Good afternoon everyone. We will be starting shortly. If you have not signed in to my right side there's a desk with a signing sheet. Please place your name and case number. Thank you. So gracias.
>> [clears throat] >> Good afternoon everyone. I hereby call the July 2nd, 2026 code compliance special master hearing to order. Roll call. Special Master Karen Jenkins present.
City Attorney Jose Arango >> here. >> Code Director Jose Perez >> present. >> Code manager Heno Morio >> here. >> Special master, please approve the minutes of the hearing that took place
on June 18, 2026. Approved. We kindly request that everyone in attendance place your cell phones on silence and sencio. Gracias.
Anyone giving testimony today, please stand to be sworn in by homestead police officer. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in these proceedings will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? If so,
say I do. Translator. Translator. Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the translations which you are about to give in these proceedings will be accurate and correct to the best of your knowledge, skill, and ability? If so,
say I do. >> [clears throat] >> for the record. The following amendments have been made to the hearings agenda. Item number six, case number CC2600147, TKT from civil citations has been complied. Item number seven, case number
CC2600152 TKT from civil citations has been complied. Item number eight, case number CC2600153 TKT from civil citations has been complied. Item number two, case number
CC2500261 NOB from previous previously heard has been tabled. Item number four, case number CC2500779 NOB from previously heard has been complied. Item number five, case number
CC2600730 NOB from new business has been tabled. Item number seven, case number CC260083 NOB from new business has been tabled. Item number B, sorry. Item number nine,
case number CC2600-927 NOB from new business has been tabled. Item 11, case number CC26 01172 NOB from new business has been tabled.
Item 23, case number C250090196 from new business has been tabled. Women Special master, if I may take the cases out of order from the agenda for those who are present today. Approved.
[snorts] Item 17, code officer Flores, case number CC261831 NOB, East Homestead Community Development District, CO GMS SF LLC
Rich Hans. Good afternoon. The property was cited on June 5th, 2026 for code section violation 19-3, public nuisance. This is in reference to overgrowth and dead vegetation along the per perimeter of
the lake located east of 500 block of Southeast 31st A. A notice of violation was mailed certified mail and posted on June 5th, 2026. Compliance was not met. Therefore, the property was set for today's hearing. Summon to appear was mailed certified mail and posted on June
17, 2026. Currently, the property is in violation. Photos were provided and I took photographs on June 5th and June 17, 2026. The photos fairly and accurately represent what was observed. Special master, please accept the photo
submitted as evidence. >> Approved. Special Master, as of today, the overgrowth has not been addressed and I've had no contact with the owner in reference to this violation. Okay, that person's not here. All right, so I'm going to go ahead and roll this. I do find a violation of City
of Homestead for case number CC2601831 NOV. I'm going to give them five days to come into compliance, which would bring it to July 8th, 2026, and an $80 administration fee. Next case, item number four, under civil
citations, code officer Lind. Case number CC2600141 TKT. Good afternoon. I will be presenting the case on behalf of Officer Lynn. On April 1st of 2026,
the co compliance department received a complaint regarding alleged um improper tree pruning at 1751 of West 17th Street. In response, the department initiated an investigation into the reported violation.
Based upon the investigation was determined that the tree had been press of onethird of his canopy within one year period. As a result of civil citation, the amount of 500 was issued for a violation of section 29-11 subsection C5 of city
of Homestead code which prohibits pruning more than one/3 of tree of of a tree canop within a one-year um period. The civil citation and the correspondent summers to appear were posted at the property and mail on June 9 of 2026.
According to USPS tracking, the mailing was delivered on June 12th of 2026. As of today's hearing, the silver citation remains unpaid. >> Hello. >> Hi. How are you? >> Good. Please state your full name and address.
>> Sure. Steven Shelley, 1751 Northwest 17th Street, Florida 33030. >> Okay. Thank you. Do you have a testimony you want to share? >> I do. Yes. I have three defenses. Uh I don't know if you want to present them one at a time or all at once. How would you like me to proceed?
>> You have what? I'm sorry. >> I have three different arguments, three different defenses to citation here. >> Okay. We're um only talking about right now the case number ending in 141 TK T. That's the one we're talking about.
>> Correct. Yes. Yes. I have three but I have three arguments on why the citation should be dismissed. >> So, you want me to proceed all three of them at once or one at a time in the discussion? >> Let's do one at a time. >> Okay. Okay. >> All right. My first argument, I have documents here. I'd like to hand you
special master that's got exhibits. >> So, the first argument deals with the form of the citation itself of Florida statutes 162.213D4 213D4 in the city of Homestead's code section 7-326 specifically state that any citation and summon issued and alleging a civil
infraction the facts should contain the fact constituting reasonable cause must be included in the citation. It defines reasonable cause as a set of facts and circumstances that would lead an ordinary prudent person to believe a specific conclusion is true. And the requirement is there is critical to make
sure that the property owner has provided proper notice and due process to prepare a defense or evaluate the validity of the citation. In this particular case, there's not one fact stated at all in the citation. If you look at the citation itself, it provides the code section and it provides the um
what the code section provides in terms of what they they say the code section violation was. But they state no facts whatsoever in the citation in terms of what would connect that violation to the actual case or make the homeowner in this case myself uh applicable to that
code section. So it doesn't state that I cut the tree. It doesn't identify what tree was cut. I've got eight trees in my property. So it doesn't say, you know, the tree in the front yard. You know, at a minimum, it should have said that I cut the tree. It should have identified the tree and that it should have identified how they determined that more
than onethird of that tree had been cut, such as I consulted Google Earth. I consulted I measured it, you know, with a truck. You know, there's multiple ways uh for them to, but ultimately they didn't state one single fact. So there's no way to even know what I was supposed to defend against. Uh, and again,
similar to a speeding ticket, which is a civil infraction as well, you know, the officer may cite you and say you were going 10 miles an hour of the speed limit, but the law still requires them to state that I observed the driver on such and such road that I measured their speed using a certain device um as a prerequisite in order to get through the
essentially the citation portion. If not, it gets dismissed when you go before a hearing officer. So, this is very similar. So, my argument would be that it contains zero facts. There's no nothing connecting me. There's no reasonable cause. There's no facts supporting reasonable cause on how that
particular section that was cited was in fact violated by by or by my homeowner by me. That's my first argument. >> Thank you. Okay. When you first got this citation um back in
what's the date here? June. June 8th. Did you talk to the code enforcer? >> I didn't talk directly to code enforcement on June 8th. So this is actually the second citation. There was another citation that was issued in May. I raised this argument uh the fact that one the first citation didn't even have
the code section properly cited. I raised that as an argument. I also raised the fact that there were no facts stated supporting it. That's required by both Florida statutes and the city of Homestead code. This was a reissued citation, I guess, in their belief to resolve the first errors, but it still
fails to contain any facts whatsoever in the citation. And the summons also does not contain any facts whatsoever, which again is required by both Florida Law and City of Homestead's code. >> Okay. Did our um I think you're the
agent for this was Jeffrey. Was the trees and the trimming already picked up by our people? >> So if if I may interject um to to answer Mr. Shel's um I guess objection. Um
currently we have the citation up on the screen under it says uh you committed in violation of the city of Homestead code section and description. So the section would be 29-11c5 and then further it gives a description of the issue which is the tree pruning
standards no more than one-third of trees living canopy shall be removed within a one-year period which is our the city's rebuttal in reference to uh the lack thereof of a description of what occurred in this case the citation uh clearly states that more than
onethird of a treere's living canopy was removed within a one-year period >> special master if I Go ahead. >> Yeah. My my argument though is that is that is just a citing of the code. If you look at the code section which I provided you a copy of, it's behind the Florida statutes portion. The code
section that they site 2911C5 specifically says no more than one third of a trees living canopy shall be removed. So all they've done is cited the code itself and what the code says. There are no facts. If you look at Florida statutes and both the city code there when it relates to citations, it
specifically says that facts constituting reasonable cause must be stated in the citation. And there are no facts constituting reasonable cause or describing how they've determined that more than onethird of that tree has been cut. So, we don't even get to the facts because they they don't properly state
it. If I may interject this again, um, can we both agree that tree pruning standards is the subsection, right? Um, correct. >> Yeah. Now, you stated that's what you guys are alleging I violated is that particular code section. I don't I'm not arguing that right now.
>> So, are are you saying that if at all the verbiage of an ordinance is ever used, that doesn't constitute the description of the violation? No, it doesn't constitute the facts of the violation. So, same thing with the speeding ticket,
like I use that as an example. The officer will state you went more than 10 miles an hour of the speed limit. So, in theory, it states facts, but it's not actually the statement of the facts. The officer has to go to the next step and say that I observed Bob Smith driving down Fifth Avenue and he was speeding
and I measured his speed using a radar device or some other methodology. Those become the facts that then constitute and support the cited code section. And so that's what's missing in this particular citation are any facts that connect the code section to the violation of my homeowner in this case
myself where it states that I cut a tree or utilizing how did they determine that more than one third was cut because there's no facts to constitute that as well. So that's my argument. >> So the determination of whether or not one more than oneird was um cut wouldn't necessarily have to be on the citation.
Rather the act in itself of what occurred has to be on the citation. In this case, the city clearly states that onethird of the trees living canopy was cut, which is therefore the city's uh violation that's being stated on the citation,
>> right? But there needs to be something that constitutes the reasonable cause. That's what I'm saying. It's it all it does is state the citation. I mean, state the violation or the uh the code section and then provides the exact language of that code section. But there needs to be something more such as what
actually result Did I cut the tree? doesn't even state that I cut the tree. So that's why I'm saying it's missing the facts. It could it's easy to solve. It could have been solved easily, but ultimately it's not there. So it doesn't put me on notice on exactly what you guys are going to assert here at this hearing so that I know what should my defenses be or assess it and say, you
know what, they're right. I should just pay the fine. >> So the fact of the case is that more than onethird of a treere's living canopy was cut within a one calendar period. I mean it wasn't but but for purposes of the talking about the citation the argument is that no one no one has
stated how that occurred though >> okay but that how it's stated isn't a requirement of the citation but rather what occurred is a requirement of the citation in this case what occurred is more than onethird of trees living canopy was cut within one calendar year that is on the description
>> but that's the description of the what I'm you're using the code section as the facts they're two separate things so you to also state more than just that. So you could have said something more specific, but it all it does is essentially states the exact code
section. So that's my argument, >> if I may interject. Okay. Um I represent the uh special magistrate in these proceedings. Um so uh code enforcement has the burden to present its case. Why don't we do as far as housekeeping rules, why don't code
enforcement go ahead and present the case? And I think what you did was you just uh introduced yourself and you jumped right into your affirmative defenses, if you will. So why why doesn't code enforcement have an opportunity to present their case? They haven't done that yet. And then you could respond and assert your defenses
at that time instead of the back and forth. >> No, I'm perfectly fine with that. That's what I I that's why I asked how to proceed. But that way I know what's being alleged and I can >> prepare my defenses pictures. So here we have on the date of the
inspection the tree in question. Um can we confirm that this is your property? This is your tree. >> Yes, that's my property. >> Okay, scroll up. This is a different angle of the tree in question. Keep scrolling up. And this is a Google Earth
image from October 2025 depicting the tree. So if we further zoom in on April 1st, that was the condition of the tree. So by the comparison of the April 1st,
2026 picture and the October 2025 street view picture, it was assertain and reviewed that more than onethird of the treere's living canopy was removed and that is the nature of this violation.
Subsequently once this complaint came in, it was reviewed by our staff. At that point, staff reviewed both the picture submitted by the complainant, both the Google Earth image and an insight uh sorry on-site inspection which further corroborated the complaint
and subsequently yielded to the citation being issued. If we may please enter these um and accept these as evidence for the case. >> Approved. >> I have a question. >> I didn't see a copy of this.
I know it was up there earlier, but is this a citation or a notice of violation? >> It is a civil citation. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So, to one of the points uh Mr. Shelley did bring up, um the city originally
issued the citation in April. However, one of the um comments that he made was that the subsection 5 was missing from citation. Therefore, uh upon being notified um our city reviewed the citation and
reissued the citation uh which therefore included the subsection 5 which is specific to the tree pruning standards and then we further go ahead and and issue on the citation that more than onethird of the living canopy was removed within that one calendar period as we observed uh within that October
2025 picture. uh compared to that April 1st 2026 picture which is less than one calendar year. So at that time uh at this time that'll conclude the city's presentation for the citation itself. Um we're more than
happy to um further continue with the questions as uh required. >> So after the parties present their case, the magistrate or even during the course of the presentation, you have the right to ask questions and stop the uh proceedings as you may
if you so the city has presented its side of the uh case. I believe this was a citation as instructed by the code enforcement director and a request to So, that citation was submitted to the city. >> Excuse me. >> A request to appeal the citation. We're
here on an appeal of that citation. >> Uh, yeah. I I provided my my grounds to the city with my for both the um safety. >> I just want to put it on the record section and >> an appeal was never received. Mr. Shelley never reached out in reference
to appeal. Rather, this is here on default because it was not paid within the 30 days as outlined within the citation. So this is a default hearing of uh payment. >> I had appealed the first version, the first citation. So this is a second citation which was issued two weeks ago.
So I didn't realize I needed to appeal the second one because I'd appealed the first and never got really any resolution on the first one. No one notified me at dismissal. I just got a second citation. >> That was a dismissal of the first citation because I believe it was um there was an issue with the contents uh
as far as the uh with the description. Correct. >> Correct. The description failed to have both the code section and the facts which I'm arguing now has the code the second one has the code section but not the facts >> and that citation was withdrawn and another one was issu corrected or amended citation was issued.
>> I I received a second citation. Nobody contacted me and said that this was how it was being resolved. It was dismissed. It was withdrawn. It was I just got a second citation with a new date. >> That is correct. After conferring with city attorney Matt Pearl and assistant city manager uh Oliver, uh the the
citation was amended with the correct subsection which was just missing the five which is the specific subsection of tree pruning standards. >> Okay. Um you have the right to proceed with uh your case if you want to. I know you have you said that you had three
defenses based on you had your arguments on >> Yeah, this this is the first one. So the um yeah I think so I've res I think we we presented the case. Hopefully the special master will make a decision on on whether or not which which way to go with it. So I'll go on to to case two or
argument number two. I do have a question though. So you presented the pictures there. You mentioned the Google Earth reference and you mentioned the pictures that were taken in person. How did you determine that more than one/3 had been removed? Was there actual measurements taken? Did anyone use a tape measure? How how would you
determine that more than one third had been removed? >> Visual representation between the October 2025 and the um witnessed April 2026 uh depicts more than um it appears that more than half the canopy was removed. Uh if we could go back to the
pictures um if you'd like. Um it looks as if more than half the canopy was removed. >> All right. So you just did it based on estimated visualization. You did correct? There was no official measurements taken. There was no >> That is correct. >> Just wanted to clarify that. So second second argument is that more than
one-third of the tree was in fact not removed. Uh the state of the code section so I don't need to go through that but there's two ways that I'll make the case here. One is um oper observational. So what I've provided to you special master is a um the same type of Google Earth photo that they had
provided to you or they had presented on the screen there. And so what you'll see and also there's that's exhibit one. Exhibit two is a picture that I took from a sidebyside comparison so that the trees are the same focal printing.
