magistrate, we are ready. All right. Thank you. With that, I'm going to call to order the town of Lahache Grove special magistrate uh hearing. It's 9:03, so we can get started. Uh is there anybody on the computer? >> Okay, very good. So, my name is AMD Bernard. I'm the special magistrate for
this morning's hearing. Uh, first thing I'm going to do is swear anybody in who's here to testify on any items that are on today's agenda, including town staff. So, if you're here for a code enforcement matter, if you could stand if you're able and raise your right hands for me, I'll swear you all in at once. Do you all swear affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you very much. You may be seated. A little bit about process. It looks like uh most of the hearings on today's agenda are violation hearings. uh find assessment hearings or continuences. So,
the process for those uh is all the same. When you hear your case called, you're going to come to the podium that is to my right or your left. Town staff is at the table in front of me. Uh the town will go first. They will present their case. They will show me their evidentiary case file. They will call any witnesses that they intend to call.
Uh once the town is finished with its presentation, you will then have an opportunity to review the case file, cross-examine any witnesses that the town has called and put on and show me anything that you've brought with you or tell me anything that you'd like me to consider as part of your case this morning. Once I've heard from both sides, I'll make a final ruling and
you'll get a copy of an order that reflects that ruling after the hearing today. So keep in mind that all of your testimony this morning is given under oath. And with that, I will turn it to the town hall's first case. Um before we go there, um I just want an addition which is the minutes. I believe the
minutes for May 20th were provided to the special magistrate. So I want to make sure you received them and you didn't have any objections. >> No, it's fine. I'll add those uh to the agenda. Thank you. First item is PA Family Revocable Trust
case number CE 2605124 uh 3700 B Road PCN number 4141431701226-0010 violation section code of ordinance 22-135A business tax receipt 92-010 permit inspections and maintenance
requirements turn it over to Deanna Thomas. It's listed by the case though. Thank you. Officer Deanna Thomas, Tanalocka Hatig Grove's code compliance division. Um,
I'm presenting case number C26-05124. Uh, before I go any further, we do have uh service. I did post the property on May 15th. I mailed it regular and certified mail
same day and posted town hall the same day. We did not get the signed green card back. However, I do have pictures of posting in the case file um both of the property and at town hall.
The notice of violation was written on 513. Like I said, it was mailed on 515. Um, this is for a BTR. We do have proof in the file that they
are they have a stable and I have the pictures. If we could scroll down on the screen, um you will see they have PTA ranch and stables, reading, boarding, training. Um and they
rent their stalls, they provide a a service, and there is no BTR. So, the town is um seeking or looking for They were asked to comply on or before
June 2nd, 2026. They have not. So, um I'm asking for 7 days and then an admin fee for the property
and doing all the research of 40966. All right. Do you have your paper case file? >> Yes, ma'am. >> The agenda also lists 92010. Is that part of the violation? >> That is complied. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome.
>> Thank you. >> Is anybody present for this case? >> No, ma'am. Have you had any communication with the respondent? >> No, ma'am. >> All right. And this is not a delinquent PTR, right? This is current.
>> There is no um BTR at all. We don't have anything in our system ever showing a BTR for this property. So, this is a brand new. There's nothing delinquent. >> Okay. All right. So, you said comply within seven days or you're going to bring them
back to which fine assessment hearing? Um, it would be I'd like to keep it in with you seven days. That would make it July 14th if I keep
it with you. Yes. >> And in the event of non-compliance, what fine amount are you seeking? >> $200 a day. Anything further? >> No ma'am. is I guess just one question. You saw
the stables or the there's signage out there that that corroborates the website that you have printed here. >> Yes, it's actually on Zillow. >> Okay. All right. And what were your administrative costs? 409 >> 66. >> Thank you.
