there. Good evening everyone. I would like to call to ordering Park Code Compliance Board meeting. Today's Wednesday, January 21st. Time is 6 pm. If the clerk would please >> Janie Anderson,
>> Dale Benton, >> here. >> Judy Hammer. Roda Bontos. Michael Lonard >> here. >> Darin C Grant. Vanessa Cherry present. Raphael Gutierrez. This is a meeting of the village of
Biscane Park Code Compliance Board. The board is authorized pursuant to chapter 14 of the villages 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. We are volunt we volunteer our
time and are not paid for our services. The purpose of each hearing is to give any alleged violators the opportunity to contest the decision of the code compliance officer which resulted in the issuance of a notice of violation and to determine whether a violation of the
villages code has occurred or is occurring. We are not authorized to dismiss violations based on hardships, ignorance or the fact 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 villages 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, 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 payment 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 code as charge. 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 witness 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're reminded this board is quasi judicial and giving false testimony can be penalized.
>> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that a testimony you about to give would be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> Are you talking to me? >> Hello. >> Yes. Is asking
me something. >> Hello is on. >> Did you swell in? >> His audio is not on. >> You Somebody muted me on that side. >> Can you hear me? >> I hear you now. Hear me now.
>> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yep. >> Okay. >> We have any additions, deletions, changes, etc.
>> Yes. I can't >> save any We were going to ask the board actually that can be moved to the end as well um in issuing orders uh to consider giving
60 to 90 days for cases that are going through PND just because the we have new staff and cases are taking a little longer. 90 days >> 60 to 90 days on orders that have to go to PND.
We have new staff and cases are taking a little longer to go through the process. Okay. In other words, where we had been given basically a month in a lot of cases. You want us to push it out the time being the 60?
It makes sense. I mean, there's no point in issuing an order and making a tight date that you share with us now in advance. We know we can't do >> and then we were also going to ask to review orders from the last hearing, but we can do that at the end.
>> We'll do that at the end. explained to Dale and Michael what we were trying to achieve and how we have to kind of tell that simple form. If there are no other changes can we do we don't always do things in agenda
order but if no one has any objection I would like to do six first. Good evening. My name is Dorian Grant. I'm the code compliance director for the village of Biscane Park. The first case on the agenda is in
section 6, old business. It's 6.1 for the address 821 Northeast 120th Street. The case number CE25-0795. uh property owner is BP 120 LLC in care of a registered agent Robin Winer. This
is a request to appeal fines. The references board of enforcement dated December 17th, 2025. Um they were assessed a $250 uh administrative fee and a $250 violation fine. The violation was uh for
offense section 11.6.7. the permit had expired for the temporary fence that's on the property. >> This is where I wanted to take it first. I don't understand why this is happening. As I just read a little bit ago, any
appeals at Florida Circuit Court, they don't come back to us. >> Well, it was a it was a penalty that was levied and a misappropriation of the actual violation. I ended up >> identify yourself and your relationship to the property. >> My name's
>> Give us a minute, please. I want to hear from the board. >> Okay. >> Again, I'm not understanding why this was brought back when Florida statutes are very clear. Any appeal goes to circuit court,
>> right? We are not to hear the I'm sorry to take action in this particular case. We are past that now. >> Well, I mean it doesn't sound like we have jurisdiction is what is is what the
we don't have jurisdiction because it's beyond us. it goes to the next realm which would be circuit court or maybe I mean I think I'm not sure if it's a if it's a question that allows it to go to circuit court because circuit court usually has a monetary you know floor
you know I'm sure it's county court or how it works >> yeah but it was mislevied against a violation that didn't occur that's the issue it's not Not that I'm appealing it. It shouldn't have been levied in the first place. And that's and you levied
it on a violation that I cured by going into the office for 3 hours when they figured out what was the right right course of action >> application. >> Yeah. No, I'm not. And talking about the the extension of the existing permit. It
was a renewal filing. It was a one-page filing to just continue the permit. Well, from what I'm seeing, >> and I paid a fee to do that. This is post you guys leving a violation for the wrong application of a violation.
>> Heard this case last month. There was no evidence to the contrary. >> Yeah. Because I didn't know >> the permit was expired. >> It's not expired. It wasn't expired. It was a final permit. Final inspection was done and all they needed was a an
extension. We're going to go around in circles. >> There is >> I mean one I didn't even know you levied a fine on me. You told me January 21st I'd have to cure it and then I get a notice in the mail I got levied a fine. >> So I'm >> because there was a violation. That's
why the fine. >> All right. >> Wouldn't there be another I I I think that what we're kind of constrained right now because according to the rules there's another >> venue that that needs to to be in. But my question is to Dorene is
>> why did we put it on the agenda? >> Well, no, if if you know and I I I hear what the homeowner is saying. My question is, you know, and he says, I guess it's 500 bucks, right? Total and he wants to and he doesn't think that it's it's should have been levied, but
wouldn't he have another alternative to try to do a a fine reduction and they can come and argue that case? um administrative cost and the violation fine cannot be >> okay. >> I mean, I paid a fee of $165 to just
renew the permit. It was literally one page filing and you're violating me for something that I shouldn't have been violated for, even according to the building department because I had a final inspection, final permit. >> All the documentation supplied to us,
everything we heard last month, I stand by my vote. >> All right. I I didn't know you levied a fine on me last month. You told me I was extended to the 21st. Again, a 30-day extension. >> Today's the 21st. I need another 60 days.
>> Were very clear last month. We're very detailed. >> Really? >> And yes. >> Were you here last month? >> I was. I was here. There was two violations. >> What's the >> Yeah, you gave me till the 21st and then I got a
>> You were very clear. There was a $250 citation violate >> with two cases >> and an admin fine. >> All right, we're going around in circles, folks. Um, >> can I request an extension, please? Another 60 days to get my permit in for the demo because we're running into the
same issue. None of the utilities can get the work done. I've been CCing Miss Grant on the email so she sees the responses. Today was my due date. As far as far as this case, there's nothing further.
>> So, they're going to send me violations now for the the 21st today on the demo. >> Explain, sir. So, for this particular case that you appealed, I needed you to hear this answer from the board. I could have explained myself blue at the counter. You wouldn't have understood. So, what
they're saying is the appeal cannot be heard here. You would have to appeal to the circuit court >> to the circuit court which has a $15,000 minimum requirement. >> It's higher than that now. That's what I'm saying. I don't know. I don't know. >> I got to sue in small claims court to get back.
>> Well, I'm not sure because I and I don't know if if an ordinance violation gives you circuit court jurisdiction. Like in federal court, if it's a federal question, you can sue in federal court if it has to do with the federal statute, for example. So, I don't know how that works, but monetarily it would
go small claims up to like eight grand and then county court now up to like 30 or 50 grand. >> So, do I get a credit at least for the 165 I paid for the one-page renewal of my permit? >> No, your permit had expired. You needed to extend it.
>> I guess that's debatable because the building department said permits once they're final, they don't expire. >> No, the the the temporary fence permits do expire. The other violation was due today which was the filing of the demo. >> Yes sir. There are two violations if
you're if the board remembers >> this. >> Yes. I was just going to explain to him. There were two cases that were brought before the board. This case and there was another case for the roof that has caved in into the building. Those two cases, that case and this case will be brought back before the board. We didn't
schedule it for the extension. The um his uh compliance date is today. I've seen the correspondence like he says between him and the building department. They are working and reviewing his permits. We we're going to come back and ask for an extension from today.
>> You can notice >> because the case is not on the agenda. >> I know, but I don't live near here. So, it's like >> efficient. It's like >> Mr. You will not be penalized. We will bring those two cases back and we will
ask for the extension retroactively. >> Can't deal with that tonight. It has to be properly noticed, properly agendaized. This is >> your request for the appeal is all we can deal with. And my motion is we take
no further action on items. >> I mean, you do want a lawsuit. It's crazy. You're you're finding somebody for something that the building department is saying is not an applicable fine. I mean, it's just >> I'm take I'm taking some staff and from what we heard last month,
>> you'll come back next month with your request for an extension. >> This tonight, we are denying going any further. >> Okay, I >> have a second. >> A second. >> All in favor? >> Any opposed? >> Motion passes 5.
The next case is in section 7 of the agenda and it's item number 7.14. It's for the address 11121 Griffin Boulevard. Case number CE-25-0656. The property owner is 11121 Griffin
Boulevard in care of their registered agent Q and Q Business Services LLC. They were found to be in violation of section 5.7 safety requirements. They had a basketball hoop that was uh placed near FPL lines and we violated them and
reminded them uh to remove it because it was a safety uh issue. They are now in compliance. 7.14. >> So they're in compliance. They move the basketball hoop. >> Make a motion to close the case.
>> I second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion passes 5-0. Thank you. >> Uh I we already removed the the basketball hoop. >> We're good. We're good. >> We agreement. Saw the pictures and said
>> it's Oh, good. >> Just don't in the same place. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> I'm sorry. Who was my second? >> The next item is in section seven of the agenda and it's 7.10.
