Mhm. >> Mhm. >> Mhm. >> Mhm. >> Are we ready? Good evening, everyone. I'd like to call to order the Village of Biscayne Park Code Compliance Board meeting for Wednesday, June 17th. The time is 6:02.
If the clerk would please call roll. >> This is like déjà vu. >> Janey Anderson. >> Here. >> Dell Blanton. >> Here. >> Judy Hammerberg. Rodolfo Barrientos. Michael Lanotte. >> Here. >> Dorothy Grant. Rafael Gutierrez. Vanessa
Cherry, present. >> This is a meeting of the Village of Biscayne Park Code Compliance Board. The board is authorized pursuant to chapter 14 of the Village's Land Development Code to ensure compliance with the Village's Code of Ordinances.
The members of the board are citizens and residents of the Village of Biscayne Park. We volunteer our time and we are not paid for our services. The purpose of each hearing is to give any alleged violators the opportunity to contest the decisions of the code compliance officer which
resulted in the issuance of a notice of violation and to determine whether a violation of the Village's code has occurred or is occurring. We are not authorized to dismiss violations based on hardships, ignorance, or that others may be guilty of the same violation.
These hearings are conducted in a quasi-judicial manner. Our responsibility is to act much like a judge in a court and that is to hear cases presented by the Village's code compliance officers and to hear contradictory arguments presented by the alleged violators. We are not authorized
to change the code. The Village Commission is solely authorized to enact or revise codes. Conversely, neither the Commission nor the Village Manager have the authority to overrule the findings of the board. Pursuant to chapter 162 of Florida
Statutes, orders of the board can only be appealed to the Circuit Court of Miami-Dade County. We have the authority to assess and order the payments of civil penalties, to issue orders having the force of law, to command whatever steps are necessary to bring a violation into compliance,
and to assess administrative costs. In order to make a finding upholding the code compliance officer's decision, we must find that there is substantial competent evidence that the named violator was responsible for a violation of the relevant section of the code as
charged. All documentary evidence presented by the parties must be submitted for placement in the hearing file. No documentary evidence will be considered unless the alleged violator or code compliance officer submits a copy for the hearing file. Each party shall have the right to call
and examine witnesses, to introduce exhibits, to cross-examine opposing witnesses on any matter relevant to the issues, even though that matter was not covered in direct examination, to impeach any witnesses regardless of which party first called them to testify, and to rebut the evidence
against them. If you intend to address the board and haven't signed in, please do so. Anyone wishing to address the board, please stand, raise your right hand so you may be sworn in. You are reminded that this board is quasi-judicial board and giving false
testimony can be penalized. We also need anyone who's on Zoom and planning to testify to be sworn in. >> Oh, I thought okay. Oh, okay. You can leave. Bye. Can you please stand up?
Nice to meet you. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Do we have any additions, deletions, or changes to the agenda? >> I emailed No, we have no additions. The
only thing I would like to add a discussion is a short discussion on trash and garbage. >> Good evening. My name is Doreen Grant. I'm the code compliance director for the Village of Biscayne Park. The first item on our agenda is in
section 7 and it's 7.8. It's for the address 11121 Griffin Boulevard for case number CE26-0255. Property owner is 11121 Griffin LLC in care of their registered agent Q&Q Business Services LLC.
We are asking for an order of enforcement with a $2,000 penalty. This is a short-term rental found to be in violation of section 10.1.5 offensive noise that's prohibited. There was unnecessary and excessive noise at a short-term vacation rental.
The property owner is present from what what I understand he's going to need a translator. So, Rafael will help us. >> And what about the Is the officer here, too? >> The officer is not here. We have a police report in evidence.
>> We've talked about this before. >> Yes. However, go ahead. >> Doreen has essentially become the off the >> resources >> for the city. We have the police report. We have the code director.
He's essentially >> No, if she cannot take an adequate statement and put it through her mouth and make it offered for the truth of the matter asserted, that is called hearsay. We've talked about this. We've had other officers
come here and testify. I don't care what it is. Who And And who is that by? I don't see what you're say What is that that you have? >> This report? >> Oh, the police report. Right, it's hearsay. Hearsay is an adequate statement offered
for the truth of the matter asserted. That's a legal term. So, I can't come in here and say she said the sky was blue because I'm offering it for the truth. It's not the It's not reliable. It needs to come from the officer.
>> Have we run the this through the >> Yes, we did run this through administration and we did speak with the legal counsel. Um what they concluded was um a police report is admissible and we can use it. Um the board can review the police report.
If they're not happy with it, then they can request someone to come here. Due to the lack of resources, we are not able to have an officer here all the time. Um >> Well, I think then the last 6 months this is the third time that we've had something on the calendar. >> I agree with >> When you talk about resources, it's not
an every week It's not an every time thing. So, you know, you can't use lack of resources to subrogate and and obfuscate somebody's rights >> I'm a mess. >> to be heard. >> Actually, you can. When this has been run by legal and the administration and
we have the having to drag in an officer on potentially their day off. There's a First of all, is that fair? Secondly, there is a minimum amount of overtime, so you can't say resources are not an issue. They very definitely are. My only
concern, legal has seen this, legal is okay with it. I'm okay. >> Well, first of all, you're talking about We were talking about resources. That's why I brought it up. >> Yes. >> It's been about three times in the last 6 months or so that we've even had this
type of situation and we've had an officer at each one. So, we can't just put somebody's rights aside because of resources. Number one. Number two is everything that you just said came from the perspective of well, the city and it
costs too much and we got to drag an officer in. We are We are residents and we are a quasi-judicial board and we are here for the for the for the residents. We are residents of Biscayne Park. We are not employees of the police
department and here to ratify hearsay statements and to rubber stamp whatever it is that they say in there without them coming in here and being subjected to questions about it. >> Michael, I can tell you there is nobody more cognizant of the importance of this
board having credibility. But when we have an officer statement and we have it been cleared by our legal people I am okay with that. You can vote as you choose to, Michael, but we need to
proceed with the case. >> The board has the right to object to the police report. >> Yeah, I I object to it because the officer is not here. We talked about that before and then the first time I talked about it, then I got a call from is it Mr. Childress? Is
he the the the building manager or the >> The village manager. >> village manager, who called me and left me a message that said that it cost too much for overtime, which I never returned and then the next next meeting that we had the officer was there and I believe once we heard the officers and
we questioned the officers, we all voted unanimously to uh enforce the violation. >> It would >> Because due process was followed. >> Michael, it would have been great if you returned that call and had that conversation with the manager because maybe you would have understood and heard some details.