>> You're welcome. >> All right. In case C26-05-124, for the record, the respondent is not present. I'll enter the city or excuse me, the town's evidentiary case files composite exhibit one. Without objection, I'll find based on the notice documents in the case file, which should include
an affidavit of posting that the town had good service for this morning's hearing. I'll find based on the documents in the case file as well as the testimony of the code enforcement officer that the respondents in violation of section 22-135A and I'll require respondent to comply
with that section on or before June 19 uh June 16th. I'm sorry that's uh 7 days from today. In the event of non-compliance, I'll assess a fine of $200 per day for each day that the violation continues thereafter. And in the event of non-compliance also, I'll set this matter for fine assessment
hearing on July 14th. Uh because the respondents have been found in violation of the listed code section, I'll assess the town's administrative cost for today's hearing in the amount of 40966 payable within 30 days. >> Thank you.
Next item is AM Solutions 1 LLC. Case number CE 2605127 address 14661 Flamingo Drive PCN number 4141431701342 0250 violation section code of ordinance 22-135A
business tax receipt. I will turn this over to Danna Thomas. >> Officer Deanna Thomas, Townah Grove Code Compliance Division. The notice of violation was it uh written on 518, 2026.
The property address and town hall were posted on May 22nd, 2026 in one affidavit of service. And then the certified and regular mail was done on May 20th, 2026. We have not gotten the signed green card
back, but I do have pictures of the posting in the file. This is for a BTR. They have um a house on Flamingo Drive that is for rent and
it is on Zillow and I have not had any contact with the property owner. Um, however, code staff did attempt um to go out to the property when the property was posted and there
was a the gate was locked and the lock box was on the door. So, to say that it's currently rented, I don't know, but it's being advertised for rent, but it's hard for us to tell if there's anybody currently living in
the home. So again, I'm seeking um compliance within a week. Otherwise, bring back first. If no compliance, bring back to the July 14th hearing with admin fees of 40966
to be paid. And I have the case file for your records as well. We have it on um the the screen. again. Case number 2605127. Thank you.
You're welcome. If I may, your honor, um I did search the Sunbiz records and I did print out a copy that shows that they are not registered with their business on Sunbiz. And what do you mean there?
>> Um when when they when we have a company that is rent well if they do any renting especially of a home and it's in a company name we check Sunbiz to get all their information for the BTR and they are not listed
as being registered in the state of Florida. Okay. >> And it's a single family home. Is that right? >> Yes, ma'am. What's the evidence of rental? The Zillow paperwork that's in the um
folder I'm not sure I'm following it. Says it gives the home value amount. This is from Zillow as well that it was listed for rent in 23 25 and late 25 on Zillow. So we can go back
three years for VTR. >> So where did this typed up information come from? That came from Zillow. I didn't type it. I just copied and pasted it. >> But you don't have the papers that say for rent.
>> No, this was all that they had. >> Is there Okay. Is there any for rent sign out on the property? >> No, ma'am. They ever had a BTR in the town before? >> No, ma'am. I'm not sure. I guess I'll defer to the town. I'm not sure that this is
sufficient to confirm that there's a rental. So I can if you want to gather more evidence and bring back to me at the next hearing, I'm happy to reconsider, but I'm not sure that it's not currently advertised for rent.
>> We'll continue the matter to the >> to the 14th >> to July 14th. >> Okay. Is any respondent present for this case? >> No, ma'am. >> All right. In case CE 26-05-127,
uh, I'll note for the record that the respondent is not present. I'll enter the town's evidentiary case files composite exhibit one. Uh, having found based on the notice documents in the case file, which include an affidavit of posting for this morning's hearing, I'll find that the town has
good service. Uh, with that legally sufficient service, I'll continue this matter and reset it for violation hearing on July 14th. Thank you. Yeah. Next case. Javar and Rosa Garcia. Case
number SE25-64. Address 147A Road. PCN number 4141437011060020. Code sections 175-110 permits required 175125 application for a permit or approval 175-170
general inspections 175-240 violations 175-145 Other permits required 175-245 authority 175-250 unlawful continuence 175-310 limitation on placement of fill order find finding
violation dated February 18th 2026 ordered respondents to comply with the above listed sections of the unified land development code of the town of Lakahachi grows either through removal of all stockpiled material from the site or by having the required FDA permit issued in the event of FDA permit
application to allow the stockpiled materials to remain on site no later than May 18th, 2026. On May 20th, 2026, it is the order of the special magistrate that this matter be continued at this continuance hearing and setting fine assessment hearing. A fine in the amount of $250 be assessed for each day
the violation continues to exist past May 18th, 2026. The compliance date set by the order finding violation dated February 18th, 2026. I will turn this over to Deanna Thomas. Code officer >> case 13 on your agend.