>> Actually, you need a copy of this so you can see what I'm referencing as well or >> I mean you're appealing before the magistrate and I'm not the magistrate. So you have to give it to the mag. >> Okay. I just didn't know in case you wanted to make any counter arguments. Um so if you look there at those those two exhibit one and exhibit two. Exhibit two again was taken on the side view so you
can see the actual what the tree looked like two weeks after the first citation was sent. And you'll see that the tree question tree here is almost the equal height or a little bit taller than the tree that's closest to the roadway. So if you go to the Google Earth picture which is exhibit one, I've taken the
liberty of drawing the line across the equal equalization of the tree closest to the road all the way across the tree in question. And what you'll see is it's not half of the tree that was cut. In fact, it's barely a third, not even a third of that tree. You can see there
where there's substantially more product or more greenery below that black line than above that black line. And secondarily, from an observational perspective, if you look at exhibit four that I've also provided to you, exhibit four, you can see on exhibit one,
there's three tiers, which are essentially the major lateral lines of the branches. And I've numbered the one, two, and three. The cut for this tree was made just above that third lateral branch, which is also visible when you go to exhibit four, you can see those same three lateral branches and the cut
being made just above the third one. And then when you go back to the Google Earth image and look at that black line right above the third tier that also corresponds with the top of the tree that's closest to the roadway, again, it reinforces that it's not clear at all
that more than one/3 was taken off the top of that tree. And I know the fact that it wasn't more than one-third, but at best it's it's questionable. It's definitely not one half. So I don't think there's enough sufficient evidence being presented by the city of Homestead to establish that more than onethird of
that tree's canopy had been removed just based observationally alone. And so for that, I also would ask that the citation be dismissed. Now, I've gone a step further and gone into a scientific analysis as well. So what I've been able to do is that if you have a photo and
you have a known measurement, you have a known object, an object that you know that size, that length, you can then use that object to create a scale for the rest of the photo. And so this is used frequently in, you know, animal biology. They'll be out in the field. They're trying to get a measurement on an
alligator, a snake, or some sort of other animal. They don't have a tape measure in place. So they'll put a Coke bottle or a Coke can or some other object that they know that they can measure later or they has a known measurement. They take their picture, they go back to the lab, they measure that object, and from that object, they can then determine the size of the alligator, the snake, or whatever the
animal is they're going through. So what I've done, if you look at exhibit two, I know that from the top of the bmilads at the base of the tree to that first nook on the left hand side, I know that's eight feet. I've measured it. I have a tape measure. I know that's eight feet. So from that I can then measure it on
the photo itself and know that it's 5/8 of an inch from that on the photo. If you look at the Google Earth photo that then I can also measure to the top of the tree and determine what the the top of that tree is. I divide that measurement by the 5/8 multiply by eight and it gives me what the top of that
tree or the height of that tree before it was cut, which I know to be 38.4T. If I then perform that same analysis on a cut tree, it shows that it was 28.3, 28.6, and 28 ft. So, I've got multiple pictures there because I want you to see
that this is repeatable. So, both critical earth images that I did the analysis on in exhibit one and exhibit three show that it's 38.4 ft before it was cut. All of the trees post cut that I did the analysis on show that it's
somewhere around 28 feet to 28.6 ft. Under the code, at 38.4, feet. If I remove 33% of that tree, I can remove up to 12.78 feet of limbs. I only removed less than 10 or right around 10 feet of limbs, well within the one-third
requirement that the code provides me. And it's it's clear. I mean that you have scientific facts and evidence. So between the observational just looking from where it was to where it is as well as the scientific data, it was not more than one-third removed. And again, on those grounds, I would ask that it would
be dismissed. And then I have a third my last argument if you want me to go ahead and go into that one. >> If I may interject, I have a rebuttal in reference to the um objection from um Mr. Shelley. Uh as it stands, uh it
again wasn't cited because the height was reduced. While you made some very uh scientific calculations in reference to the height, the overall canopy extends not just linear but also uh horizontally
providing overall canopy um dimensions. So while I understand that maybe the height was reduced by a certain amount, it also takes into consideration that the width of the canopy was reduced as well. Can we both agree with that? So
typically a treere's width and height are equal meaning that as it grows height it also grows wide. So in this particular case the tree trimming company makes a rounded tree. So whatever was taken off the top would have been taken off the sides in equal proportion. So the analysis would be
whether it's looking at top to bottom or side to side the proportion of limbs taken on any given side would have been the same. >> Right. So if if we could go back on on what you just said, um whether it was taken from side or up and down, the
proportion would have been the same. But if you remove part of the canopy from the side and part of the canopy from the top, wouldn't the overall addition of both the sides and the top add up? >> No. Because your your canopy is either considered the widthwise because that's
the shade side or the top is kind of part of that. You could cut the entire top off, leave it, leave it all wide, and your canopy really wouldn't change. Your shade pattern, which is how they define a canopy, would not change at all. So, you don't combine top removal and side removal. But by using the top removal, which is much easier to compare
because I have I don't have a 360°ree view of all the trees. That's why I've used this this is the analysis. I can tell you that whatever was taken off the top was less than a third. So, I know whatever was taken off the side was less than a third, but they don't get added together to be more than a third. It's just as you round the tree around. That
would be the That would be the analysis. So the analysis applies whether it's top to bottom or side to side in this case. >> You advised that you had a professional company do it, right? So I'm guessing it's a certified arborist company. >> Are they present for their testimony advising? >> No, they're not present here.
>> They're not present. Do you have a receipt that maybe or or some sort of documentation that says that they removed only oneird of the canopy or less than one third of the canopy? >> I might because I know we talked about it. I don't remember whether or not it specifically says one/3 on the receipt. I mean, I could look, but I think it's irrelevant for this case because
ultimately it's going to be their testimony. Scientifically, I've shown the exact height of the tree on both before it was cut and after it was cut. So, I don't think we need that. And again, to delay this, I wouldn't want to say, "Hey, let's delay this. Come back and do this again." I think I've given sufficient evidence to to find that this citation should be dismissed. Well, part
of your testimony is that you had a certified arborist company do the trimmings and if if if they're a certified arborist and they provide testimony, I I would rebuttal that it is definitely relevant uh towards the case. Um >> yeah, but I'd also say that ultimately the burden is not on me. The burden is on you, the government. You guys have to
establish the case. That's why my argument from point one was that lack of facts, it's it starts with that. You guys have to provide the proof and the evidence and the burden is on you ultimately to prove the case. And the same goes here. Ult it's not I'm prevailing my defenses but it's not on me. You guys have to prove first and
foremost. And right now all you have is pictures but with no scientific data, no measurements, no nothing other than to say, well I looked at it and I think it's more than half. I can tell you scientifically it's definitely not half. In fact, it's not even a third. >> Well, you say scientifically, but are you a certified arborist?
>> I don't need to be a certified arist. I do math. >> Well, it's just a simple external question. Are you a certified arborist? >> No, I'm not a certified arist. >> Are you a scientist? It could be. I'm a doctor. >> But are you a scientist? >> No, I'm not a scientist. Look, here's the thing. We're not We're not getting
anywhere. Special master. >> Why don't we proceed with the third argument so that you could conclude your presentation? >> Excuse me. >> You have a third argument that you were waiting to >> I do. Yes. So, here's my third argument is this the code section or the city of Homestead's code.
One second. So the city of Homestead's code also provides an exception to the one-third rule if the tree poses a risk to the property or assets. So City of Homestead code 29.11C3 provides that a tree may be cut back more than onethird of its height if required for clearance
pruning. Clearance pruning is defined in the code as pruning required to avoid damage or danger related to structures, power distribution, and property. So even if there's some debate as going back and forth here, if even there's some debate about well is it a third? Is it more than a third which I believe
it's not even it's not one-third and in fact the burden again is on the city of Homestead to prove that it's more than a third and provide evidence establishing that. But in this case the tree the trunk of that tree is 7 foot from my driveway and almost 10 feet or approximately 10 feet from my garage and
my roof. Additionally, some of it was encroaching west to the front facade of the house where it was also started to over approach the roof of my of a bedroom. And so last last summer, there was a storm that came through caused one of the branches to fall onto the driveway. Luckily, there were no cars there at the time, but that was the
impetus to say, "Okay, look, we've got to cut this tree back before it falls on the car or we have a bigger storm or tropical storm and ultimately it causes damage to the roof, caves in the garage or lands on one of the bedrooms." And so that was ultimately why we decided to cut the tree. So mitigation of this hazard to my property is specifically
authorized by the city code and is not subject to the one-/3 restriction. And additionally, the city code also contains um 2911 C7 that trees shall be pruned as needed to minimize potential hazards from wind and storm. So the code also requires you to say, hey, you need to take action ahead of time to mitigate
these things so that these trees don't cause damage to property. And so between that plus the fact that it was a danger to my property, it was so close to my property, they even if you guys determine that more than one-third was cut, that code section provides that I have the authority and the ability to do
that to protect my property and the structures, which I have now done, although the tree probably should be fully removed because it's it's still dangerous, but ultimately um >> that's kind of the course of events. >> Sir, can you repeat that section? Was it C11? Uh 2911 C3.
>> No, but no, there was another reference to there was a different section of the code that you find. >> Oh, that was the one just saying 2911 C7. And so that was just a general shall be pruned as needed to minimize potential hazards for wind and storms. So that was kind of a catchall. Why it's in there, I don't know, but it says that
we, you know, you should take action to make sure that the tree does become a danger. So you have both of those items that ultimately justify or support the actions of cutting that tree. And two, if the tree is in fact less than one third, what it's not, but if it was cut
more than one/3, the code section would provide for that given the safety issues to the house and the property and the cars. >> If I may. >> Okay. He's presented. You have the right to uh cross-examine. If I may, um, can we agree that state
statute 163 045 is admissible? Correct, >> city attorney. >> I mean, you could you could admit it and uh the the magistrate could take uh judicial notice. >> Okay. So, I I am um admitting Florida
statute 163.045 045 uh which is in reference to tree pruning, trimming or removal on residential properties within Florida statute 163. It outlines that and this is applicable to single family homes and
res and detached residential uh properties, right? It it detaches and outlines that a certified board arborist or a certified landscape architect must
provide you a written letter if there's cause for the tree to be um causing damage to your property, potential damage to your property. Um do you happen to have that letter? >> I think that's if the tree is going to be removed. >> No, it's it's tree trimming. trimming,
pruning, or removal. >> I don't have that letter, but again, your city of Homestead code does not provide. And again, if you guys were going to cite that, then you should have put that part of the citation to put me on notice that that was something you were going to raise today. So that's again, it ties into the whole problem here is now we can't go outside of what
your citation is to start bringing in other citations, other statutes, other arguments because I'm not prepared here to make those arguments. That should have been done at the time of the citation. Well, the violations for hatrackcking for the removal more than one third of the canopy. What you're
referencing now is that you had an exemption because of the potential damage to your property. But state statute says if you have an exemption because of potential damage to your property, you're supposed to have a letter of um assessment from an arborist
or certified architect. >> So, were you citing me under the state statute or you citing under the city of Homestead Code? I I I I think he's not raising that exemption. Um I mean so ultimately there's going to be a
special um special master. You're going to have to make findings of fact in this case. So, you're going to have to find whether or not uh his determination, meaning his meaning the property owner, uh his determination is as to whether or not it's below based on the evidence
that he's provided below the one-third standard uh or or not. Uh you're going to have to review that evidence and make a finding of fact as to uh what constitutes the facts of the case and whether or not a violation exists based on those facts. Um and then of course
consider any multiple defenses. Uh so it may be he's ra the property owner has raised three uh defenses. uh one as to the form of the citation uh whether or not the citation suffic sufficiently details and I'll just pull
the uh section uh here um that under 7-326 of the code it says that uh the citation must contain facts constituting reasonable cause uh whether or not the citation is
sufficient based on that provision. Um his second argument was the uh threshold argument that and he's providing uh his evidence as that the tree was not trimmed or cut or pruned uh beyond the
one-/3 threshold. And the third argument is that under 29.11c3 that the tree was a hazard and therefore allowed uh him to be pruned him to prune the uh tree accordingly. Um if you have
questions regarding the ordinance uh or any type of uh legal issues, you could direct them my way uh for discussion. Um, so those are his three arguments. Uh, so you have to both make findings of
fact and conclusions of law and I don't mean to put words in your mouth. If I if anything that I said was incorrect, please correct me. >> No, I think I think you actually said it. >> And on the back of the exhibits are are the calculations in case you want to see them. Shows you what was used, how I got
to those numbers. Exhibit one through five. Hey, give me a minute here. >> My my my main argument, my closing thing is just, you know, given the totality of the circumstances and the arguments that I've laid out, I think it's debatable. At at best for you guys, it's debatable.
And again, the burden is on the government to prove their case. And I don't feel like the government has proven their case here. I think I provided more facts and more justification for why a citation should not be entered and upheld versus why it
should be dismissed. So my my argument would be it should be dismissed because it's not clearcut. >> Right. [clears throat] Well, I do think um I'm going to go ahead and rule on this. All right. I do find a violation of city of Homestead
um for case number bring it up here CC2600141 TKT um I still think that based on the pictures that you even provided I mean it's not it's original you know there was some cutting done um also that you
got two violations you've had I think quite some time to kind of go through this get something resolved clarity um exact measurements and all that. Um, so I do see the the violation of the 500 wasn't um paid for today. I I I'll go a little help you a little bit, but it's
not going to be completely waved. So, I'm going to give it 375. That's what's going to be paid. And um I really think that the clarity and the measurements and all that you should do like what um our director said, get the arborist, have that receipts for the future so that you're not coming back in here and
you know not having the clear side of the city as well as your side. So have the the arbiters um and this should be your last final violation because you've you've had to you know you didn't have clarity in the first one what was happening. Now you do. But I still do
think that the cutting was done. So, um, just to have this, I I hear your side. I I thank you for grabbing all the information. So, I'll give you, um, fairness on that, but that's what I'm going to rule on today. Instead of the 500 that you were supposed to, I do the
375 with an $80 administration fee. Okay, that's it. >> Thank you. Next case item number one code officer Johnson under civil citations case number CC 2600113
TKT Belus Bonia. >> Citation was issued to Belis Bonia property address 520 Northeast 20 terrace. Citation was issued on April 9th, 2026 for code section 29-12
subsection H for tree abuse which is prohibited. Location of violation is 520 Northeast 20 of Terrace. I took the photographs on April 9th of 2026 and May 29th of 2026. The photos fairly and
accurately represent the photos. Wait, the photos fairly and accurately represent what was observed. Special master, please accept the photos submitted as evidence. >> Approved. >> Hello. >> Hi. >> Please state your full name and address.
>> Uh, Bonia, 520 Northeast 23, Homestead, Florida 33033. You have a testimony you want to share? >> Yes. I going to say what happened to the three. Um it was someone in the community. I got a
man that was uh working in my neighborhood and I tell him if he can cut the branch on my in the house in the tree because it was bad the neighborhood surpassing truth and he cut it but was
the way wasn't the way that he supposed to cut it. That's the only thing that I can say because I not having nothing. >> Okay. So you agree that you cut the tree? Yes. I told him to cut the branch to bother the
neighbor passing through the uh sidewalk. >> Can you um show me the pictures, please? Oh, yeah. >> And um have you >> we have no pictures of this one?