>> of all, I don't need to understand from the village manager about what the legal rights are of the residents of Biscayne Park having practiced law for the last 34 years and been a trial lawyer, so I understand what the rules are. I understand what the rights of our residents are and I
understand as a neighbor here that if somebody's going to get rung up on a charge like this then get the officer in here and have him testify and we'll probably enforce it. >> Understood Michael but I can give you a list of all our short short term
rentals and I can assure you that none of these short term rentals are owned by residents. These are businesses that people are running in the in the village. >> Well, that's fine but the the fact of the matter is is that they are they have a place in Biscayne Park and we have neighbors and if there are
rules that are being broken and they're too loud then let's get people in here to that that have enforced those rules the police officers and have them testify. I don't think we've ever said no to any one of these violations when we've followed due process.
So if we're going to if we're going to short >> If the board agrees we'll we'll ask >> shortcut our residents and we're going to shortcut the rights of our residents you know for for for convenience >> business owners business owners >> Excuse me?
>> Not just residents business owners. >> Okay. They're running businesses in the village. >> Okay. We >> They don't really live here. >> police department so have the police department come in here. >> Sure. But if the board is okay with that we will ask to bring the police officer at the next meeting.
>> I'd actually like to go ahead and have an officer present. Um or I'd like to have something in writing from the attorney state giving the reasons that we could proceed without it. I understand what allegedly the the
attorney has said and we have asked for the police officers in the past to be here and they've shown. If we're on a if it's on a day off or something maybe we could reschedule it for when they're here. Um that's just me.
And then maybe we could get some clarity as far as can we proceed without it or have that happen in the right statement, but >> That would work. I like I like what you just last said. They don't necessarily have to be in here, but they can have a notarized statement.
It carries more weight than just this. >> A notarized statement is just notarizing the signature. I mean, we could talk to the to the village lawyer about that because what it still prevents is the right of
cross-examination and to test what is in there and to have the officer talk about, you know, what they are hearing, what they're observing, what they're recording, and what they're coming in here and telling the board. Did they hear something when they walked up, you know,
you know, to the backyard and they heard music thumping three blocks down. You know, let's hear that. I mean, and and it's an easy decision, but it's a process. So, we can talk to the the village attorney about what what he thinks would pass
judicial muster in that regard. >> Fair enough. We we we we may go ahead and ask for a continuance on the case um respectfully to accommodate >> I'm willing to be affirmative as to continuance of the case, not necess-
contingent upon the village attorney's determination of what we need to do. If he says yes, you do need to have officers in there, then we have to figure out a way to make that happen. If he says that is an unnecessary step,
then we know. But, if we're going to continue, I want to continue it upon Mr. Herron's opinion. >> So, we have a motion? >> The motion would be in case number >> Can I make one comment? Would it be
possible for the police officer to testify on video? >> Absolutely. >> Well, >> Absolutely. >> why can't we have that? Isn't available? >> We can ask. >> Right, but well, then they don't have to travel here cuz a lot of them don't live
in the neighborhood. So, if they could be on the zoom call, then that would mean that they have to travel here, but still get >> But, I still want to contingent upon Let's see what our village attorney has
to say. Rather than us getting saying rather than us deciding what we want, I want to know what legally we're required to do. >> And I will just add that uh since COVID that the courts in Florida uh allow for
uh testimony by zoom in court at the position and at the other proceedings. So, I think that would be a perfectly >> You can do it now. >> available. Right, but I'm just talking about when you take sworn testimony. >> Continue your case. >> Sorry.
>> Yeah, I just think that that might be It's kind of an in between. It gives the officer the opportunity to say meantime, doesn't have to put in all the travel. >> Understood. >> Okay. >> In case number
CE26-0255, my motion would be that we table it until the July, I believe that's 15th meeting and contingent upon and in the meantime, we get the opinion of the village attorney as to what our responsibilities
are in terms of whether or not we have to have sworn testimony by the witnessing police officer as part of the meeting proceedings. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion passes 5-0.
That's July Yeah, that's July 15. >> Um can the board allow uh Rafael to translate um the motion to the owner? Rafael, you have to go on the record, please. >> Test test test. So,
I translated the motion. Yeah. >> Thank you. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> The next item is in section eight, fine reduction, and it's 8.1. The address is 11
853 Griffin Boulevard. It's for case number CE 25-0921. Property owners, Luis Iragory and Rafael Harris. This is for a fine reduction. They were found to be in violation of
section 16.14.1 double fee permits. There was a construction dumpster parked in front of the yard of the property without first obtaining permits. They have since um paid the double fee permits, and an affidavit of compliance has been
for the record. Uh the outstanding amount of the fee of the fine was $7,750. The residents are offering $250. Our recommendation considering administrative cost and the time it took
to come into compliance um is $500. >> the board Questions, anyone? If you would, sir, identify yourself and your name and your relationship to the property. >> Uh I don't think so.
I don't think it's on. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. >> Okay. Um hello, everyone. First time here. Uh my name is Luis Iraragorri. This is my wife, Rafa Harris. Uh we live on 11853
Griffin Boulevard. Uh I think now almost for 7 beautiful years here in the neighborhood. Um Uh the the the fine was assessed correctly by a code enforcer, Mr. Gutierrez. Uh there was a dump truck a dump trailer, let's say, uh parked outside of our house.
Um it was We were under the impression So, this was part of the roofing uh job for our house, which did have the necessary permits. And we were under the impression that our roofer had obtained the necessary permit to park that uh dump trailer there
uh to basically throw in the additional debris that had been left in the yard, tiles and those sorts of things. Um so, it came as complete surprise to us when we received the fine. Uh, my uh now obviously incorrect approach was to try to visit the village
uh to discuss it uh and to understand, you know, may >> So, what what are the things that I want to just mention before we go forward? Can you guys hear me? Okay. Is that um while you have just seen that sometimes we don't always see eye to eye on this
board, but one of the things that we do see eye to eye on, or at least historically we have, is when it comes to the issue of fine reductions, is that we really place a lot of emphasis on what Doreen does and what they recommend. And you heard what her recommendation
was. She recommended 500 and what she had had expressed and what we take great stock in because we know the job that she does. Um, is is to uh, you know, to to listen to her and to find out what they had to do on their
end to to enforce this uh, this fine. And you know, your offer is about half of what her recommendation is, which I think either way, it's a whole lot less than 707
uh, or 7750. So, you know, I I can't predict the future, but I would not support uh, you know, your recommendation because I place a lot of emphasis on hers and you know, we'll take a vote in a second, but
one of the things that I would urge you to do is to consider what uh, this information since it's your first time here and also, you know, the kind of emphasis that we place on Doreen and you know, uh, consider that as we go forward.
But I'll make a motion in uh, Well, in a second. This is CE 250 uh, 21. >> 921. >> 921. Uh, item agenda 8.1 to reject the $250
um, fine reduction request. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Motion passes 5-0. >> Now, the cool thing about knowledge is that you can sit here and you can make another offer.