7.10. is for the address 910 Northeast 118th Street. It's case number C-25-0745 for Sherry L. Coat. We're asking for an order of enforcement in this case found to be in violation of section 163.1
exterior wall painting. The exterior wall is in need of paint. >> Yes. Um I'm having trouble hearing. Ma'am have any discussion first and >> oh >> okay okay >> any questions
>> um the main question has u I see where there was a notice of violation on the uh September the 10th um was there any uh correspondence >> yes we were in comm >> from the homeowner >> we were in communication with um Sherry she has experienced some hardships she
she lost her husband who used to live in that house and uh she's been talking to uh realtors. Um she's trying to sell the house. However, we got complaints from neighbors that the house is not maintained. She did get the property
cut. However, the house has not been painted as of today. >> Is that the is that what's before us? Is that the house painting or is it the roof? >> The first time we're bringing it before the board. >> Okay. Cuz am I looking at the right one? Because I thought it said dirty roof.
Roof. SE 7.10. >> Oh, one10. I thought it was 01. I'm sorry. Okay. Oh, okay. Sorry, guys. I was on 01, not 10. Okay. >> Ma'am, if you would I your name and
identify your relationship to this property. >> Uh, yes. My name is Sher Cody and I'm the owner of the property. And as um Oh, okay. I'm having trouble hearing you guys, too. I'm being fitted for a hearing aid, so >> trust me. >> Okay.
>> I can understand. >> Okay. All right. Anyway, um my as Dorene had mentioned, I had been in contact with her. My husband passed away of 53 years. So, um we were dealing with an Alzheimer's issue. Um and the property
did go downhill. Um I was not able to maintain it. Um, however, I'm in the process right now of, uh, working with an investor who wants to buy the property. Uh, so I obviously didn't want
to paint my whole house. Um, although I did offer, you can only see the front porch. The house is uh, landscaped nicely. You can't see the rest of it. That's the only part that's really um,
ugly, I guess you'd say. And I'm willing to paint that and touch it up with the same paint that was approved the last time it was painted um until it can be sold, but I really don't want to have to paint the whole house. It's just going to be demolished. So,
>> when is the uh when is the sale that with the investor going to take place? >> When is the sale with the investor going to take place? >> In negotiation right now. His name is Rodrigo Pintos. He's bought other properties in here and sold a few recently. So, we're we're in we're
having talks right now negotiating the price and also Nancy um Dson who you all know well um she also has a couple that are interested. So, we're kind of having not a bidding war but they're sort of talking with each other. So,
>> yes. I was just wondering in the interim about pressure cleaning. >> I was going to say yes >> because you'd have to pressure clean anyway. You can't over all of this, >> right? Okay. >> It'll it'll start to peel right away. >> Um
>> just a suggestion. Totally agree. >> Mind suggesting have this um uh brought back in a month. >> That's uh uh have it. >> Yes. first pressure cleaned and then to actually it' be a month and a half. Our next meeting is
>> way too early >> 24th I think. >> Yeah, because I don't think Miss Sherry would get out there and pressure clean it on their own. >> Well, I might have to. No. No. I have some grown children that'll help me. Yeah. >> Is that your motion? >> Yes. Um well, if there are no other
questions or anything, uh then I'll make a motion on case number CE-25-0745. Uh that violation has occurred but give the property owner due to hardship and u pending uh sale of property uh till
March hearing March O hearing to have the No, 30 days. What would that be? February 20 >> February the make it the 23rd the day before a meeting.
>> February 23rd to have the uh property pressure cleaned and uh brought back before us with hopefully a pressure clean. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I
oppose. Motion passes 5. Ma'am, you understand we've we've given you until February 23rd to at least get a pressure cleaned. >> Okay. >> You can't just go paint like they'll explain. You can't paint it any pressure clean. Then we're going to ask that this
case come back to us in February for an update. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> That sounds reasonable. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you a lot. >> Good luck. >> Need to look sort of decent. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Please. Sorry for your loss.
>> Yes. >> Next item is in section 7 still and it's 7.8. This is for the address 821 Northeast 109th Street. It's for case number C-25-0947. Peter Lobenov and Danielle Ayala.
for an order of enforcement found to be in violation of section 16.14.1 double fee permits. They installed a construction fence without first obtaining permits. >> Yeah, my friend my first name is Rainer.
Just a second. Has a permit been obtained yet? >> There's no permit, but the fence is still up. >> Okay. >> Is there a permit for the work that's being done? >> Yes, the work is fully permitted. Don't Don't you have to get a fence
permit? Does that like form follow? I don't get how they can even get one without the other. >> This particular case, I believe when they applied for the permit, they were only doing interior work. However, they have a major addition that they've uh converted the garage or they just adding
on to the house. And once we noticed that um there was an addition and there was work being done outside of the interior, we issued the violation for them to uh put up the fence right away. We asked them to put up the fence and come back and apply for a permit after the fact, but they haven't come back and
applied for >> Yeah. Yeah, we are. I'm I'm Rainer. I'm >> sorry. Do you have a contractor, sir? >> Uh yeah. Yeah. I'm representing the contractor. Yeah. Yeah. >> Wait. So you're you're not uh the owner? >> We not I'm not the owner. Oh yeah. >> Need your name and your relationship to
the property. >> Okay. So, my first name is Raino Cabayo. I'm represent the general contractor. As like as like they said, we have permits for this property. We're building the property right now on addition. >> And you you have not applied for the
fence permit. >> So, yeah, we were uh we were we're going to try to apply the this I think last week or this week. So pretty much that's that's our plan. So I just wanted to to to see with you guys what's the next step there. Just apply online, right? >> Correct.
>> Okay. >> I do see where the notice of violation was for December the 4th with a pull the permit by December 21st. Now we're already in January what? The 21st. >> Yeah. 21st.
>> Today's the 21st. The compliance date is December 31st. Okay. >> Anybody like to make any other questions? >> I I have one question was kind of off topic, but is is the addition is that how it's going to look like the picture
that's on the front or is that just a general picture? >> No, no, no. Actually, it's not it's not it's not going to be as it's just as per plan, you know. >> Okay. That picture is not >> Exactly. That's just a >> I just want to bet with my wife. >> That's a mockup for another project. Yeah. >> All right. I that's what I said, but my
wife Yeah. said otherwise. So now I'll have to bring that home. >> No other questions. I'd like to make a motion in case number CE-25-097 that a violation has occurred uh the property owner to uh have a fully issued
um permit by February 24th. Looks like their second date. >> Yeah. >> Construction term. They only have to apply for it. >> Ah, you're right. You're right. >> So, um, >> still I'd like to give them a couple weeks >> by
Pardon. >> PNZ has to approve a construction. >> I do. >> Yes. >> Okay. Well, let me see. >> Yeah, we have our architect working on it also. If you guys want to, you know, I
March the uh >> I was thinking for February 24th. That will be the second meeting in February, >> right? >> Yeah. When is when is our meeting? >> Our meeting is the 24th. >> But aren't we supposed to be giving PNZ like an extra amount of time because of the new people that she said at the
beginning of the meeting? >> This is pretty simple. You're looking at plans that have to be approved and >> Right. But even though it's simple, they still have to go through the same process like >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Michael, for reminding. >> All right. Um, give them uh until
give them until uh violation has occurred uh property owner to obtain a fully issued uh permit by March the 24th. If not, uh a daily fine of $250. in addition a uh
fine of 250 and a uh administrative cost of so in short I'm going to rephrase I know I was rambling I messed up last month um violation occurred $250 fine $250 administrative uh fee um have a
fully issued obtained permit by March the 24th if not a $250 per day fine thereafter I'll second All in favor? I >> motion passes 5-0. >> I got one more question for you. >> Yes, sir.
>> What's going to be in that addition? >> Um, yes. Uh, it's a master. Master bedroom. >> A master bedroom. >> Master bedroom. Yeah. >> With this bathroom. Yeah. >> I wasn't sure if that was a kitchen or a bedroom. >> No, just a master. >> Very close to my house, so I see it a lot. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. More board meetings. The next item is 8.2 section 8 of the agenda. Item 8.2. Address 11623 Northeast 11th place. Case
number AC22-120. Mr. Charles Francois and his wife were found to be in violation of chapter 5.6.1 off street parking. They had a driveway that did not meet the design standards. They are however in compliance now.
Um their violation run fines up to $130,000. Uh they're asking for a fine reduction. They are offering to pay $600. Um we are also recommending the same
amount. >> You're recommending the same amount. >> That's correct. We're recommending 600. >> And everything is done now, right? Looks >> It's done. And they did have some issues and but they they did they worked really hard to bring the property into
compliance >> and it looks great. >> Yeah. >> And that's what we want. >> Well, in short, the property owner has been um cooperative with >> cooperative. It did take some time, but they they were very cooperative. We they
they came to village hall and resolved everything that needed to be resolved. They are now in compliance. >> And I note that the homeowner, you know, took responsibility and had some issues and um
you know, also wrote an addendum as well advising that they completed all the work and got the final inspections. >> Any other questions? I will respect what staff says you do
and I will go along with that. But I have to also say in a case that took well over two years to come into compliance and came back in front of us multiple times. I have a problem with this. I really do.
