i'm ready okay Nancy you want to start us good morning your honor uh Nancy Stup serving as the town attorney for the town of Fort Myers Beach um before you today just to give kind of an overview
um we have two code violation cases and one appeal of a building official decision concerning an unsafe building um officer Yazo is here and he'll proceed with the first code violation um the parties for the
um uh property maintenance violation regarding 1313 Astera Boulevard as well as the appeal we have been working together trying to come up with a stipulation and so at the appropriate time when we begin the presentation on
the property maintenance we will provide you with a copy of the stipulation um that will hopefully um eliminate the need for an actual evidentiary hearing however we do need your guidance on um the appropriate remedy for both of those
cases um so with that said if you would like I can go ahead and call Officer Yazo i I believe he needs to be sworn in um and we can begin with presentation of uh 1249 Eststerero Boulevard also known as the whale owned by 1249 Eststerero
Adventures LLC all right before we call that first case there are a couple of matters on you kind of preliminary matters on the agenda are there compliance cases that uh needed to be uh put on the record for status updates i see that's noted in the
uh on the agenda so we don't have any however present we do have um attorney and um um Holden to give you an update on Lola um on how that case is progressing so we
would like to just go ahead and um allow them an opportunity in your discretion uh to give you an update well why don't we go ahead and do that and then they can they can probably you know be released instead of sitting around for the hearings okay thank you
good morning your honor morning Amy Tibau for the record with Bretzel and Andress and this is Tom H hotton good morning morning um we know that we're not on the agenda this morning but we did come prepared we
just wanted to discuss where we are with this particular project as I'm sure you remember the temporary use permit that um has been rescended and revoked with all the other temporary use permits um initially required you know that we
would be required to submit building plans by September of this year obviously things have changed so um Mr hton is here to discuss where we are as far as um redeveloping the site and so
with that I'll turn it over to him all right morning morning yes so um since we last spoke I have hired um an architect and been working with builder and I've already got some preliminary
plans but they're but I have another meeting to go over and uh make some tweaks to it but we plan on um doing our prepackage I guess or preliminary meeting with the town to discuss um the building plans in the next 30 days
excellent that's good very exciting um all right uh there's probably nothing for me to do in the matter at the moment i'm glad to hear things are moving forward um and uh that's probably it unless uh the town wants to to weigh in on this
one no no we just appreciate all the work that they've done very good well thanks for coming in and uh you all are free to go uh good luck it sounds like things are moving forward in a positive way it's good to hear
thank you very much thank you and also in terms of a preliminary business we've got the minutes from last month's March 4 meeting for approval i've looked at them are there any objections to the approval of those minutes none your honor all right
hearing none those minutes will be approved um now we can go ahead and move into the cases you wanted to start with 1249 Estster Boulevard the whale yes yes your honor um officer Yazo will need to be in as well as anyone elseify
all right and who do we have here for the respondent whale nobody's your honor your honor we do have some good news on this case so okay
i like good news uh so there's no one here no no respondent representatives here on this one no your honor all right let me get uh get you sworn in then if you raise your right hand for me do you swear or from the testimony you're about to give
be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir all right you may proceed good morning your honor thomas Yazo Fort Myers Beach Operations Compliance Manager we do have some good news on this case uh it is case number
FM2024919 for the site address of 1249 EO Boulevard partial strap number 1 194 624 W40060H30 0 uh they have come into compliance as of as of Friday of last
week they have removed the uh structure that was causing the issue uh they are in full compliance as of this time so we are going to move to have the case dismissed um with the thought process that there
would be a administrative fee applied for the work that went into this case your honor if I can clarify we do want a finding that there was a violation um as well as um the
$250 administrative fee um however we are not looking for a fine in this case because there's been cooperation um and contact with the town in in trying to remedy this violation all right so um what we'll do then is
we'll enter a final order we'll make the finding a violation um we'll make a finding that compliance has been achieved we'll impose the uh prosecutorial costs that are recover recoverable by statute and you're saying it's a flat $250 yes sir
it's easy it's a flat $250 your honor all right and they have no other obligations in at this point other than paying the costs other than maintaining compliance okay very good that is good news indeed that'll be it for that case your honor
okay so your honor the next case um on your agenda is the 1313 Eststerero Boulevard Island Shores Club um Mr null Davies is here representing the property owner who is Good morning your honor kaminsky at 131 Eststerero LLC um this
case is related to uh the building official appeals um as I indicated initially there has been conversation um between myself um Mr davies his client and town staff uh to put together a
joint stipulation concerning the code violation and the notice to demolish and the notice to vacate um we have asked that the clerk um provide you with a copy of a draft um