And if you can make another offer and we'll vote on it. So, you've heard what the emphasis is that we as a group place on hers and you can >> It's up to you. >> monitor yourself accordingly. >> You make the next offer. >> This represents the 500 is basically
represents the fine and the administrative costs of the whole procedure from November until where we are today. Uh well, till the order of enforcement. That's where the administrative >> Right. >> Now, you can make an oral tennis, which
means an a verbal counter offer and we can talk about it and we can vote on it. >> another offer and >> Right now. >> say it happens to be 500 and we happen to accept that. As long as that fine is paid, that's it. If you make that offer but
the fine doesn't get paid, it reverts back to the original fine. >> I'd like to make a motion in CE 25-0921 agenda item 8.1 to accept the uh fine reduction of $500 in this case.
>> Second. All in favor? >> I. >> I. >> Motion passes 5-0. Thank you both very much. We have to give >> And >> Michael a >> A by date. >> Deadline for paying. >> Uh >> Your motion. >> Deadline in 30 days.
>> Let's give a specific date. That always works better. >> July 17th. >> July 17th. Is that a weekday? >> 17th. It's >> Okay. >> July 17th. Yes. >> If you motion, I'll second that. All in favor? >> I. >> I. Good luck. >> Both.
>> Thank you. >> The next item is in section 7 and it's 7.10. 7.10. The address is 11222 Northeast 9th Avenue.
A case number CE-26-0140 for Daniel Gonzalez. We're asking for an order of enforcement. We found to be in violation of section 16.14.130 permits. They installed a metal brown fence without first obtaining building
permits. As of today, they are non-compliant. >> I'm sorry, Darlene. They are or not? >> Non-compliant. Permits. >> One sec. It was one second. You don't I don't have any questions. Does anyone else?
If you would, ma'am, identify yourself and your relationship to the property. >> You live in the property to the right of it, right? But you've been here before. You You know what You know what this process is. >> He knows the drill. >> Yes.
Yeah, that's an issue that only the building official can um deal with. We cannot give you any kind of authority in code. The only two things I'd like to mention This is a new property for you. You're renting it out. There's no registration for landlord. That's a different violation. And then the
property is homesteaded. So, you have to clear all that before you can even go ahead and get those affidavits for from the building official for the building official to approve. Yeah, I'm not sure he will, but >> And it's
It's strictly anecdotal evidence, but I have heard residents do that before, get signatures, but then properties change hands. >> And the next resident doesn't >> big problem. The new owner doesn't like the ugly side, their side. That's only
anecdotal evidence. But, I just wanted to share that with you. But, more importantly, as Darlene said, this is a building issue. That's outside of our realm. >> I have a question. It still holds that it takes approximately 90 days in order
for it to go through the permitting process, indeed. >> Yeah, we'll say 90 days. It's a little quicker than that now, but >> than the um >> the application, no. No. >> That's what he was she was trying to >> Yeah.
>> general contractor >> All right. Right. There's several issues to resolve. >> If there are no questions >> I'd make a motion. >> I'd like to make a motion. >> I'd like to make a motion in case number CE-26-0140. Violation has occurred. Assess a fine of
$250. Administrative costs of 250. Uh give the property owner until Let's see. September the 21st to uh
have a fully uh uh to put have a permit pulled and finalized. Uh >> Well, but it wouldn't be finalized by the 21st. >> It'd be pulled by the um pulled by
September the 21st. Uh if not, a $250 per day fine thereafter. >> I'll second. All in favor? >> Aye. >> Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes 5-0. Thank you.
>> Good luck. >> Thank you. >> The next item is in section seven, new business, and it's 7.1. It's for the address 519 Northeast 118th Street. It's for case number CE26-0020. Property owner is NCC Renovations LLC in
care of their registered agent, Fernandez Candelaria. >> Did you say 7.1? >> Yes. >> I don't have a 7.1. >> You don't >> I got 6.1 and then jumps to 7.02. >> business
That's Vanessa. >> Vanessa? I got it right here. It went right from my Dropbox. But I'll I'll share with Dale. >> Go ahead and and read the case. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> You don't use Dropbox. What do you use the >> Uh OneDrive.
>> Okay. >> Must be OneDrive. >> So, they were found to be in violation of section 8.5 unsafe structure Miami-Dade County Code of Ordinance. Property was declared unsafe by the building official. They're back here for a progress report.
Uh they have permits in progress and I believe they are working with Durham at the mo- moment to get all the paperwork um cleared up. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> If you would even though you've been here and we know you, we do need it for
the record, your name and your relationship to the property. >> Are you still intending to raise the building or you going to Okay. Okay. >> Monday. Um Yeah, and I was pleased to see that the
property is being maintained and and the tarp is removed. Okay. So, basically that was it is is was was um getting the fence installed and and I believe it was approved on Monday.
Yeah. >> At least you've made the decision the decision and you're moving forward cuz I thought at one point you weren't really sure which direction. Any Any more questions? Shall we table this say for till August and have
her come back in August instead of every month? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, I mean I I see where there's already a enforcement and and um yeah, we're just taling it. This point seems how well the fence isn't up yet. >> Right. >> But they do have a
was approved by them. >> She's She's going to go up tomorrow, right? The fence is going up tomorrow? >> Do you know if the permit's finished for the fence? >> Wait. Rafael, are you able to see that? He'll He'll check real quick.
>> Oh, I'm sorry. We can't just table. I got it. We have to do another order of continuance if we're doing that. >> Right. >> Fine. >> Right. >> But we have >> That's fine. >> order of continuance. >> Does that That doesn't Does that stay
the thing on? >> Yes. >> So, it's already a stay up till today. I didn't realize that's what order of >> Yeah. >> Order of continuance wipes out any >> No, no. The continuance just continues the case. The extension is what can
extend wipes out the fines um on the order of enforcement. The order of extension because we are extending the compliance date. Continuance is just continuing to another day. >> I was sorry. That's what
>> It's okay. >> You're right. Getting the two terms mixed up. So, the daily >> She doesn't have any Yeah, it's been tabled, so she her fines are not running. >> So, not >> Not running, no. >> Is it extended? I don't see an order. >> We don't have an order of extension. We
need to do one. >> We have a notice of We have an order of continuance. >> for >> Is there >> I just saw order two different things. Thank you. One second. Yeah, there's there's no reason at this
point to kick in the We find she's doing everything necessary. >> She should have done an extension. >> So, in this case, she's actually right. What we What the board should order is an order of extension, not continuance. They have to order the
extension because the compliance date has passed and these fines would run with a continuance. Now, you want to extend it so that the fines don't run. >> I think it's We continued it till today, so no fines have accrued, but if we don't do an extension
>> from today. >> Well, the extension would have to go back >> Let's working through it. >> We're getting there. >> And and um with with the type of what she needs to get done >> Yes. >> safe to say 60 days. >> 60 days would be good, because derm is
backed up. Yes. >> All right, so that would be um uh July, August. Is the meeting in August? 17th. >> 17th. >> That's P&Z, P&, whatever. >> 17th. Oh my god, I didn't know we did it. >> Is it going to be a square house?
