You don't want everybody coming in and say, "Well, here's what my view is and here's what my view is." It really doesn't matter. The city's trying to prove a case. The response is either agreeing to the case that was shown or disputing it. Okay? Does that make sense to everybody? Okay? And at the end of
the proceedings, I'll enter a oral order which will later be consummated in a written order usually within a few days. Uh and then that order will be distributed. Um, like I said, all testimony will be given under oath. Um, and I'm going to
swear all the witnesses is in just a second. Miss Crawford, is can you think of anything I might have missed? >> No. >> Okay. So, anybody who plans on testifying today, would you please rise and raise your right hand? Okay. We'll start with you, Mr. Foster.
Would you state your full name? >> Richard C. Foster. >> Danielle Crawford. Do each of you solemnly spirit the testimony about the given matter not hearing the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth help you God. >> Thank you. All right. The first case is case number
25-175 relates to 55 Cedar Avenue unit one. The propert is Richard C. Foster. Miss Crawford you can begin. >> Uh yes. So the respondent today is Richard C. Foster. Uh he is the owner of
55 Cedar A unit one. Uh parcel ID and legal description as shown. Um above is an aerial view of the property. Um on August 14th, 2025, I completed an inspection of the property and observed the balcony in dilapidated condition
without railing. Additionally, uh there was trash and debris on the property, including an inoperable vehicle. On September 16th, 2025, a notice of violation was sent to the respondent via first class and certified mail for violations of the following codes.
Violations of section 10-22, enumerated conditions. Section 304.1, exterior structure, uh, property maintenance code. Section 304.10, exterior structure, stairways, decks, porches, and balconies.
uh international property maintenance code. On October 2nd, 2025, the respondent signed for the certified mailing of the on December 11th, 2025. The NOV was resent to the owner as I had not heard from anyone or seen any P uh permits
pulled. Uh the trash and debris and dilapidated vehicle um had been removed and the respondent was no longer in violation of section 10-22 enumerated conditions. On December 15, 2025, the respondent signed for the second certified mailing of the NOV. On
February 20th, 2026, a notice of cancellation and hearing was sent to the respondent. On March 20th, the notice of cancellation and hearing was received by the respondent. On March 30th, uh the
notice was posted on the property as no green card or certified mail had been returned. And as of today, uh, permits for the balcony repairs have not been pulled and the balcony remains in dilapidated and unsafe condition without any railing.
Um, so these are the original pictures from August 14th, 2025. It's just a vehicle without um tags or registration, a balcony uh without railing, and just some minor trash and debris.
This is March 30th, 2026. As you can see, the property has been cleaned up. The vehicle's been removed. Um, however, there is still no railing, the balcony, and this is um an image from yesterday. >> Okay, Mr. Foster, does that conclude the
city's case? >> It does. >> Did you want to introduce the PowerPoint and evidence? >> I Yes, please. >> And Mr. Foster, do you have any objection to the documents that were just shown on the screen being introduced in evidence? >> No. >> Okay, it'll be admitted. Do you have any questions of Miss Crawford?
>> Uh, well, my only question is who initially filed the complaint? >> Well, please come up here. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Well, don't ask me. Ask Miss Crawford. Uh, who initially filed the complaint? >> There was no complaint. I was just
driving around and I saw a violation. So, I sent a notice of violation. >> Okay. >> No neighbor complaints >> because I want to say my next door neighbor's house is even worse than mine, but I'm I'm not throwing stones,
you know. Um I' I've tried to I I mean, I've got >> Okay, hang on just one sec. Are you through with Miss Crawford then? >> Yes. Okay, you can >> um I'm I'm trying to get it fixed. I'm trying to get a railing up there. Um
I've replaced it once myself and it lasted all of three years and then ripped out again in a hurricane. Um, and everybody that I've talked to, the handyman
slash rail repairers, um, they want like $20,000 to put a railing on that. And it's like, the materials aren't that much. I've already got the materials on my back porch. I need help with actually putting them
mounting them because the way I did it before and the way it was done before is they just put screws through the roof and the wind would just sit there and do this and just rip them out. I want to put a larger base underneath the actual roof
to give it stability, a little strength. And being that I'm the only one in the house, only one living there, it's hard for one person. So, I'm I'm struggling. And as I told Miss Crawford too, um I
have been scammed um to the tune of $120,000. The FBI is involved in it now. Um, I'm hoping to recover some of that money because that scum, pardon me, scam
emptied my account and I'm trying to recover, pay bills, pay back mortgages. I I had to take out a heliloc. I got to pay that back. I'm short of funds right now. I'm $18 overdrawn in my checking account.