>> I I >> the cost of the city for the multiple times it came in front of us and for over two years to come into compliance
>> but unfortunately not all I'm sorry sir into the microphone if you would. >> Okay. >> Was wait before before you do was was that a motion or were you >> Okay. Well, I want to I want to answer to unfortunately not every time not everybody have the same financial
facility to do things you know >> into the microphone you have to be recorded. >> Okay. I said unfortunately not all the time not everybody have the same capabilities financially to do things you know I understand I was wrong I took responsibility for it you know and I've
been spoken to Mr. to everybody and I told them this is the problem but I will resolve it finally I resolve it it's not that I wanted it to be to stay that way there was problem but finally I did resolve it you know
>> will have to give you immense credit you have turned that property into one of the prettiest homes in the city you have done overall an elegant job >> thank you >> very impressive >> I even took your out of puff and put in front of my house.
>> I've walked past your house numerous times. I think I've told you. >> Beautifully done. >> Thank you. >> That's much appreciated. >> Thank you. >> So, do we have a motion? >> Um, >> no. >> I have no other questions. >> I can make a motion that we accept the
homeowner's offer of $600 and fine reduction. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I by date. >> Oh, by date. Day by date by the 30th January.
30th of January. >> What today? >> Um, today is the 20th. You're giving them 10 days to pay. >> 30. >> I can pay it now. >> Oh, you can? >> No. Can't pay it now.
>> 10 days. You can pay within 10 days. Yes. And yes, >> the 30th. >> We get We need a specific date. What date are we doing? >> 30. >> 30th. >> Okay.
>> All right. So, we have a motion and a second to accept the 600 pay by >> January 30. Motion P. All in favor? >> I. >> Motion passes 5. >> And I greatly appreciate it, Mr. >> Thank you. >> We do too. Looks great. Thank you. Good
luck. >> Next item is in section seven and it's uh item. Did we do this one? No. What? Okay. 7.15. 7.15 for the address 11550
Northeast 11th place. case number is CE-25-0883 Hector Reglerero. >> Yes. >> Basa regular. We asking for an order of of enforcement found to be in violation of section
11.6.7A fence maintenance. They have a wooden fence located on the south side of the property that shows signs of discoloration and is not plum. It's not straight.
There is no permit in the system and it's still non-compliant >> and this will need to go in front of PNC. Am I correct? >> Correct. >> I also know there's quite a few boards that are just um broken.
>> That's why that's going to be more than just >> pressure washing a stain. Yeah, >> exactly. >> That's going to be P&Z for sure. All right, questions from the board. >> Sir, if you would identify yourself and
your relationship to the property and >> how you doing to all my name is Hector Regto. I'm the owner of the property. >> Would you like to explain this situation? >> I would like just to uh why why can I explain it is out of code and I would like to have just two more months to fix
it. >> Yeah. fixing it. By that you mean putting in a new fence? >> Well, I won't put a new fence. I will replace some some of the woods because uh from my perspective, I think uh the fence is straight on level and you can see it from anywhere. It is straight,
level, standing perfectly, but some uh pieces of wood are broken. use the pictures that we're looking at. >> I mean, uh, I'm going to be surprised if you can simply fix it. Um, there appears
to be a significant amount of damage. Either way, they'll have to go through building department. >> We will um encourage them to show a picture of the We'll encourage you to show a picture of the fence to the building department. They'll let you
know if it's repairable or you'll have to go through the process of replacing it. >> Okay. What about Raphael coming home and see it again? >> Raphael is is not a building inspector. He's a code inspector. >> Oh. Oh, okay. Okay. >> Also, isn't it if it's more than 50%
disreed one dimensional, but it is lean. Can I see what you're Can I see what you're looking at? >> All this >> and uh that is not
>> it's in the pictures with >> Hey, I only cases like I said um >> and and look at the pictures. I I I'll do my best. >> Broken top things at the top. >> Yes. Yes. >> I say this is because I have a fence. >> No, no, no, no, no. Yeah.
>> Is coming before PND on this coming Monday to be completely redone, but that's my fence, not yours. You said there was not an existing permit for this. So, you already have a
I mean, if you're going to repair a fence that's not permitted to begin with, you might need to get a permit. >> Okay. But once again, that's not before us. It's just the property maintenance. I mean, the fence maintenance. >> So, >> I mean, could it be so old that there's
not a permit that can be found? I mean, so that was put up without a permit at some point in the past. >> No, we would be talking about a permit for now, >> right? Oh, okay. Okay. Right. But >> there was no original permit for the
fence. Okay, that's what I was wondering. >> So, the concern is now, >> right? >> Okay. >> I said, wouldn't it be best? >> That's what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to replace some of the woods that are
broken and I will pressure clean it myself as I do all around my house. I do my landscaping. I take care of the property myself and that's what I was wondering to to do. Nothing too big. >> There's nothing further
would like to make a motion. >> Make a motion on case number CE-25-0883. uh that a violation has occurred, assess a fine of $250 and a straight fee of $250
given until the March the 24th to bring the property uh bring the fence into compliance. >> Second >> or a $250 per day fine thereafter. And what that means is if you have to go
before PNZ, it's giving you two months in which to um submit the necessary paperwork to go before planning and zoning. >> Okay. >> We have a second just for discussion.
>> Second >> to come into compliance by pulling a permit >> or bringing the fence into repair. Yeah. >> Okay. >> What compliance is this? >> My compliance is
yeah bringing bringing the fence into uh up to code or having a fully issued permit. >> That's fair. >> We second the whole duty.
>> All in favor? >> I. Any opposed? Motion passes 5. >> And thank you. That that was Thank you. Thank you. >> Look, nice. last year. >> All right. Good evening all and thank you for that.
>> It's from the board. >> Wait, let me just catch up. >> Sir, if you would identify yourself and your relationship to the property. Yes, my name is Clayton Powing and I am the property owner. >> I'm seeing that a courtesy notice was
given in June with a July compliance date and a notice of violation in September with an October date. Has there been any communication between Mr. Dingle and to the what?
Last month. Yes. We're working on seven months now. >> It's been a while. >> It has. And I appreciate your patience. And since then, I have procure a painter to come and paint the house. I even have swatches. And I don't know this is the place for this, but um uh
>> it's not our purview, but it's nice that you have that. >> And the gentleman told me he had me plan for March to paint the house. So, I already submitted the paperwork through the email system. Yes. To the point.
>> So is you mean the permit to seeking a permit? >> Yes, I believe. >> It's been approved. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> It's like automatic. Yeah. >> Questions. >> No. Uh, also you can you can go uh and
get the colors already approved at the city hall. >> Yes, >> exactly. >> Yes. Um, >> there is a batch of colors that is an automatic approval. You don't have to wait for >> Okay. Uh, when I went to plan on, they told me any light color pretty much it's
go is good to go. So, I don't know. I guess I'll have to come sometime during business hours to show you the color that um, you know, I would like to paint my property with. So, Okay. This Uhhuh.
Okay. Okay. And then I guess make a copy of this and upload it to the Okay. >> Can you upload a picture now? >> Yeah. >> So, >> is it is it sergeant? Is it Colonel? What is >> No, just deputy. >> Deputy Dingle, right?
>> Yes. So, uh, and you guys were in communication, but he had his work took him away last month. >> Yes, she has. >> Yeah. >> Well, um,
>> no, no, no, not >> well. I mean, I I walk in the morning. I see him rushing out in the morning and then he got and then he got like went from the police car to the to the detective car. So, I don't know what's going on, but >> So, yes.
So, as you um are aware, we recently transition over to the sheriff office. So, we're in that three-year transition period. So, it's a little crazy cuz we never been in a elected position. So, the sheriff, you know, making sure that her constituents are happy. We're doing
a lot of stuff like um I believe when we had the last meeting I'm not sure the prime minister of Israel was here if it was all hands on deck. Not saying that's an excuse but been a little busy. >> Realistically speaking to be honest when
would you anticipate being able to have the property painted? >> I say by March like the painters. >> Yes. >> We always have to put a date. >> Um I would say um second week of March. give you ask because he said March but do you have a date? >> You have to make a date. >> If I had to make a date
>> says March, it may be middle of March before we can start. So what what do >> Okay, put me down tentively March 9th and then I get a confirmations a little more time. Give it March 16th. >> Okay. And then um if anything >> some wiggle room.
>> Okay. >> Or maybe the March >> when's the March meeting? 24th. Um, in the case of CE-25-0492, a violation has occurred.
Assess a $250 fine. Wave the admin fine. Give the property owner until March 16th to come into compliance. Or else a $250 daily fine. I'll second from Stephan because I'd like to see that for this that if you
see that your contract for your painter is going to be a little bit later, please request an extension. >> Okay. >> Okay. Because if not, they'll start at $250 time. >> Okay. >> And um just an FY
doing it have the driveway clean. >> Yes. >> No, that's a part of the whole thing. idea. You don't want to come back. >> That that that'll be another thing. >> No. Yeah. So, I spoke to the painter about that. He's also going to pressure clean the driveway as well. Yes.