>> 70. >> Whatever it is. >> I had it been in the clock. Here we go. >> Good, is that >> August is the name of the cube. >> Yeah, okay. >> All right. >> No, you didn't. >> Um >> You're an architect, too?
>> So charming. >> Oh, you are. >> Oops. >> Okay. >> Well, meanwhile we can we can I'm going to go ahead and make the motion on case number C - 26 - 00 20. Uh I can make a motion uh for an
order of extension until September, I mean August the uh 19th. August the 19th. That's 60 days from now. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I. >> This motion passes 5-0. We'll see you in
August. Thank you, and good luck with everything. >> The next case is seven is under section seven and it's 7.13. The address is 12005 Northeast 7th Avenue. Case number is CE - 26 - 0003.
Javier Estrella and Kimberly. We were going to This was going to be a progress report for a double fee permit fence. However, the building official um complied this case. So, we are asking for the board to close
the case. >> Wonderful. >> Hey. >> I think it looks great. >> I'd like to make a motion on case number 26 - 0003. The move to close. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I.
>> Opposed? Motion passes 5-0. Thank you, Kim. Thank you, Kim. >> Excuse me, Mr. Corrine. Kim has a >> I think it looks great. >> Right. That's not a Yeah, that's not a question for here. You would have to meet with the officer and then he'll he'll connect
you with the building people. You can ask them. You're welcome. >> Yeah, you're good luck, dude. Your property is always >> Oh, it's perfect. >> Beautiful. >> The next item >> Who did I think? >> No, it was me. >> You did.
>> You're still on >> Next item is 7.3. It's for the address 850 Northeast 118th Street. Case number CE-26-0157. The property owners are PRBP9 LLC in care of their registered agent
Joe Accounting LLC. We're asking for an order of enforcement. Um found to be in violation of section 8.4. 11 excessive growth of grass, weeds, and other overgrowth. Uh we have a representative on Zoom
on this case. >> So, what is the current condition What is the current condition of the property? >> Um They have been approved by the Planning and Design Review Board for a demo. That house will be demoed and I I like to enter onto the record
demo permit number p d e m o - 26 - 0012. Is that 002? The condition of the property is um I went there yesterday and the grass has not been cut. The grass is still high.
I They still have to maintain it. That's correct. There hasn't been any maintenance and we have reached out. They are aware. >> Okay, so you got to swear him in. >> Has this gentleman been sworn in?
Okay. >> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> So, when are you going to cut your grass? >> If you would, identify
open your relationship to the property. >> Hi, good evening. My name is Kyle Legarreta. I am the project manager. We have a several properties in Biscayne Park and we have been constant communication with the code compliance department.
Uh we are aware that it needs to be cut. We already scheduled this to be done. Also, our building permit was already issued and it was already approved, but it was not issued yet. We are pending the contractor to finalize the
registration so we can get the permit issued. Uh we are working on on the violation, not only this, but all the other ones for the other properties. >> If if I may ask a question, um
you say you you you have it scheduled to be cut. When when when when is it um scheduled for? >> It's for next week. >> Huh. >> They they will do all together. They they're going to do the demolition. They will cut They will put up the fence. They going to do the septic tank
abandonment. It's the same company who take care of the entire project. >> Excellent. But we're here for the overgrowth and the grass and the weeds. When When What date is that going to be um >> You can It's Monday. Next Monday we can
do that. We don't need a permit for that. >> And the thing is the original violation was given on back in April. So we're looking at a little over 2 months and compliance. >> I want to add that the pictures that are attached here were dated June 5th and
the grass is overgrown and then it's a little, you know, disappointing to hear that on June 17th after an email exchange, and I don't know if that's the representative that's there when he asked when when he got the notice to appear and asked if he could attend online cuz he's in Brazil. Is that who this is?
>> Yes. >> So he's known >> Yes. >> for 12 days that the grass is overgrown and and it had a notice to appear and now we're hearing it's going to be like another another week plus cuz it's not this Monday, it's next Monday, right? The 29th? >> No, the 27th.
>> Yeah, 22nd? >> He said Monday. He said next >> Yeah, next Monday. The The issue was when we received the when we received the notices, we We didn't get only this one. We got another one for the fence. We got the the total demolition for a different
property. So I started immediately working and Vanessa knows. I started working all all the process that needs to be done. Miami-Dade County is really backed backed up. So I started applying for the for the septic tank abandonment. I I started applying for the total
demolition and I focused on the permits that it took more time and I ended up not paying attention to the grass. >> Yeah, cuz the grass you don't need a You don't need a permit. You don't need anything. You just need a lawnmower and somebody that's got one. And And it's been going on for a while.
>> Needs to be cut about every 2 weeks, every 3 weeks at the absolute most, so you can't just wait until you get fines for it. >> Let me ask you this. You said next Monday, you talking June 22nd or June 29th? >> June 22nd.
>> Okay. >> Which is still 2 full months after the original notice of violation. It doesn't take 2 months to cut the grass. >> Yeah. You're not in the microphone. >> Oh, sorry. >> Can't hear you. >> It doesn't take 2 months to cut the grass.
And the violation was given April 21st. A weed eater could do it. >> Um If there's nothing else to be said because we were only really here to hear the um overgrown grass, I'd like to make a make a motion. >> Please.
>> In case number CE-26-0157 that the property is in the violation has occurred, assess a fine of $250, administrative costs of 250. Um Uh the grass is to be cut by Monday,
June the 22nd. If not, a commence uh the following day, uh $250 per day fine. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion passes 5-0. >> During I I don't have I didn't have a a
time to check the agenda. I don't know if it's only this uh case or I have more cases. >> No, you only have this one case. >> Oh, amazing. Thank you. >> I'll reach out tomorrow. I'm going to give you a call so we can go through everything else. >> Yeah, perfect. That's fine. Thank you
very much. Have a good one. >> Okay, bye. >> Bye. >> The next item is in section 7 and it's 7.7. It's for the address 1110 Northeast 119th Street. It's for case
number CE-26-0258 Adriana Montes Trust Abodanza Trust. We're asking for an order of enforcement. Um Sorry. 7.7. They were found to be in violation of Section 19.1.7
renewal of a vacation rental license. Uh we had no license on file and they were renting the property on a short-term basis. They have since applied for the license and they are awaiting a fire inspection
from Miami-Dade County Fire Department. >> And approximately how long so we give them a deadline it'll be realistic cuz I don't think they can't get the license until that's >> Until that's done. Uh we have no control over what Miami-Dade County does. They
have to request it and we don't know what the time we wouldn't know what the timeline is. >> Is it safe to say 2 weeks or more of a 30 days? >> Um 30 days I think would be better. >> Carried. >> So the next meeting >> Uh 57.