stipulation and the issues that we have not been able to come to agreement on uh relate to the uh the timing um of the uh demolition to occur they have agreed to demolish the building
um and the imposition of a fine um and I think that's it right the timing and the imposition of the fine yeah which is in section six any provisions that relate to timing and position of fines and also the escro
mechanism that's outlined in there I do have some preliminary remarks if I may your honor go ahead let me get your name again i It went by quickly just go ahead and introduce yourself good morning uh Noel Davies with the law firm of Davies Duke on behalf of the property owner
respondent good morning Mr davies go ahead good morning your honor um we as the town attorney mentioned we have um we were hopeful that we would have uh a fully agreed to stipulation to
present to you today um there are a few items um where we're in a disagree agree to disagree posture your honor uh which primarily is the the meat so to speak of section six um relating to the town's
request for imposition of fines and also uh the escrow mechanism that they're proposing and and the timing as well um so we we did talk through a number of times with with Miss Stuperic um to try to get to agreement
but we're not quite there so uh if I may I just wanted to outline a bit of context here for you and then uh provide you with um just some substance with respect to my client's position on those items uh and then we'll of course await your your
ruling with respect to those specifics uh so just just so I'm clear Mr davis are the the parties are asking me to decide several it sounds like you know up to maybe three or so issues that there isn't agreement on in this
stipulation correct in other words impose a debt impose a time frame uh set a fine uh and I guess there's an issue with an escrow that I'm I'm not fully aware of but the fine and the and the deadline you certainly that's clear
enough to me you and you want me to decide you all want me to decide that yes your honor i think what Nancy and I had discussed is you know working in good faith in advance of the hearing with the hope of trying to provide you with a fully agreed upon stipulation for
you to simply enter um but rather than start from scratch and and you know do a full evidentiary hearing today we wanted to at least provide you with a framework of the items that we agree upon um and then talk through um the
specifics with respect to that section six and anything related to that okay okay um so first and foremost the substantive issue here your honor is the you know the repair of the
building andor demolition of the building which is the request of the town uh my client is committed to demolishing the structure on the property and is committed committing to do so quickly um my client executed a contract with a
demolition contractor um and a copy of that I believe was provided Miss Duperich to your honor in the document as exhibit C so there's a fully executed demolition contract excuse me null your honor um they are in the
SharePoint folder they should be there this morning for you okay go ahead thank you Madam Clerk um so so the the contract's been issued the demolition contract um that that cures any alleged
violation your honor um and what we had proposed to the town is the following schedule um which you know in my opinion is is is is reasonable is is quite quick and and also practical uh given the need for permits uh or a demolition permit
for this so the schedule that we proposed uh that we're agreeable to your honor and would ask that you incorporate in your order is to obtain a demolition permit within 15 days from today and completing
demolition within 30 days after the town issues the demolition permit um we wanted to make sure that the clock for completing demolition runs from the date that the town issues the permit and then
of course we'll we'll apply for a permit as soon as possible and no later than 15 days from today um my client will abide by that schedule your honor uh of course if he does not we are not objecting
to whatever the appropriate provision um would need to be in there to allow the town to demolish the structure charge that back to my client um and of course be entitled to the corresponding lean
rights incident to that uh again if my client does not comply with the with the time frames I just outlined um for context your honor this is the first hearing on this matter we've been
working on the town with this for many many months you heard from Miss Dupich uh about an appeal that my office had filed with respect to um it was a building official determination appeal that was uh some time ago now but at the
time the town did not have uh the mechanism that it has with you now with respect to having um having a third party neutral uh hear those types of appeals so that's still pending and that's technically one of the items that's that's on the agenda
today but the the the specifics of that your honor I think we we didn't want to waste your time with that um and that's what me and Miss M stup and I discussed because again foundationally here and and and fundamentally my client's
willing to demolish the structure the demolition of the structure in full because we had talked previously about partial or doing certain repairs we've moved past that the client's going to demolish in full and we'll do so in accordance with the time frames that
that we outlined um but but today's hearing technically is a is a violation hearing uh there has been no finding of violation um by a by the third party neutral through your process your honor uh so at this time it's my position that
any fines that would be payable today would be would be premature right you can find uh a violation today and then provide that provide a time frame for curing that violation uh and of course I I provided you with with a proposed time
frame for you to assess in your discretion uh and then of course in the event that um that cure is not accomplished within the subject time frame that you set um then at that time fines certainly would be appropriate but the issuance of fines today uh without
