I'm sorry. I can't get it to work. >> What I would like uh what I would suggest then is um let's have some Can you print some printed copies of the slides for >> you print them up? How who who here would like a copy of the slides? If you
just show by raising your hands like who's the applicant today? >> I can I can go make >> I just need to know how many three. Okay. So, we have three then I'll be the fourth. >> Okay.
>> Then, um Miss then I'll >> Okay. understand able to call. Do you have a cell number for whatever that is? Turn around and get back. Just work from the printed pages.
Absolutely. TV. >> No, I don't. I still have the seal on my screen. Oh, there we go. Now I have it. Now I have it. >> You got it. >> Yeah. Okay, >> I see it. >> We're up in business. >> That's great. So, if you want to just hit slideshow so you you fill the
screen. >> I can do that. >> Okay. Well, well, I would like a copy, but um it's not necessary, I think, for the public at this point since they'll be able to see what was being presented.
I would like to wait uh until Miss Roth gets back because she is the the recording secretary. Appreciate your help in getting making that work for everyone. as soon as she gets here. Yeah, because she's she's she's the recording secretary, so we'll wait for her. So,
appreciate everyone's patience. [Music] I definitely need one. Yes. Thank you. I'll take it with me. Thank you so much. Are we ready to proceed? Thank you so much everyone. Appreciate your your patience. I've been doing this
since before the pandemic. So, eight years. I suppose this is the first time we've had technical glitches like this, so it was just bound to happen at some point, but but it happened to be tonight. And uh thanks everyone for your patience. My name is Rick Geller. I am a special magistrate appointed by the city
council of Cape Canaveral. Today's date is July 22nd, 2025. I hear code enforcement cases pursuant to article 6 of the city code and Florida statutes chapter 162. Although this evening, I understand we have a
proceeding that's a little out of the ordinary for what I'm typically doing. And this proceeding tonight is under section 2-260 of the city code uh pertaining to an application for satisfaction, release, or reduction of code enforcement leans.
And I'm going to explain how how this works under our ordinance. So hopefully everyone will understand the the first thing that must happen is an applicant submits an application for um a
reduction of a lean or release of a lean. Uh the application must be executed under oath and sworn to in the presence of notary public and um shall include uh the following. a copy of the
order of the code enforcement order and I have that in the agenda packet. The the order that I I I prepared um back five years ago in September 2020. The date upon which the applicant brought the subject property into compliance and
there is a date stated in the application uh the basis upon which the applicant believes the application for release or reduction of lean should be granted. uh the terms upon which the release or reduction of lean should be granted. The reasons if any compliance was not
obtained prior to the order of penalty or fine being recorded. Uh the reduction in the penalty or fine sought by the applicant. A statement verifying whether the applicant was issued any title policy or policies for the subject property
encumbered by the lean after the lean was recorded. And I believe the application said there were none in this case. As well as any other information which the applicant deems pertinent to the request, including but not limited to the circumstances that exist that would warrant the reduction or
satisfaction of the penalty or fine. And then there's also a requirement for the reimbursement to the city for recording costs at the time of the application as well as any other costs uh any other um
was the application fee, excuse me. And then when the application is reviewed, the code enforcement division shall confirm that the violation which resulted in the order imposing penalty or fine has been corrected and then it is placed um the application
is placed on the agenda together with a staff recommendation um for the next meeting of the special magistrate which is what we're here for this evening. And then it says, "At the hearing before the special magistrate, the special magistrate shall review and consider the application for reduction
or release of lean, provide the violator with an opportunity to address the special magistrate regarding the application for reduction and release of lean and take the testimony of a of other interested parties, including but
not limited to city staff." So now, let me turn to what I'm supposed to do this evening. Upon review of the application and any testimony presented by the applicant, city staff, or other interested parties, the special magistrate shall render a written
recommendation to the city council based on findings of fact and law to either approve approve with conditions or deny the application for reduction or release of lean. The city council shall consider and give considerable weight to the
written recommendation of the special magistrate and render a final decision on the application. So this is not the final stop for this process. It goes to the city council and they are to to give considerable weight to my recommendation but they have the
final say. So whenever a recommendation or decision is made under the section, the following factors shall be applied by the city in determining the amount of any reduction or release of the lean. And so these are
the considerations that that I will um that we'll have before me tonight. the amount of any administrative and out-ofpocket costs incurred by the city that are directly associated with the underlying code enforcement case and lean but not including uh including but
not limited to code enforcement staff and attorney time, postage, advertising, recording costs and other city expenses related to any measure taken by the uh code board or or the special magistrate in in my case or the city to abate a nuisance caused by the violation.