>> Okay. All in favor? >> I. Any opposed? Motion passes. 5-0. >> Okay. >> Detective. >> That's okay. >> Thank you so much, sir. And thank you for your service. >> Well, thank you and um also for your patience. I know it's long overdue. I am
aware of that. And if and if you run into any issue, please get a hold of staff. >> Yes. >> Come back for an extension. >> Okay, we'll do. >> All right. Thank you. >> Have a good night. >> You too. >> 7.13. It's for the address 10916 Northeast 9th
Court. The case number is CE25-0870 for Glenn R. Wexel asking for an order of enforcement found to be in violation of chapter 5.6.7 design standards for off- street parking. The driveway is missing an approach. Um, we have a
representative on Zoom. >> I'm here well as well. Glenn Wexo, I'm the owner of the property. >> Can you hear me? >> Oh, the property owners. Okay. >> Yeah, I'm here. Oh, thank you, sir. >> So, shall I start?
>> Sir, if you would, uh, yes, go ahead. Can you turn your camera on, please? >> Sure. Hold on a second. There we go. Hello. >> Thank you. Um, yeah, I've been in the park since
1999 and probably 15 years ago, I had code enforcement come by and they had mentioned uh something about driveways and and uh and the lady, I don't have her name right here. If I went back in my files, I travel a lot. I'm not in
Miami right now. Um they had said that before I had bought the property uh the people or before I before I acquired it um on the swale they had done a rock like a rock um kind of a
driveway so not a driveway but so you could park on the swale. They had done that somewhere in the 70s or so which I was informed. And then it has it's one of those older buildings built in 53 and it has um you know the the two strips
that go out and uh this is the first that I have heard about it in like 15 years about this. So um I don't know if there's I mean that's that's what that's what I was told uh by one of the former uh code people that so and since it was
built in 53 it would have been um grandfathered in. That's only I know about it. >> They're only as far as the ribbons. >> Okay. >> It still requires an approach. We have had multiple cases in front of us since
the enactment of the more current driveway ordinance. Always had a driveway ordinance, just a current one that have had to put approaches in. Their ribbons are grandfathered in. The lack of an approach, sir, is not. >> Okay.
Uh, so how does what's how do I go about doing that? >> I'm gonna ask you to pause just a second. >> Sure. >> Code, please step in. >> Yes, we did check in with PND and the chairperson of PND uh gave us some um information exactly what you say that
they have to have the approach. The ribbon is grandfathered in, but they have to have an approach. >> But let me let me let me ask a question. If if the ribbon goes to that to that um I thought when the ribbon goes to that
that part, you know, the uh the gravel driveway, that that would would have been uh eliminated. >> Well, that's a whole another issue. That gravel that's there is not is not a proper um >> not a proper approach. >> Okay. So, the approach So, the so the
concrete has to go directly to the um to the to the road. That's correct. >> Okay. >> The approach has to go to the road and if you're going to use gravel, there are specific >> Can't use gravel. My writing has to use
>> has to use the same material. It has to be concrete. >> Yeah. >> Sorry. Concrete. >> Can I do that? Can I can I do that uh like owner owner builder or do I have to get a contractor or what's the process of doing that? >> You you would need to speak sir with the building department. That's not our
perview. Okay. >> I can't hear that the other person talking. >> It would have to go in front of planning and design board has to be reviewed by them >> just to just to just to continue the couple feet for to the to the
>> because they will work with you with the proper dimensions, the requirements, the positioning. there's more to it >> and you you want it you want to know you're doing it correctly. So you of course of course >> you want to be in front of Planning and
Design Review >> and that's Planning and Design Review. Is that North Miami or is that uh Biscane Park? >> Biscane Park. >> Biscame Park. >> Okay. Okay. So I guess I should go down to uh >> to Village Hall building department. >> Okay. So I can do that. Um can I have
some time to do this? I do a lot of traveling. a couple of months and then I'll I'll I'll be able to I'll be able to get it uh taken care of. >> I I think um the this one might >> because I mean he hasn't even started with the design. >> Exactly. Very >> may warrant.
>> Yeah, this is all kind of new to me. So, >> well, it's it's been out there for quite a while because they put out flyers and everything when the ordinance was >> the ordinance was first enacted in 2023. Okay. >> Um,
no. Are you making >> I believe it was 2022 because I was corrected >> on the commission. I think >> it was the it was the final date that it had to be. Okay. What are we thinking? Like April 30th.
Let's see. >> April 20th is the last. >> Okay. >> So, >> April 21st. >> Yeah, that's the >> that gives
four. >> Yeah, that'll give me some time >> Yeah. Okay. So, April 21st. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. I'd like to make a motion in the case CE25-0870.
A violation has occurred. Assess a $250 fine, 250 administrative fee. give the property owner until April 21st ex to come into compliance by pulling by
obtaining all necessary permits or a $250 daily fine. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I. Any opposed? >> Motion passes 5-0. >> Just one other comment. I'm just looking at the pictures. Um I do see where
there's a truck parked on the grass. Um, that is a violation. Just so you'll know. You may want to if somebody's visiting or whatever, let them know not to park on the grass because uh >> Okay. >> Another code violation. >> Okay. Usually there's stuff the only
time people do are on the grass is just to unload stuff. And >> that was just just a little a little friendly thing. >> Okay. I appreciate it. All right. >> Okay, sir. Have a good day. Thank you. >> Safe travels. is for the address 10003 Northeast 115th
Street. Case number C-25-027. Prop uh property owner is 10003 Northeast 115th Street LLC in care of their registered agent Adono Ariana. They are here for a fine reduction. They
were found to be in violation of section 16.14.1 double fee permits. They installed a driveway without first obtaining permits. Fine outstanding at 5,500. They are offering to um pay $500 for the
fine to be reduced to $500. We are recommending $500. >> Hello. Hello. Can you hear me? >> Yes, sir. We sure can. But give us a second, please. >> You got it. No problem. Thank you so much. >> We got to make sure he was We got to make sure he's sworn in, too.
>> If he's going to test it. >> No. >> Thank you. >> No. >> Thank you. >> Please raise your right hand. >> Sure. >> Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give would be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
>> Absolutely. Yes. >> Okay. just comments. I do see this is a non-h homestead property and it's come it's come before us first notice the violation was back in April of 20 25 and
then we have order enforcement to obtain a permit but that was order enforcement was back in May of 25 and then we stopped the fines in July of 2025. So personally, I mean, if it's We
only had one administrative fine of $500. I mean, of $250, but number of times we've been dealing with it. Maybe it was just
their time was a little bit more than just the 500. >> The 500 only covers the citation finding. um admin finding does nothing for the dailies and the amount of time involved >> the the amount of time involved and what I'm sorry um
>> please let staff and the board talk and then I will give you >> okay you got it you got you got >> would staff like to weigh in on your And I know that we give great deference to the staff and their recommendations.
So, >> uh, yes, but I was also looking at the time of, you know, it it's come before us well twice for an order for a hearing. So, that's every bit of and this is the third time.
We're not even >> right. So that's three times it's come before this this board. In addition, there was a notice of violation in the um period of time to go back to reinspect and to
um continue to reinspect that. Uh he's been very cooperative. So, we haven't had any any issues that I can >> Well, I mean, I think that's one of the things that that that that I look at is
the cooperation with the homeowner and and also the difference to the to the board or to the to to you guys as far as the the time that you put in. And I know that, you know, for every uh cooperative resident that you have like this one,
that there's a number of ones that aren't that that do create time and energy. Um that it sounds like this one did it. That's why I'm glad to hear that said they were property owner was very well.
>> Can anybody shed some light on why the application was back in April and the permit wasn't issued until the end of July? >> Once they apply for a permit, we have no control really. >> No, no, no. I understand. Yeah. So, it
could be several issues. Um, there was a time when the PNZ um meeting was cancelled. Um, it could be the the reviewing process took longer than it's supposed to take. So, that's really out of his his control and our control, how
much it takes in that process. >> You are obviously very involved in it. Can you shed some light for us? July. Your application shows you applied in April, but your permit not issued until the end of July.
>> Are you referring the questions to me? >> Yes, sir. >> Um, I I think uh to reiterate what they just said, the uh there was multiple times where it was under review. I was constantly on top of the uh application.
Um there was a cancellation of a meeting like they just said right now. I think it was just bad timing. Um for my part uh in the beginning I submitted a survey which was um over a year old which I was not aware that you had to submit
something under a year. So that took an extra couple of weeks from my part. I did get the other survey. Um this is my first time ever doing this. Um I've never done this before. So I tried my best. I'm not a general contractor. I'm not a GC. I'm not an expert. I did try
my best moving forward. I got it done in a few months. I heard somebody earlier today that they were doing this for two years. Um I think considering the fact that um I'm not an expert and I did try my best. I never disappeared. I answer every single email. I responded. I stood
on top of everything else uh to get it done a few months. I thought that that was actually pretty good on my part. >> Yeah. No, no. And after hearing a little clarity on the fact that the property owner has been cooperative and I do see
the second time it came before us for an or with an order of enforcement was a request to stop daily fines um given the fact that it was still working >> planning and design. So, if there are no other questions, I'd like to make a
motion on case number CE-25-0271 with the recommendation of the village to accept the offer of $500 paid by uh can you pay it by March the 30th? >> Yeah, that won't be an issue. Absolutely. >> J by January 30th.