the opportunity to cure um in my opinion would would be premature right you've got you've got to find the violation set the time frame and then upon in the event of non-compliance then fines would be appropriate so that's the basis for our request to not include in any order
with respect to today's proceedings um any requirement for payment of fines today but rather those fines would be owed in the event of non-compliance and the intent your honor is compliance and compliance to demolish
the building within the time frames that we outlined um there was another mention or there was another item in section six your honor with with respect to escrow with your discretion if if that
appears appropriate to you um you know we technically object to that your honor we want to we want to comply within the time frames we outlined in the event that doesn't occur as I mentioned the town you know we're then agreeable to the town having the right to demolish
the structure charge it back lean the property etc uh but we don't think an an escrow mechanism is is necessary to do that the town would have the right to uh pursue its you know its legal recourse in the event non-compliance um occurs uh and with that uh I'm happy
to answer your questions your honor and we appreciate the opportunity to be in front of you today so uh I guess the bottom line is putting aside the escrow which I haven't really seen the details of that but you're seeking a you want a compliance date in
effect um uh that's uh at least 30 days after the issuance of the permit and no fines to begin acrewing unless uh compliance is not achieved by that compliance date whatever that date happens to be at which point you know a daily fine would start to run as in a
normal case that's correct your honor um and then the escrow I guess is something specific that the town is seeking to uh either enforce compliance or extract some penalty for non-compliance i take it i I believe so all right um so that's
pretty straightforward um and in terms of the violation um it sounds like the uh the respondent is not contesting the violation but the argument is the fine shouldn't begin to run unless and until
compliance is not achieved by a by an established compliance state and that hasn't happened yes that's our position your honor because the you know the the client's due process rights contemplate the holding of this hearing which has which has not occurred yet for a number
of reasons including good faith discussions with the town um but we are we are here today we're you know we're we're curing that alleged violation with respect to agreement to demolish the uh the structure and to your point your
honor um you know the compliance date will be provided and then any fines and mechanisms for the town subsequent to that compliance date in the event compliance is not achieved um the town will have the appropriate recourse in accordance with with your process and
the governing regulations for these proceedings i mean your your position on that would be I right that uh the town's recourse would be to foreclose a lean for non-payment of the of the uh of the fine if that happened and or do the work
and seek to be reimbursed yes sir do the and we'd like that opportunity to cure just like in any other of these types of matters right and just um this stipulation or these agreements
that you've made um uh regarding the uh really what you've done is narrow the issues to be decided in effect um this is going to resolve both the cases because the appeal is tied into the code violation or the enforcement case right
that as I understand it the appeal uh uh is a challenge to the building official determination that you need to vacate and demolish the premises you're telling me that you're in effect now agreeing that the premise or the you the building will be demolished yes you're right so so the the the demolition of the
building cures any alleged violation and would resolve any both pending matters that are before you today and uh just um um for a little bit of context what is is the building a residence or is it a commercial structure i I saw the
pictures briefly but it looked like a residence to me the there there are a number of residential units i mean it it it is in disrepair your honor um and what we've been trying to think through is um and what we talked with the town for months about is the specifics of
some sort of partial repair that would remedy the you know the any life safety issues that are there but allow for the rehabilitation of the structure so we went back and forth on that a number of times but we've we've moved through through all of that and we're just going
to demolish the building all right very good thank you your honor thank you Mr davies let me hear from the town thank you your honor um I'll try to address um the issues in the same order that um you have outlined and Mr davies
has addressed them um that would be addressing the time frame first the fine the possibility of the escrow and then a little comment regarding the um the unsafe building appeal concerning the timeline um this
matter has been an issue for the town um basically since Hurricane Ian as far back when we took action um June 28th of 2024 um the town needs to have this um
building demolished uh for a variety of reasons um I do have a witness today um it is Bill Wula he is the manager at Pink Shell which is the adjacent property and I would like to um offer
his testimony to you regarding the need for the expedited um demolition of this property um as far as the time frame the county is or the county the town is committed to moving this uh demolition
permit to the top of the stack um again it's in the best interest of everyone to to have this remedied as quick as possible my understanding is that um in order to move forward with that permit the processing can take perhaps one to
two days um the u possible delay would be for the need to um disconnect the electricity as well as disconnect any type of sewer connection um I've been told that the electricity has already