That's point number one. Number two, the gravity and number of the violations. Three, the amount of the requested reduction. Four, the time in which it took to bring the property into compliance. Five, whether the applicant was responsible for the violation which
caused the lean. Six, whether the applicant is or will be a bonafide purchaser of the subject property or is filing or is filed for a homestead exemption evidencing a desire to live within the city on a non-transient basis
or whether the property is or will be acquired for investment or other purposes. Number seven, whether the applicant acquired the subject property with knowledge of the subject lean. I don't think that that that's relevant in this case. Um, but we'll I'll wait for the evidence
to to prove me wrong if if that is uh so. Number eight, the crude amount of the code enforcement fine or lean as compared to the current market value of the property. Number nine, this is with with respect to a
speculator or non-homestead purchase of the subject property, the crude amount of the code enforcement fine or lean compared to the investment profit that will be gained. Again, I'm not certain that is relevant. any previous or subsequent violations pertaining to the property.
Um, any previous and number 11, any previous or subsequent violations of the applicant pertaining to any other properties owned within the city. Number 12, any relevant information contained in any title policy. Again, I
did review the application. I think it indicated there was no title policy. 13, any financial hardship. Number 14, any other mitigation, sorry, any other mitigating circumstances which may warrant the reduction or satisfaction of
the penalty or fine. And any other administrative review criteria relevant to whether it is equitable to reduce or release a lean uh which are adopted by the city manager in writing which are intended to be
applied to all applications on a uniform basis. And I'm not um certain I saw any such criteria by the by the city manager. So with that um I will after hearing all the evidence this
evening um I will issue a written um recommendation. It will probably need to be next week. Uh simply because I'm completely booked the rest of this week. I don't I don't think I'll be able to to to write up um a recommendation this
week. So, look, I would say look for it within 7 to 10 days would be realistic. Um and typically what we do is the city's agenda packet is administratively accepted into evidence as the city's
exhibit one and the powerpoints uh slides as exhibit two. So any other exhibits will will go from there. On other business briefly, I have approved of the hearing minutes from May
27, 2025. They've been given to Miss Roth. And then our next hearing date will be on Tuesday, August 26, 2025. And so I'll turn it over to Mr. Coats if you'd just introduce yourself for the
record. And um I'd like to hear the the city's point of view on on this application. >> Yes, let's do that. So, anyone who is who expects to testify before me, if I would ask you to please stand up and to be sworn in,
is there anyone else going to testify? Okay. Does everyone Does everyone swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? So, be God. >> Thank you very much. General Co. What I've got here is a city of Cape Canaveral special magistrate
hearing consideration of an application for satisfaction or reduction of a code enforcement lean presented by me. Code manager 43 Harbor Drive Cape Canaveral 3292
legal as written parcel is written requested action consideration of an application for a satisfaction or reduction of the code enforcement lean notification summary findings of facts conclusions of law and
order 6:30 2020 Certified mail Rita M. Goldberg Life Estate 6:30 2020 property posted in accordance with Florida statute 16212
notices Rita M. Goldberg Life estate notice of lean reduction hearing 6:30 2025 certified mail to Rita M. Goldberg Life estate 6:30 2025 the property was posted in
accordance with Florida statute 162.12 notices life estate >> can I just interject here for a moment I thought my my order there were two orders there was one in in in June 2020 and then there was a follow-up order I
thought in September 2020 which um actually imposed is the fines. Do you have the information for the September 2025 order? Which >> September 2025? >> Yes. September 23rd. I'm sorry. Let me
let me restick. September 20th. I'm sorry. September 23rd, 2020. This was the the order. It's in the agenda packet. It's the LA It's the >> I've got order. I've got the order document.