>> Thank you. >> Code officer Deanna Thomas townahhatchi groves code compliance division. Um this case C CE-25-64 um we do have good service the there is
an affidavit of service in the file um for the reg mailing the uh orders for continuance regular and certified mail and then posting the property and town hall um and
the property owner Mr. Garcia is present along with the tenants who are represented by attorney Preston Fields. Uh Mr. Garcia is not represented by Preston Fields. So there are pictures in the file I
received. I went to the property yesterday and they are not in compliance. the east side of the property is satisfied.
>> Oh, >> yes. It's all on the screen. We could scroll down. Now, the pictures that are scroll she's scrolling through right now are is everything that is on the left side of the case folder
which I can give to you if you'd like to follow along with that please. Yeah, >> I've seen it previously and >> you'll get a chance to see it again. >> Okay. >> Thank you. everything that she's showing right now
green to >> okay >> you may recall this was the um case in 1478 road it involved large mounds of manure all over the entirety of the
property >> fresh recollection >> um and they'll be testimon respondents have done. >> Turn your microphone on, Mr. Curts. >> The respondents have done a yman's job
of trying to come into compliance, but they have not yet achieved it. But I'll turn the case back over to uh Miss Thomas. >> So, um I had gotten pictures I received an email from Mr. Fields on Sunday
evening. Um he did send pictures. I have uh put them in the case file. Uh they are labeled uh email received from Preston Fields on June 7th, 2026.
Um I went out to the property yesterday along with our town engineer. the east side of the property along B road I mean I'm sorry the west side of the property on if you're looking at it from B road
the topography was changed which would have required an FDA yeah >> any pictures thing is scrolling we get to a picture perhaps >> yeah just keep keep going it's a it's a big case file I I
apologize Nope. Keep going. Okay, exit out of that. There should be another folder there that says right side. Yeah. Now, those pictures right there. I know. Didn't know they'd come out like that.
Sideways. Um, that shows looking at from B Road. Looking at the the west side of the property from B Road. Those are current conditions. >> Yes, that's from the drive. This one is from
the driveway. Inside the driveway. Now, you'll see if you continue to scroll, this isn't this is from inside the property as well. This is like the ditch that goes alongside their property. Scroll to the
next picture. I did keep going. I did measure. Now it shows three feet on that measuring tape, but because it's in the swale, like in the dip. >> Do you want to go back to the microphone
just so the recording gets you? >> So in that swale area, that's where dirt is. However, it's it's not a total of three foot. It's probably about 2 feet change of the topography where they laid
out material on the land which would require an FDA. >> So what are you trying to tell me? Are you telling me they just spread it out instead of removing it? Is that what you're telling me? >> They have rem there's material there.
>> Are there still piles there? >> No, there's no piles. However, the topography was changed. They added more than six inches to the topog to the bottom layer.
>> Okay. >> They have re they have removed the vast major majority of the materials from >> you'll get your turn. >> Testify. >> He's he's speaking. >> I'm commenting on uh
the town's position. town's position is that um they have removed the vast majority of the material. Um but as uh Miss Thomas testified um and there is also a report from our um town engineer
um Gary Kloff who handles the FDA applications that there is um a volume of material that remains on the site primarily in the um front portion of the
property. Um and it has raised the topography um a considerable amount. >> Continue to go down >> that. Okay. Go back. >> Does that say Gary? Yeah.