>> Yes. Yes. It it'll get paid this week. >> Be paid by January 30th. If not, the uh >> will um on I'll second. All in favor? >> I I motion passes 50. Thank you, sir.
You're off. >> Thank you. Have a good evening. I appreciate your help. Thank you so much. >> You, too. >> By the 30th. >> Yes, ma'am. Of course. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Bye-bye. >> Next item is in new business, section 7. It's um item number 7.1. The address is
700 Northeast 113th Street. Case number CE-25-0932 Gonzalo Munos and Maria Joseia Lilia Kubilos Kubilos Kubilos.
>> This is the dirty roof one that I was doing before when it was 7.10. And and the question I had is >> one >> is uh is uh the seven the January 14th picture is that intending to show a dirty roof because it doesn't look like
that to me. >> Um if I'll be honest, the last time I went there, which was a couple days ago, it looks like they did pressure wash it, but it didn't look completely clean. There was still things in the ridge,
like dirt, and I didn't close the case for that reason. They they need to do a little more work to to complete cleaning it. >> I think since they've obviously >> attempted >> started
>> I I would like to give them >> another >> benefit of the doubt >> finish. >> I I I know I made my I made my notes after reviewing the cases. I put that they were complied because I'm looking at the picture from the 14. I I did. >> Well, you can see a little bit, but
>> yeah, the side they could have done a better job, but they did try >> give them another, you know, month or so to complete the job and then if it isn't complete, >> then >> taking a daily fine, but not to find
them since they've >> any questions comments. close. >> Okay, >> I like that. >> I mean, I'm looking at pictures that >> we would we would recommend that.
>> All right. On case number um C-25-0932 that the property is in compliance. >> I'll second. All in favor? >> Any opposed? Motion passes 5. >> Next item 7.2. same address, same property owner, but
it's case number C25-0933. Found to be in violation of section 8.4.3.1F property maintenance. They have a carport that's in disrepair. >> It's still non-compliant. >> Um, yeah. And and is this a rental
property? Do you know? >> So, the the the part where the carput is is a rental property. And I just discovered that lately because when I was taking pictures, someone came out of the the place. Two years ago when I went there, they told me a family member lives in the in the property and that's
why I never issued a violation for a landlord permit. However, when I was taking pictures for this particular case, a gentleman came out and told me he was a tenant. So, I am working on issuing a violation for a landlord permit. >> Yeah. And maybe for that uh the um fence
over there, >> the the retaining wall, it's very dirty. It does need to be painted. I saw that. >> Um yeah. So, have you heard anything from the I do see it's a non-h homesteaded property and um heard
anything from the propert? >> No, there has been no contact except for the tenant that I encountered when I was taking pictures. >> No questions. I'd like to make a motion here. Case number CE-25-093
property is in violation assess a fine of $250 administrative fee of $250 repair or replace the uh port awning uh by that has to go before P& right
>> um >> I Hold. I don't have a new one. >> Uh yeah, by um March the 7th. No, this is the
by March the 24th or $250 per day. Thereafter, >> I'll second. >> Is there an administrative fee? I didn't hear. >> Uh yeah, $250 plus 250. >> Okay. um have a fully issued permit for or um
>> by March 24th. >> March 24th or $250 per day fund >> and Judy second. >> All in favor? >> Any opposed? >> Motion passes 5. >> Did Judy second or Judy did? Thank you.
Next item is 7.3 for the address 720 North Northeast 117th Street. It's case number CE-25-011. Property owner is Icon Capital LLC in care of their registered agent Khan
Jeffrey. We are asking for an order of enforcement for an abatement. Um they were found to be in violation of section 8.4. 4.1 B1 overgrown grass, weeds, and brush. Uh the village abated
because there was no compliance by the compliance date on the notice of violation. Village abated at a cost of $500. >> What's going on with this property? Do you know? >> Like to mention to the board that the LLC is now inactive in the corporate um
in Sunbiz. >> Know this propert >> property is in foreclosure. Yes, the property is in foreclosure. Um, this morning I discovered from our volunteer that someone has requested a
lean search. So, there's a possibility that a sale might happen. >> Um, no. Well, I make a motion. >> Sure. >> On case number um CE-25-1011, violation has occurred uh
to um grant the uh order of enforcement for the abatement of the property for $500 plus an administrative fee of $250. And requests that the village um move forward with placing the ring
We would have to come back for due process. We will bring it back for intent to lean. >> Yes. >> A second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Motion passes by. >> So you'll bring it back next month.
We're intent. >> Intent to lean. >> The problem is is if there's a lean search done now and our fines are not on that lean search, are we going to get paid that $500? I actually did provide Linda with this information is going to be on that's >> all we can do
>> 500 because it's already been expended by the village will be on there. What may not be on the lean search. Well, we'll put it on because it hasn't gone out. So, whatever is assessed today on the next three cases will be added to the lan search. >> Well, this isn't 500. This is 750
because of the admin. >> 750. You're right. On that one case, there's three other cases I'm about to call. It's um items >> Yeah. 7.4 to 7.6. Same address, same property owner. We're asking for orders of enforcement on
these three cases for a swimming pool that's not maintained. It's section 11.9. >> 6, section 11.9.1 protective perimeter fence, water clarity, and section. 8.4.7 for stagnant
water. All three cases are second offenses. But >> did we take one at a time? Yeah, definitely. >> Any questions? >> No. Um, case number CE-25-1014,
make a motion that property is in violation. Sets a fine of $500 a uh administrative fee of $500 and by having by January 30th or $500 per
day fine thereafter. >> I'll second. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion passes 50 >> 5003. >> It's a repeat of things. There was in the wrong Janie was the may I read the case numbers? onto the
record. >> May I May I just read the case numbers onto the record? I didn't say them. >> Case numbers. >> You you ruled on 7.4. I'm just going to read out the case number for that one and the two other cases. Uh cases in
violation. Case numbers CN-24-653 for water clarity. Case number CN-24-652. I'm reading the old cases. I'm so sorry. >> That was the first offense. I'm so sorry. I apologize for that.
>> So, the previous one would be 25- >> correct. The the water clarity is case number C25-1014. >> For the protective perimeter fence, it's case number C-25-1015. And for the stagnant water,
um, it's case number C25-1016. >> We have any questions on agenda 75? >> The only question I had is um because this isn't having the fence there. So, what is it what is it like going from the sides of the house? Is there fences there? Is it completely
enclosed or what? >> Correct. They have fences on both sides. Um, sometimes it's left open. I went there two days ago and I had to close the fence cuz the the realtors that are going to this house go back and they leave it open. So, we we are keeping an eye both Raphael and I every day when we
drive by, we we this is that property that we keep an eye on. So by virtue of so by virtue of the uh of the activity that's going on the the the perimeter does get uh left open compromised >> allowing for the danger of kids and all
that stuff going in there >> and animals. >> Aren't therea certain cases though where it's required to have this pool itself >> if it was a construction site but this is not. It's a vacant property that they had bought to renovate, but they have
allowed it to go into foreclosure, >> but at any point it's become a danger because too many strangers >> and the mosquitoes for the neighbors are just the pool is green and >> and it's been been a danger when she's had to go there on random uh drivebys and has had to close the fence because
realtors have left it open. So, that's an issue. >> Safety issues and health hazard. If there are no more further questions, in CE-25-1015, a violation has occurred. Assess a $500
fine, $500 admin. Give the property owner until January 30th to come into compliance by securing the swimming pool with protective barrier or a $500 fine >> per day. >> Per day. Thank you. I'll second.
>> All in favor? I opposed. Motion passes 5-0. Okay. The next one, 25-1016. Any questions on No questions. I'll make a motion in case
number C25-1016 a violation has occurred. Assess a $500 fine, $500 admin fee. Give the property owner until January 30th to come into
compliance or a $500 daily fine. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. 5-0. Next item 7.7 is for the address 724 Northeast 119th
Street. Case number C25-0645. Property uh owner is LPM25 2025 LLC in care of their registered agent Miami Accounting and Tax Services LLC. They were found to be in violation
of section 8.4 4.3.1F roof maintenance. They had a dirty roof. They have since um come into compliance. We are however asking for a complete dismissal of this case even though they're in compliance. Uh while doing uh
research, our code officer, Mr. Gutierrez, found that the owners had applied for a permit for the roof. Was that the permit to Oh, for a demo uh in August.
And then he sent him an email. Uh what was the date of the email? And and that was missed. So when this process was happening, there was already activity that was happening that we missed in our office. We are asking the
board to completely dismiss this case due to an error on our part. >> That's fine. But um has the uh demolition permit been issued? >> Yes. >> So it has been and they already have a construction fence and all around the
property. >> Not yet. >> Yet started with the demon >> permits issued there. theoretically >> which is good. So they're within um >> you got a nice clean roof now
>> it needed to be done. >> Yes. >> I mean it's it's still not demolished and it's still not um >> a clean. >> Yeah. >> Would you like to make a motion >> on case number uh CE-25-0645? Um I'll move to have the case dis.