>> Yeah. >> She's on Zoom. I'm sorry. I didn't announce that. >> Has she been sworn in? >> Um Well, um Adriana, can you mute your computer? Please. Your microphone. And uh we would like to swear you in.
>> Do you want me to join right now? >> We're going to swear you in now. >> Right hand swear. >> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes.
>> yes I do. >> So ma'am, you didn't have a short-term rental license on your on file and you rented this short-term. Is that true? >> I actually the property right now is vacant and we've been intending to find a long-term tenant. And so that's kind of my situation now
when we were 25 and that we also listed it on Airbnb and VRBO to see what was the interest, but we really want somebody long-term. And so um I was notified by
Veronica Valeria um I forgot her name right now, but she notified me and my office is working on the permit. We already paid the permit fees. Now we're waiting for an inspection. Um that I think it has been scheduled. So as soon as I realized I need that and
because we have one with the state um I I went ahead and acted as soon as I could. >> I appreciate all that, but let let me just ask it again. So you're the owner of the property? >> Yes. >> And you were renting this on a
short-term basis on Airbnb when you got this violation? >> No, we haven't rented the property. The property has been vacant. Property was listed as an advertisement for both long-term and short-term. >> I would like to put personal testimony on the record. I went to the property
myself and met two gentlemen who said to me they were renting. They advertised She advertised on Hoppers. That's where they found the ad. In fact, while I was on site, they called their mother who had rented from Ms. Montes and spoke
with her and explained to her what had happened because the previous night police had There was an incident. The police. So I went to confirm that they were renting this place short-term. Went to the door, knocked on the door, and spoke to two young gentlemen who
confirmed to me that they were there for a few days. >> And when you went there, did you see this woman there? >> No, she doesn't live here. She lives in another city. >> Okay. Well, that's the kind of thing >> if [clears throat] I may if I may say if I may say I was in Boston studying.
I've been there for the whole month of May and June. So, I don't know I was not at the property. I was not there to see. My office has been handling that. What I'm aware is that the property has been listed for short-term and long-term. And
and yeah, that's that's what I I know, but we we want to we want to either do the long-term if we want just a long-term tenant if we can, but if not then and we have to do a short-term, then we will abide by the license. >> Okay.
>> Well, just so you're aware, there are two entirely different licenses for long-term rental and for short-term rental. >> I applied for the long-term as well. >> Okay. >> Do I need a long a long-term too, right? A long-term and a short-term. I need two licenses, right? >> If your plan is to pretend leave
yourself open to be able to go back and forth, you need both licenses. >> Yeah, I mean like I say, my intention is to have a long-term tenant. But the market has been very slow. I had this property in the market for I don't know, 3 months and I haven't got
any any any body to apply for long-term. So, uh I guess if yeah, if I need two licenses I will do the two licenses, but I do really just want to deal with long-term. >> Okay. >> Any further questions? Can we get a motion?
>> Uh for me, uh so once I find a tenant, if I have a long-term tenant uh do I let you know so you cancel the short-term license or how does that work? >> You don't have to cancel it. You can hold it up to the end of the year. It's valid until October 2027. So, you don't have to cancel it. You can
just hold it and not renew it if you intend to go with long-term rental. >> But if you choose not to renew it, let us know, please. >> But if I keep renewing it, then I can go either way? >> But again, if it's not renewed, you cannot rent short-term.
>> Which >> She's aware because she's been She's owned that property for a long time. She's been both a long-term and short-term renter. So, she's aware of how this works. >> Yeah, I'm aware. I just was confused
that we had a short-term license that we keep paying with the state. And I guess it was my mistake to assume that that was enough. So, I I understand what you're saying. Yeah, and I'm willing to comply with whatever
the city the village needs from me. >> Are there any further comments? If not, motion. >> I'll make the >> Case number CE-26-20258. The violation has occurred. Assess a fine of $250.
Administrative cost of 250. Uh Give the property owner >> I'm sorry, I can't hear you. >> Assess a fine of $250, administrative cost of $250. Give the property owner until August I
mean July the 17th to secure a short-term or and or long-term permit license. If not, a $250 per day fine thereafter.
>> Second. Quick discussion. >> I have a question. I have a question. Since I've already paid for the permit fees and I complied as soon as I could, is there any way you can not find me right now? >> No. >> No, you're already in violation.
>> Well, I understand what you said about the two gentlemen that were there uh when I was not here, but there's nobody at the property now. The property is vacant. There's nobody has been at the property short-term or long-term since we got the call from the village. >> I'll second.
>> discussion, you said either or. >> I mean or or both. But either or or both. I mean to obtain the short-term and or long-term rental license. Okay. >> We we understand the order. Mhm. We
understand. >> But it's the short-term that we're dealing with. What >> She's in violation. I'm just letting her I mean if she decides not to do short-term >> Right. She >> needs the long-term one. >> Right. >> But
how am I in violation if the property is vacant? >> Uh, you rented it out. >> had um by the testimony of uh um our code uh officer um from the property >> that in in in the past. I understand
that, but the property once we were notified is vacant. >> Ma'am. You are in violation because you were renting the property short-term very recently without the short-term license. So
>> I believe the recent date was um May 30th, 2026, and it was for a couple a few nights. >> But if anything, we didn't even make the $500 you're fine fine finding me. That property gets rented for like a hundred a night. >> Well,
with a license Um, we we've made a ruling and I believe it got a second. >> And all in favor? >> I I >> Any op- >> Second, Michael. >> I think it was um >> It was Janie. >> Any opposed? Motion passes 5-0.
>> The next item is in old business. Do I still have to pay? Can you advise me what I have to pay the city? >> Okay. >> You >> She's still >> You owe a $50 fine. >> Uh >> $250 >> the order in the mail. >> I'm sorry. >> We'll send the order in the mail. We'll
email her the order. >> The >> It's $500 with the license being issued by the 17th of July, otherwise it's $250 a day. Okay. >> All right. >> The next item is in old business,
section 6 of the agenda, and it's 6.1. The address is 821 Northeast 120th Street. It's for case number CE-25-0563. Property owner BP 120 LLC in care of their registered agent, Robin Weiner.
Um, this property is now in compliance. It has been demolished and we're asking the board to close this case. We are asking for an re- We're We're requesting an extension in order to remove the fines. I apologize for that.
>> You were retroactive >> Retroactively, yes. >> It looks like the permit Bear with me, was granted May 20th? >> Yes, and the work was done. >> The week No, actually, we need to look
for the last I know the last extension. We need to do a retroactive extension to April 1st. >> Right. >> Okay. Everybody understand what we got to do? >> No. >> Okay. In In February, we gave them an
extension to March 31st. They weren't able to get the permit until May. Therefore, since it's achieved what we wanted achieved, the the building is down,
we need, if everybody agrees, we need to make a retroactive extension to April 1st, so the daily fines don't kick in. Since compliance has been met, this kind of >> Yeah, we got what we wanted. Exactly. I understand.