>> Yes. And so just so we're talking about notification. I just want to make sure the record is clear that notification was I see a not I see an affidavit of posting at the very end of the agenda packet on the order dated June 24, 2020.
>> I've got the >> and then I have I see magistrate order. >> Okay. >> So I see US Postal Service certified mail receipt and it stated September 29, 2020. And I see a a signature. Um it looks like Barbara
>> Barbara stole. Yes, sir. I've got right here. >> Stole. Okay. So, looks like that was signed as received >> by Barbara Stol. Yes, sir. >> Yeah. And And do we have a an approximate date on that? I >> Yes, sir. She signed October 2nd.
>> October 2nd. Thank you so much. >> This is the property as it looked in 2020. According to county property prison site staff report staff on 63 of 2020 staff presented this case to you and you
found the property in violation of the notice of violation and gave the respondent until July 22nd, 2020 to bring the property into compliance. Can >> Can I just stop for one second? We have some kind of high-pitched sound coming. Is that
>> Is that a hearing aid? >> It's okay. Do you need to adjust? Just take your time. Do you Okay. >> Are we good? Okay. >> All right. So So go ahead and repeat that again. It was It was on on on on June 3rd, 2020.
>> I gave until July 23rd, 2020 to come into compliance. Yes, sir. Last Okay. As of the July 23rd, 2020, the property was still in violation. On September 22nd, 2020, staff presented this case to you during a Massie hearing and requested a
lean be placed on the property due to the respondent's failure to bring the property into compliance. You placed a lean on the property retroactively effective as of June 22nd, 2020 in the amount of $100 for the first day and $50
for each subsequent day a until the violation is fully resolved. >> Um I I wonder if there's a discrepancy in there. Um if you just back up a slide. So the the the compliance date I thought I gave till July 22nd, but then
I made the fine or the the fine retroactive to June 22nd. >> I think that was a compliance hearing. That was not done by me, Mr. Geller. >> Okay, hold on one second here. Let me let me let me look at these dates here because I may have made an error in my
in my order on on on September 22nd. So, I want to fix that if I made an error >> because I'm looking at the order right here. >> Okay. So, I said it was retroactive. This the fines are retroactive to and
begin occurring on July 22nd, 2020. So, I did get it right. There was just it was just an error in the slide. >> Okay. >> So, so they were Yeah. The fines are retroactive to and begin acrewing from July 22nd, 2020. the date required for compliance in the special magistrate's
June 24, 2020 order. Okay, I'm good. >> Okay. Uh Okay. Now on May 9th, 2025, this property was determined to be in compliance and the consequently the accural of fines associated with the
recorded lean which had reached an approximate total of $83,600 has been formally discontinued as of this date. On 612 2025, the respondent contacted the code enforcement division to inquire
about the process for the potential removal or reduction of the lean currently recorded against the subject property. The respondent was advised that the procedures had to formally apply for a lean reduction consideration.
On 619 2025, staff received a notorized application for lean reduction consideration along with appropriate processing fees associated with lean application protocols. >> And let me stop you here. Uh that determination of the property being in compliance, did you make that
determination, officer codes, >> or someone else? >> What sir? >> Did did you or someone else in the code division make the determination the property was now in compliance? >> I did. >> You did. Okay. Okay. Yes, sir. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> All right. All right. You you could you could back up and and um >> All right. All right. You can proceed. >> I'm going proceed on. You've already went over the application review. >> I did. >> Okay. Now, application review continue. Respond is requesting a reduction to $8,200.
Okay. However, after further review, the city stands firm on required payment of the full lean amount of $83,600 in order to satisfy and remove the lean from the property. In addition to all staff, cost and attorney fees must be included as part of the total lean
amount. >> Why why is the uh city taking the position that uh there should be no no reduction in the lean? due to the time it's taken along with the staff cost and attorney fees. >> Okay.