been um disconnected so that should not cause any type of delay um so with that said if I may I'd like to go ahead and ask Mr wulis to come to the podium
would you like me to swear them in your honor or you i can swear a minute you raise your right hand please i swear affirm the testimony about to give be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do all right may I proceed thank you honor um for the record uh Bill White Tulis president
Pink Shell Beach Resort and Marina um we're a 7acre resort spell your last name for me please uh yeah it's not an easy one uh w ai c hu l i s like y chew less got it um we're a 7acre resort um
the property uh uh owner is JBO LLC i am a representative of JBO LLC uh we own all surrounding of this uh this property um about uh well how ironic it is uh two
years ago uh I sent a certified letter to to Mr taminsky um and I I'll read briefly real quick what it said sergey I'm writing to express our concern over the dangerous condition of your property
located at 1313 Euro Boulevard Fort Myers Beach the property poses many life safety concerns as well as as we begin to bring families return to the hotel this exposes you and possibly others to serious liability risk as you know the
condition of your dwelling has been uninhabitable for over 6 months since Hurricane Ian since that event no attempt has ever been made to remove the condemned structure or the at a minimum provide a fence to protect the public it's unsafe possesses a fire hazard and
has become a liability for you the rest of the town and your neighbors are moving forward taking responsibility to remedy their lots we request you to do the same immediately please communicate your intentions within the next 5 days a receipt to myself if we do not hear we will be
forced to elevate this to the town authorities and that was sent April 21st 2023 certified to him um within those 5 days he did put a fence up only on three sides um there continues to be
um homeless going entering the property um there is a significant beehive we've had to create um bait traps at the top of our buildings to keep the bees from coming on uh by the bars um I have a lot of
families we have about a thousand guests at the resort a lot of kids someone is going to get hurt i I understand if I I'm the slowest one in this room looks like 45 days but honor I please make it
faster than 45 days we've been suffering with this condemned structure for over two years now and it's just it's an eyesore and it's costing us money no bride will book at our resort when they see that structure i mean it looks horrible um the rest of the resort is
beautiful our neighboring properties are beautiful they're all being put together this structure hasn't been touched so with that I am available for any questions right mr davies did you have any Well Mr
dupers do you have any questions for the witness um no your honor um I defer if Mr davies has any questions just ask if he has any questions no your honor uh not with respect to this witness I would like to reserve a couple minutes to rebot
okay so your honor um in view of the testimony and the documents that have been placed into record um before you we don't feel that extending the time for actually demolishing it yes the um property owner has provided a copy of an
estimate um however they have not applied for the demolition permit um as as of yet um the town believes that they could apply for that permit as early as today um again if the electricity has
already been turned off and it just be it would just be the checking to make sure there's no sewer connection um they should have that permit we would hope by at least the end of the week um and then it's a matter of scheduling which we
would we as the town would not have any control over their ability to get it scheduled so we would have to go forward in good faith thinking that they would have it scheduled very quickly um however we we are not optimistic in that
regard um simply because such a long period of time has expire has expired um there has been conversation there has been attempts to try to resolve this short of having to come through the code enforcement process and the demolition
process but it's fallen on um I'm not going to say on death years because they have communicated with us there's just been no progress made so the town is looking for a short period uh to get that demolition done as soon as possible
um for those various reasons um as far as the the fine um the property owner's attorney has has said that they really want an opportunity to cure the town's position is that they've had an opportunity to
cure this um it's pretty obvious to anyone that comes down the Astero Boulevard that this building has significant issues and needs to be demolished um again the town um the the witness provided testimony that back in
2023 April 23rd I believe he said um he put the property owner on notice that there was an issue um subsequent to that in June of 2024 the town began the process of going through the unsafe
building procedure to um to achieve a demolition of the property um as Mr davies pointed out we did learn during that process that um our review process our appellet rules uh
needed some revision um they u the code initially provided appeals to go to the Lee County Board of Adjustments um and that was directed to that reviewing body by virtue of an interlocal agreement
which unfortunately had expired in 2017 the town then proceeded as soon as it found out about this it proceeded and drafted an emergency ordinance vesting authority to review um appeals in the special magistrate process um and then
ultimately codified uh through ordinance in November um during this period of time there was an attempt to come up with a settlement agreement which had actually gone to council I believe once if not twice um to try to resolve the
more hazardous areas um located on this building however there were objections raised um and so that process never went forward either um so with all this said um the bottom line is we believe they