>> motion would be in CE-5-0763, there was a violation. He is now in compliance. We order an extension of time retroactive to April 1st. >> I'll second.
Hi. >> Motion passes 5-0. >> The next item is 6.2 for the address 1015 Northeast 112th Street. It's for case number CE-25-0598. >> I'm sorry, Doreen. My apologies. >> Did you say 6.2? >> 6.2.
>> I don't have 6.2 either. >> Drop that. >> Vanessa. >> There's some papers. >> This is the first time that you have failed me. >> The words are too heavy. [laughter]
>> That was a notice of violation. First minute, order of extension, order >> You know what he's called. She'll give you the paper in the file, Michael. >> Well, he's looking at the paper. >> I I I He's looking at mine. >> Is sharing? >> Yeah, we're sharing. >> Go and read the case.
Address is 1015 Northeast 112th Street. It's for case number CE25-0598. Property owner is Brick In Forelace LLC in care of their registered agent Harvard Business. Asking for an intent to lien.
Property is non-compliant. An affidavit of non-compliance has been filed. The violation is chapter 5.6A1 off-street parking. Vehicles were observed parking on an approved parking surface. >> Have you had any contact with these people?
>> Rafael. And the fines are up to 54 >> Have you had any contact with these people? >> Uh >> Yes. Yes. Uh I've had multiple conversations with the property management and also the registered agent in uh Delaware.
So, we have not received no reply from the property owner. And the property managers, they're also not doing anything. >> The started yeah, July 20 >> And the And the property is up for sale.
>> The property is up for sale. We recalculated. I just want to put that on the record. The outstanding amount is 30,000 uh 30,500 dollars. >> Uh in order to protect the village interest, we have to file a lien or we
don't get paid on this. >> I mean, that's correct. >> Yes. And now, ironically, we had given them one extension. We had given them uh yeah. One extension. That was in December to February. And then they came back in I mean, we
had a hearing in in April. >> So, we have recalculated the outstanding amount. >> Yes. >> I can make a motion in the case of CE-25-0598 that um I make a motion to file a lien
on the property for the outstanding amount of 30,000. Wait a minute, where did I put it? 30,000 >> $500 >> $500 plus the applicable um filing fees.
>> And what about administrative fee for um bring it here? >> And we can add a $250 administration fee as well. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I.
>> Opposed? Motion passes 5-0. >> Oh, it's >> The next item in new business, section 7 of the agenda, is 7. Did you say 7.2? No. It's 7.2. It's for the address 630 Northeast 117th
Street. And it's case number CE-26-0181. Property owner is Long Kiss LLC in care of their registered agent Hernandez Caesar, the manager. We asking for an order of enforcement. Found to be in violation of section 19.1.7
renewal of a vacation rental license. They were renting the property with an expired short-term rental license. They have since applied uh for the license and they are awaiting the fire inspection. >> Good news, I've got this one.
Let the board know. >> I thought you were going to make your motion make a motion. >> I just want to Vanessa got this one in there. >> Great. >> There's no questions property owner present. >> No. >> There's no questions. I'd like to make a
motion. >> Please do. >> Case number CE-26-0181, that a violation has occurred. Um the assess a fine of $250, administrative uh fee of $250, uh obtain the short-term rental license
by July 17th or $250 per day fine thereafter. >> I'll second on favor. >> I. >> Motion passes 5-0. >> The next item is 7.4. 7.4.
The address is 931 Northeast 120th Street. It's for case number CE-26-0126. The property owner is 931 Northeast 120 20th at LLC. They're asking for an order of enforcement. They are not they are non-compliant, found to be in violation
of section 16.15.2 landlord registration. They have no landlord registration on file and they have several units that they're renting out. >> Yes. >> Rafael, explain. >> Three units.
>> They have three units instead of two. We're going to issue a violation for the third unit. >> Well, the third unit is not is not is not fully owned? >> Permit's on the line on on in the system that show that there's a it's a triplex. It shows that it's a duplex.
>> Okay. >> For now, we are just on this uh landlord case, but we will be moving for more. >> And the same with the landlord res- registration. It has to have the fire department go as well to the >> No. >> No. >> No. >> Only in the short-term >> Only in the >> Is that
>> We treat it more like a hotel. >> And that um can be done within 2 weeks. >> Yes. >> Any questions? Any questions? >> Nope. >> I have no questions. I'd like to make a motion on case CE-26-0126.
A violation has occurred. Assess a fine of $250, administrative costs of 250, have a secure landlord registration by June the 30th or $250 per day fine thereafter. >> I'll second. All in favor?
>> Aye. >> Aye. >> This motion passes 5-0. >> Wait, I'm moving to issue a violation for the third unit. >> Are we even permitted to have triplexes here? >> In this There There's a few.
But they >> It has to be in the zone. I mean, is there a duplex, triplex zone in one area? >> So, I would say this. They are some that were fathered grandfathered in because of the time when they were done, right?
>> they have to be grandfathered. You can't have a new one. Right. >> No, not in certain areas. >> Not in certain areas. >> I don't know if there's there's any There's any more now that I just said. >> No. >> Right. You're right. They're not allowed.
>> Mhm. >> This thing time. >> Right. >> Duplexes and single-family residences only in Biscayne Park moving forward. >> Makes sense. Did we vote on that? Or I second. >> Janice
>> Janice second, we voted. Okay, 5-0. >> Good. >> June 30. The next item is 7.5 and it's for the address 1107 Northeast 117 Street 117
Street. Case number CE-26-0009 B Park 110 LLC in care of their registered agent Z Val Val. We are bringing this for a progress report for the driveway that has not met
that does not meet approved design standards. Now, this property is up for demo. We have a demo permit on file and I would like to enter onto the record E E D M O -26-009. There's also a permit for new
construction E P B 26-00 8 2 8 2 8. Mhm. >> No, it's the construction with that in their permitting plans and
all that would have would have a drive a drive >> It will include a driveway. So, it's up to the board. You can either close this case or >> There's no point in holding it to a different >> I don't want to see another table or conference. >> No, no. No.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I just have one quick question. There is an email in this packet that references Please find the attached payment receipt case closed. >> Oh, no, that was >> Oops.
>> It was like correct. Oh, it was easy. >> It was a new one. >> But please feel good if nobody's got any further questions. >> No, and and and this this guy this owner also like painted the place when it was all bad shape and all that.