>> Yeah. That's the email from our town engineer yesterday when he was out at the property and he sent that as an email explaining in his words. All right. So, the town want to
continue? >> If you can continue to go down. Now, those are the pictures that Mr. Fields provided to me in an email on Sunday. And what do those pictures show? They show Well, that picture right there
shows that where they had cleared, but it's got running off into the water. I have pictures of that as well that back up into the at the beginning of the screen. Is that
>> if you could go to the the next picture. Does >> Yep. >> Does that picture show the back area? What are we looking? >> Yes, that's the uh west the east side of the property >> and on the east side of the property in in there that that shows conditions which you believe to be in compliance.
Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And that is in comparison to the front of the property. What is the difference between that and the front of the property or the west side of the property I should say? >> That's ground level.
>> You know, on the on the west side, what do you see? >> Material. At least over a foot, 12 in of material. You have any other pictures you want to
go through? Um, yes. If you can go back to the beginning. All right. Okay. Yeah. Keep going. Nope. Go back up. Yep. Keep going. That one right there. So on Friday,
uh, last Friday, I along with code officer Suarez and officer Johnson, we had go and Craig Lowour, public works superintendent, we had all gone to the property. There are photos in there from that
date, but these were taken yesterday. And it shows that this is now leaning into the water along with whatever material is going into the water as it was as it's I'm guessing being it was pushed maybe
or I don't know. I don't know how that would have gotten into the water, but that was not like that on Friday. Go up to the picture. The next one. Scroll up. Yeah. Oh, that's the front. Okay. Um, if you go down more, go. There
are pictures from Friday that are in the file as well. >> That was from Friday. That picture. There's more also. That's the picture. west side of the property. That is also the west side of the property. And that's when I spoke to the
tenant at the property along with officers Suarez and Johnson. That is the runoff into the water body
right next to the property. What does that picture show? >> That's the west side of the property from the driveway looking south. Another picture from the driveway. >> Is there an FDA permit? >> No, ma'am. >> Has one been applied for?
>> No, ma'am. as of today or >> as of today. >> Okay. >> What is the town's position relative to compliance? I think I heard you say you do not believe they're in compliance. >> Correct. >> They're not in compliance. Um because the
material has been spread over uh the western edge of the western side of the property um and has raised the um topography of the property u by at least
6 in and perhaps um a foot or more in some places. Um and while that is certainly not all the materials that were there, they have removed the vast majority of them. Um they had a choice of either applying
for an FDA um or removing the materials down to to grade um they have not achieved that um on the west side of the property. um and
therefore they are still in violation and more work needs to to be done and we would seek a fine of $250 a day from the date that your honor gave them to come into compliance. Um and while
their efforts have been notable, uh the um problem was caused by their efforts. Um and your honor gave them sufficient time to come into compliance. So um
they need to be assessed of fine in our uh in our view um and continue to work towards achieving true compliance. All right. Does the town have any additional witnesses it intends to call? >> Not at this point. No.
>> All right. Your name, sir? >> My name is Preston Fields. >> And you represent >> I represent Melet Ways Incorporated and Santana Equestrian Private Financial Incorporated. >> And who else is here for this case?