had ample opportunity to cure and for that reason we think that a fine should be imposed um not taking it back to 2024 because the 2024 notice that they had was through the unsafe building process however um the property
maintenance violation was properly noticed to them in January and so our calculation of the $14,000 is based on um I believe it's 56 days that they have been in in non-compliance as far as the escrow we
asked for the escrowing of the amount of the escrow the amount of the estimate for the demolition again we're asking that that money um I believe it's $15,000 um be placed in Mr davy's escrow account
or trust account uh to be held to give the town some assurance that this building is going to come down and the town doesn't then have to expend the money to pay for the demolition which is going to cause um additional you know
financial issue for the town as well as delay and hardship um we feel that it's it would be appropriate because the property owner is going to pay that money anyway i think it's a step towards making sure that that building actually does come down um and then as far as the
dismissal of the appeal um yes we believe that once the um the building is demolished there is no real basis for for the appeal because that is the the conclusion that we were seeking there um you know in addition we are asking
for the $250 administrative uh fine or fee fee not a fine fee um because as you can see from as far back as 2024 the town has expended numerous
resources to try to bring this thing to um a conclusion so I think that's um my comments just ask you a couple of questions here um in terms of a compliance date um you you talked about getting it done as soon
as possible um uh ordinarily when you know when when we said when I set compliance dates the the uh the the idea is that if compliance is achieved by that date a fine is not
imposed if compliance is not achieved then a daily fine starts to run you know and for safe it might be you know $200 a day or something like that and runs until compliance is achieved and that can add up to a pretty big fine sometimes um and so in those situations
in setting the compliance date you typically like to ensure that the date is something that can reasonably be met so it's not a trap that it's set too soon that it's impossible you know to avoid incurring a fine um here the it
sounds like the town is seeking in effect a one-time or a retroactive fine um would that be in addition to or would that be in lie of uh a fine running uh post compliance date i'm just trying to
understand get an idea of what the town is looking for in in terms of remedy here um you mentioned $14,000 again you're the town is seeking that as a an imposition based on the past uh and then
is the would the town also be seeking a daily fine if compliance wasn't achieved after the compliance date yes yes your honor um and Okay and what uh do you have a date in
mind for a compliance date um you know rather than as soon as possible i mean yes obviously if they're sent too soon it would be impossible right you know uh You know I I no matter what their good intentions or what their intentions are
I I doubt they could get the permit issued and and the dem demolition accomplished and the permit closed in you know 7 days so that that's probably not realistic um uh the the the respondent the property owner has uh
proposed 30 days from date of issuance of the permit with uh the permit being applied for within 15 days um uh so uh that would uh you know I guess you'd be looking at somewhere between 45
and I don't know 60 days depending on the time it took to process the permit application and whether they waited until the 15th day but uh what what what do you have a date in mind so in our stipulation which um Mr davies has
objected to we did propose that within five days that um that they would go and um excuse me within seven days that they would go and apply for the demolition permit they already have an estimate so
they would need to figure out you know if there's any sewer connections honestly I don't think there are but I don't have um information or proof of that to that effect so getting the permit um filed filing for the permit should
not be a heavy lift or a timely endeavor for them um as I indicated the town will take every effort it it can to move that permit along and not in any way delay it um but thereafter then it goes back to
the property owner and the ability to have their contractor schedule the actual demolition and the town doesn't really have any ability to make sure that that occurs in a timely manner um that's where our concern is primarily um
well I guess the town's I mean the hammer would be the daily fine the the respondent proposed 30 days from the issuance of the permit let's say we shortened the time from 15 to seven or even 5 days when they have to apply uh and uh let's assume the town could
process the application in two or three days or two or three business days or that you know seems reasonable um so let's say they had the permit in hand within 10 days from today um again that you know maybe that's reasonable and realistic mr davies I think was
proposing that from that date of the issuance of the permit that the the the that the complete demolition and close the permit um I might have missed but I think that was the idea that would be roughly let's say 40 days from today's
date which is you know pretty quick for a project of this nature I think but wouldn't the the enforcement mechanism on the town's part be the acrruel of daily fines after that deadline let's say it's you know let's say it was in
mid sometime in in May if we go if we went 40 or 50 days out um and so after May 20th I'm just picking a number out of the air you not not necessarily the date that starting the next day they start running a $100 or $200 a day fine uh or
something like that or $250 for an unsafe building the the uh the the mechanism for ensuring enforcement would be that that fine would get very large very quickly um and the town could uh you know enforce a lean uh against the property that would be the ordinary