>> And he did a lot of landscaping. Tear out the landscaping that was overgrown. >> a question about that landscaping. All the that bamboo that's coming up, was that was that down to the ground and it grew up back that fast? >> Yes. >> It was it was down to the ground and I went there a month later and it's
halfway it's >> I can't believe it. I thought they >> Bamboo can grow at 12 in a day. >> Yeah. >> Really? >> Oh, yeah. >> With that, I'd like to make my motion to case number CE-26-0009 that a demo
permit has been approved and there's new construction um is is is being uh >> And away. >> issued and move to close this case. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Motion passes 5-0.
>> Next item is 7.6 for the same address and same property owner. Case number CE-26-0225. Um this was a violation of section 8.41 property maintenance for overgrowth. Uh we're happy to report that they are
in compliance with this case and asking the board to close it. >> Case number CE-26-0225 that the property is in compliance and move to close. >> I'll second. All in favor? >> Aye. >> Motion passes 5-0.
>> Next item is 7.9. It's for the address 11173 Griffin Boulevard. The case number is CE-25-0839. Church of the Resurrection. Found to be in violation of section 4.2.1
structural recertification of existing building 40 years or older. I'm happy to report that they are now in compliance. >> Close case. >> And asking the board to close the case, please.
>> Okay, in CE-25-0839 the property owner is now in compliance. Close the case. >> Second. >> All in favor? I. Any opposed? 5-0. >> The next item is 7.11. 7.11.
It's for the address 11308 Griffin Boulevard. Case number CE-25-0608. Renata Casiba and Pierre Itter Pratt. Uh we this was a violation um for the roof.
Um this case was moved up several times. Was tabled several times. Because of a roof violation and they were waiting on um their insurance. Uh we're happy to report that they're now in compliance. And asking the board to close the case. >> This is the one that we continued.
>> Yeah, it's been coming on since November of of 25. And we continued it one, two, three four times. >> And they got her over the finish line. >> Yes. >> Right. If there are no other questions, I'd like to make a motion on case number
25-0608. Property is now in compliance and move to close. >> I'll second. All in favor? >> I. >> Motion passes. 5-0. >> Next item 7.12. For the address 11920 Northeast 11th
Place. Case number CE-25-0178 for Alina Perez. Um found to be in violation of section 8.4.3.1. Property maintenance. They had the same issues that the previous case we heard with the you just heard had. Uh they
have applied for a permit. And um they are working with the building clerk through some paperwork. So they have made some progress. >> So we last heard this in April. They applied for the permit in June.
It was rejected. I would guess because of the >> paperwork. Is >> that has any of that paperwork come in yet? >> Some of it, yeah. >> contractor >> The contractor needs to be registered with Biscayne Park, so they they brought
that paperwork today. They brought in the paperwork today, so she's good. So, this permit will now move forward. >> The only thing I want to say, this is one of those situations that we get into frequently where you know, a case that takes a while, in fairness.
Permit's finally applied for. There's a glitch, we know. Anybody who's ever applied for a permit knows there can be a glitch. But, if we don't set parameters, if we don't set a sense of urgency,
these cases can languish because the easy part is giving a progress report. The tougher part is following through behind your contractor, working with the city. So, I I believe strongly we are at a time
where we have to set a deadline with a potential daily fine like we would do for anybody else. We can't do special treatment anymore now that this is out of litigation. >> Well, I believe the last time that we were here, it had been settled that
week, and I don't even believe she'd even met with a contractor. And I believe that this is the property that we had the spirited discussion, and and gave her because she was involved in active litigation. Uh continuance is up to the point where she got to the finish line and got the
thing settled, and we said we would give her the time that I think that you wanted to give her, which is until September or start doing some kind of retroactive fines. But, and And and and and well, that it would be permissible, it would be permissible
with what you were you were saying. And then I think that that I think that that vote was three to one, and then we gave her the continuance, and I think the very next one, if I remember correctly, was the one that we just closed uh because they were in the same predicament, and they and they got over
the finish line and got it done. So, now we're about what? We're How many days? We're We're We're a month or two from her settling the case. She's got a contractor. They've now registered, and now she's just got to get the roof on, right? >> She has to pull to come into compliance.
She doesn't have to have the roof on. She just has to have the permit. Anytime we have to Okay. I think the credibility of this board is critical to the whole code process, and I think we have to justify everything we
do. When this was in litigation, we could easily justify progress reports. Now that it's not out of litigation, unless we want to leave ourselves wide open to selective enforcement charges, we
have to do like we do. For everybody out there needs to be a deadline, and you're quite correct. I said September. We can give a September deadline. And if she comes into compliance and has that permit, there is no fine. If she
doesn't, then yes, just like we do. Special treatment, we can't anymore, Michael. We just can't. >> Well, nobody's to give a special treatment. The problem that I had the last time was whatever it was that you were where you were proposing would leave
open the room for possibility that she could have retroactive fines. If there's something in the language that gives her a time frame, if there if we give her a particular time frame, and uh you know, to to get something done that's reasonable to the extent that you get uh you know, you you get the
settlement, you get the money, and from however long it takes I don't know what the reasonable amount of time is to go from soup to nuts to get a new roof. That's what she needs, a new roof, right? What is the general time for that? >> I just got a new roof 4 years ago. It took me less than a month. And I was good with >> All we're talking about right now is for
her to secure a permit. >> Right. That's >> Now that litigation's over is to secure a permit. >> Correct. >> And with the village and all that would take within 60 to 90 days. >> Yes. >> So um >> And she's already >> By August, September. September is still a reasonable date. And Michael, I hear
what you were saying, but there wasn't anything in an order about any type of retroactive. >> No, but the >> It's been discussion, but it was never put in an order. >> discussion was I think that did didn't you say Doreen that there would be an ability to go retroactively apply fees if she didn't comply, Doreen?
>> That's not what I meant, Michael. I meant that an order of enforcement can be put in place, so we have a deadline, and the board did not have to assess fees. I think those were my exact words. >> Right, but you also said that they could retroactively apply fines. >> If. >> If. >> If.
>> Is that so the answer to that question is yes, right? >> Yes, Michael. >> Okay. So if there's something if there's something in the language that says that that if has been removed, then I'm okay with that. >> Cuz if she doesn't comply, Michael, after all this time that you've given um
the the resident, if it so happens that she doesn't put the roof on her house in September, what would you suggest then that the board does? >> Well, I I would suggest then that she doesn't get it by time certain, whatever and if she's been had 60, 120 days at
that point. You know, it you know, give her to the next meeting. If she doesn't, then you can do daily fines and do all that kind of stuff, but it would be proactive, not retroactive. And and under the scenario that was that was dealt with the last time and I don't I don't think you were here. You said that if
>> If. >> they could we could as a board and I just didn't think that that was right. If that is removed from the equation, then that's fine. Give her until September. Well, but it's but it's but it's possible and that's the thing. If you remove that >> Just have Can we have a motion that may
answer everybody's question? >> Yes. >> I'll make a motion there is just in case number >> Exactly. >> In case number CE25-0178 a violation has occurred. Give the property owner until September 28th
to come into compliance by obtaining a roofing permit. If not, as of September 29th, a daily fine of $250. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> May I make a comment?