>> Second. >> All in favor? I >> any opposed motion passes 5. >> Next item 7.9. This is for the address 830 Northeast 120th Street. It's for case number
C25-0494. Property owner is 830 Northeast 120th Street LLC in care of their registered agent F. Stratio Leontis. I did that better today
asking for Oh, we were going to ask for an order of enforcement. I just learned that um they are now in compliance. We're asking to close the case. >> This the only thing I have to say is this property is listed under having
homestead exemption. >> Yes. Home homesteaded properties can be rented out. You can rent your house out. >> I don't lose the homestead exemption. >> You can live in your house for six months and rent it for six months and
you can't lose your homestead exemption. >> Judy, but um there is no home. It says exemption zero. There is no >> Yeah. No, >> they have it there. But >> either way, >> so if you want to be a winterbird and go
to Boston for six months, you can still claim homestead exemption on your house. and then and rent it to me for six months. >> We can watch the stuff. >> That's the issue is trying to follow through to me.
>> Exactly. >> Either way, I'd like to make a motion if there are no other questions on case number C-5-0494. Case is now in compliance and close. Make a motion. I move to close. >> Second. >> All in favor? I
>> I >> motion passes 5. >> Next case is in section 797.11. The address is 951 Northeast 111 Street
is for case CE25-0913. Owner is Patricia Estella asking for an order of enforcement found to be in violation of section 16.15.2. They have no landlord registration on file for 2025
and we'll be issuing another one for 2026. For now, this is the case before the board >> and no communication. >> Uh we have spoken with the tenant and the tenant did let us know that the property owner is very unwell.
>> Well, very unwell, but >> he's alive, right? Um, >> somebody's living there and paying ping rent. If there are no questions, I'd like to make a motion on case number C-25-0913 that a violation has occurred a fine of
$250 plus administrative cost of $250 for the property owner to obtain a landlord uh application permit registration by January the 30th or $250 per day fine
I'll second. All in favor? >> I >> opposed. Motion passes 5. >> I would also just like direct um I don't know if that's mold on the on the columns or it's in supposed to be painted.
>> No, I mean they just may want to clean that up. The rest of the property looks pretty good. Like only part of it was pressure clean. >> I see. Okay. >> No issue for that phone.
Terrible. The next item is 7.12. Same address, same property owner. The case number AC is CE-25-0962. Order. We're asking for an order of enforcement. We have found them to be in violation of section 7.3.1
conditions for the storage of recreational vehicles and trailers. They have a large white trailer parked on the grass in the front yard. They moved it to the side of the house, but the side of the house is still visible from a
ride of public right of way. This trailer belongs to the tenant. We've had a conversation with me. I personally with him. I've personally spoken with him and explained the violation, but he is very uncooperative and doesn't intend
to comply. He has planted some things um plants around, but we can still see the the trailer. It's very large. I've seen too many times over the years, both in code cases and in various cases where foliage has been part of the
effort to help people come into compliance and it almost never works. Now, I don't care how tall it might be, I'm guessing. And yeah, the ones that are in there will get reasonably tall. >> There's no big gap. >> Yeah,
>> there's not going to be anything in there. And the ordinance is not that it has to go behind the front facing. >> It has to be shielded from view >> and that's corner lot, >> right? >> Well, that's not working.
>> His argument was I've moved it from the front to the side, but I but I said the ordinance says we cannot see it. It has from the right of way. >> And this is the tenant, right? Not the owner. >> This is the tenant that's fighting us.
But it's the owner or property manager's responsibility to read the riot act. >> That's correct. >> And it come into compliance. >> But you didn't have any communication with the owner. >> No, the owner is is they are in a
facility. They are bedridden. >> They're old and unwell as well. >> Old. Yes. I believe the either the husband or the one of the it's a couple but one one of them passed away. >> Oh okay. So he walks and Oh.
No. So, I'm not sure who's sick. Patricia is sick. >> And she's the one that's Okay. this side. >> Regardless though, the property is not in compliance. there's an issue and we
don't know the facts. They may even have somebody that they hired to be a property manager. So, it's not for us to second guess, right? >> They've been notified and could have submitted a letter or something. If there are no other questions, I'd like to make a motion.
>> Case number C-25-0962. The violation has occurred. That's the fine of $250, administrative cost of $250. have the uh trailer uh removed or come into full compliance by February the 7th or $250
per day fine there. >> I'll second. All in favor? >> I motion passes 5. The next item is 7.17 and it's for the address 11920 Northeast
11th Place. A case number is CE-25-0178 for Alina Perez. Um, we have received an email progress report as was requested by the board from Alina and it's in your package. She has a new trial date for
February 9, 2026. She's been cooperative and has been here, right? >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> I said that she's been cooperative and she's been here. >> We just address >> maybe three months. These cases take
forever. Maybe another three months. >> Yeah. Okay. >> It's not unusual either, by the way, that it's taken so long. >> Um Um All right. In case number CE-25-0178,
I make a motion to table this until the April code hearing. >> I'll second. All in favor? >> I motion passes. Next case is 7.18 and it's for the address 12025
Norththeast 8th Avenue for the case number C-25-0592. Property owners are Andrew and Lameus Wilson. We are asking for an order of enforcement. They were found to be in violation of section 8.4.3.1F 4.3.1F
property maintenance. The exterior wall is in need of painting. They have washed the awnings, I believe, but the exterior wall still needs to be painted. This case has uh come before the board. They were given time. Um but
they're still not in compliance. >> Did you print the email she sent today? >> Okay. Yeah. Send an email saying that she's in compliance and she couldn't be in the meeting. Um, Dorian, I'm just looking at the
September 11th exchange here. The the blue ink is yours. >> That again. >> The blue ink. The blue writing. >> That's submitted saying she's in compliance. >> Yes. >> Okay.
Well, they came before the board and the board did give them grant more time. They asked for time. The board granted it. >> This is going back since 24. >> Yeah. October 29th. There was a code there was a courtesy notice. um October
29th of 2024 and then a notice of violation September the 22nd of 2025 to comply by um August the 22nd of 2025. Then we had an order of enforcement um where there was no finding just to
comply by January the 26th um code hearing. Uh so looks like there has been no appliance and even the pictures that are brought before us today uh for January the 21st, 2026,
I'm seeing uh rust streaks, mold on the base of the house. Uh looks like peeling paint. >> Um there's white patches where like the gutter had been installed and stuff over it. And then in the front um mold from
underneath the windows and yeah the door I just also want to just add that you know there there there seems to be a long uh history um of Miss Grant
and Raphael trying to um work with this homeowner. uh and has had to endure quite a lot of um aggression from the other side. >> Yes, I do see that. And and for the record, this is a non homesteaded
property. Is this also a rental propert? >> It's a it's a triplex. >> Yes, it's a it's a triplex. They live there on the top floor and the two bottom properties are rented. I mean it's it's a income generating
correct >> so uh that was just for the record it's non homestead which we look at home properties sometimes >> situations >> right um there are no questions on case number I'd like to make a motion on case
number C-25 a violation has occurred that's a fine of $250 administrative fine of uh fully comply by so this would require I'm going to give them the other than
pressure cleaning it does look like it does need to have a paint job >> that does not have to go before P and Z so apply by February the 27th for a 200 to have a what's it called what type of
>> paint per paint approval paint approval by February the 27th of 2020. >> Fully issued paint. >> I'll second. >> Would you want would you want that or would you want the property to be fully painted by then?
>> Well, that's a little fully painted if you have to get a contract. But I mean, if I have a if they have a approval with I'm I'm not familiar now with the paint approvals. Did that >> approval? It's not a permit. It's just a form they have to fill out to show the village that they are using.
>> It has a deadline. >> Have it. Doesn't it have a deadline? >> Has a deadline. >> Does it have a deadline? They change the >> It does. I've had recent paint permit. >> Yeah. I thought it was six months. >> Yes, it has a deadline. >> I would have. >> So that's why I thought So if they
obtain the paint approval, >> you know, and that that requires very little time. Yeah, it's just a matter of choosing a color and if it's an approved color, they don't even they don't go through PNZ. >> This has been going on for
>> Yeah. for quite a while. >> And while you're calculating that, I was just going to add that based on the motion. I'm probably going to say no only because I think that the $250 fine when I look at this long history is probably a little too light for an administrative fee because it's looks
like you've been had to endure quite a bit of um hostility and it doesn't look like it was warranted and your responses to you know the the aggressive uh emails have been you know nothing short of um
professional and um inappropriate. Thank you, Michael. >> I have to agree with that. My concern are the legalities, >> right, >> of whether or not we process >> above 250. >> You did 500 on the other ones. >> Second offense.