>> Now, Mr. Geller, you can make a determined to slash that if you chose, but this is the way the city is standing firm. >> I can I can make a recommendation. So, um so it took a long time to bring the property into compliance. At least by by the city's count, property did not come
to compliance until what was the date again? It was it was um >> May 9th. >> May 9th, 2025. So it was it was a almost five years. >> Yes sir. >> Was um Right.
Did the did the city uh and in coming up with your recommendation did you take into consideration the value of the property or anything of that nature? Sir, >> did you well well among the different the different um
factors that I I'm supposed to consider just bear with me a second here. I had it here. Yeah. The time it took to bring the property into combin that's number four. Do you have any calculation of the um administrative and out-ofpocket costs of
the city including paying the special magistrate? >> Financial is still working on that figure and >> okay >> this is not set by me alone. We had a meeting along with the uh city manager, financial director, and al along with the directors, okay,
>> to stand firm until see what what what happens. >> I I understand, but but I can >> they're still they're still trying to calculate the staff cost and attorney fees, which has not been done to my knowledge. >> Okay. So, my recommendation cannot
I I I really can't recommend one way or another on the on the attorney's fees or or the the out-of- pocket administrative cost not having it in front of me. So, it's hard for me to say, well, I think you know, city council, you ought to do
this, that, or the other thing. Um, okay. So, so I'll make a note here. No, no calculations. of cost of staff time and for the special magistrate. Well, number what I was getting at
before, like number eight says the acred amount of the code enforcement fine or lean as compared to the current market value of the property. Is is that anything that that the city looked into? where the property is now. >> Yes. So, so it it's so one of the
criteria is the amount of the lean compared to the current market value. So, >> I do not know what the current market value is of that property. I know it's a nice piece of property. >> Okay. Well, and in the location, it's pretty close to the to the Atlantic, right? It's >> Yeah, it's like
>> like right there almost. Yes, sir. Okay. Um, >> okay. If that's all the city has, I'd like to hear from the applicant. >> Yes, sir. Of course. Do you have a copy for the city as well? That's right. Thank you.
We come before you today to respectfully acknowledge the citation >> before you get before you get into into your argument. Could you give me your name and your address and and and who you are? >> Uh Julianne Elizabeth Stoell. I'm the granddaughter of Rita M. Goldberg. My
current address is 6295 Northwest 61st Court, Ocala, Florida. The property in reference was my childhood home where I grew up, where my parents currently reside. >> And and and who who are your who are
your parents who are currently residing in the house? >> Um Barbara Goldberg. She is the daughter of Rita M. Goldberg. Barbara Stol, I'm sorry. And then my father, Charles Stowel. So, so, so you you were um Rita Goldberg's granddaughter. I I got it.
Yes, sir. >> Okay. >> All right. Sorry for the interruption. I'll let you uh I just want to know who people are, so feel free to continue. >> We come before you today to respectfully acknowledge the citations issued against the Rita M. Goldberg Life estate
property at 403 Harbor Drive. At the time of the original violation, our family was enduring an extremely difficult period marked by multiple hospitalizations and deaths of loved ones. While these personal circumstances
do not excuse the situation, they significantly impacted our ability to manage the matter and communicate properly with the city. We have lived in this community for 43 years owning and maintaining three properties and have always taken pride
in keeping these residences well-maintained. In past instances where Karns were were concerns were raised, we have been receptive, cooperative, and prompt in correcting any matters brought to our attention. In September 2024, we
proactively contacted the city and were informed that our property was free and clear of any city citations and fines. This is also reflected in the documents in the folder before you, which shows no outstanding issues or fines at this time.