Oh, you go ahead and finish the motion. >> Well, we finished. >> It's done. >> Okay. >> We need to vote. >> I just wanted to make a comment and and for Michael to consider this that we've brought this case so many times to the board and we even have never assessed administrative cost. And it's >> Right, because she came in if each time
and told us what the progress was and each time we said, "Okay, well, you're in litigation. The wheels of justice grind slowly." >> Vanessa, however, did her work. And Vanessa has to be paid for her work. >> [laughter] >> Vanessa needs to get all the stuff in my
iPad. >> Okay, let's let me let's >> I just wanted to mention that, you know, we cannot do selective enforcement. We have to >> I understand and and the problem that I had was the fact that there was going to there was a possibly a retroactive applicability.
Whether we would or not is is a is a aside. Right. >> Attorney said, "We actually could have been assigning fines all along. We didn't. It's up to us. Your concern
is valid except you could help control whether or not that ever happened." And far as I'm concerned, it wasn't going to happen. You wouldn't let it happen. So, the likelihood of her getting retroactive fines >> It was very But the difference between then and now is that we is that it's
it's there is no retroactive applicability that's even there. >> active. My only worry is there's someone out there with a similar situation that might get a completely different outcome in this um kind of meeting. And that's where I we would I personally
>> And the main reason is because this this property owner actually was very cooperative. >> Great. >> provided the information over and over and over again. So, I'm I'm not >> We're not here to penalize.
>> at of of or having it tabled for the number of times we have. >> when it happened. >> Right. >> When you don't instill a sense of urgency, it's it's not a fun process working through all the >> Things can go south very quickly.
>> But each case is a case-by-case. >> It's case-by-case, yes. >> That's right. Wait a minute. Just on this case, because I hear what you're saying, but on this case, they actually had she had dates she was going before the courts, given us time frames. That's right.
That's why Yeah. Well, >> All right. It's a case-by-case. >> Yeah. >> So, do you think to the vote. Hang >> is on the case. >> Hang on. >> All right. >> Okay. >> They they both >> Septem- >> The motion was? >> This one again. >> I vote. >> Pass.
>> No. September 28th. And so who seconded? >> it was 29th. >> It's 28th. If not, then the 29th. >> Oh, I see. Okay. >> Fail. >> Okay. >> Fine starting the 29th.
>> And we can ask for an extension if she's not finished by September. >> Okay. >> Tell you I >> Perfect. >> fine in less than 30 days. >> But anyway, >> Okay. We're good. >> And with were all the cases we brought before the board tonight.
>> All right. >> Minutes. >> Minutes. >> Did everybody read the minutes? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> On 7.6 it says the property owner, it's the church is the owner. >> Right. >> So, I would really prefer it to say the
property representative. >> Yeah, agreed. >> In 7.6. >> Any other corrections, changes? >> Get that. 7.10 Javier Estaris, it begins with an I, not a U. Spelling of his
>> Oh, right. Thank you. >> And that's all I got. Good job, guys. >> You. >> All right. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes with those two corrections? >> Uh, I'll make a motion to approve with the two corrections mentioned. Is there
a second? >> Second. All in favor? >> I. >> Those motion passes 5-0. Okay. Everybody remember the disclosure forms. >> I did it. >> Yep, completed. >> Yes. Yes,
I can never remember. >> One, I think it's one, it's the easy one. Go online and >> Yes. >> You can upload You can accept if you're if nothing's changed from the one then all you do is just previous previous year and
>> You said >> Yeah, and um, it'll just upload everything you had from the previous year. You review it and you accept. >> Oh, I didn't do that. >> I did my first. >> Cuz look, what I had to do last time like I had to go to my 401k and do all the individual stocks.
>> Wait, that one. No, no, no, don't do that. Don't do that. >> There's Oh, well, you don't want to do that one then. Just do the simple one. >> No, I want to do the simple one. I That's the one I did when I first did it. >> Ooh. No. >> Yeah. The list them all, right? >> No.
>> Fine. >> I don't have a lot. >> It'll be like a couple. You just need them out of state. >> I need what? >> You just need them out of state. >> Yeah, I know. I mine, too. Save mine, too. It's a 401k. Oh. I went to each single I got like a
million of them in there. >> You can you know If If you If you have some >> Blind trust. Yeah. Yeah, and that, too. Okay. >> All right. We had some >> Guys >> We had a couple discussions. >> Or discussion on um
trash and garbage wrong day. This came up at the commission meeting. A couple of people and one commissioner in particular discussing about what is essentially and we've talked about it, too. An ongoing problem with garbage out on the wrong day. >> With what garbage?
>> Or trash and garbage? >> Garbage. >> And garbage cans that become permanent fixtures. I mean, you did explain some things that night. Would you mind reiterating some of what you said? >> You know it's the right way. >> No.
>> Oh. >> Connection. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. >> That's a surprise. >> Well, one of the things Dorina I I Please feel free to tell me if I misunderstood. In talking about
the admin citation, you I seem to understand that part of the problem is the size of the um fine, nobody cares. Well, for sure. That's right. Which if it works is wonderful, but my
concern is that not everyone is going to do electrical work without a permit. Just cuz your neighbor does doesn't mean you're going to copy them. But something like trash and garbage wrong day, garbage cans are the permanent fixtures. I My neighbor doesn't have to come home from work and put the can away, why
should I? And part of what I see on the admin citation is you could issue one every day for a while that stacks up out there. So at least it goes up. And I realize to put a lien on a property for $25 might
seem bizarre, but we also include the filing fees. Yes. >> And administrative. >> Okay, exactly. And we're Mhm, got it. >> You would bring it if you were to That's to the point where you wanted to follow the lien, you would bring that to them.
>> Right. Or if they were contesting it. >> It but but I know. This is You know, garbage day day after >> Yes. Yes. Yes.
>> Mhm. The day before that's where >> Yeah, well, they're pretty much putting it out >> Mhm. >> almost on that Monday or Tuesday. >> Exactly. Exactly. Yep. Mhm. >> Yeah, you have no choice. Right. Right.
You know, something I thought was rather interesting. It was suggested that staff puts out more letters, you know, informing everyone. And I seem to remember you saying that you've done letters, and then you get people unhappy for getting letters.
It's like Yes, to me education should be number one, and citations should be far down the line. But you've I've seen people in meetings literally complain that they got letters. I mean, yeah. Okay. And
everybody have a >> Motion to adjourn. >> Second. >> Thank you. >> Well, wait, wait, hang on. Why don't we If you're sure you're not going to be here in And why don't we vote on Judy's absence? Why don't we vote on Judy's absence? Uh I make a motion to approve Judy's
July absence. >> Do we have a reason? >> He was >> [laughter] >> I I