Yeah, that one >> special message. The last photo right there, that is how the tree that's the most recent picture of the tree of how it looks now. >> That this this last one right here, >> correct? >> Okay. And um has Miss Bonia been keeping
in touch with you? You explained to her the whole situation? She understands what she did? >> Yes. Uh I did get in contact. She was unaware of the situation of everything how it how it happened. >> Okay. And Miss Bonia, you have this fine
of 500. Why didn't you pay it? >> To pay the 500? >> Yes. >> I don't have no money. I'm disabled and it's hard for me to pay that. That's why I come here. >> Okay.
Are are you uh clear now of how the tree needs to be done? >> Yes, ma'am. Yes, Arnold. Sorry. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. Well, I'll go ahead and roll on this. Um I do find violation of City of Homestead for case number CC260013
TKT. I do see you have this fine of 500, but um today because I know you are going through some hard time, I'm just going to go ahead and bring it down to 15. So, you'll have to pay 150 only the instead of the 500 with an $80 administration fee today. Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Right. Next case, item number 20. Code officer Morataya under new business. Case number C25 080289 Angel Ramirez.
This property was cited August 18, 2025 for code section violation 6-36 nonp permitted work. Drywood was extended without a city permit. Notice of violation was mailed via certify mail and posted August 19th, 2025. Also, summons to appeal was mailed via
certified mail 14, 2026 and posted May 17, 2026. Currently, the property is in violation. Compliance has not been made. Therefore, the property was set for today's hearing. Photographs were taken August 18th, 19th, uh, May 14th, and
17th of 2026. As of today, there's a permit on file, permit number 2590420. The photos fairly and accurately represent what was observed. Special master, please accept these photos submitted as as evidence. >> Approved.
>> Hi. Hello. Please state your full name and address. >> Translator. Do you have a testimony you want to share? I brought that puppy seven years ago to association because I needed an
additional parking for children. They authorized me to park the city. I submit when I citation from the inspector the house on that permit did not required
and it wasn't open. I took out the addition of papers of the extra two months. process. >> Okay. Right. Is that all he wants to share? >> No.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um I'm going to go ahead and roll on this. I do find in violation of city of Homestead uh for case number C250 80289. I'm going to go ahead and grant him this 60 days. It will bring him to September
1st, 2026. And today would just be an $80 administration fee. >> Tell them to stay in contact with Mr. M um Morata. Sorry, I mispronounced it. Keep in contact with him and make sure
that he's keeping contact with the the city as well for those permits. >> Okay. remove all the favor. >> Um, that's something that he Go ahead. >> Yeah, that's something you will have to check with development services. They're the ones that will tell you what gets
approved and what doesn't, but stay in contact with them. They're the ones that will finalize uh or tell you what what is approval and what is it that you have to do. >> Okay. >> That's it. >> Special master, I'm sorry. What's the compliance date? How many days are you
giving him? I gave him to September u September 1st which is 60 days. >> Thank you. >> After we discuss your case, please wait in the main in the lobby here in the audience so we can give you your paperwork.
Next case, item 19 under new business. Court officer Morataya, case [clears throat] number C25070340, Marila Castillo. Property was cited July 17, 2025 for code section violation 6-36 nonp
permitted work extended driveway. Notice of violation was mailed via certified mail and posted July 18, 2025. Summon to appear was mailed via certified mail 14th and posted May 17th. Currently, their property is in violation.
Photographs were taken July 17th, 18, 2025, and May 18, May 14, and May and 17, 2026. There's a permanent file, permit number 2590419. The photos fairly and accurately represent was observed. Special master,
please accept these photos submitted as evidence. >> Approved. >> Hello. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, what is your first and last name and the address? >> Uh, Marinella Castillo, 4250 Northeast,
16th Street, Homestead, Florida, 33033. >> And do you have a testimony you want to share? >> Uh, when I received the violation, I went ahead and requested a um I put in for a u a permit. Uh, I received the email saying that it
was not approved based on that it was above 25 The papers were extended 25 point something. The comments were overall width of the driveway with the expansion may not
exceed 25.5 ft. However, I did measure the um when I submitted the permit, the permit was just for request for 23 feet and some change and that's exactly what we did.
So I never went above the 25.5 that the um permit was denied for. I never went beyond that. It was 23 point >> the measurements were 23 >> like 23.3 or 23.5. >> So it was below the requirement.
>> Yes, ma'am. >> And they still denied it? >> Yes, ma'am. >> What what happened next? Did you >> I didn't know anything else. I don't know what else. >> Okay. Yeah. You need to contact um the city building permit and um also keep in contact with your code enforcer because
you know I mean if not you're going to continue to have this violation. So I would say get it worked out. >> Okay. So my question is is do I go back and >> Right. Because you said you have the the correct measurements that was you doing
this with a a professional company correct? >> No I'm doing it myself. >> You're doing it yourself? >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. So then you have to provide that those measurements and everything that you're doing to the the city, you know, and they'll come out and and
double check. All right. So I'll go ahead and rule on this. Um so you have not redone the permit again. So advise you to do that. I can give you some additional time. Um all right. So I'll go ahead and rule on this. I do find a violation of city of Homestead case
number C2505 I mean 70340 I'll go ahead and give you an additional 30 days that will bring you to August 2nd 2026 to go ahead and redo everything and um today would just be an $8 administration fee.
>> Okay. Thanks. Next case, item 15 under civil citations, code officer Palmer. Case number CC2600163 TKT JW Russell.
>> The citation was issued to Garfield Garfield Henry and JW Russell. The violator was cited on June 2nd, 2026. Uh, the property in violation is 531 Southwest 7th Avenue for code section violations 23.5-6 section A, illegal
deposit of trash, bulk, or debris on a private property. The service was received via certified mail and property posting with a posting date of June 2nd, 2026. The photos fairly accurately represent
what was observed. Special M special master, please accept the photo submitted as evidence. approved. >> Uh I did speak with the homeowner, uh Valerie Hugley, who was currently living in the state of Georgia, but she rents the house out. Uh she stated that she
hired a family member to clean the house out. um and they did not um know that they could put it on that property, but since then, I believe on the 16th, uh
they removed um they removed all the trash. So, it is it is cleaned up. >> Thank you. Hello. >> Hi. How are you? >> U please state your full name and address. >> My name is Nicole Clark. I'm here representing um Miss Valerie. I do have
a power of attorney paperwork. My address or do you want this address? >> My address is 406 Northwest 14th Street in Florida, >> but this address is 527 Southwest 7th Avenue in >> Okay. And you said you have a power of attorney.
>> Yes, sir. >> Okay. This is somebody else. She's talking to somebody else. Okay. Jose Orango for the record. Um, you are Valerie. Uh, how do you say your
last name? >> I'm Nicole Clark. Valerie Hugh, who >> is the current homeowner. She's the daughter of JW Wells. inherited the house. >> Okay. >> Um years ago. So, she's the current homeowner. I'm her niece that just came to represent her today because she's ill
and could not um travel to be here. >> And who is Garfield Henry? >> Gar I'm sorry. Garfield Henry was the name that I found inside the debris. >> Okay. That was the tenant that um
vacated and left everything inside the house. >> I Okay, I see. So, Garfield Henry was a name on the Yeah. The dumping. Um and this was on the property that was formerly owned by JW Russell
and you're saying that the estate has passed or the administrator is Valerie Hulie. Okay. Okay. All right. It's fine. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. So, this
violation here is for $500. Um, the reason why I came today because she has after she called prior to asking my cousin who's a younger male to go over and clean out the house because the neighbors let her know that the
gentleman had vacated the property. She didn't know the amount that he had left in the house, but she did contact solid waste prior asking about b, you know, trash disposal, and they told her they do that, but she didn't know the amount. So, I guess it exceeded or it was too
much or where the young man put it. So, then she did get um a charge on her. It went to her electrical bill where she actually had to pay for the bulk pickup and she actually had to pay a company to come out and clean, you know, cut the grass, clean the yard and everything. So, she wanted me to come represent her
because she is a retired um officer with disability and she didn't have the funds to pay the $500, but she did rectify everything. She brought it up to code and because she didn't know he, you know, the amount of bulk and where he put it until she got the notifications.
So, it has been corrected, but she was just trying to get me to come speak on her behalf to either wave that fee or lower that fee because she is on a limited income and being that she paid everything corrected it. >> Correct. And she's the one who cleaned up all that area, right? >> Yes. Okay.
>> All right. Well, I appreciate that she did that. Um I cost her. All right. So, um I am going to go ahead and um roll on this case. Um I do find a violation of City of Homestead for case number CC2600163. Um, I'm going to go ahead and wave this
500 because since she already paid all the other fees, you know, she's she's aware um what needs to be done and I appreciate that she took her time to do that. So, she's already contributed some funds, but just make sure that she's aware of any other tenants or anything coming that it won't be as kindly as
this for if it happens again. Yes, sir. >> Okay. >> Thank you, sir. >> All right. Today is only going to be an $80 administration fee. Okay. So, let her know that. >> Thank you. Thank you. Bless you. Next case, item 14 under civil citations
code officer view case number CC2600160 TKT Jose Luis Tees Castillo Good afternoon. [clears throat] Citation was issued to Mr. Jose Talis Castillo at property address 2905 Fairways Drive, Homestead, Florida
33035. Citation was issued on Tuesday, May 26, 2026 for code section 23.5-6i. Illegal dumping location of the violation was at 63 Northeast 10th Street. I took the photographs on May
26, 2026. The photos fairly and accurately represent what was observed. Please admit this into evidence. >> Approved. So, I uh came across a big uh illegal dump uh bulk trash pile in the center median in front of the address of
uh 63 Northeast 10th Street. I found this Amazon package addressed to Mr. Jose um within that pile and issued the citation. >> Okay. Hello.
>> Hi. >> Please state your full name and address. My name Roas 2905 Fairway Drive Home Florida 3035 and my husband Jose. >> Okay. >> He doesn't speak English. Is it okay if I speak? >> Um
can attorney can she speak on behalf of him? >> If he if he authorizes he he needs to introduce himself on the record and then authorize her to speak. Yeah. I would formally request that the translator introduce him and then via the translator, he authorizes her to
speak on his behalf. >> Yeah, the translator is going to have to. >> Okay. Please state your full name and address >> in the microphone so we can hear and have it record. Does he have a testimony he wants to
share? >> When I arrived my house, I sold this ticket that I got for supposedly dump in reality. I have not dumped anything any place. >> Um, could you ask him how did his why
how did that box get if he does he didn't do it and it was inside his house or he threw it on his on his own, how would that box get there? My son was a box that came a steering wheel for a bike.
My wife, she has the kids in the house. They do open packages and then she and the wife, she takes the boxes outside because we live at a community. The community picked up the big garbage
and you can see on the camera that picking up the package. >> I do not know how that arrived. >> Um, ask him. He received this back in May 26. Today is now we're in July. He's
had 30 days to communicate, to talk to the code enforcer, to show proof his cameras. What's happened in 30 days? Sure. >> Um, I spoke when we got the the violation, I called the officer and what
he told me was if I if I believe I didn't we didn't do it to come here to court. That's that's everything I he told me. So, we just waited until today. >> Okay. So you're you're you >> special me yes she did call me um two
different times or she contacted me uh once through phone and once email I believe um letting me know that it wasn't her and her husband didn't do it. Um I did tell her if if they believe that you know this is inaccurate then they have an opportunity to contest it
but she didn't tell me anything about any other evidence showing that they had that they didn't. >> Okay. Um, who was the trash picked up by our people? >> It It's been picked up by Southern Waste. Yes. >> Okay. All right. So, I'm going to go
ahead and roll on this. Do you Before I roll on this, are you um your husband did state that the box was taken outside? >> Yeah. Um, when we received Amazon packages, the kids open it up and I just got the boxes and put outside. But if
you see the box, it says 57. So, it was May 7th when we got the box. And then I have the 58 the like the boat that comes inside the fairways community got the the they come up and they get the the trash but I don't know how the box got to that the
right like that that place. >> Okay. Well, we still had our city go out there and clean up. I would advise you since this you're here and you've gotten this violation that for future that you know that you have to whether it's cut it up, put it in your trash because if
not you're going to continue to come here. >> You know what I'm I'm putting up and taking out the the the sticker because I really don't know how that box. >> Yeah, but I'm talking here for the future. I mean, this I'm just letting you know. I'm going to go ahead and rule on this, but so you don't keep coming
back. You are aware now of what needs to be done, correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um All right. So, I'm going to go ahead and rule on this. I do find a violation of city homestead. Um for case number CC260016TKT. Um you have this violation of 500. I'm
going to bring it down to 375 and today an $80 administration fee. And this should really give you an impact. I am trying to help you as well. But at the same time for the future so this doesn't happen. You need to go ahead and make sure your boxes are taken care of underneath your name. whether it's
putting um tearing them up or whatever it is so that you don't have that problem later. Okay. All right. Ne next next case item 22 court officer Valencia under new business
case number C25090181 Ever Martinez and W Carmen Ortiz Peace. So, property was cited on September 11 of 2025 for code section 6-36 non-permitted work without a permit. And what they did it was a terrace at the
rear of the property without a permit. A notice of violation will sound regular and certified on 12 of 2025. The service was received signed. The summer up here was posted on 61 of 2025
and I took the photographs on night 11 of 2025 and 61 of 2026. Correction, the posting date is 61 of 2026. Currently, the property is in violation. I took the photos and special master, please accept the
photos submitted as evidence approved. All right. Um, please state your full name and address of the property. >> Special master, I'm sorry. Um, special master. Um, I have been um in contact with them. I
believe they are in the process of um getting the permit. They're just going to need more time. Um the city is kind of behind on issue permits. So if we can
give them additional time. >> Thank you. All right. Please state your full name and address. >> Does he have a testimony he wants to share? >> [clears throat] >> No. >> Okay. Um, all right. So, I'm going to go
ahead and roll on this. I do find a violation of City of Homestead for case number C25080495. >> No, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. CE25090181. Correction. Um, so I'm going to go ahead and give them 60 days, which would bring them to September 1st, 2026. Today would
just be an $8 administration fee. That's it. Next case item number 12 under civil citations court officer buo case number CC 26
0058 TKT Julio Ernnandez. This citation was issued to Julio Hernandez. Property address uh 63 Northeast 10th Street apartment 5. Citation was issued
on Tuesday, May 26, 2026 for code section 23- sorry, 23.5-6. Location of the violation was 63 Northeast 10th Street in the center median. I took the photographs on May 26, 2026.
The citation was posted on property and mailed uh to his address. Um this is in the same pile as the last. There were packages that were addressed to uh to Mr. Hernandez within that same
pile. and I issued the citation as such. >> Okay. Thank you. Have him um please state his full name and address. Does he have a testimony he wants to share? that that ticket that got there by
caught me by surprise. We have not thumped by that garbage area there. That night I throw AI garbage in the dumper, but it was full. So maybe when the truck lift the the
dump dumpster up probably that box and fell over there where there's always garbages that other people not big Well, I put I do I put my garbage in my >> That's all.