>> Okay, hold let's let me stop you there. Which which document am I looking at here? >> The very last one. No, there's two emails. That one in your hand. Yes, >> this one here. >> Yeah. So, that is what's pulled off of your website when you enter the address. >> Okay, hold on one moment. Let me let me
look at this. >> And then also the information that we were told when we called reflects that. And this is a this is a a document from the from the building department. Is that >> when you go on your the city of Kate Prenaval's website and use the drop-own
bar to search like any fines or anything against properties when you enter the address of 403 Harbor Drive that's what comes up. >> Okay. Now enforcements Okay. So, so, so, so you you saw this in
September 2024, and we're under the belief as of September 2024, there were there were no >> Yes. >> no um >> anything against the property. It was free and clear. >> So, it says enforcements enforcement type. Okay. Did you did you look at the
public records of Breard County? >> No. So, >> um, we just kind of moved forward cuz we were going to list the property for sale. So, we move forward with everything, but then it was brought to
our attention by a neighbor who was interested in purchasing the property that there was fines on said property. So, that's when we done we reached out further, my cousin Jennifer Childs, and discovered all the leans against the property. >> Okay. And that was via correspondence
with Esther. >> Okay. Who Who is Esther? >> She works here. I think she's like the city clerk. >> Okay. So, the city clerk advised you of the of the code. >> She emailed us like a list of everything, all the documents,
everything that was on the property in regard to the matter in that case number. >> And was this also in September 2024 more or less? No, that was uh this year, the beginning of this year. March 3rd, I believe. >> All right. Okay. So, however, a neighbor interested
in purchasing this property informed us that the fines were in fact being incurred. Acting on this information, Jennifer Childles reached out to the city and discovered that prop uh the property was indeed accumulating fines. And >> who who was Jennifer Childs?
>> So, she is my cousin. So, her father was the son of Rita M. Goldberg. He is deceased. So, she is granddaughter as well. >> Okay. Also granddaughter. Okay. Um, since this discovery, we have been nothing but eager and fully compliant in
working to resolve these matters. Also in that folder there before you is two emails that my sister and I um reached out to the city in regard to trying to find out information pertaining to this.
>> Okay. So, I have a an email from Esther Coulson. your public records request was received and will be processed in accordance with Florida statutes chapter 119 >> and then you asked for all documentation
and lean information on the property at 403 Harbor Drive. >> That must be backwards. So I initially reached out to her and that was her response. >> Okay. Sure. Sure. I I just read it I read in reverse reverse chronological order. So you reached out to her on May 19th. Okay. And so she provide and she
provided you with the documents that you need. did not provide me personally. So those two emails are uh one is from myself, one is from my sister. I believe it's the Danielle email. Um my sister did not receive a response. I did receive a response. >> Okay.
>> Um that the case was being reviewed, but I have never yet to receive the documents. >> Okay. So what was the response if you did not get the documents? >> My cousin because she was also in contact. Uh there was no response from
me. I did not get a response. It was just that initial response. So I left it at that due to the fact that my cousin had acquired the documents from her. >> Okay. I'm a little confused. Did anyone receive the documents? >> Yes, my cousin. >> Okay. And your and your cousin is who?
>> Jennifer Childs. >> Jennifer. >> Yes. Who I previously spoke about? Yeah. >> Jennifer Childs. C H I L Ds. >> Yes, sir. >> Received the documents. And And then Miss Child shared the documents with you. >> Yes. >> Okay. All right.
>> Okay. I'll let you continue. >> Sorry. Since the this discovery, we have been nothing but eager and fully compliant in working to resolve these matters. Also in the folder before you is the two emails. Um, we fully expect responsibility and do not dispute the
original citation. However, we respectfully request that the court consider reducing the fines to $8,200, reflecting the situation in 2020 when the citation was originally issued and recognizing that these citations were corrected and should not have resulted
in a continuence of fines. So, that $8,200 was determined from July 22nd of 2020 till through the end of the year. So, that duration is where we got that number from. July 22nd, 2020 until
December 20 to December 31st, 2020. >> Was the property brought into compliance by the end of the year? >> Yes. >> Did anyone advise the city that the >> No, that's where we failed to do so due to just circumstances going on at that
time >> and just unaware of being that you had to notify you guys in order for that to be lifted because we were unaware that we were even being fined. Did did did you or did anyone to your knowledge
review my my order from July 20? >> No. Okay. >> So during that time um we had a lot of like I said family members that were ill. >> Okay. >> So >> a lot of times no one was home. Okay.
>> And my grandmother was 93. I mean she was older so she >> would have not received the documents. Plus they were going to a PO box. >> So and and and your grandma was living in the house at the time.