So, I don't I don't know what else I can do. Okay. Uh, let me ask the city. Well, first of all, how much time do you think you need to I've been I've been This has been going on for years. I I'm, you know,
I get a little bit ahead and my truck breaks down. My truck is 24 years old. I, you know, I'm just trying to stay above water right now. I mean, I've got the pieces. I've got the post for the railing sitting on my back porch. Um, I've got
the plates for it. Um, as I get stuff, if I could get uh my brother, unfortunately, is out in Houston to come help me, maybe I get things done. But he is older than me and
I don't foresee any possibility him coming here to Florida. And I don't >> I don't want to sound insensitive and I because I everything you said you just told me obviously >> stinks for lack of a better techical
word. >> That being said, you you really acknowledge that there's no railing there, >> right? >> You acknowledge that the code requires that a railing be there >> and you understand the reason why a railing should be there. >> Well, yes and no. I mean, the only the
only I understand the railing I've got a door to that sund deck. Um, that door has been blocked off. Um, at one time the city said, "Okay, yeah, block the door off. Don't have to seal
it, but you can block it off to where that door is not used and it's I guess you call it a gray area. you know, no one can get out onto that roof and possibly fall off. >> Let me ask you a question about that.
The photo that on the right is where the railing isn't. On the left, there is railing. That's two separate units though, right? >> Yes. >> So, the ab budding owner could get on that what otherwise would be a roof if it wasn't for a door, right? >> It' be a roof if there wasn't a door
there, >> right? So the abuing owner can get on the quote unquote walking surface and still be in danger of going off if assuming they on your side of the I got that. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, >> and that's what the correct me if I'm wrong, city, but that's where in the
code is important because the code is designed so people don't fall off walking services that are elevated. Right. Right. >> Okay. >> And let me ask the city another question in the general scheme of things. This I
heard Miss Foster say he'd like to do this about this type of construction and that type of construction. There are code requirements for railings, right? About >> theft to hold 250 lbs. >> Okay. And so there is a requirement for a permit obviously and there is a
requirement for an inspection after the installation. So everything has to be done in accordance with the code and pass inspection. Okay. So the question then arises, how much time do you do you think you need to you agree that this is
a public safety hazard, right? >> Yes. I Well, I wouldn't say public. It's a safety hazard. >> It's a safety Okay. For whoever's on, >> but my neighbor is also got her door blocked off also. >> Well, >> so no one should be out on that roof
unless they're doing construction. Let me ask the city a question. I mean, just out of if the door wasn't blocked off, but there wasn't a door, there was a wall, there would be a roof, then it wouldn't be a it wouldn't be a deck. Right.
>> Right. >> So, that's the option, I suppose, is to make both parties have walls that don't access what becomes a roof and not a deck. That makes sense.
>> Yeah, I know what you're saying. >> But anyway, let's Do you have anything else you need to say right now? Cuz I'm Let me switch it to the city about how much time you think needs to be given to come into compliance
considering this is a public safety hazard. Before we before um we had spoken, I had listed 30 days. Um but now hearing uh some some more testimony, I would like to defer to my supervisor, Brian.