>> Oh, second offenses. Okay. >> Because there is that fine chart that we have to abide by and only on a second offense. >> Okay. you go. >> Realistically, you are >> 100% correct. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. >> So, we're stuck. >> No, I appreciate that because I didn't know. >> Here's something we can do. And I'm so sorry. Do you mind if your moment is kind of open and if we we can formulate the verbiage
properly? If you guys remember, couple of months ago, we had a discussion on properties that technically come into compliance because they pulled the permit, but that's it as far as it goes. The work doesn't get done. Last month,
we started, albeit a bit clunky, and we're going to refine that tonight, where in certain situations, there would be the citation fine, the admin fine, the daily fine if they don't comply. But if they comply by pulling their permit
or in this case approval but don't finish the work by the expiration of the permit, there is another situation where a $250 fine can kick in the day after the
permit expires. >> I haven't finished my motion. >> I was changing the date. >> He hasn't done part B. later is refined language so it makes more sense. >> So, um I'll restate my motion that a violation has occurred assess a fine of
$250 administrative cost fee of $250 to uh a fully approved um paint permit by >> approval >> paint approval uh by uh February the 4th, if not a $250
per day fine. The uh paint uh job is to the paint job. The paint completion of the uh project is to be done by the expiration of the permit. If not, $150
per day uh is to commence the day after expiration of >> So, we already have a 250 going here by February 4th. So, we're going to have another 250 >> if they don't complete the job by the
expiration of the paint approval permit. So, that's another >> 60 days. It's 60 days. They have 60 days. If it doesn't happen >> by the expiration of the paint approval
>> time >> then >> in 250 >> daily fine will a second >> favor motion passes five >> sure we can tidy up the language
>> yes >> yeah because it's just it's just 250 250 comply by I mean pull um get the approval by fe February 4th. >> You do get the approval and >> that stop then the 250 >> the 250. Yeah. If they don't get the approval then it's 250.
>> It will be running anyway. >> Yeah. They'll start. Yeah. Then >> so really only one 250 per day fine will go into effect. If they don't get either one of them done. >> All right. >> And those were all the cases we've
brought before the board tonight. However, there are several discussion items. The first one I would like to bring to the attention of the board is u to get out of the way so we can talk about the orders is an update on the property next
door to the one we just discussed. >> Mhm. Um the village has been sued is an injunction um that has been put in place and I just made copies for the board to go through board members to go through in their own time. The village has not yet responded. The
the new village attorney just received this in his office today and he we had a meeting and he updated us. >> When was it served? >> It was I'm I'm not sure if they serve you. um the attorneys um electronically
now. No, it it was served to his office today. Yeah. It was filed in court yesterday, but it was served today to respond. Yes. So, I'll be meeting tomorrow with the building officials and
then we'll go to the meet with the village attorney to know the stance for the village. So in a nutshell, the basis of their complaint is we're not letting them bring the
property up. This is they filed it as a complaint and maybe Michael may be able to explain this to the board. It's a legal issue and I would not like to comment on the legal issue before the attorney does.
Do we even see where they're talking about the $10,000 fee? >> I I just jumped ironically to item number 28. Mine have asserted the right to rehabilitate the historic structure consistent with its former multif family
use. Well, they can't. zoning has changed. And then they go on to say, well, the village insisted at would approve only a single family residence. Yes. Because the zoning has
changed, that area is no longer zone. >> They don't know that it's for us to >> Yeah. I I my only comments my my only comments would be this is that is that there those are allegations. So they still have to prove those allegations. There's only two counts of the complaint. So these are the the only two
things that they're saying is number one that there's been a violation of procedural due process and they they reference the Florida Constitution and the second count is for a temporary and permanent injunction which means that they want to try to stop the village from doing whatever we're doing on the lean. But all all those other stuff is
all allegations. Those are all things that they're saying are the parade of horribles that lead up to these. We would have to provide our legal our legal department with the files for them to answer to those uh allegations. >> Right. Exactly.
Um the next thing is the orders. Um the chairperson can elaborate on that. The orders were not clear um the way they were issued and uh like Dale said that we would need to have language that is clear um because stuff like this can
happen where they turn around and sue the the village for something. when we present a case and when orders are issued, they have to have clarity because these um orders can end up in front of a judge and we have to make sure they are clear that um the
respondents are informed because they come back and say, "I didn't know I was supposed to pay $500." So, the orders were a little bit confusing and I just wanted to bring this back to the board. It's a few of them. It wasn't all of them.
Um and I have made copies of one that I tried to clarify. However, I am not the complete expert. I I brought in some language. The the the chairperson has also done a document. We want to compare this and bring it before the attorney so
he can formulate an order that makes sense for everybody. >> Reading here. I absolutely support it. It much clearer. gives more information. >> But this was done by me >> broken out beautifully.
>> You you want the the attorney to read this and confirm that this is the language that we want to put in the final order. >> Yeah. Because part B is what well A and B of part one A and B is what I was trying to >> exactly
>> to come into by expiration of the permit. >> Here it says an additional plan of >> actually that should change to a,000. But I changed it in ink. It should change to a th00and not 25. >> It says
>> you can do Yeah, you can >> so so bec right we already have a 250 up there in the order if you notice. However, you can assess an extra fine say 250 or $500 if this case comes
back for whatever reason. But if because on the case with the paint, >> they wouldn't be fined if they pull the paint approval by two by February 4th, there won't be a daily >> 51 to keep that
>> but and then 60 days February, March, April, April the 4th, let's say it's only it's 60 days by April the 4th. >> If they don't do the work, >> if they don't do a work, then it starts a $250 per day. Correct. Right. Um, so >> that's clear in that situation, but
there were situations where an actual permit needs to be pulled. >> And I want to bring to that attention that permits do have different expiration dates depending on the job. A driveway permit has a different expiration date from a paint permit or
depending on the job. So we have to be careful in how the language is put in a particular order. My question it says if work's not completed an additional fine of up to 2500 will be assessed. >> 25 is not the number 1,000. >> 1,000
>> two >> and >> up to >> you can do 25500 up to a,000. >> Does that mean does that mean then the $250 daily fine would cap? >> No, that's in part one. >> So if you read part one >> gotcha.
>> This is additional additional. >> Okay. I just want to >> see Dale most of his orders when he gives he does assess an extra administrative fees for cases that come multiple times and that's the correct thing to do and that's what we're doing in this order only we >> so it would be
>> the language >> it would be a thousand plus the ability to add the 250 daily not complete >> absolutely >> but yes if we're going to go through the effort to start this incentivizing. I
think absolutely critical that village attorney reads it. >> And when we do the does this go to the homeowner? >> Yes, >> we do mail them to homeowners. >> Correct. >> Does it go to the home? >> Well, we do send the orders to the
homeowner for sure. That's what you've heard me say several times. We have to set our um compliance dates to make sure they will have a order by then. >> Yeah, they absolutely have to be served. Well, that's what I was a little by one of our property owners tonight when said
I didn't know about the thing. I'm going Well, >> you were standing right there when I didn't know. >> Didn't want to get into it. >> You were recent certified. >> Yes, we send them certified. >> We do keep the record that it wasn't
picked up and we do have information from the post office that we can get electronically. If someone signed for it, if someone didn't sign for it, it will show in the electronic record. If they don't sign, >> we can post it on the door.
>> And you send certified and regular mail. >> Send it certified >> only. I usually send when I send legal stuff, I'll send it certified and regular mail. And if they to >> And then with regard to the certified, so they never if they never signed for it, right? They can say they never
received it. But if the if if the other one never comes back, you know, that's one of the things you can tell the court is that, you know, they sent it regular mail and it never came back. So there's an implied receipt there. >> That absolutely. And this is why I say that an order of
enforcement can be landing on the desk of an owner who is a Michael. And if our language is convoluted, he will he will give us a lesson on what a finding of fact is bringing them. I I wonder at times and
and I should have taken responsibility to to pull it forward. It's one of those we've been using that same form, >> right, >> for as far >> so long and there are some things in there that definitely need to be updated. >> You know, we've evolved and so does the form need to evolve.
>> And now I think we learn every time we're challenged and >> that things can be >> Let's try not to be challenged. Let's get it right. >> The other order >> things on here is part two which tells Yes.
>> that once you complied that she Yes, absolutely. >> And I'm inition. >> Absolutely. Excellent. >> Nice job. I'd like to see how the attorney >> I think. >> I think it's fantastic. And also just
when when you send certified mail and like you put like on the letter head like on, you know, you know, via certified mail and US mail. >> Thank you. >> So that way it's on the letterhead too and you can say, "Look, we sent it both ways to you." >> Yes. Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yes. Does we need Michael?
Thank you, Michael. >> This is great. Thank you so much. >> Right. >> So, usually when an um you know, having worked for other jurisdictions, when a final order is issued, which we call an order of enforcement here, we cannot
have it twice. There can only be one final order. Now, that final order can be amended or can be extended. So, the reason I put those two orders together is for you to just uh for some clarity. When you issue the final order, there's a fine in there. There's a comply by
date. When you issue the second order, it cannot give another different kind of compliance date, another condition. What we can do is just extend the compliance date using a an order of extension. Okay.
>> What does it the order of extension wipes out the daily fine because you are granting an extension on the compliance day. >> Gotcha. >> Right. >> I It's confusing to me about when it says all acred fines will be removed.