>> Oh, she had passed away. My brother was um ill at the time and my father as well. So it was just my there was four residents in the house at the time, but two of which were ill.
>> Okay. I'm I'm going to I want to explore this a little more with you, but let me just back up. Okay. Just just just so I want the record very clear, >> okay, >> that my findings of fact conclusions of law and order which
was dated uh September September 23rd, 2020. I I misspoke when I said July before September 23rd, 2020. In in order to abate the acrewing fines, the respondent must correct the violations identified in this order and in the special magistrate's order dated June
24, 2020 and inform the city's code enforcement division to verify that the violations no longer exist. Right. >> Okay. So now I have some conflicting evidence before me. I have the city saying, "Look, we we verified everything's been
been rectified, but that's in May of >> 2025." And then then you're representing that the violations actually were corrected by the end of the year by >> 2020. Yes. So, we're saying that we corrected the issues, but where we
failed was to inform the city that corrected. Do you have any any documentary evidence of the the fence being repaired or any of the other >> We believe there is >> pictures um
>> online that you can reference that things were fixed. There was also other issues that were closed out as well. But like how do you prove the grass was mowed during that time? You know, >> well, if you if you have a a contract with They move in themselves. So that
that's the problem. >> Okay. But but but to but to fix the fence, you typically need a fence contractor to come in >> and replace themselves. >> Okay. >> I I I can't have testimony from someone in the audience. I'm going to need if someone wants to testify, I'll need
they'll need to be sworn in. Then they'll need to come up so they >> are on the microphone and are part of the record. Yeah. Okay. So So it's a testimony that the the the grass was cut and the fence was repaired. Yes. And then the mildo on the wall
>> and and it was all self-help. It was there were there were there no outside contractors >> hired to fix it. It was all done. >> And I was just asking just to see if there was something that could corroborate the the earlier date
>> All right. Okay. I I I keep interrupting you, but but I I think this is >> totally fine. >> Okay. >> So, yes. Um, so the $8,200 is reflected based upon that information of when it was originally. >> Yeah. I I want I want to talk to you more about uh the the family
circumstances. I So, so you said that your your brother was ill, your dad was ill, >> grandma was 93. >> She was she passed away. So, during that time um I was incarcerated. I did six years in prison. So, I was not there. I wasn't residing in the house.
>> Okay. Um but my brother was alive but he was ill due to congestive heart failures a lot of injuries at that time and then my father same thing. So between Shans in Orlando both of them were being hospitalized and then my mother who was
also residing there and then her brother as well who was facing some issues was ill. So there was really no one at the house. Just my mom was the only one that was of health able to do anything. >> Okay. And so and and I'm trying to get
every So so so so in 2020 grandma Rita was deceased at that point. Okay. Then was there someone I someone was 93 years old. Who was that? >> I'm sorry. That was my mistake. >> Okay. All right. Okay. So that so I'll
strike that. So all right. And so so at the time so so you're the family members are having to deal with hospital >> one person who's also a business owner to look after the home during that time.
>> And who was that? >> My mother Barbara Stoa. >> Okay. So Barbara was was was was living at the home >> trying to run a business. Also trying to run back and forth between hospital visits and doctor visits due to ill family members.
>> What kind of what kind of business? >> Uh housekeeping, commercial, residential, Airbnbs. She does housekeeping. >> Okay. Okay. So, basically it's the uh so so so your
brother is ill, dad is ill, mom is >> she's having to run up the shs in Gainesville. She's um she's she's working um she she's and she's the the owner of this housekeeping business. >> Owner, operator, only employee.
>> Okay. She's dealing that you're you're out of the picture during this time. >> Unfortunately. >> All right. Um are there any other circumstances to help me help me understand anything else that prevented uh Barbara
>> the death of her brother? Okay. When did when did uh when did her brother die? >> September 13th, 2020, >> which was shortly before my order, like 10 days before my my second order was issued. Do you know the brother's name? Your
uncle? >> Uh Roy Goldberg. >> Okay. Where did Roy Goldberg live? So, he actually resided at the property 20 243 Coral Drive. Um, but when he died, he was living between my mother's home
at 403 and then the other property, her other sister right up the street on Harbor Drive as well. >> Okay. >> So, they were all kind of helping look after him. >> Okay. Was was was uh Roy Goldberg uh ill before his death?
