-compliance had not yet been recorded, a necessary step for imposing fines. The magistrate suggested that the hearing was premature and proposed rescheduling to allow time for the parties to address outstanding issues.

The hearing was tentatively set for September 17th at 9:00 a.m., with a request for the town to provide notice of the rescheduled meeting. The magistrate concluded that further discussions were necessary to clarify the stipulation terms and establish a path forward for compliance and potential fines.