>> We the city's willing to to provide him with enough time to to fix the railing or to completely block off the door. A single 2x4 doesn't keep people from going out onto the deck. um to completely block off the door to to
completely eliminate access to that to that roof unless somebody's up there working on it. >> What about the budding known roof access? >> Same. That would have to be the same. >> It would have to be dual, wouldn't it? >> Or or a safety, you know, something between the two units can also be uh placed up there temporarily to keep
anybody from coming over onto his unit. But the city is willing to end up with I'm sorry, but you end up in the same problem. Is it the expense of doing that? No, I I understand that. I'm just I'm giving options. >> No, I'm just I'm I'm just articulating that that then you still end up with
>> with expense to build that barrier. >> But the city's willing to we're we're willing to work with him. Um we'll get a date. I mean, we can give him >> We can't that Well, it's up to you. We could suggest giving till June
and giving him two months to get something moving. We could come back, bring this back in front of the magistrate at that date, see where we're at at that point in time and either ask for more time or what, you know, anything that may happen at that point
in time. >> There be any conditions about taping, yellow taping, or keeping the doors blocked or anything like that? >> The doors need do need to be blocked off. We can't allow access up there while it's like like it is. Um, I'm I'm
sure I'm sure the property owner here wouldn't go out on that deck. Um, I I'm sure that's not an issue. What I'm concerned about is the neighbor if somebody is, you know, if they have young children or or or what have that may go up there. >> I I don't know.
>> Is the neighbor cooperative? >> Oh, yeah. >> And the neighbor is blocked. >> She's actually in worse shape than I am. uh being that she's got an older son lives with her that doesn't work, doesn't do anything
and I won't go any further than that, but he is been arrested many times and >> but you might want not Yeah, you might want to that's end the story at that point. >> Yeah. Yeah. You know, she's got her problems. >> There you go.
>> Just as just as much as I do. Um and I've I've tried to help her. Actually, we had a leak in a adjoining wall and I ended up paying for it because it was actually my water pipe that was leaking down through the wall.
>> Well, let me ask the city this. Would it be a condition that the abuing neighbor also maintain her door blocked? >> Well, that's not a that's not something that I mean, unless they're in violation of something there. I mean, it depends on whose railing it is. We can't really
ask somebody else to do something that is a property owner, a budding property owner's uh violation. >> It's a common railing between us. >> There's nothing when I see >> that goes this way. Hers goes this way. >> Is there a is there a railing running? I
couldn't see. >> Is that railing in between still there? >> No, >> I didn't see. That's what I thought. Yeah. >> Who's responsible for that? >> I can't really see it from that angle or either either of those angles. Oh, like this. >> Yeah, there. >> No, it sort of goes around the corner
and stops. >> Yeah, >> there's about it looks like two foot of it, >> but that's it. >> If it's a common railing, then both properties would be responsible for the upkeep. >> But it's like my my door block
>> goes horizontal, hers is diagonal. >> Oh, I see the block now. Even >> one's diagonal and one's crossways. Right. >> Right. One's horizontal. Okay. So, you just want to deal don't want to impose any obligation on Mr.
Foster to ensure that actions taken by his abuing neighbor either also. Excuse me. >> No, but no, that's a different that's a different discussion to have. I don't think that we need to uh the the city
isn't asking Mr. Foster to to contact his neighbor to enforce his neighbor to do something. This is a violation on his property. Uh the city will deal with the other property um instead of in this in this forum here. Um so we can work with Mr.
Foster on how to block that off and and and we can do that. we can have a code officer go out there and work with him on how to block that off and the and the easiest and the most costefficient way to do that until you can get the railing up. You can get a permit, get the railing up. You can do an owner builder
permit. This is a duplex. So, um >> done that in the past. >> Okay. >> And unfortunately, they I haven't been able to do anything and in the permit has >> last. Okay, that's fine. and we can also give you some um you know a list of uh
of people that could possibly help you get the railing up and you can reach out to them. >> So uh let's uh the city's willing to go to June and give him two months to uh to to at least get something um started. >> Okay.
>> And then like I said if we have to we can come back and ask for for more time. >> So that's the city's going to go till the next hearing is June 10th. So, what I hear the city saying is that they're willing to give you until June 9th to comply
and then >> All right. Okay. So, we we're agreeing on the time. Does the city have a proposed fine in the event non-compliance occurs after June 9th? >> No, not >> you want to establish the fine after that's okay. So
what the city said was that they're not saying right now that on June 10th a fine will kick in, but on June 10th it'll be determined whether or not like Mr. Palmer just said more times granted or a fine is established for f for
future days of non-compliance. Okay. So, I think that'll largely depend, not to tell put words in the city's mouth, on how much interaction you have with the city about getting things done, for lack of a better word. >> Okay. >> Okay. Does that make sense?