>> Uh, yes. Yes, he had cancer and multiple other health issues. >> Okay. The the the more you tell me the the the more I more information I have. What kind of >> He was epileptic. He had cancer, gastro
problems. >> I said cancer. >> Okay. >> A lot of issues. >> What kind of cancer? Um was he stricken with >> prostate? But then it spread through his entire body. Okay.
>> Are there any other uh medical issues or other um other considerations that would help me to understand the the um >> just between you know my father he um had congestive heart failure. He also
uh was on dialysis during that time. >> Okay. My brother um was in full organ shutdown. He had a heart transplant, double valve transplant. >> When when when was the heart transplant?
>> When did he have the open heart surgery? >> Um We're getting information from from outside incarcerated during that time. >> Yeah, I understand. So So I'm wondering if if maybe another family member would like to get up and give me some more of this detail. >> Can they come stand beside me like mom?
>> Of course. Okay. >> Of course. Would that be okay? >> And I'm going to have to swear you in. Raise your right hand, please. Do you swear the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you very much. Could you um introduce yourself for the record and your address?
>> Barber Stoell, 403 Harbor Drive, Cape Canal. >> Okay, Miss Stoell. Um would you like to add anything to >> Yeah, we have we had 10 deaths in that 2-year period between 20 and 22. All family members.
>> Mhm. my husband's mother, sister, two sisters, brother, my brother, an uncle, and you know, all that was going on between 20 and 22. >> Okay. >> So, it was he was on dialysis and my son
was had two valves transplanted >> and then So, one second. So, so this was your your husband on diialysis? On >> dialysis. >> Okay. And and your husband's name is >> Carl Stoa. Okay. Someone told me that earlier. I I
couldn't remember. Um and then then then your your son had a heart transplant in October 2020. >> He didn't he died before the heart. He had valve replacement in October of 2020 and he was on the transplant list for heart and liver through.
>> So he had a a valve transplant. >> Yeah. And then he got the infection in the valves and he was on the transplant list. And and and and when was the valve transplant? >> Octo October of 2020. >> Okay. And >> we kind of found out he had the heart
problem fixing the fence. He was me and him were fixing the fence and he couldn't do it. He was like and that's when we realized he had a heart problem. And that was in I believe in June or
July. We were fixing the fence. >> Okay. We were trying to rebuild the fence >> and then he he just couldn't do the work at at a certain point. >> He started I thought he was going to have a heart attack. >> Did uh did you take him to be checked
out anywhere during >> and he ended up in OMC hospital and he was in there almost a whole year because of the infection. >> Okay. Um, so I'm a little
>> go during that time. >> I'm just trying to understand the the timing of everything. So So you're trying to fix the fence in June or July 2020. >> Yeah. >> This is in response to to my initial order. >> Your initial order. >> Okay. And then
um so so you're out there uh with your son. What was your son's name? >> Charles Stoall Jr. and then >> pictures of where it was fixed. >> That where we showed him the one the original complaint and took pictures of
that. >> Okay. >> When he came out. >> Okay. Uh, and so, um, he he he went, um, did you take or do you have to be taken by ambulance or >> No, he ended up we went to a
cardiologist and they admitted him in the hospital. >> Okay. Okay. So he's trying to fix the fence and with you in June or July and then uh and and and he unfortunately passed away in October.
>> No, he passed away in 23. He had valve replacement. >> Oh, the valve replacement was in October. >> Was and the spring of the next year he was put on the heart transplant list.
>> Okay. So spring of 21 he was on the heart transplant list. >> Passed away in do either of you have any information about the value of the house or the property? Yes, >> it was appraised at a million22.