course um you seem to have other concerns though and I'm just trying to you know explore that a little bit so I understand concerns are um basically that um we don't have u a level of confidence and comfort knowing that this
is actually going to occur in a timely manner um we have had conversations um but there has been delay after delay after delay uh for reasons and I'm not passing judgment on whether the reasons
are valid or not um in including the fact that they're not moving the boat because they don't own the boat the boat's not there it's not their problem um they've also applied for a reasonzoning application and it seems
that there's always missing information that prohibits that resoning application to move forward and actually redevelop that property which is what the town would want um I don't think that the
daily fine uh really is going to be a deterrent to them to expedite the demolition of it i just don't have the the confidence in in telling my client that it's it is going to happen um I believe it may just end up being the cost of them doing business i I don't
really know the basis for why it's been delayed um the the photographs that are in the record clearly show that this this building is unsafe um the the property has not been maintained um there's a boat in the backyard um again
all showing hazards so um a shorter period is what we're looking for okay and again do you have a a date in mind you talked about shortening the the window within which to apply um would would the what does the town have a view
that at some point after that there would still be additional time to complete the work we we would ask I mean the town has um under contract several uh demolition contractors um the town has been demolishing or actually we
haven't as you may be aware um we have been uh pursuing demolition of of dilapidated buildings um so we do have a contractor um under contract in the event that a
um a a building doesn't come down um if you set some time frames for them and in the event they did not one of the requests in the stipulation was also that the town would have the authority to go forward and demolish it um if they
did not in a timely fashion do that um their estimate of demolition cost is only 15,000 in the past our estimates of demolition cost has been much higher um so we did put in a provision that if the
town has to go and demolish it because of whatever delay or uh scheduling issue that they have um we would use our contractors and and get the job done um and they would pay for any type of difference um in the money um so having
that escrow is is kind of important to us as well in the event they're not able to meet those deadlines because we don't feel that the fine in and of itself is going to be enough of a deterrent all right and Mr davies did you want to
respond you wanted some time to rebut yes your honor if I may briefly so on the timing piece uh again we just we just want to be practical with the schedule uh we don't want to not comply based on some sort of
footfall um it's not an estimate this is a fully executed contract between the demolition contractor and my client uh the intent your honor is to apply as soon as possible but I I don't want to agree to five days and then apply on the sixth
day and this whole thing falls apart because I know that the goal of the town here and of my client is to get the building demolished to do it as soon as possible and and to have compliance reached so that's that's the the basis for the the 15 and 30 which we believe
is a reasonable and practical time frame but als but also an expedited one um on the fine your honor uh we would respectfully request you follow your your customary process um I don't believe the town has provided a
proper legal basis for what would be an improper re retroactive fine um you know we we provided a an expedited schedule the town is more than adequately protected um in the event
that schedule is not complied with um and and has recourse through the daily fine lean foreclosure rights incident to that um and then the same position your honor on on the escrow uh we'd respectfully ask that your your standard process be followed um I I don't believe
that that's necessary or or supportable um and we'd ask that the the standards that you know you would typically impose here with respect to setting a compliance date again no violation has formally been found this is the first
hearing on this matter uh compliance date can be set my client's got to comply with that and if that doesn't occur then does standard mechanisms including daily fines uh lean and foreclosure rights spring into place thank you again your honor we appreciate
the opportunity all right let me just questions for both of you um I haven't looked at the documents that were uh I think they're in the SharePoint drive now and I haven't paused to open it up that takes a second but uh the stipulation has been uploaded i haven't
seen it yet but that that document lays out what you've agreed to and what the issues are remaining for decision yes your honor so there's a section six with some sub points which you know was Miss Stupich's proposal
um on timing fine and escrow so the the meat of the document is in section six there are some recitals and um you know uh contextual items that we have no objection to even some some some
agreement to waiver with respect to violation etc all that's agreed upon the the I think the when we when we talked just before this hearing again I I think what we wanted to share with your honor was that we need your help with section
six um and then there are some references later in the document for example section 10 references a date of April 15th section 11 references the escrow process again
so and then 10 also references the fine so really it's section six and then anything postsection six uh that relates back to the content of section six is where we're agree to disagree all right so here's what I mean what I
uh envision doing uh unless you two have agreed to something different and again I haven't seen the stipulation but um what what I am uh uh uh inclined to do is enter a final order