>> Okay. All right. Um well, like I told the other people, I'm going to advise him as well. Is it's it's still his trash. So, I would advise him for in the future any packages, anything um that he can take care of himself, whether it's
cutting it up, putting it in his trash, because this will continue to happen. Um there's a fine here of $500. I'm willing to go help him. It's not going to be waved because he needs to uh understand
that this can happen again if he's not careful about his trash. And if it's full, then that should be like an obvious not to continue to put it in there. Do something else to take care of his trash. It's um for the whole community. So, I'm going to rule on it.
Um I do find a violation of City of Homestead for case number CC6 I mean 2600158 KT. Um he has a fine here of 500. I'm going to bring it to 375 with an $80 administration fee and I advise him to
take care of his trash. >> Thank you. Next case, item number one under new business, code officer Simmons, case number CC 25 005 512
N O Antonio Antonio Piski P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P O Tano. The property was cited on October 30th, 2025 for code section violation 6-36 building without a permit in reference to a tiki hut installed without a
permit. A notice of violation was mailed certified and posted on October 30th, 2025. A summon to appear was mailed certified and posted on June 1st, 2026. Compliance was not met. Therefore, the property is was set for tonight's
hearing on July 2nd, 2026. Currently, the property is in violation. I took the photographs on October 30th, 2025. The photos fairly and accurately represent what was observed. Special master, please accept the photos submitted as evidence. >> Approved.
The owner was granted a 60-day extension with the revised comp um compliance date of May 21st, 2026. There is an active permit um application on file for this property. permit number 2604327
which was submitted on April 28, 2026. As of today, the permit has not yet been issued. >> Thank you. Please state your full name and address. Does she own this property?
>> Power of attorney. I have the power of attorney. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. >> Does she have a testimony she wants to share on behalf of the owner? >> Yes. Um start a process with the
permanent. Um he the owner start by himself with a friend to the process per permitting process but he has a lot of back and forth with the permitting because in the last time he applied for
the whole system then he said he knew apply for the new system he paid in voice and many things happened in the in the process. So he called me to continue working with him because confused and concerned with the time that is took
this all this process. So now um I went to the city start to looking for information what is the corporate measurements for the tiki hut if we can continue or demolition we start everything like a zero game because the person who is working is not
handle it uh with the code and we try to um u receive information from the GC to to put the permit in a correct way. So um at this moment we have a corrections to submit because finally we came back
to the old permit that we applied in January. So now we have corrections in the system but the system is through the emails. So we have more time to continue working in the process because we need to fix the the slab. We need to fix the
ticky hot to comply with the code. So the reason is I came to request more time to complete the approval permit inspection with the the the structure and close the violation. >> Sure. Okay. All right. So I'm going to
go ahead and rule on this. I do find a violation of City of Homestead for case number CC2500512. I'm going go ahead and grant um additional time 90 days. That would bring the the date to October 1st, 2026. And today was just going to be an $80
administration fee and that's it. Okay. >> Thank you so much. Next case item 24 under new business code officer Valencia case number C25
090199 Santiago Rodriguez with Anna Diaz. My name is Santiago Rodriguez. >> Mr. Santiago, give me one second. Okay, just give me one second. >> The property was added on 911 of 2025
for code section 6-36 fell into obtaining permit required by CO forward done in the premises and what they did is that install the terrace at the rear without a permit. The notice of violation was met regular and certifiable on 912 of 2025.
The property was posted on 601 2026 with the summons to appear. Current the property is in violation. I took the photographs on 912 of 20 25 and 61 of 2026. I'm sorry. Correction 911 of 2025 and 61
of 2026. The photos finger represent what was observed. Special please accept the photo as a evidence approved. They applied for a for a demo permit
on March 5th of 2026. The permit has not been issued yet. And that's all I have for now. Okay. Thank you. All right. Now, please state your full name and address. >> I am Santiago Rodriguez. My wife, sorry,
Anna Patricia Diaz. Our address is 1609 Southwest Third Street, Onstead, Florida 330. >> Thank you. Do you have a testimony you want to share? >> Um, well, we um received two code
compliances. The first one remove what we needed to be removed and it was dismissed I believe. So we talked to a general contractor about what to do with the uh the roof. He said the best thing was
to remove the demolishing get you know laid out to get it you know through all the holes to build it back. So he tell us to to get a demolition permit.
Um we receive information here this on pending zoning review. >> I'm sorry. >> We receive uh information here in the building that this is still on pending zoning review which are >> Oh yeah, it's pending. Yes. >> Yes.
>> But you have that permanent. Great. So we just need some more time. [snorts] >> Okay. Um, make sure you stay in communication with Miss Valencia and the U city as well. >> Um, all right. So, I'll go ahead and roll on this. I do find a violation of
City of Homestead for case number C25090199. I'll go ahead and give you an additional 60 days. It will bring you to September 1st, 2026. And today is just going to be an $80 administration fee. That's it. Okay.
You're welcome. special last year. I'm sorry for that last case. What was the ruling? >> I have it. It is um September 1st 26 um which was 60 days and an $8 administration fee. >> Thank you.
Next case, item number six under previously heard code officer Garcia. Case number CC 25001121 N O Elizabeth Capin Pilar Perez.
Good afternoon, special manager. This is an affidavit of non-compliance. The the property owners are Elizabeth Capin and Par Perez. The property address in question is 895 Northwest 15th Street under Folio
10-7812-022-0690. Uh the coding violation for this case is 6-206 installing a wood fence without a permit. This case was originally heard back on February 19, 2026 and was given until March 22nd, 2026 to comply. The
case was reviewed on March 22nd, 2026 and determined that the property is still in violation. There is currently a permit currently in apply status which is permit number BD2600667 BLR and per application note from development services the application is
missing documentation as June 1st 2026 the photos for represent was observed special master please observe the photos evidence >> approved >> special master right now as of the current note from development services
from the building division. Uh as of June 29, 2026, um they updated the notes on the permit and apparently they are asking at least on that portion uh for the applicant to reapply a portion because it's either
missing some documentation or or has some kind of incomplete documentation for the notes. >> Thank you. All right. Please state your full name and address. >> Hi, good afternoon. Elizabeth Capin, 895 Northwest 15th Street, Homestead,
Florida 33030. >> Okay. And you have a testimony you want to share? >> So, I had to resubmit the application because apparently the application I used um the city's no longer using it and I believe the notary had to be an
electronic notary. So, I wasn't aware of that. I did um resend the application. Uh the notary, it was an e sign or an e notary. Um and I I believe I had to
upload an addendum. That was it. So I did receive a notification that the application had been approved and they're just waiting for the permit to be issued, I guess. I'm not sure. >> Okay. Were you um Did you see that, Mr.
Garcia? Did you see the approval? >> Well, right now finally um said and I also when I was looking at the notes this morning, the last note that they have on the record, at least on the actual record of the permit is that um the building division, which is one of
the main disciplines that review a permit, uh are kicking the the review, sorry, the application back to the applicant due to some missing documentation. So perhaps that is what they're needing in order to move with the permit forward. As far as I know, there are still other disciplines that
still have to review. I think signing as well, but that's what I have as of now based on the records that we have on file. >> Okay. Um, so Miss Perez, did you hear that? That there's um additional information that is needed from you.
>> I was trying to go into the portal, but for some reason, I'm not sure. Um, I I was trying to pull it up. It says it's been approved, and it doesn't it's not asking for additional Can you show that to the um the code
enforceer, Mr. Garcia, that it's been approved? >> Yeah. Can you show it to me, please? >> I don't know if there's Is it the Civic Plus platform? I don't think it is. When I um go into the site, it's rerouting me there, but that's not where I have a
login. So, >> yes. >> Where is it that you see they're approved? Wherever you see that it's >> so I received an email from Is it EPL? I'm looking for it now. >> Okay. >> EPL. Um,
>> okay. If I may interject here, I think I have that same email because we do have like a way to check that as well according to this. But again, it's on 6 on June 29, 2026 back on 4:54
p.m. saying that they're pleased to inform that the permit application has been accepted and routed for review. So it means that is still in the process. That's based on the current note we have here. I have an email from Alexa um Ranel
and she um she told me that it was the application that I submitted. You guys don't use it on the new portal. So she told me that's what I had to do. Um reapply and have the electronic notary. >> Um and I also have that
>> uploaded the fence addendum. >> So you you've done that? >> I've done that. That was on Yes. and it was approved. I'm just unable to go into the portal for some reason. >> Okay. Well, um, well, Mr. Garcia read what the notes to me. Um, so
you obviously were here for you've been here a few times already. You you've you um are in the process of getting your permits and all that. So, for today u regarding this case, >> I'm going to go ahead and give a little bit more time, but after this time is it's not going to be the same anymore.
There's going to be daily fines going back as of probably March. So, I would advise you to whatever needs to be done, complete it, stay in communication with Mr. Garcia, who's the uh your assigned um code enforcer, and then the city as well. Okay. >> It's taken a little bit longer because
of financial issues. I had to get a new survey, the application, so I' I've spent at least almost $600, >> right? I understand. But, um Okay. So, I'm going to go ahead and rule on this. Um, I do find violation of City of
Homestead for case number CC2501121. Um, I'm going to go ahead and give you an additional 30 days that will bring you to August 2nd, 2026 and um an $8 administration fee since you have everything already in in
the process you've started. >> Okay. So, so the August 2nd deadline is to have what completed? because I know inspections have to be I don't know how long that takes with the city. >> Well, >> is that something >> that's why you stay in communication
with him and the city as well? You know, you have to be on top of them. But up now, I mean, we're we're going back as of March. So, all of this going stuff has been happening for a while. So, I'm giving you an additional extension and that should be enough time because it's not just recent. I mean, it's months and
months. >> Okay. So, that's it. That's it for today. >> Thank you. Ma'am, excuse me, ma'am. Next case, item 26 under new business. Court Officer Chapelli. Case number C250181.
CBD 2 Properties Inc. >> Good afternoon. >> This is an affidavit of non-compliance. The case was heard on August 7th, 2025 and were given until October 7th, 2025 to comply for code section 6-36
nonpermitted work for the hurricane shutters. Affidavit of non-compliance was certified in regular mail on May 3rd, 2026. Property was also posted with an affidavit of non-compliance on May 4th, 2026. Special master, please accept the photo submitted as evidence. Yes,
approved. Special master, they do have a permit on file 255080434 for the hurricane shutters. It's just been in an applied status as of um August 13, 2025. He has a power of attorney and he's
going to provide a testimony on behalf of the owner. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, just state your name and then the address of the property. >> Sure. Uh my name is uh Jane Torres. Uh the address of the property is 530
Southwest uh third pair. So we as uh the officer stated we submitted the we submitted plans for the permit uh ownership hire a contractor who we haven't been able to contact. So
we are taking action over that. We are doing a complaint against him. Uh we just need a little bit more time. I don't know if we could uh get 60 90 days for uh compliance. We are looking for a new contractor. We already h we already
uh interviewed two. So right now it's just a matter of uh getting retained and and try to close this as soon as possible. >> Sure. Thank you for your honesty. All right. So I'll go ahead and roll on this. I do find a violation of city of
Homestead for case number C250181. I'll go ahead and grant the 90 days. That will bring you to 10 October 1st, 2026. today would just be uh an $80 administration fee. >> Thank you. >> Okay,
that's it. Next case, item [clears throat] n item 10 under civil citations. Court officer buo case number CC 26 00156 TKT Rosa Cernna.
Citation was issued to uh Rosa Cerna. Property address 63 Northeast 10th Street apartment 1. Citation was issued on Tuesday, May 26, 2026 for code section 23.5-6i
in the same location as the others. Um I took the photographs on May 26, 2026. I came across this uh bulk trash pile with Miss Cerna's mail
littered in the pile and she was issued uh the citation for illegal dumping. >> Hello. Good afternoon. >> Hello. Please state your name and address. >> My name is Rosa. Um >> what's the address? >> Excuse me.
>> The address? 63 Northeast 10 Street, Homestead, Florida 330. >> Okay. And do you have a testimony you want to share? >> Yes. Um I know that the it was issued for May 2029, right?
>> May 26. >> May 26. Oh, sorry. Um actually, I was the manager there and um like um how can I say it? A lot of people
I was the minor there and a lot of people dump and stuff over there. Um I know I didn't dump in the place over there because I know that I will have a dumpster. The problem there is I used to call the city because sometimes they don't pick up the garbage um let's say
on a Monday when it's due. It's um and I call them because the dumpster is for 12 unit apartment and it get so full to the top. And I don't know if somebody grabbed the stuff, I put it sometimes when the dumpster was full. What I do is I call
the city when they don't pick out the garbage and put my bags on the side with everything I threw. And I noticed that some people go there in the garbage and search for things like let's say homeless people usually go there and look for items in the garbage. I don't
know if they try to open my bags and just dump my stuff over there because I know dump the garbage inside it if it was kind of empty but I usually get full the tacos as I told you in our apartment and um I don't know how it got there
because I usually I usually call the enforcement when I see garbage there I used to put them in my bathroom when it was kind of empty I used to call the city of homestead to pick up the garbage because it was kind of full and sometimes they said there was a car parked there and they don't they don't
go pick it up because it was a car got so full. Like I said, whenever it was full, I just tie my bags and put them on the side. Even if the the people don't get out of the truck to pick it up, whenever they come pick it up, I just dump put it on the dumpster. But I
don't know. I was the man. I know it's not right to put the garbage there. So, I don't know. >> All right. Well, thank you for your story. Okay. Well, um, just like I told I've been living in that place for since 1995 and I've been mined like maybe 25
26 years, >> right? >> So, I know you're not supposed to put in every time I see like big sometimes I found letters from Miami all the way from Miami and a lot of the stuff from Miami and I told the enforcement to check it. >> Right. Okay. Well, I know this has been
um an area and just I will going to tell you the same like I've told everybody else. It still has your information, still has your trash, so you're responsible for it. >> So, um, you know, that's something that if you see it's full, like, you know, you've said it's full, then, you know, I
advise you to find another way to throw away your trash, handle your trash, because this is continue. You'll be coming here over and over and, you know, so >> my first time they call me for something like this because like I said, when I see it was all the way up and I tie my back and put them on the side,
>> right? get out of the truck to pick it up. Whenever they pick up the garbage, I just put him on the dumpster. I don't know. >> All right. Well, I'm going to go ahead and roll on this. Um I do find a violation of City V Homestead. Um for case number CC2600156.
Um just like I've done for everyone, I'll go your fine was 500. I would bring I'm going to bring it down to 375, but that's one time. So, you know, to avoid this, I would advise you to make sure is taken care of the correct way. And if it's overfilled, then you got to figure
out another way because this one time reduction is only one time. Okay. >> No, I know. Like I said, I never put my garbage in in that area because I know it's not supposed to be there. >> All right. Special message. >> Yes, it's an $80 administration fee.
Okay. So, 375 and then uh $80 administration fee. That's it. You're welcome. >> Next case. Item 11 under civil citations code officer Garcia case number CC2600
157 TKT 1027 Property LLC. Okay. Good afternoon. The citation, sorry. [clears throat] The citation was issued to 1027 Property LLC with a mailing address of PO Box 431093, Miami, Florida 33243.