>> Yes. >> Is that what the city would like to see in into an order? >> Yes. And I just have one question for the record, just cuz uh for clarity. >> Do do you own the whole property? >> No. >> No, just the unit. Just the the unit on
the right. >> I see. Okay. I'm so sorry. >> So unit the one on the left is what? Unit two or >> Yeah, that's unit two. Then it goes three four. >> I see. >> Are these individually owned? >> Yes. >> Now you see look at that one from the
the obviously you don't have to look from it from the top because it is looking at it from the top. Now, >> I'm color blind and I'm color challenged and I'm which includes shade, >> but it looks like the quote unquote
cross wall, the dividing wall, fence, railing, whatever you want to call it, is curving towards the unit on the other unit's owner's side. Does that make sense? >> It's a shade. There's a shade there.
There's just shade there. That's So that actually >> that was actually a wall, a wooden wall that came out >> and went down to a rail. >> You see what I'm saying? >> Anyway, that's for the city to fix. It looks like there's no
division part of that dividing wall on unit one side and it's all on the unit two side. Beats me, but that's what it looks like. Okay. >> Okay. Is there anything further on this case? >> No. >> Okay. The order that'll be entered is that there is a violation of the code
remaining code that's cited uh and that the property owner will have until June 9th of 2026 to come into compliance. and that should the property owner not be in compliance on June 9th, the
hearing on June 10th will determine whether additional time is granted or a fine is established. So long story of that is the city's trying to work with you, Mr. Foster, and I appreciate it. I mean, okay,
>> I want to say unfortunately you guys have been after me for years, and I've been trying. I have really been trying. Like I said, I went out and got pieces and parts or the posts and I've actually encased them in PVC to try and protect
them longer. And you know, I'm I'm get my pieces together. It's just trying to get it done is what's been stopping me. >> You I I think you know the city is the code enforcer, but also from not not as
a little bit of a editorial I guess not And I don't editorialize, but you don't want to compound your problems that you've articulated with somebody wandering over on your side of the property and falling off the the roof
and because there's no railing there. >> Yeah. >> You know, I don't think either you or your homeowners insurance company would appreciate that. >> No. >> Okay. That'll be the order that'll be entered then. >> All right. Thank you. >> Okay. Okay. The next case is case number
25-91 and it's a lean reduction case. The property owner is Michael Sarco and the address of the property is 300 South Orlando Avenue and we've heard this case before and uh you may proceed.
>> Uh the miss reader >> the property was sold. The new owners are Dancing Coco LLC. um they are the ones working the lean reduction. >> Okay. >> On April 24th, 2025, the case was opened
for operating three vacation rentals without the required registrations and BTRs. The case was initially presented on July 9th and found in violation of the notice violation and the property was given until August 8th to come into compliance. The case was presented at a Massie hearing on September 10th and a lean was placed on the property
retroactive to August 9th. $100 the first day and $50 every day thereafter until in compliance is met, as well as a $250 onetime fine. On November 19th, the listings were found to have been removed once the property was sold, bringing the property in compliance. The total lean
is 5200 plus the $250 fine, and there's a breakdown of each month. >> Okay. >> Um, >> and the property owner is seeking a reduction. Is the city opposing it? No,
>> no. Okay. Represent the property owner. >> Well, let me ask you this. How how much is the city is the city not opposing the city is willing to reduce the uh lean to uh by 4,000 and get staff cost which is
approximately 1,200. Okay. So, reduce it by 4,000, which would leave a fine of $1,200 plus the $250 fine for the the other violation. So, a total of 1450. Have I got that right? >> Yes, sir.
>> Okay. Yes, sir. You may proceed. >> Morning, your honor. On behalf of the property owner. Um, so if um >> So, you're you're an attorney? >> Yes. >> Okay. I didn't need to swear you in then. I'm sorry. Yeah, it's okay. Um, so, um, if the city is willing to reduce
it to the cost, then I mean I have nothing further. >> Well, the cost, what the city's willing to do is go from 5200 to 4 to 1,200 plus the 250 fine. So, a total of 1450. >> I I'd be in agreement with that.
>> Okay. That was hard. >> Yeah. So without objection, that'll be the order that'll be entered then. >> Okay. >> Thank you, honor. >> Yes. >> All right. Are there any other matters to be
brought before the special magistrate this morning? No. All right, then we stand adjourned.