uh that you know a typical code enforcement final order but it would incorporate the stipulation and then you know there's going to be a finding of violation because that's being agreed to and ultimately establishing a compliance date what you all have referred to as
the time frame um establishing the the remedy uh which would be a daily fine if compliance isn't timely achieved by the compliance date that's the standard mechanism for enforcement on an unsafe uh building like this particularly given
the amount of time typically I would impose a onetime fine at the maximum statutory maximum which I think is $250 a day for an unsafe um you know the range is you know up to that um so somewhere between $1 and $250 a day for
a issue like this um I need to think about you know a reasonable time frame again if I'm understanding you Mr davies your proposed time frame is to complete the project and close the permit within 30 days after issuance of the permit yes
your honor um and uh and of course there's this issue of the I'll call it a one-time fine or retroactive fine um and that I need to look at as well because you know unless the parties agreed to it and you're obviously not in agreement on
that issue um my recollection is that uh under chapter 162 I think it's 16209 there's a mechanism for imposing that kind of fine if the if the harm
from the violation is irreversible or um uh irrevocable or something like irre irrevocable or irreversible and I think you can impose a onetime fine up to $15,000 which would be retroactive or looking back notwithstanding a
forwardlooking in compliance state um I I don't know what the without you know looking at it what the law is if there is any body of law that's developed uh in terms of applying that standard to an unsafe building or an unsafe building
over time um my typical experience is to apply that in vacation rental cases if you can imagine but um but uh uh not so much in unsafe buildings where usually it's a large you know daily fine if compliance isn't achieved
u so I need to look at that and I don't know if you all want to also look at that and provide I don't know maybe it's in the stipulation um but uh in order to impose that fine I need to have a basis I think that would be the statute I I I haven't researched
the application of that standard to an unsafe building it doesn't seem implausible on the face of it i just haven't looked at it but I think I would to impose that find i probably need that hook otherwise I think there needs to be a finding as Mr davies has suggested and
non-compliance with any compliance date um so no a I think that the the power is there provided certain conditions are met i just don't know without thinking about it and looking more at the documentation whether it's satisfied here i'm certainly willing to let the
parties supplement their their materials if you want to take a look at that again there may be some cases there may not be i don't know i haven't researched it as to whether that standard applies to an unsafe building or when it would apply and when it might not again it doesn't seem implausible to me i just haven't
looked we're happy to do that your honor what would be your preferred procedure for providing that supplementary documents to you i mean if you all wanted to submit memos I mean does the town want to do that as well Miss Ste branch we can your honor but in with all
due respect the $14,000 is just a drop in the bucket um our primary concern is having that building demolished um and we have we have tried
yeah I agree i I just my point is in order to impose that kind of fine I I need to have a basis to do it um if you agreed that would be one thing i'd probably you know order something that you stipulate to but um I think the statute makes a demarcation about that kind of a fine there's authority to do
it um uh that doesn't have to slow down the the compliance again I understand that um the town wants this done as quickly as possible and from what Mr davies is telling me I don't I don't really hear that being opposed uh
obviously they the owner wants something that they can actually comply with but um I don't want to drag out the process waiting for you to file something so if you did want to do it probably want it quickly like in 5 days or something in the meantime I think Mr davis your
client does need to get that application in as soon as possible because whatever the deadline is that I established it's not going to be too far out i mean and you proposed a pretty pretty quick time frame so uh um uh I'm not sure once you get the permit
just how quickly it could be done but um you know if we're looking at 30 40 days from today that's you know let's say that's pretty quick um and on the escrow I just again I have to go back and look at the statute that's uh again there's nothing unusual i mean nothing u um
ownorous about it necessarily i just need to make sure I have the authority to do it where it's not agreed to um so I'll I'll take a look at what you've filed um and and get the order together but you know if you want a few days to
weigh in as well on that irreparable and irreversible nature of the harm issue I'm willing to do that i don't want it to delay things though i mean is that something you could get me what is today maybe by the end of the week would be better so we can keep this moving could you have that to me by Friday um
your honor if I may um some of the facts that I would refer to in a response would are actually in the record for the unsafe building um so if I could ask that the court incorporate um the agenda materials for the unsafe
building into the property maintenance case is there any objection to that i probably need something to refer to uh in terms of understanding the what the facts are yeah I don't think there's no
objection to that your honor and Friday is fine on our end okay so I I'll go ahead and you know incorporate that or include that as part of the the evidentary record the the file that was presented as part of the agenda yes as part of the