Citation was issued on May 27, 2026 via certified mail and a copy of it was also posted on on the property on May 28, 2026 for the violation of chapter 23.5 of the city code of ordinance under section 23.5-4. Condition of an inspection of containers
allowing a dumpster to overflow with waste. The location of the violation is 320 Southwest 11 Avenue under Folio 10-7813-000000-139. Uh I took the initial inspection photograph on May 27, 2026 and the followup photograph on June 2nd, 2026
and another photo follow-up photograph on June 10, 2026. Um the photos fally and accurate represent was observed. Special masterpiece accept the photos submit as evidence >> approved. special master uh about this case uh it is very important to say for the consideration that since the moment
that the property received the citation I didn't believe the one of the representative express some concerns about the case however be advised that since they issued the citation the property changed the the from being a one container to a
multiple individual dumpster and based on that effort I think that I haven't seen that issue reoccur again and I have reason to believe it may not occur again in the future. So, it is very commendable on the effort put on their part and therefore is for your recommendation in order for the first
citation. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Please state your full name and address. >> Yes. Evette Agusti. This is for 1027 LLC. I am the property owner and the owner of the LLC for 320 Southwest 11th
Avenue, Homestead, Florida 330. Thank you. And do you have a testimony you want to share? >> I do. I actually have a presentation for you. >> So we acquired the property on the first of April. We have I have
the certified warranty deed. So there is a correction because the due process was not delivered correctly. But either way, we were on of the dumpster. The waste department, which they can testify, I have communication with them. I went in
person prior to a Mr. Garcia's uh citation. And when we went, they said that it had been working for several months on changing and removing these dumpsters to individual containers per unit.
So, um, Officer Palmer, we spoke to him personally. We had somebody constantly picking up waste from the dumpster and we said it is an issue that is impossible to sustain it but the waste
department has been working on changing this. Then he said not to worry we corrected it every other day. Then officer Garcia comes and I'm sorry but there's not to date a certified
anything going to the PO box. He may have sent it later but there was no due process because our address wasn't even on there during this time. Our address did not show up on this property. So either way we were on top of our property and we went to the waste department and they removed these
containers. But I have to say my partner and I have 50 years of combined real estate experience and this municipality with the exception of officer Palmer who actually does a thorough investigation before doing a citation or doing a
violation or in this case site citing us to go to court. He actually because we even recently spoke to him again does a little bit of investigation. I just don't know the rush to do these citations without
investigating anything. So, no department speaks to any other. You know, the waste department actually delivered the containers. They I have an an actual date where those containers weren't even within a week of officer Garcia's quick to put this
into the court system. And I think it's impossible for somebody who is on top of their properties to actually continue to improve them when all they do is deal with these um violations that nobody's investigating,
nobody's talking to the waste department to see what they're doing. Nobody's talking to each other in their own department. And I can see the same for officer Capelli, Valencia. I've spoken to numerous of them already. I mean, I can go through the citations, which I
actually brought them up here because as a new owner to the city of Homestead, I couldn't even get a list of what was available. The two supervisors, which is Jose Perez and Mario, I think Morio, he they had to do
a list for me. So, I had not received not one of these things. We were already on top of it. And I find it shocking that a city would do all these things and not really make sure that they're even getting it delivered appropriately. Ma Mahabak Johnson, the previous owners,
received several of them. Um, so after speaking with Modia, who actually did me the favor of putting a process of, it's called process something that you get a list of anything that's open and he has been
very helpful and officer Palmer. But everybody else, I'm going to give you an example that's on your list there for a timeline so that you know. Um, Officer Capelli was, I understand, doing her job responding to complaints and so is another. >> Today we're hearing the case specifically that's before you, not
other cases. >> Go ahead. Anyway, I feel like this is um something that should be dismissed and my recommendation is that the department is I'm putting a formal complaint because I I do feel like it's it's very
difficult to maintain properties when there the own departments are not speaking. But this was corrected right away. And there's I actually didn't request individual units trash that Mr. Garcia said that we requested it. We did
not request it. The city was already working on taking those dumpsters away because my partner did have to file a police report that same week. There was it was in the news. There was a shooting in the park across the street because we have a lot of bones there, which is who
goes through this trash. But either way that the waste department already had it done and the next I don't know four or five days from the date of this citation they had individual containers for each unit. >> If I may interject as it relates to the
due process I just want to state and clarify for the record for Florida statute 162 due process is given when the property is both posted and sent via certified mail. uh due process per Florida statute 162 dictates that the city's effort to send via certified mail
is one of two components for certified uh mail process including the posting. So in in this case um we have testimony from um officer Andres who advised that he both sent it via certified mail and posted the property. um whether or not
they received the certified mail. Unfortunately, per Florida statute 162 is not part of the requirement. As long as the city and good faith efforts did send it via certified mail, um at this juncture, the violation in question isn't necessarily tied to the other
speculations that are being brought up with the property owner. However, what we will bring up and mention is that at the time of the inspection, there was a violation and therefore that is why the citation was issued. And at this juncture, the city is uh finalized with presenting their case. Um we're
requesting an adjudication at this time. >> Okay. Um yeah. So you understand now the the host what we're here for, you know, and I know that you've gotten the the dumps, but actually it's been a a benefit because as um the code
>> Mr. Garcia, I'm sorry to interrupt, but that picture is what Mr. Garcia saw, not the previous one. We to we don't handle garbage that is collected by the city of Homestead and that's over uh the other picture that he inserted because this is
the picture. This is what he saw. The one that is up right now, not the previous one that he showed that it was overflowing because that one we took care of right away with the city. at the time of because he's referring to
>> this is a certified picture that has a date and time stamp. Zoom out a little bit. Zoom out. >> Which dictates that on May 27, 2026 at approximately 4:45 p.m. the dumpster was overflowing.
>> The previous picture that it was posted there, what time stamp did it have? The violation is for this picture. This picture depicts the violation in question which shows the overflowing dumpster and litter. >> I know we don't we don't control the pickup though of trash. We picked up
around it but we don't we don't have that. That's a city of homestead. That's why we went to the waste department and that's why they switched and removed dumpsters and they said they would >> I understand however at the time of the violation this was the active condition
and therefore that was why the citation was issued as mentioned previously via email um and we were very adamant the city at Homestead takes public safety very seriously and littered trash and debris is a very serious nuisance to the
city causing more blight So that is why the citation was issued. >> Okay. Can you please show the time stamp of the previous picture that you just showed because it's the picture that we have. >> At this time the city concludes the presentation and
>> Okay. >> Allow for the magistrate. >> All right. So I'm going to go ahead and rule on this case. Um I do find violation of city of Homestead for case number CC2600157. um for that remaining uh 500 to continue
to be paid and an $80 administration fee as well. And remember, these citations when they're given, you have 30 days to rectify them in case that you didn't know. So when they're given to you, you have a full 30 days. >> We we rectified it or it's been
>> at the time, but at the time of that of the citation, it was not >> No, he didn't give us any days. He we rectified it already before he even said anything. I have an email in your presentation that I that I gave you that he said it has been rectified.
I mean it's in his own words that it was rectified. We didn't leave it like that. They came to pick it up. >> So for clarification, this is not a notice of violation. This is a citation. >> So the citation carries a monetary fine
even if compliance is met. What the 30 days is in reference to that the magistrate is bringing up is 30 days to uh submit your appeal and pay for the citation. If the citation is not paid or an appeal is not received within 30 days, then it's going to be >> over here.
>> So if an appeal or payment is not made within the 30 days, then the citation is brought up before the magistrate for default. In this case, since you appealed the citation, the only thing in question right now is whether or not the violation existed at the time of the citation.
>> But it so he let us know. >> Was the violation corrected? >> Yes, it was corrected. >> That is that is that is not a uh that is not being discredited. However, at the time of the citation, >> there was a violation. >> There was a violation and therefore the
citation was issued. >> Right. But he didn't You you say that he gives some time to correct it, right? That is in an email from him saying it has been corrected. So why [clears throat] am I getting the fine? >> Because a citation
was issued. Whether or not you corrected it, the monetary fine is attached to the action that already occurred. You can't take back that the litter and debris was in the city. You can't take back the overflowing dumpster. it already
occurred. So, it's treated as >> a dumpster that shouldn't have been there to begin with. As for the waste, >> it's treated as an irreparable act in nature because of the continuing curb circumstances. >> It's like a speeding ticket. >> Exactly.
>> Right. >> Yes. >> The violation happened. You stopped. You spoke to the officer. It's corrected. But the >> But slowing down to speed with the officer doesn't take away the fact that you were going 80 miles hour. >> Yeah. I'm just clarifying. Yes. Okay.
>> So, that's it. The violation still there. I already um stated you still need to pay the $580 administration fee. Now returning to the agenda order of the remaining cases. Next case item number two under civil
citations court officer Johnson case number CC2600 1116 TKT Allison G's. Citation was issued to [clears throat]
Allison Maria G's. Property address P. Box 8320001, Miami, Florida 33283. Citation was issued on April 15, 2026 for code section 29-12
section H for tree abuse. Location of violation happened at 2046 Northeast 4th Court. I took the photographs on April 9th, April 15, and May 29th of 2026.
The photos fairly and accurately represent what was observed. Special master, please accept the photos submitted as evidence. >> Approved. >> Have you spoken to this person and the owner? >> I did speak to the uh the owner when I
posted the property. Um I asked the owner if they, you know, cut the tree and everything. They did admit that they did cut the tree. I explained the process and everything. Um, she did state that she was going to come to the hearing and
>> Okay. Thank you. All right. So, I'm going to go ahead and ruin this. Um, I do find violation of city of Homestead. Her case number CC2600116 TKT did not show up. Fine is a th000 with an
$8 administration fee. Next case, item number three under civil citations code officer Garcia. Case number CC2600134 TKT Michael James Murray. Michael James Mari REV
special master. This is a civil citation. This is under Garcia with the city of Homestead compliance. The citation was issued to Michael Rosel which was the violator and a copy of the citation plus the actual summon to
appear was issued to Michael James Mari a Michael James Mari rev trust via certified mail to the address located at 7724 Southwest 175th Terrace in Pomemetto Bay, Florida 33157
and posted on the 9005 Northeast Fifth Avenue, Homestead to Florida 33030 uh back on April 25 of 2026 for the violation of chapter 23.5 of the city code of ordinance under section 23.5-68
improper garbage disposal commonly known as illegal dumping. The location of the violation is the swell abuting the address of 904 Northwest 5th Avenue. So technically in front of the in front of the property. uh the initial inspection photographs
were taken on April 25, 2026 and the follow reins inspection that were taken on April 29 and a subsequent reinspection per solid waste was made on April 30, 2026. Per my knowledge, the waste was removed
by by the city and please accept the photo submitted as evidence >> approved. Special master, the defendant was supposed to be here. Actually, this case was supposed to be heard last month. He requested to be changed to this day due
to some availability issues. So, I'm kind of surprised he's not here, too. >> Okay. All right. I'm going to go ahead and roll on this. I do find a violation of City of Homestead for case number CC2600134 TKT. Fine to be a,000 with an $80
administration fee. Next case, item number five under civil citations code officer Simmons Case number CC 2600145 TKT Reo Castillion.
Citation was issued to Reel Cast Castellum at property address 840 Independence Drive, unit 848. Citation was issued on May 7, 2026 for code section 19-14D
um abandoned property fee. This was in reference to the ticketed the citation is in reference to non-compliance of giving payment of the annual registration fee. The location of the violation was 840 Independence Drive
unit 848. I took the photographs of the nov posting on April 15, 2026. The photos accurately and represent what was reserved. Special master, please accept the photo submitted as evidence. Approved.
I spoke with I spoke with the owner of the property when the initial notice of violation was posted. The owner stated that the property is not abandoned and that he currently resides there. Um he said that he would get in contact with the bank and I haven't heard or spoke to
him again. So he's currently in violation. He didn't pay a fee. All right. So I'm going to go ahead and roll on this. I do find a violation of City of Homestead for case number CC2600145 TKT
have a $1,000 um violation and an $80 administration fee. Next case under civil citation item item number nine code officer Chapelli case number CC 2600 0154
TKT FKH SFR Propco B HLD LP CO First Key Homes LLC. A citation was issued to FKH SFR
Propcoh Ferski Homes LLC. Mailing address of 1850 Parkway Place 900 Maretta, Georgia 367 located at 213 Southwest 15 Place, Homestead, Florida. The citation was
issued on May 21st, 2026 and was mailed and posted along with summits to appear and a copy of the citation. A reinspection was scheduled and conducted on May 24th, 2026. The citation was issued for a violation of the city code section 23.56B
excessive book trash on property. The violation was corrected by solid waste on May 26, 2026. The citation also remains unpaid. Photographs documenting the condition were taken and submitted as evidence. Approved.
All right. So, I'm going to go ahead and roll on this case. I do find violation of City of Homestead for case number CC2600154T KT. A $1,000
fine and an $80 administration fee. Next case, item 13 under civil citations, code officer ble case number CC2600159 TKT Milson Hernandez. >> Citation was issued to Mr. Milson
Hernandez at the property address of 63 Northeast I'm sorry his property address is 63 Northeast 10th Street apartment 9 citation was issued on Tuesday May 26 2026 code section uh 23.5-6
I location of the violation was 63 Northeast 10th Street in the center median I took the photographs on May 26 2026 said the citation was issued posted on property and sent via certified mail.
I've had no contact with this this person. >> All right, let me go ahead and roll on this. I do find a violation of City of Homestead for case number CC2600159 TKT, $1,000
fine and an $80 administration fee. next case. Item number one under previously heard item number one code officer Chapelli case number CC2500176 NOB Ulyses Salgado Navy Rodriguez Ulyses
Salgado Navy Rodriguez Yes. This [snorts] is an affidavit of non-compliance. The case was heard on February 19, 2026 and were given until March 22nd, 2026 to comply for code section 6-36 non-permitted work for the side doors and the door of fans with no
permits. Affidavit of non-compliance was sent certifying regular mail on April 29, 2026. Property was also posted with an affidavit of non-compliance on April 29, 2026. Special master, please accept the photo submitted as evidence. >> Approved. special masters. Um, as of
today, there's no permits on file. >> Um, when did you tell me that they had to come back? Um, where they had time? >> They were heard on February 19, 2026 and were given until March 22nd, 2026. >> March 27th. >> 22nd. >> Oh, 22nd.
26. Okay. So, I'm going to go ahead and rule on this. I do find a violation of City of Homestead case number CC2500176 NOV. Um, this is going to have a fine of $250
daily going back as of March 27, 26 and an $80 administration fee. Special master March 22nd 22, sorry, did I say 27? Sorry, let me make that correction. uh case number CC2500176
NOV will have a daily fine of $250 going back as of March 22nd 2026 and all administration fee. Next case, item 13, item number three, under previously heard
code officer Chapelli. Case number CC 2500 755 NOB Bruce Ramirez. This is an affidavit of non-compliance. The case was heard on January 29th, 2026
and were given until March 1st, 2026 to comply for code section 19-71. Multiple abandoned vehicles on property. Affidavit of non-compliance was sent certified in regular mail on April 29th, 2026. Property was also posted with an affidavit of non-compliance on April
29th, 2026. Special master, please accept the photo submitted as evidence. >> Approved. All right, I'm going to go ahead and roll on this. I do find in violation of city of Homestead for case number CC2500755
will have a daily fine of $250 going back as of March 1st, 2026 in an $80 administration fee. Next case, item number five under previously heard code officer Chapelli.