>> I have a witness, Mr. Paulo Santano. And I think Mr. >> Property owner here. >> Yes. >> All right. All right. Mr. Fields, let's start with the case file. Uh, let me get the property owner up there so we can do this at the same
time. Sir, can you come to the podium? Mr. Fields, do you mind if he stands there with you for a moment? You you do not mind or you do mind? >> Okay. Thank you, sir. What's your name, sir? >> What's your last name? >> Garcia. >> Thank you, sir. So, you're the property
owner. I'm going to have the code enforcement officer show both of you the case file that I've been looking at. It's a fairly lengthy file. Mr. Fields, you've seen a portion. There's some new documents on uh both sides, I believe, relative to service. So, I'd like to give both of
you an opportunity now to review that case file. When I'm when you're done reviewing, I'm going to ask you if you have any objection to the file being entered. So, take as much time as you need. Mr. Garcia, do you want to review that file? >> Um, Mr. Garcia, would you want us to bring a translator in here for you? Oh,
does he not? >> Okay. >> Yeah, you you can >> objection. >> Just give me your name, sir. >> Anthony Medina. So, Mr. Medina, if you could explain to him to look through the file and at the
end, I'm going to ask him if he has any objection to the documents being entered. question. Is the left side the sort of side? >> Yes. >> Unless you want to >> correct that was issued today. These are the pictures that were taken
yesterday at your property when I saw you. from the engineer. >> These are the pictures from Mr. Fields on Sunday. You would like to know specifically what exactly is a violation. >> So let me let me back up one step. Let
me ask you can you ask him was he here at the beginning of the hearing or did he walk in late? >> A little bit a little bit later. >> Ask him if he raised his hand. I need to swear him in. Raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank
you, sir. Go ahead. So, his question was what specifically what is what is it that is what is not clear on what is >> so once once we're done with the documents, I'll have the code enforcement officer explain the areas and show on the screen uh the exact
photos. But what I'm hearing and what I heard them say is there are portions of areas on the site that have been removed all the way down to the ground, but some have not. So, I'll have her once you're done looking at the the file explain that better. Okay. Let's see what we want. I think I need a finish letting him do I
think we can ask You say that there really >> these are um pictures that show it's hard to see there is another date on the picture >> from as the case went So June subject
>> and these are coming up case um back a few months. It said December 2025. So those seen So these were taken at the time of the alleged of the members of the self, >> correct?
February 17, 26. that this is the flood plane map showing plane area on your property >> and all of that documentation is from the violation hearing. Correct. Correct. >> So that we're going all the way back to the beginning. >> Yeah.
Okay. >> If if if you want to flip through, Mr. Fields, you can. Mr. Garcia, you can flip through as well, but the the case has already been found in violation. So, those documents are uh of less import at this hearing because we're past that point. >> So, can you ask Mr. Garcia if he has any
objection to the case file being entered? >> Okay. Thank you for translating. If you can just hang tight, I'm gonna have Mr. Garcia, I'm gonna have you sit down for a moment and hear from Mr. Fields and I'm gonna bring you back up. Okay, Mr. Fields, do you have any objection to the case file being entered?
>> General Still doesn't sound like >> There we go. Thank you, sir. just to the general um objection to we don't think we did anything wrong. I understand you made the finding already, but we're doing this and trying to comply with
your order. >> Understood. So, just the objection should just be about the documents. You know me by now. You've been to many of these hearings. I let everything in and then uh >> I know >> we there can be future fights about it, but everything comes in. So, um with your limited objection and with Mr.
Garcia's uh non-objection. I'm going to admit the town's evidentiary case files composite exhibit one. Without an over objection. All right, Mr. Fields, I'm going to let you go ahead and speak since you're at the podium
>> and I can ask Miss Thomas questions. >> Absolutely. You can cross-examine any witnesses that the town has put on. >> Miss Thomas, um to confirm, there has at least been an assertion uh by Mr. Curts and I think you're agreeing that some part of the property is in compliance.
>> Correct. >> So if you're relatively familiar with the property, can you tell us generally what area is not in compliance? >> The west side of the property is not in compliance.