property maintenance record um your honor I do have some procedural questions for you um because we've somewhat combined these two cases um my expectation or my my request would be that we get separate orders um one for
the property maintenance and then one for the um appeal i don't know if I don't think Mr davies objects but I don't want to put words in his mouth no no objection to that so that way we have a clear you know file as to the conclusion of one and the conclusion of
the other so would the idea be that the appeal would be dismissed or held in advance until the other case is resolved that what's what's your preference on that i believe we put in the stipulation that
they would dismiss it dismissing okay um but something from the court acknowledging that it it has been dismissed pursuant to the stipulation if that's a stipulation I'm happy to dismiss the appeal pursuit of the stipulation essentially the appeal is
being withdrawn if that's the case that's fine Ron okay all right so I will um see can if can you file then if you want to file something on the one time fine can you do that by Friday so we can
keep this moving yes your honor i can get the order together i do want to look at the materials i haven't had a chance to study everything that was attached to the agenda um and take a quick look at that um that that that fine issue and and uh give some thought to the escrow
mechanism which is at least in my experience atypical but uh I want to get the order out fairly quickly everyone is obviously interested in making sure that the uh the demolition project moves forward with uh you know as quickly as it can um I mean Mr dave it sounds like
you're committed to that as well but there's some disagreement it's maybe a matter of weeks as far as when the deadline is but either way it's going pretty fast so um I will uh I will start getting that order together um and if you file something by Friday I'll look
at that as well and after that I'll get the order out is there anything else that either party wants to add uh or say or uh any final comments on this before we uh move on anything else for the town yes um we did have present our building
official uh if we were going to go down the evidentary route but since that's been stipulated to um we don't need to do that I just wanted to acknowledge his presence all right and Mr davis do you have anything else further from respondent thank you your honor all right thank you
we have a few other items on the agenda um it's not clear to me whether there are any specific cases here um the next item listed is the certification of leans for non-compliance is there anything there that needs to be
addressed no your honor um those other cases were pushed to May so we hopefully have some there is a um a procedural or administrative is a better description of it administrative question that I
need to ask and get your guidance on so we still have a couple cases that have DOA case numbers on them uh for instance the whale also had a DOA case number and if it's um permissible then I would like to work with the clerk and any of the
code cases that we have remaining with DOA numbers if we could offer a uh or request a dismissal of those that would still keep the uh underlying code case in effect it would simply remove the uh
use of the DOA filing process okay is that how many how many are there i defer to the clerk possibly two we're signing in right now to find out she says about two okay so it's just a a
little couple i mean that's really kind of a housekeeping matter if you you send me the an email or something with the case numbers I think what we could do is close them without prejudice to the you know underlying case yes down case and
then they would just proceed the way the other cases are to the extent they need to proceed to hearing yes that is our request okay we just close our file then with without prejudice and are there any other again a couple other things lean foreclosure cases is
there anything that we need to do there um no your honor we we did not know that uh we would have the agreement on the prior case so we anticipated a longer hearing today um we're prepared um but I'm glad that it's it's worked out
um I will tell you also that we the town just as an aside the town has also continued its uh communication with FEMA and um we're moving forward still towards um getting back into the um national flood insurance program and um
they did acknowledge the u the good work that was done being done by code yeah i wondered how the transactions with FEMA were going to go i mean it sounds like FEMA may be much a much different entity uh in you know in the
near term um I think I read that it might even be abolished so I don't know um but uh certainly uh people will be replaced there and perhaps different different enforcement priorities will will come into play u but uh I saw there
were I I I saw but haven't studied yet i think I won't need to now because the case uh has been resolved but there's some more recent communication with FEMA it looks like within the last few months i was I was hoping to kind of refer to that um and uh the town is is working
very very hard uh with a lot of resources devoted to uh to moving forward and we can almost see the light at the end of the tunnel well that's good yeah everybody's happy about that yes but it's still going to take some time and uh you know effort and and
again you know thank you for you being a part of it as well um but we do have more code cases that'll be coming um as a result of that okay let's so I haven't put myself out of business on the code cases yet um all right is there anything else
that we need to do before we adjourn today's proceeding i believe that's it your honor right very good um I will uh be able to get these uh taken care of
fairly quickly i I'll wait until at least Friday on the one to see any submissions uh on the uh on the legal issue uh on the uh on the whale case um that's a that's a pretty simple order
there of uh so this shouldn't shouldn't take too much time um all right well if there's nothing else for us to address today we're adjourned and I will see you next time thank you you're welcome thank you