Case number CC 2600385 NOB 250 Northwest 9th Terrace LLC. This is an affidavit of non-compliance. The case was heard on May 21st, 2026 and were given until May 26, 2026 to comply
for code section 6-36 non-permitted work for the change link fans and partial removal of wall structure with no permits. Affidavit of non-compliance was sent certified and regular mail on May 27, 2026. Property was also posted with an affidavit of non-compliance on May
27, 2026. Special master, please set the photo submitted as evidence approved. special [clears throat] master. Um they do have a permit um on file 26030131 for the change link fans is stolen and apply status as of March 7, 2026 and
they're missing the permit for the partial removal of the wall structure. Okay. Okay. But they have gone ahead and and the the original violation was for not having a a permit to do the chain link or what?
>> For the changeling fence and the partial removal of the wall structure. Um but for the changeling fence, those permits have been denied. >> Okay. So, what's the permit for now? >> It's still just in an applied status
just for the changelink fence. >> Okay. Then they're still missing the other ones. >> The removal of the wall structure. Okay. All right. I'm going to go ahead and roll on this. I do find in violation of city of Homestead for case number CC 2600385.
We go back as of May 26, a daily fine of $185 and an $80 administration fee. Special master, can you repeat the fine? I'm sorry. The >> fine is a daily fine of $185
going back as of May 26, 26 and an $80 administration fee. >> Thank you. Next case, item number two, under new business, code officer Chapelli. Case number CC25
01334 N O Julio C the Armas Yamira Guerrero. The property was cited on December 30th, 2025 for the following code violation 6- um 6-36 nonpermitted work for the
windows, front door, and the side door. Compliance was not met. Summon to appear was smelled on April 26, 2026 and posted on April 27, 2026. As of today, the property remains in violation. Photographs were taken and submitted as evidence.
Right. [clears throat] I'll go ahead and roll on this. I do find violation of City of Homestead for case number CC2501 334 NOV, giving them five days to come into compliance, which would bring it to July
8th. 2026 and an $80 administration fee. Next case, item number four under new business code officer Chapelli case number CC 2600726 NOB Yonel Torres.
The property was cited on March 9th, 2026 for the following code violation 6-36 non-p permitted work for the duro fence and structure on rear with no permits. Compliance was not met. Summons to appear was smelled on May 12th, 2026 and posted. As of today, the property
remains in violation. Photographs were taken and submitted as evidence. Um, special master, they do have a permit number BD-26-0000633-BL-R for the Duro fence. Um, is in an applied status as of May 11th, 2026.
permit number BD-26-0000874-BL-R for the structure on the rear is in an applied status as of 72 2026 and they have it as a demo permit. >> Okay. So, they got everything on and um in the permit status.
>> Yes. All right. All right. So, I'm going to go ahead and rule on this. I do find violation of city of Homestead for case number CC2600726 NOB. We go ahead and give them 30 days. That would bring it to August 2nd, 2026
and an $8 administration fee. Next case, item number six under new business, court officer Morataya. Case number CC 2600 875 N O B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B andB Invest.
This property was cited March 19th, 2026 for code section violation 6-197 fence in need of repair. A notice of violation was mailed via certified mail and posted March 19th, 2026. Someone took here was mailed via certified mail and posted May 13, 2026.
Currently, the property is in violation. Compliance has not been met. Photographs were taken March 19th and May 13, 2026. As of today, no effort has been made to fix the fence. Uh the photos fairly and accurately represent what was observed.
Special master, please accept these photos submitted as evidence. approved. All right, I'm going to go ahead and roll on this. I do find a violation of City of Homestead for case number CC2600875 NOV. They have 5 days to come into
compliance and that would bring to July 8th, 2026 and an $80 administration fee. Next case, item number eight under new business code officer Chapelli case number CC 2600924
N O SK LLC. >> Special master, this case is complied. Next case, item number 10 under new business, code officer Simmons, case number CC26 00946
NOV oris Landi Diaz Maro Jimenez. The property was cited on March 24th, 2026 for code section violation 6-206, fence build without a permit. A notice of violation was mailed certified and posted on March 25th,
2026. A summon to appear was mailed certified and posted on May 27, 2026. Compliance was not met. Therefore, the property is set for tonight's hearing on July 2nd, 2026. Currently, the property is in violation. I took the photographs
on March 25th, 2026. The photos fairly and accurately represent what was observed. Special master, please accept the photos submitted as evidence. approved. >> As of today, I have not spoken with the owner of the property and no one has contacted me regarding this matter. Um,
there is no permit on file for this property and violation. All right, I'll go ahead and roll this. I do find a violation of city of Homestead for case number CC2600946. They have five days to come into compliance and an $80 administration
fee. >> Special What would the five days be? >> Um, five days will bring it to July 8th, 2026. Next case, item number 12, Court Officer Chapel. Case number CC 2611
75 NOB Assad Shahade. The property was cited on April 10th, 2026 for the following code violations 19-4. Tree limbs sulo over sidewall. Compliance was not met. Summons to
appear was smelled on April 27, 2026 and posted on April 28th, 2026. As of today, the property remains in violation. Photographs were taken and submitted as evidence. All right. I do find violation of city of Homestead for case number CC2601175
NOV have five days to come into compliance which would bring it to July 8th 2026 and an $8 administration fee. Next case, item 13 under new business code officer Chapelli. Case number CC 26
01237 N O Tika Carr. >> Special master. Um, can I read both cases together? She has two cases. >> Yes. >> Okay. The property was cited on April 14, 2026
for the following code violations 30-443 for the commercial vehicle on the property. Compliance was not met. The summon to appear was mailed on April 27, 2026 and posted. As of today, the property remains in violation. Photographs were taken and submitted as evidence.
And the other case is CC261238. The property was cited on April 14, 2026 for the following code violations. 19-95 grass overgrown on the property. Compliance was not met. Summons to appear was mailed on April 27, 2026 and
posted as well. As of today, the property remains in violation. Photographs were taken and submitted as evidence. All [clears throat] right. Go ahead and rule this. I do find violation of city of Homestead for case number CC26 01237
NOV and CC2601 238 NOV. Both violations have 5 days to come into compliance. That will bring it to July 8th, 2026. And both violations have an $80 administration fee.
Next case, item 15 under new business code officer mentor case number CC 2601248 NO Iris D Cwell. Next case, item 16, under new business,
code officer Chapelli. Case number CC26 0 6 01 681 N O Y Yolanda Zamoiski. The property was cited on May 20th, 2026
for the following code violations 19-95 and overgrown alleyway. Compliance was not met. summon to appear was mailed on June 3rd, 2026 and posted on June 4th, 2026. As of today, the property remains in violation. Photographs were taken and
submitted as evidence. Okay. [clears throat] I do find a violation of city of Homestead for case number CC26011681 NOV. Um 5 days to come into compliance, which would bring to July 8th, 2026, and
an $80 administration fee. Next case item 18 under new business court officer Morataya case number C250701 50 Giovani Milidoni Carol Melidoni >> property was cited July 10th 2025 for
code section violation 6-36 failing to obtain a permit for the extended driveway a notice of violation was mailed uh via certified mail and posted July 11th, 2025. Summon to appear was mailed via certified mail on May 14th and posted May 17, 2026.
Compliance has not been made there for the property set for today's hearing. Currently, the property is in violation. Photographs were taken July 10th, 11, 2025, and May 17, 2026. Uh no permit are on fire as of today. The photos fairly
and accurately represent what was observed. Special master, please accept these photos submitted as evidence. >> Approved. >> All right, I'm going to go ahead and roll on this. I do find a violation of city of Homestead for case number C25070150. Have 5 days to come into compliance,
which will bring to July 8th, 2026, and an $80 administration fee. Next case, item 21 under new business court officer Valencia. Case number C25080495. Andrea and Gabrielle Enriquez. The property was cited on August 28th of
2025 for code section 6-36 fell into obtaining a permit required by code for work done on the premises. And what they did, they installed an awning and several minutes split without a permit. A notice of violation was made regular certified on 829 of 2025.
The property was posted with the sum to appear on 601 of 2026. Current the property is in violation. As of today, I have not seen any permit for um the ministry and also for the awning. I took the photographs on A28 of 2025 and on 61
of 2026. The photos frame represent what was observed. Special master, please accept the photo submitted as evidence. Approved. Okay. >> [snorts] >> Um they do find a violation of city of Homestead for case number CE25080495 days to come into compliance that would
bring to July 8th 2026 and an $8 administration fee. Next case, item 25 under new business court officer Valencia. Case number CE 259
04 02 Ugo and Alejandra Leovski LLC. The property was cited on 924 of 2025 for code section 6-36 following to obtain permit by by CO for word were done on the premises and what they did they installed two windows on
unit 1111. A notice of violation was not regular certified on 925 of 2025 with the posting date for someone to appear on 601 of 2026. Currently the property is in violation. I took the
photographs on 925 of 2025. 924 2025 and also on 61 of 2026. The photos fing represent what was observed. Special master please accept the photo submitted as the evidence approved. As said today, I have not seen
any permit for the windows. Okay. [clears throat] I do find violation of city of Homestead for case number C2509042. They have five days to come into compliance which will bring it to July
8th, 2026 and an $80 administration fee. Thank you everyone. meeting adjourn at 4:39. Happy 4th of July everyone. than a couple of blocks at a time. Uh the one another important point is traffic will always be maintained in
both directions at all times. The only biggest challenge I see here is that the entrance to Pioneer Village is going to be impacted for a short period of time upwards of a couple of weeks and uh the administration intend to work with the
vice mayor with the residents of Pioneer Village for alternate access into Pioneer Village for temporarily perhaps open one of the rear fences so that folks can utilize that area. There's no other way you can do this construction
without shutting down that location because you're digging up four trenches, four different trenches on the street and that's a life safety concern. So again, prior to commencement of work, there will be a series of public outreach measures being taken. Thanks.
>> Thank you, mayor. If you can go back to segment that includes Second Street. I just had a couple questions. So, I understand the splits in um how the construction is going to happen, but just to get a little more of a visual.
So, that was a relatively small piece that includes Second Street to close to Fourth Street. When that piece starts, okay, let's say right before that piece starts, would Pioneer Village be able to come out and go north? Yes. And once that piece
finishes, Pioneer Village could come out and go south. >> Correct. >> So what is your guess as far as that one segment being completely closed? >> So it's what's going to impact Pioneer
Village the most and its access is the work at the intersection itself. >> Right. So that one we anticipate that should take anywhere from two to two to three weeks max hopefully two >> because the sewer that's more in the center of the street
>> the sewer and the and the drainage. Yeah. >> And at that time there will be a lane open that Pioneer Village could exit >> through North Second Street. No, North Second Street intersection itself would be fully closed. So the entrance and the
exit would be somewhere towards the the back of the of the neighborhood we have identified. So the fences in the neighborhood they have columns right and in order for this to be only anote related pay item and
not need additional construction from the contractor engineering services from them which typically contractors are not good at. What we want to do is avoid touching the columns and only focusing on opening the gated area because of the width that we have between columns and because of safety. What we anticipating
is to have two openings, one that is in and the other one that is out. That will also be wide enough for um um solid waste trucks, emergency vehicles and whatnot. And those we are proposing to take place at North Second and North
Third at the roundabout. What place or street? >> Um, so it's not the main entrance which is street. It will be the next one >> on the west side. >> No grown trees that will be taken down there. >> There will be a the plans call for a
landscape arborist to do some minor trimming uh of a tree on second. On third there there are no trees affected. So second place and third street are your recommendations. Both >> going out to the west side. Nothing on the east.
>> Well, one would be in and the other one would be out. So >> but there will be no entrance or exit going out towards the east because then you're going to have the same issue with the construction. >> Correct. Yeah. >> Thank you very much. You're welcome.
So you may want to point out that we intend to have expedited construction schedule. The contractor will be allowed to utilize multiple crews. The contractor will be allowed to work both day and night >> and weekends
>> and weekends. This is the only way we can get this aggressive schedule accomplished. The more you delay this type of construction, you pay more. So in order to minimize their budget exposure, we want to give them the ability and flexibility to work multiple
timelines, daytime hours, nighttime hours as well. However, during the daytime hours, there will not be any open trench. It has to always be covered with plates. >> Thanks, Mr. Manager. And in that regard, R not to belver the point. I know we
have a long night ahead of us. Have we looked at how the calendar falls? Is this going to impact being able to have Winter Wonderland in Loster Park? Do we need to look for alternate locations for the coming year? >> Uh, we something to think about.
>> Yeah, we we'll think about that. It's too early in the construction schedule to predict when we're going to hit Chrome Chrome Chrome Lo Park on Chrome. >> Got Councilman Fletcher. >> Yes, thank you. I just want to make sure we're also commun communicating with
Miami date county fire rescue and and other agencies that will be uh having to use an alternate egress access point for Piner Village. I know our police will be very knowledgeable of it, but we need to make sure the county's aware. >> Whenever construction of this type, we
we have to coordinate with them uh as well as any hospital services so that whenever they dispatch, they they know not to hit a a roadblock. Well, the fire station is on the west side, so they would have quicker access to us. >> Thank you. Anything? Yes, council woman.
>> I'm sorry, Councilman and then council. >> Thank you, mayor. Um, great presentation. Love the design. Love the exped expedited construction. I I just would like to um get some clarification because I recall the walkthrough on
Crumb Avenue. I recall the discussion we had about inquiring uh regarding removing the parking and but then this is what I recalled next is was there any do we have the finalized plan on how we're going to
provide alternate parking for what we're removing from downtown? Is that something we can discuss between now and the time construction starts? I think that's kind of prudent right for the businesses. I think what the presenter the public was director mentioned was elimination of parking during the
construction time. >> But the design has con the parking on parallel parking on Chrome Avenue removed does it not >> during construction >> some of it >> some but the final >> the final plan is what the council >> does or does it not remove parking that's existing today on Chrome Avenue. So
>> on the historic um district no >> so Chrome Avenue parking that we have today we will continue to have after the the finalization of this project. Yes. >> So that was an adjustment to the plan that we did >> during the walk through. >> Okay. So also can I please have an
updated copy of the presentation? I noticed that some slides that we're seeing here are not in the packet. Um so just to clarify for those business owners that have been very concerned about what they're going to do with parking. They're going to continue to have the same amount of parking on Chrome Avenue that they have now as a
result of finalizing this project. >> Correct. At the end of the construction. Yes. >> Correct. I understand during construction there's going to be phasing and moving around but but the renderings pictures that I saw here I don't recall seeing >> yes let me show you >> parking lines and whatnot on Chrome Avenue. So
>> they don't have um parking line differentiated because it's only a rendering but here you can see that one includes >> those are the pictures we reviewed and approved for the light poles but the the one where you have the rendering of what it was going to look like that >> and that one also includes the set for
the parking. All right, perfect. Thank you. >> And remember, we're building the parking lot behind Jacobson's, >> right? For >> that's moving forward. >> Yes. Okay. But thank you for clarifying that. >> Very good. Thank you all. >> All right. Thank you. >> Yes. I'm sorry, Councilman. >> Sorry.