>> So that's what an extension is supposed to do. I was even explaining this to our clerk. If I f avenue um my pay by date is today and I call them and tell them, "Hey, I can't make this payment today. Can you give me two more weeks? When they give me that grace period of two,
they can't charge me for that. They have agreed to extend my pay for a future date. >> The 250 250 they have to pay. We are talking about the daily fine. Only the daily fine can date comply by date. But we use this.
>> We use this order, not this form. We've been using this form for everything. continuences, orders of extension, regular orders. But I have all the orders now. And going forward, we're gonna use the right order for the right
>> to say daily instead of all fines. >> Oh, that's a good one. Yes. All acrewed daily fines. Yes, that word. >> And let me ask a question. The the orders that are being um granted or extended, are those coming from you?
They come from the board. The orders come >> Oh, they come from the board. Okay. Because I was going to say I >> never come from me. >> I wanted to just clarify that because I didn't know >> my pay grade, Michael. >> Bring it before us, but it may have already started on a daily. >> Exactly. >> Yeah. You know,
>> the circumstances allow for the extension >> once a month, right? starting has two weeks worth and he said, "Yeah, >> let's wait until six months when they try to bring them back for um a reduction when an extension can legally remove those fines."
>> Right. >> That sounds great. >> I was wondering when I first saw this sign, >> yes, I should have done this a long time ago, but I I have to work with with the clerk. >> Awesome. I mean, when I see here's what it tells me is it first of all, it's
better for the client because they're going to get more information and >> and have it clear. >> It saves you time and >> it keeps us from running into >> unintentionally. >> It's great. Thank you.
Did they miss anything? >> Sort of went in with the orders and all. And I know we because we were talking about the driveways and the fact that so many of them have been initiated because >> I know there's at least one on Griffin that has been >> sitting there. Yeah.
>> Sitting there for almost two years. >> But an order like this keeps them accountable because we don't close the case. And if you don't build the driveway, this is what's going to happen. condition there. >> But I I I mean it's just a hazard, too, because it's a drop down. >> Yes. >> And we have no sidewalks.
>> Mhm. >> I spoke with uh the building official about that. I think they can do something on their side as well to make sure they keep it safe. >> And then just for my edification, I did try to go find our codes on on the little website. I could not
>> um Florida building code. You're not going to find it on the land development code. >> I just couldn't find it. So question, um, asphalt driveways are still allowed. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> I mean, it just seems like that was just a chemical hazard. Uh, I mean, leeching. >> That was a big argument >> environmentally and >> environmental. >> Well, >> yeah. >> Okay. That was just a question cuz I saw one and I'm going. >> If we were a homeowners association, we
could be banned. >> Oh. >> Oh, there. That's what's allowed and what's not allowed. >> Those Yes, we will amend the language and if the board agrees. >> You got you guys will
>> Oh, I I got it. I >> I'll amend it and then I'll have the uh the minute. So he No, we won't check. Yes. >> They haven't gotten orders.
>> Yeah. >> They did get these orders. So we will have to send out amended orders. >> Oh, they did get >> They already got these order. >> Oh, okay. >> But we're going to amend them because these were saying February 18 is when
>> Yeah. I amend them and let them let you look at them and see. I'm not sure >> because I have to be in a certain thinking mode >> to fix this. >> Let's not forget we need to I'll make a motion to Michael
December meeting. >> Second that. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. I appreciate it. Judy knows when I realized that I missed I know. And and you know, you're here consistently and you participate
consistently and we all have brain farts every now and again. >> Yeah, it was. >> You know, you can shoot a quick email to Vanessa. >> I totally What? >> Didn't remember. >> I didn't even know. >> Hey, I was collapsing. Was it? I didn't
even remember what I wrote. I just said what happened. >> Yeah. I mean, I I collapsed when I got to my house. >> You understand, Michael? Your job is mentally demanding. >> And I'll be in court tomorrow at 10:00
a.m. on a hearing on a motion to compel better answers with regard to the deposition I took on that day to allow me to go back to TGK to take another deposition of her. So, >> was just the minutes from last >> minutes
>> and I did find one error. I mean, if that's what we're going to do next. >> Yes. >> I was not on 7.5. I was not present to make any type of >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> 7.5.
>> That should be I believe that would have been me. >> That's what I had put down. Not should be chair. >> Okay. Do you have I have quite a few. So, I'll go last. >> So, I just want to say upfront for all
you had to decipher last month, >> that was a lot. >> These still came out better than I could have hoped. even though there's some things we got to change with all we threw at you. Thank you. >> And I didn't really get a chance to go over the the orders as I usually do was
going on vacation. She did the best that she could and I knew that. >> Absolutely. No. No. >> Great job, Vanessa. >> And she's she's so professional in every way. So, okay. She has something. I don't have anything
on Judy does. >> Okay. >> Doesn't >> No, we did do two because the table. I mean, you said we Okay.
anything. Bear with me, folks. Okay. On 61, we can delete the second reference to seconding the motion. >> Oh, the motion was
>> on 63. We didn't just stopped the daily fines. We rescended the daily fines because it was a internal problem. >> Was it resended daily as of December 17th or just
>> in total? In total. Yes. Yes. Okay. 74. This is where it gets tacky and I apologize. We'll we'll get it cleaner next month. Um where it says all work is to be completed by the expiration date of the
permit. It needs to add or $250 daily fine will be assessed commencing day following permit expiration.
>> I know if you can shorten that. >> I just want to If no compliance is achieved by expiration of a permit, a daily 250 will commence the following day.
I wouldn't want to use the word compliance again because we use it in terms of getting the original. I want to say work work is not completed >> because we say compliance in terms of getting the permit work is not completed.
Yeah, that's shorter. If work is not completed by expiration date of permit, 250 day $250 daily fine commences as of day after permit expiration. >> Yeah.
Also there's no mention in in that of the violation fine and the admin home the 250 is there were also 250 violation and 250 admin. Yeah. Have fines
that >> did do you have signs on anybody? >> No, it was a different case. It was the second case. The second 75 on the minutes >> you don't have it on that one >> there is 250 250
but on the 74 >> no okay >> small >> okay all right thank you I stand corrected two two or three of us don't Hey guys. Now on to 79.
Just the the last two sent the last sentence is a repeat. If no compliance is achieved by December 31st, a daily fine, etc., etc. That's already up there. 7:14. Again, we have to add in u if work is
not completed. Oh, wait a minute. We have to add in a $250 daily fine besides the citation. Besides the violation and the admin fine, there's the 250 daily.
>> Yep. >> Right. Compliance is not achieved by February 17th and a daily fine of 250. Right. So here we I think we can't say the way we say it by the expiration permit by the expiration date of the
permit of February 17 because we don't know when the >> take that out right so we have to delete completed by the expiration date >> we have to take that part out but expiration date of the permit
a daily fine of $250 will commence day after expiration. It'll get smoother. >> SE 716. >> Same thing. The daily fine needs to be added in if if compliance isn't achieved by the permit
being pulled by February 17th, etc. A daily fine of 250, 716. Check your notes. And then the same thing all work to be completed etc etc. A daily fine will commence
day following the expiration. Same thing for 717. The same two additions, the daily fine and the words the day following the expiration of the permit. I was going to say that we'll bring it back after we clean it up.
>> It can be reviewed a second. >> And again, I can't thank you enough for being so patient. You know what we're trying to achieve. It's just getting it >> right, >> not so clunky, and that we cover every possible eventuality yet writing war in
peace. We're >> thriving for excellence. Right, Michael. >> Hey, >> we're getting there with you guys. >> Guys, the dates I apologize. We do need to discuss at least >> do a motion for the minutes, an actual
motion to move it. >> Sorry. >> Oh, no. They have not been approved. >> I I'll make a motion to accept minutes with the changes. No, we can't accept them. A motion to make the changes were
offered here tonight on the minutes and to have the minutes brought back next month for approval. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> thank you for reminding me. >> Okay. This year's meeting dates. I do
have one other issue and that's the May meeting. We could possibly consider moving that should be here. >> Although I'm not sure, May. That's when Blair's having I will be on the
So everybody could possibly I know it's far out, but consider moving May's meeting the meeting is supposed to be on the 20th. You'd like to move that? Okay.
>> Would the Would the 13th be a >> So, let's look at >> I've got trial caveat. I have a couple of caveats for all of these. So, you know, that's really going to be my only issue. I don't have any vacation or anything set up yet. So, I'm we can do
whatever we want >> like to always if it's at all possible have a full board. So, if anybody has >> bring it forward, let's do the best we can. But we're better with a full board. >> Yeah,
>> I agree. But I can't control her pregnancy. >> Yeah. Okay. That's a little tough. That's a little bit tough. But what what do we think of >> May 13 is good. Yeah, it's for us it's okay. >> Yeah, we do have four four weeks
between. >> Okay. May 13th. Thank you. and anything else that stands out for anybody or >> I don't know at this point at some point
I may We want to have zoom in. >> Yes. >> They do not have internet. >> No, I I appreciate that. I appreciate that. I can't even use my phone in their house,
>> but trying to consider all possibility. We'll have after I find out I'll know about it and um you know maybe I'll go to my brothers. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Motion to return. >> Second.
>> I won't say all in favor.