>> 1 million 22. Okay. Is there any any anything else you either of you would like to tell me? Um, okay. Let me kind of give you some of my my thoughts and I'm going to give you an opportunity to respond. I'm going to give officer coats an opportunity to
respond and I'm going to I'm going to make a final decision in writing. But but I want you all to kind of understand you my thinking or at least um my concerns or or at least how I'm I'm viewing the evidence right now and then I'm going to give you a chance to
respond. Um so the first point you don't need to worry about the administrative and out-of- pocket costs. that's the city's responsibility. Um the gravity and and the number of violations I thought I I thought it was a pretty um
major violation uh because there's a swimming pool there and I was at the time and I I remember this case and I was really concerned about a child who could not swim getting through the slats. Um and so in my order I I wrote
that it was an imminent and continuing threat to public health and safety. So um that that's one of the issues I have to weigh here. Uh the amount of the requested reduction is 90%. Um I think that's a lot frankly. Um but
I got to I've got to take that in consider you know these are just all the different factors I need to consider. Uh the time in which it it took to bring the property into compliance. the um the the evidence that that you all have presented was by the end of December
2020. The um uh but my order to advise the city so that they could confirm that was not complied with. So I'm I'm I'm at a
disadvantage there to um um let's see. So that's on the time it took to bring the property into compliance. I have conflicting evidence whether the applicant was responsible for the violation. Um I would say yes if you're reciting mayor you're responsible
um um some this next factor does not apply whether the applicant is or will be a bonafide purchaser of the property. No, you already were residing there. Um whether you did not acquire the property with with knowledge of the lean. you already
you already have the property. Um the the amount of the code enforcement fine or lean about 83,000 more or less uh compared to the market value of of a little over a million. I I need to take that into consideration.
Um and so are there any other any other mortgages or other leans on the property? No. >> Okay. I'm supposed to I'm supposed to consider any previous or subsequent violations pertaining to the property. I've not seen any evidence of
that. I've not seen any evidence of any previous or subsequent violations of the applicant. Um uh the title policy is irrelevant. Um I I have no no evidence of financial
hardship that's been provided to me. Uh it's a it's a um the location's incredible. I I mean I I know the street and um that's a um it's it's a valuable asset to your family. Um any other mitigating
circumstances? The mitigating circumstances are all the the health issues that were uh impacting um your family at the time and um I I' I've dealt with similar issues in my own family and I know how how distracting
that can be. Um, and I've not been given any administrative review criteria by the city manager. Uh, so, uh, is there anything else you'd like to tell me before I let Mr. Coats, um, address that? >> Okay. All right. Well, thank you for your testimony. I appreciate both of
you, Mr. Coats. Any uh any further um responses or rebuttal to anything that you've heard? >> No, sir. Okay. >> The only thing that I can say is yes, I
that figure sounds accurate based on where the property is and it's a pristine piece of property. >> Yeah. Um Okay. Is is there there any way that
short of them? I mean, I mean, obviously, no one came to the code division saying, "We got it fixed. Please, please do another inspection." Is there any way that we're able to um look back in time? Are there any Google Street View images we could look at to
see, yeah, they did fix the the fence by a certain time? I what I showed you at the uh start property data, I've got that photograph and you can go all the way from 2020 to 2025 and look at the pool for instance. Uh
it's still uh sludgy green. The car has not been covered up. There's one picture at one year I think it had a cover on it. Uh but I can't remember when that was. >> Okay, let's So you gave me pictures? I I
do not have any documentation from the code officer in 2020 other than >> the original. >> Well, I'm concerned, you know, starting I'm I'm concerned about 2021 through May 2025. Is there is there any evidence one way or another that these conditions
were were rectified? Does that that would corroborate their testimony or or or would refute it? >> Not evidence. No, sir. Not in proof. >> Okay. So, we have we we have no um
>> until I test Chris Velia with the uh responsibility to going out there and see if this property gets complied with. That's the only thing I got. >> Okay. All right. I um I'm going to have to take this under advisement. I'll I'll
issue a written recommendation in in 7 to 10 days and um uh we'll then then um whatever the recommendation is, you'll you'll take this on to the uh to the city council and they'll they'll be the ones to make
uh the final decision on this. So, appreciate everyone coming here and sharing your testimony. Is there is there any other business this evening? >> No, sir. >> Then we'll uh we'll call the meeting adjourned. Thank you, everyone. >> Thank you. Okay.