>> Yeah. And that was kind of my concern because originally we had taken out the parking along Chrome Avenue >> in certain places. >> Yeah. And and I think it was more so to um allow for outdoor dining purposes and things like that. Um, and you're
mentioning that we're going to have the exact same number of parking spaces along Chrome Avenue after construction and then we're add we're able to adjust that if restaurants come in and then want to do uh expansions of sidewalks for outdoor eating.
>> We have to get you the exact number. There are some eliminations due to two uh comments that we received from the county, but um that might off the top of my head um that was a while. I think it's about maybe five in total out of 60 something. >> Then we're going to reconfigure some of
the side streets to accommodate more parking >> so that they're they don't have to walk all the way from the parking garage to let's say you know second drive or you know beyond north of that to fourth. So um that that was just my concern because people have been calling me like what are you doing with the sidewalks in the
in the in the parking spaces? I said well I'm not sure. I think I mentioned that in my my oneons with >> can you can you state on the record what is the final status of the sidewalks you're going to maintain the exact width of the sidewalks >> the exact footprint but now the width
and usable width is the whole footprint whereas before the usable width if you're ADA right um if you have some sort of a disability uh your width is restricted to that one which is 2% across about
five feet or six feet on either side. Now we're making the entire footprint ADA accessible which is now fully usable sidewalk that will go anywhere from I believe at the narrowest point very few areas is about 8 ft. The majority is about 10
>> was because of the planters also. >> Yeah. So so the width the width is coming from the removal of the planters. >> There is some some width augmentation because of the planter removal. Yeah. >> Okay. Yes. >> Thank you. Throw the manager if I can just get a diagram of the parking spaces
that will be removed so that I can speak more clearly and transparently to any businesses that call me, etc. Thank you. >> Yeah. Is that it, Councilman Roth? Okay. Good. Thank you. And thank you all. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, let's move to the consent agenda and then we'll insert the the
add-on item. So, move moved and seconded. All in favor? >> Any opposed? All right. Let's go to the added item, the the grant. Mr. Manager, >> or [clears throat] do we have a motion? >> We have a a resolution.
>> Oh, go ahead. Read the resolution. >> Uh, it's a resolution of the city council of the city of Homestead, Florida, accepting a grant award from the state of Florida, Office of Attorney General in order to provide victim advocacy services to crime victims, training of victim advocates, and approving grant agreement. authorizing the city manager to execute and
implement the grant agreement establishing a budget in the amount of $15,594 for the expenditure and grant funds and providing for an effective date. >> We have a motion on this item. Moved moved by Ross, seconded by
Cannibal. We beat you to it. Is there any discussion? >> Let's have a roll call vote on this item. >> Councilman Cannibal? >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Abulu? >> Yes. Councilwoman Ksky, >> yes. >> Councilman Fletcher, >> yes. >> Councilman Ross, yes.
>> Vice Mayor Bailey, yes. >> Mayor Lawson, >> yes. >> The motion carries. >> Mr. White, the floor is yours. >> Yes. Please be advised the following items on the agenda are quazi judicial in nature. If you wish to comment upon any of these items, please indicate the item number you would like to address. When the announcement regarding the quai
judicial item is made, an opportunity for persons to speak on each item will made will be made available after the applicant and staff have made their presentations on each item. Swearing in all testimony, including public testimony and evidence will be made under oath affirmation. Additionally, each person who gives testimony may be
subject to cross-examination. If you do not wish either be cross-examined or sworn, your testimony will be given in C8. The general public will not be permitted to cross-examine witnesses, but the public may request the council to ask questions of staff or witnesses on their behalf. The full agenda packet
on each item is hereby entered into the record. Persons representing organizations must present evidence of their authority to speak for the organization. Further details of the qua judicial procedures may be obtained from the clerk. In accordance with code section 2-590, any lobbyists must register before
addressing the council on any of the following items. At this time, I'd ask council members to must ask council members to disclose any expporte communications concerning tab six and seven on the agenda. >> We had unonymity on six. I didn't have
anything on seven that I recall. >> Thank you. And at this time, I'd ask the clerk to swear in any persons who wish to testify on tab six. Uh anyone in the audience is wishing to speak on tab six, please stand, raise your right hand to be sworn by the clerk. Do he hereby
swear affirm to tell the truth and nothing but the truth to help me God gone? >> Thank you. You may be seated. Tab six, card number 49:15 is the first reading of an ordinance of the city of Homestead, Florida approving the reszoning as requested by Bama LLC and
Penco LLC an approximately 62.35 acre parcel of land from agricultural AU zoning district to one family 1 halfacre estate A2 zoning district for property generally located south of Southwest 296 north of 302nd Street west of Southwest
192nd Avenue as legally described in exhibit A, providing for conflict subability and providing for an effective date. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Orza. I know we we we spoke at length regarding this at the >> Yes, I
>> Hugo 701 Burkel Avenue in light of both uh how long it's taken us to get here and how much longer you have to go. I am happy to forego any formal presentation since I did so previously, but happy to answer any questions. >> We'll take CAB six, which is a reasonzoning, and then the the agreement
separately. make a couple comments on >> we'll just do that do that that separately in the uh in the next uh discussion. Um is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this item
on the resoning item only? Okay. Is there anyone online? All right hearing none I'll close the public hearing. Any final comments from from council? >> Yes councilwoman. >> Thank you mayor. on this particular
item. Um I I notate that it is pretty compatible with the surrounding areas and my understanding is that um that without this resoning um you would be uh having a incompatible zone use right a
on residential the rights run with the land. Um, so I I don't see how, you know, we we could not um you know, how we could keep it from being developed, but um out of principle, I will not be supporting this item tonight. But I do
look forward to being able to provide comments and suggestions on site plan when it does come uh to us. So I appreciate that. But out of respect to LAR in general, I know that LAR is a great corporate citizen. They provide a lot of community benefits and uh they
really do have great design and um take into consideration and modify their site plans to uh to meet the needs of the council members. Uh so I appreciate the collaboration, but on this particular item, I will have to decline. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Councilwoman. Vice Mayor, >> I was going to save it for the next one, but I will put my two cents in real quick as well. Um, obviously we as as residents of Homestead want to hold on to that Aland. I am very happy that we had at least one person come out and
still try to fight for things, but it is hard to understand what those rights are. Um, one thing I would like to to say now is, you know, as we spoke during our
discussions, we don't have many of these types of lots left. These are the estate lots. This represents old homestead, at least in my eyes. So, I would really work hard at not coming back with any variances. If it means getting rid of a lot or two
and making sure that we are at least holding to what that halfacre requirements are, I would really like to see that. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. >> Thank you, Vice Mayor. Any further council? I appreciate the the council
woman's, you know, comments and clarification of your earlier vote at the LPA. Um, just out of my, you know, out of my academic curiosity, look, I lament the loss of our open space. I'm not a big fan of cookie cutter homes
either. I'd love to see that available for somebody that's going to be built to do some custom architecturally diverse homes, but as many builders have told me, that's not reality anymore. there aren't any small builders left, much less any medium-siz builders. So, you
know, I I guess my question in that regard to to either of my my council colleagues who who voted in the negative at the LPA, what the the thoughts just remain open, larger lots.
um the just e either of you the the thought process because I'm always struggling for that middle ground and the alternative. So I'm just curious, you know, would one acre lots do it or as is just >> Thank you, mayor. I think this agenda item is only for the reasoning. It's not
for sight plan on lots. >> But this this resoning allows up to two homes per acre, >> right? and in discussion. My understanding is their plan is to not do um you know the full amount close to it probably but um you know it's it's
currently being harmed. >> Not that it matters but for the record it's my understanding that neither of the two parcels at hand are owned by farmers and haven't been for many many
many years. These have been investorowned. Are they being farmed? Yes, these are not farmers >> cashing out to the extent it's relevant. I think that's I agree with you, mayor. I just reserved the right to, you know, make comments.
>> Absolutely. Appreciate and respect that. Okay. So, do we have a motion to approve >> tab six moved by Councilman Cannibal. We have a second. >> Second by uh Councilman Fletcher. So, let's have a roll call vote on tab six.
>> Councilwoman Avula. Councilwoman Ksky, >> Councilman Ross, >> yes. >> Council Councilman Fletcher, >> yes. >> Councilman Cannibal, Vice Mayor Bailey, >> looking forward to see your aame. Yes.
>> Vice Mayor May Los. >> Yes. >> The motion carries. >> All right, let's move on to tab 7. >> Tab seven is a companion item. Uh this is car number 4917. This is a resolution of the city of Homestead, Florida approving a public
school concurrency proportionate share mitigation development agreement between the city Miami Day County School Board Peno Bama and Lenar Homes providing for implementation and providing for an effective date. >> Okay. Thank you. Moved by Councilman
Fletcher, second by Vice Mayor Bailey. Quick presentation. >> I mean Yeah, I mean >> we've seen these in the past. >> Yeah, this this is standard fair and development. that um the school trip party agreement between the city, the school district and the um and the county and so there's a there's a school
deficiency in the area. Any developer has to pay the money goes to the school district and then they you know >> and we enforce that through the permitting and co process. >> Exactly. So um this will allow and that payment has to be made obviously in connection with the PLA process at the county but this will approve the
agreement and um yeah let me just part of the development process. So there's nothing further from council. Let me open this open the public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience? Is there anyone online? No one online. Last call for inperson
discussion on this item. Okay. I'll close the public hearing and ask for a roll call vote on tab eight. >> Seven. >> Seven. I'm sorry. Looking at eight. >> Councilwoman Ksky. >> Yes. >> Councilman Cannibal. >> Yes. Councilwoman Athula.
>> Yes. >> Councilman Raw. Yes. >> Councilman Fletcher. Yes. >> Vice Mayor Bailey. Mayor Lawson. Yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you all. >> Thank you, Mr. Arza. Tab eight. Mr. White Pearl. >> We're finished with that session.
For the tab 8 is the first reading of an ordinance of the city of Homestead, Florida amending chapter 19 of the city code by creating article 8 entitled squatters by adding definitions providing for methods of enforcement referencing sections 82.036
and 82.037 of the Florida statutes and requiring information to be submitted to the city for enforcement against violations providing for inclusion in the code providing for severability and providing for conflicts and providing for an effective date. Any objection to waving the staff report on this item?
Are there any questions from councel? All right, it's been moved by Councilman Cannibal, seconded by Councilwoman Avala. There's nothing further. Let's have a roll call vote on tab eight. >> Councilman Rock, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Ksky,
>> yes. >> Councilman Canaval, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Aila, >> yes. >> Councilman Fletcher, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Bailey, >> yes. Mayor Los. >> Yes. >> Motion carried. >> All right.
>> If if in with respect in respect of the time of the uh the tax collector who's who's joined us, if we could deviate >> yes >> to that item which is tab 17, >> I believe. Is that correct?
>> Yes. Any objection to jumping to tab 17? And we welcome our Miami Dade uh tax collector, Dariel Fernandez. >> Thank you so much. Uh good evening. >> Pull that down. >> Uh thank you for the opportunity. Um
thank you mayor and members of the council. My name is Daniel Fernandez, Miami date county tax collector. I'm here today in support of iron c4919 that create coordination between the city of homestead and my office to
ensure that business tax receive are issue and renew in full compliance with the law. For more than 60 years the Cuban communist and socialist regime has oppressed the people of Cuba and depend on support from other countries to stay in power. Many families in our community
understand this reality firsthand. This is why full compliance with federal laws and authorization requirements is essential. The city of Homestead is taking the responsibility approach by promoting clarity, proper communication
and carefully review of any businesses affected by federal restriction under the appropriate legal framework. I want to thank Mayor Loser for his leadership and councilwoman Erica and Councilwoman
Clement for sponsor this important item and prioritizing accountability and compliance. This resolution promotes consistent enforcement, clear coordination and transparency in the licensing process. My offices stand
ready to work with the town manager, mayor and council to support compliance and protect the integrity of this process. Thank you for your consideration. God bless the city of Homestead and God bless the United States of America. I always say that you know the issue with Cuba um is is
important because this is not just about polity. This is about national security for the United States of America. Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak. >> Thank you, Mr. Fernandez. Thank you for coming down and uh sitting through some of our uh >> thank you >> process tonight. Mr. Pearl, let's get it
uh the resolution before us. >> Bear with me for just a moment. >> Sure. >> Tab 17 is a resolution of the city council of the city of home state Florida urging President Donald J. Trump to direct all relevant federal agencies to immediately suspend all applicable Cuba related authorizations, general
licenses, specific licenses, license exceptions, and other approvals for exports, reexports, financial transactions, services, or business activities to or involving Cuba except as statutoily required for food and medicine pending comprehensive audits to
ensure no support or benefit is provided to the Cuban regime or its entities and review of the nature, end use, and ultimate destin ation of such activities, urging the Florida legislature to enact Senate Bill 1176, House Bill 1397, or similar legislation
that would require any applicants for a local business tax receipt or renewal thereof to conduct transactions subject to a federal sanctions programs to exhibit an active license or authorization from the Office of Foreign Asset Control, amending the city's 2026
legislative priorities, is adopted by resolution 2005 1111060. 6 authorizing and directing the city manager to work with and support the Miami Dade County tax collector to ensure that all applicable federal, state, and local laws governing business tax receipts and
related compliance requirements are properly followed and enforced, providing for implementation and providing for an effective date. Thank you. That's almost as big a mouthful as the uh as the pension uh pension item. All
right. Any questions or comments from from council? Councilwoman. >> Thank you, mayor. I appreciate the opportunity to bring this item forward. Co-sponsored by my colleague, Councilman Ganaval. And um this is not going to affect any businesses that are operating
justly and under the proper um uh regulations. It is to ensure that there's no support or benefit providing to the Cuban regime or its entities. and it is authorizing the city manager to work with and support the Miami day county tax collector not to initiate
their own initiatives etc. So, um this is really just um expressing that the city of Homestead stands for freedom and supports. >> Thank you. And supports um the county's unanimous vote to um to act on their resolutions as well as the city of
Miami, city of Coral Gables, and um coming from a Cuban uh family, this is something paramount that I really hope we'll have a unanimous um agreement for tonight as well. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councilman Cannibal. Anything further? Appreciate your co-sponsorship
of this item. Vice Mayor Bailey. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, when I first read it, my only concern was, as I'm sure most people have friends, I have teachers that are that are Cuban. They're constantly sending their families things that they need, sending them money. We are 100% sure that that
is not going to hurt any of our residents who are trying to help their families specifically in Cuba. And >> I'm glad you brought that up, Vice Mayor. I intimately know of many um friends, colleagues that use those services and I specifically asked and
and the reality is is that they want this to pass. This is how you crush communism is by defunding anything that supports their their business. So, it is possible that a business is identified by the Miami takes Miami date tax
collector and could be pulled for doing business, but that is not necessarily an objection from the Cuban community. I hope that um >> No, that definitely clarifies a lot and and as I spoke with city manager's office that that information does end up
coming back to us. So, as we are looking at how it is specifically um affecting or not affecting our local businesses that we just keep an eye out for our residents that are using some of those services to help their families that um that need that need that help. So, I
just would appreciate any updates as you receive them. >> Sure. I think our responsibility is to leers with the task collector and uh whatever information we receive on a monthly basis we share with mayor and council.
>> All right. Thank you again. Thank you tax collector Fernandez. So we have a motion and a second. We've had public input. Let's have a roll call vote. >> No, I you moved it. >> You seconded. Yeah.
>> Councilwoman Ksky. Yes. >> Councilwoman Abula. >> Yes. >> Councilman Roth. >> Yes. >> Councilman Fletcher. >> Yes. >> Councilman Cannibal. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Bailey. >> Yes. >> Mayor Lawson. >> Yes. >> The motion. >> All right. Moving on to tab nine.
>> Yes, Mr. Mayor. Tab nine is the first reading of an ordinance of the city of Homestead, Florida, amending the city code of ordinances by amending chapter 16, local business taxes and business regulations, article 2, local business tax receipts, section 16-40, schedule of local business taxes by adopting the
North American industry classification system manual to replace the standard industrial classification system as the standard by which all businesses, occupations, and professions subject to a local business tax shall be classified. for repealing and replacing related provisions to reflect the adoption
>> got to teach you >> of the NICS manual providing for severability providing for inclusion in the code providing for conflicts and providing for an effective date. >> Thank you. Any objection to the waiver of the staff report? There any questions or comments from council? Do we have a
motion to approve this item on? Moved by Councilman Fletcher, second by Councilwoman Ksky. Roll call, please, Madam Clerk. Abula, >> yes. >> Councilman Ross, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Ksky, >> yes. >> Councilman Fletcher,
>> yes. >> Vice Mayor Bailey, >> yes. >> Mayor Lawson, >> yes. >> The motion carries. >> And moving on to uh tab 10. >> Tab 10 is the first reading of an ordinance of the city of Homestead, Florida, amending the city code of
ordinances by amending chapter 30 zoning, article 4, supplemental district regulations, division 1, generally to create section 30-405.2 2 entitled Brontage. Definition for addressing purposes establishing standards for determining official property addressing
for interior lots, corner lots, vacant parcels, commercial and mixeduse properties and double frontage lots. Providing for severability, providing for inclusion in the code, providing for conflicts, and providing for an effective date. >> Thank you. Any objection to waving the staff report on this item? Didn't think
so. Do we have a motion to approve? Moved by Councilman Fletcher. Second by Vice Mayor Bailey. Let's have a roll call. >> Councilman Fletcher. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Abula. >> Yes. >> Councilman Cannibal? >> Yes.
>> Councilman Ross? >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Ksky? >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Bailey? >> Yes. >> Mayor Losner? >> Yes. >> The motion? >> Motion carries. >> All right. Tab 11. Mr. Pearl. AB 11 is the first reading of an ordinance of the city of Homestead, Florida, amending the
budget for the stormwater utility fund for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2025 and ending September 30th, 2026 by increasing the total budgeted revenues and expenditures by $2 million, providing for severability and an effective date. >> Thank you. Any questions or comments the
staff report? This is to provide for some additional funding. Do we have a move by >> by Vice Mayor Bailey, seconded by Councilman Cannibal? Let's have a roll call, please, on tab 10, Madam Clerk. >> Councilwoman Avula, >> yes. >> Councilman Fletcher,
>> Councilman Roth, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Ksky, >> yes. >> Councilman Cannibal, Vice Mayor Bailey, >> Mayor Lawson, >> yes. >> The motion carries. >> And uh second reading on tab 12. >> Yes. Tab 12 is the second reading of an ordinance of the city of Homestead,
Florida, amending the firefighters retirement plan at article 4 of chapter 22.5, retirement programs. Article five, firefighters retirement plan of the city code by amending section 22.5-277 reserve to be titled funding stabilization reserve account to provide
for annual distributions to elig eligible members providing for inclusion in the code providing for severability and providing for an effective date. >> Thank you. Any objection to waving the staff report on this second reading? Do we have a motion to approve tab 12?
Moved by Councilman Roth, >> second by Vice Mayor Bailey. Roll call, please, on tab 12. >> Councilman Ksky, >> yes. >> Councilman Ross, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Avula, >> yes. >> Councilman Cannibal, >> Vice Mayor Bailey,
>> yes. >> Mayor Losner, >> yes. >> The motion carries. >> All right, that takes us to a resolution under tab 12, Mr. Pearl. >> Tab 13. >> 13. Sorry. Yes. Tab 13 is a resolution of the city council of the city of Homestead, Florida, acknowledging and
formally adopting direction provided to city staff at a council workshop regarding uncollected utility fees, directing the city manager and appropriate departments to implement specific remedial actions, providing for implementation, providing for reporting, and providing for an effective date. >> Thank you. Any objection to waving the
staff report? Do we have a motion to approve this item? >> Second by Vice Mayor Bailey, second by Councilman Roth. any comments? >> I just want to say this is this is the one we talked about where we're going to start uh >> the process
>> the process. It's a long time coming. Um I had a gentleman I spoke to a gentleman today just as a backstory to this. Um apparently he does a lot of evictions on properties in the city of Homestead and he's surprised at how long after the
tenant has been evicted the power and water stays on. Some cases six to eight months. knowing we're not going to get paid for any of that. So, this will help that process um and help eliminate some of
those uh situations where we're not receiving monies for utilities provided. So, thank you to staff uh for for doing all this work because it's going to be a big push to get some of these uncollected revenues
uh brought back to the city and hopefully it'll help >> into the enterprise. >> Yeah. Into the enterprise and help us with infrastructure issues and things that we can eventually start paying for. So, thank you to staff for all the work you did on this. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor.
>> Thank you, Council Roth. Council, >> thank you, mayor. I had the same same conversation with I'm assuming the same gentleman because I can't imagine this is happening um often but in that particular case what is the issue or can you identify the break in the process
and how is this um you know the action items we're approving tonight going to help avoid that from happening or do we already have a process we just have to implement it. So um the first phase is the mailers that started on the 13th to notify customers that their past due
balances need to be uh made up to date or come into a payment plan. Uh the second phase is the tagging process which will start after March 16th which will give a full month so all customers are notified. After that if you have past due balances you are subject to
disconnection. So that is the piece that is missing >> the actual disconnection of past due balances. >> Got it. Okay. Thank you so much. >> Very good. Thank you. Does that conclude the questions or comments from council?
So let's have a roll call vote on tab 13. >> Councilman Cannibal. >> Yes. >> Councilman Fletcher. >> Yes. >> Councilman Ross. Yes. >> Councilwoman Ksky. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Abul. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Bailey. Mayor Losner. >> Yes. >> The motion.
Uh, moving on to tab 14. Mr. >> Tab 14 is a resolution of the city council of the city of Homestead, Florida, concerning authorized signitories on city checks, wire transfers, and related financial instruments superseding a portion of the prior resolution 2011-10-104
on the same subject matter providing for implementation providing for an effective date. >> Thank you. Any questions or comments from council? We have a motion to approve. >> Okay. >> Moved by the vice mayor. Second. >> Second by Councilman Cannibal.
>> Roll call, please, Madam Clerk. >> Councilwoman Avula. >> Councilman Cannibal. >> Yes. >> Councilman Roth. >> Yes. >> Councilman Fletcher. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Ksky. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Bailey. >> Yes. >> Mayor Losner. >> Yes. >> The motion carries.
>> And Mr. Pearl, tab 15, please. Tab 15 is a resolution of the city council of the city of Homestead, Florida, approving a purchase sale agreement authorizing the execution of a triple net lease agreement authorizing the issuance of a note and amount not to exceed $1,666,812
to secure a loan for the purchase of a property from the sellers of the property located at 406 Washington Avenue. Providing for a covenant to budget and appropriate non-edarm revenues for the payment of the loan. Providing for security for the note approving and authorizing the execution delivery of a loan agreement. authorizing
note and such other documents as may be necessary in connection with the loan, providing for severability, providing for repeal, providing for an effective date. >> Thank you. Um, the staff report, I'll let staff address any questions that members of council may have with respect
to this item. Are there any questions or or comments on on this item from council? Councilwoman, >> thank you, mayor. Um, I still stand in op in in objection to this um to this item in general and I can't see myself
approving financing uh the acquisition of it. We have um properties already in our coffers that we can't uh um get deals [clears throat] done with. And um adding another property to our inventory, especially this one, that um
land value as is is what we want it for. And this price is just way beyond price per square footage. It's just not in my per professional opinion where we should be investing our our money. and the gentleman that spoke earlier um he he
had sound comments and he had the right to speak the items that he was speaking and um the reality is is that this is not providing a return. It's not for an immediate plan. It's not adding to the the the livability or the
the uh profitability for businesses in downtown. Um there's no public benefit. It's for a future plan that we don't have and the this is this is just not a good investment in my opinion. So I will be um not supporting this item again. >> Thank you councilwoman.
Anything further? Vice Mayor. >> Thank you Vice Mayor Bailey. >> Thank you mayor. So we have obvious obviously had many discussions on this. As I mentioned at the last meeting, um
I was greatly inspired by the Cherrettes um at the state of the city with Mayor Mirbot speaking about acquiring land. I do believe that there are specific places that we as a city um
should hold on to. Um I have always prided myself in voting honestly and with my heart. I am apologizing right now. I am really embarrassed to say this, but I was
always sure that the parking lot next to the Goodyear was part of the deal. So having frontage on Chrome and having frontage on Washington Avenue was one of the bigger
pieces that I was hopeful for. Not having that parking lot really changed things. You can ask staff. I I almost cried. I I think that it is incredibly I I I can't even apologize enough that somehow that fell through the cracks for
me. Um I typically take my time and look at things. I was 100% sure that that parking lot was included. And when I was speaking with the CRA director and talking about other opportunities that we would have in the meantime, um, of course there's concerns with not having
the marketplace taking off yet, um, not having that parking lot honestly was a big a big deal for me. So, I don't know if I can support it without that. I had I was really hopeful with a vision to be able to do something great on that
corner. Um, but just on the corner of of Washington Avenue, like I said, um, from what the CRA director says, the person who owns the parking lot is absolutely not interested in selling. That was another question that I had
right away. Are we able to at least then acquire that lot? So, I'm sorry, but I am going to have to change my mind not having that parking lot. Thank you, >> Vice Mayor. Yes, Councilman Fletcher. >> Yes, thank you. Uh, and I appreciate
everybody's comments so far. Um, one of my major concerns is what other properties do we still need to get to uh for the long-term plan of the the downtown Cherret planning process. Uh, I too had the question in regards to the
parking lot. I know there's some adjacent properties that we're also going to be looking at in the future. uh a couple of basic questions are uh were answered for me. I've I've always asked this question in the past and a lot of
these times these things become very political, but I actually have a recommendation from city staff to approve this purchase and long-term plan. But I I would look at the the manager or the CRA director
and and say, "If this was your money, would you buy this piece of property?" I beg you. You're telling me you're requesting us recommendation for us to approve it. If this was your money and you're going to buy this property, would
you do this? No answer. That gives me a little concern, but it doesn't change my resolve on what I think we need to do. Is this necessary to complete our vision for downtown is this piece of property.
Can someone give me an answer to that? This one partic [clears throat] this one particular piece of property um like all of the core downtown has a future place in that vision that was formulated by the community and accepted
by the board. Is it absolutely critical? No. No. No piece of property is critical in that vision. It is a part of the overall fabric though of that future plan for downtown. >> Okay. Thank you for that. >> [clears throat]
>> And for some of the adjacent properties, again, I understand the parking lot is not for sale. The current owner is not interested, but some of the other properties around it, have we discussed that with those property owners and are they willing to to look at that in the future? At this time, we have not had
those discussions and I would would share with the board as I think I had shared with you, council member, um the discussions that we had initially had with the parking lot owner was was not for this purpose. it was related to u potential acquisition for expanding parking. We have not however had any
conversations with any other adjacent property owners. >> Okay. And and finally, just for clarification, uh the gentleman that spoke earlier talked about expending taxpayer funds on on this purchase.
Although CRA money is taxpayer funds, it's specifically for a certain area of the city. Uh we're doing we're spending taxpayer funds on Chrome Avenue doing a whole lot of upgrades. We just saw that earlier tonight. Uh I think this is the benefit for for that process. Uh I will
be supporting this item tonight. Uh doesn't look like uh long term that I think you know it's going to be occupied for someone for some period of time, maybe longer than the three-year period. So, I think we can get some of our
investment back long term. Uh, with that, uh, I'll yield for any other comments. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councilman Fletcher. Um, not not and Vice Mayor to to your concern. Yeah, for me, parking is a
really big concern. I don't think the parking garage is sufficient. It's not um centrally located. you know, we we're going to have a small parking lot behind Jacobson's and we've, you know, I think we're all kind of getting a little bit
of mixed signals on sidewalk width and is parking coming out as a guy in the the chrome issues and I've kind of cast about and and spoken with the manager and the CRA director together about finding parking islands. And one thing
one thing I can to your point of the parking lot one thing I came up with and I don't know that it's been addressed with the the corn the parking lot to the to the west of this property clearly that has to travel with that building they have no parking but for that lot I
mean as far back as I can remember when that was a big cafeteria there the until Andrew the sign still had still said Barnett cafeteria parking but let let me let me come back to the I think we're at the point in the life of this city where we can get really
creative and perhaps even in the future go to that property owner and acquire air rights where a parking garage is done where the owner still retains the surface rights and we can
acquire air rights over that corner for um a parking structure. So, I guess my point to that is is we're not totally wiped out there. That that is is not not off the table. And, you know, certainly,
you know, had it been connected to this that that that changes a lot of things. I I think that this did, you know, it became political. That's, you know, my colleagues right to make it political. But I just want to say, you know, for
the record, the council asked for deep environmental studies. They were provided. They came back clear. Structural studies came back solid. Pardon, pardon the pun. So, this is not
about slandering this property or these property owners. This is a policy decision. You know, my problem with the speaker earlier was is that he made allegations that were not borne out by
the facts and by by the homework that uh apparently some of his colleagues here um you know as asked to be done. So it's it's just a policy. Are we we going to control our destiny or not? I think we missed the boat on Palms Plaza right
across the street. You know, the words of Mayor Mirbot, if you don't own it, you don't control it. Um, you know, we know that, you know, three years in the future at the at the furthest, there
will no longer be a a tire and and auto repair shop at that location. When we look back and see how things have changed in Homestead for the better in the last 18 to 24 months and what the
future may bring, I still feel and and look, the CRA director brought this this item to the table. Am I friends with the owners? Absolutely. I've known Mr. Patterson since the mid 1980s.
Am I their attorney? No. Do I have financial dealings with them? No, don't judge them by me or where they are politically. Judge them by what's right for Homestead. And I think we've, you know, previously
and we all have the right to change our minds, but you know, technically we've we've gotten all the the the information that this council asked for. And I think we can be certain that for the next 24 to 36 months, we're not going to have
another vacant building. And I'm confident that the next council will be able to find a really good tenant or use without demolish perhaps without demolishing the building. That's not even on our our
radar today. But without that, without ownership, we don't get to uh to control it.