>> Okay. So, can we maybe pull up a photograph of the area because I want to just make sure that everything else from at least from the town's perspective is in compliance. >> Keep go. Okay. Keep going. Go up to the
first. I know it's crooked. Keep going. Keep going. Keep going. Right. Yeah. We that's from the driveway. That's the looking at looking south at the west side of the property. >> Okay. So on the top part of this
picture, that would be the road coming in. Right, >> Mr. Fields? I'm sorry to interrupt you. Can I ask you to grab the microphone off of there if you're going to stand up there just so the reporting picks up? Thank you. Excuse >> me. Speaking do your wedding singer impersonation now. Thank you, sir. So in
this photograph, the the main road is on the top part of this picture. Correct. >> Correct. Which is B road. >> I mean A road. A road. Sorry. >> Okay. And then you would take a right and go east on the driveway. And that's what we're dealing with right here. The driveway. >> Yes, sir.
>> And this is this segment. I'm sorry. If you come down the driveway, then you would take another right. There's like a parking area, right? >> Correct. It turns >> right onto >> which would be bigger section of the property. Yes. >> So from that driveway and that park that
the driveway south and the parking area west is the only segment in the entire property that's no longer in compliance. >> No. >> I thought that's what you just said that the west side was not in compliance.
Everything else was. >> The west side. Yes. Is not in compliance. There is one section along the water that is not in compliance.
The east side of the property, if we can get to that picture, scroll, keep scrolling right there. that that picture and that picture is the east side of the property that is
in compliance. There's the water picture or the the canal bank area as I would call it. I don't know the proper terminology for that, but
there's material that has gone into that water. >> Where is the canal on the east side? Is that the problem? >> It's It's on the north side of the property. >> Okay. >> It's east of the parking lot.
>> Yes. >> So that's why I was asked >> not north. Yeah. >> That's why I'd asked confirm you were dealing only with the western section and now you're saying that there's something on the eastern section which would be the canal. Is yes. Is there anything else that you
find that my client is not in compliance with? No. >> Okay. Let's talk about the canal. Have you the the material that's in the canal? Was my client requested to try to pull the material away from the edge of the bank?
>> Yes, he was. >> And did he say that there could be erosion once you do that? >> Not to me. He did not. >> Did he say it to another gentleman? >> Let me ask you. I'm sorry to interrupt, Mr. Fields. Who requested that that material be moved from the >> Who requested that that material be um moved?
>> Uh Mr. Lower Craig Craig Lowour >> on behalf of the town. >> Correct. >> And Mr. Santana or someone that one of his employees complied and pulled it away from the edge of the of the pond, right?
>> No. >> Yeah. >> In my opinion, >> the p the pictures I sent you, you didn't see the gradient being pulled away from the from the edge of the um canal. >> Can we go back to his pictures, please? Okay. Right there. >> Do you see that it's been it's being
pulled away from the canal? >> I don't know if it was pulled away or not. I know what I saw in the pictures that I took on Monday. >> Is it possible that the soil around those the the two trees that were in the
water fell over into the water? Is it possible that by pulling the soil away that the trees could have tilted over into the canal? >> Could be possible. >> Do you have any evidence that my client pushed the can the trees into the canal? >> No.
>> So, other than the two trees that were kind of laying over at the edge of the canal, anything else to do with the canal to the picture where the trees were, please keep going. Right there. Again, we're he's cited for he's cited for
stockpiling of manure, right? There could be some some some shavings on the edge, but as far as these these trees, any evidence that my client pushed those trees in there into the canal?
>> I'm I mean, I'll let you continue if you want, but we're going way beyond what I care about at this hearing. Uh >> the question is compliance and she's saying we're not in compliance, >> right? But I think the picture speaks for itself. So you can tell there the the sand versus the manure material, right? So as I look at that picture, my
review of that is is there still >> the pile material in that photograph. Can it be scraped off the surface? Probably. Right? Whether there's material in the canal that that's >> okay. So all right. So if we're just dealing with that that question. So, as
far as um the going back to the actual charges, we've got the notice of violation and we have a stop work order. In the notice of violation, was there any explanation of what he had allegedly had done
improperly in the notice? >> Well, I'm going to question the relevance of that question. There finding a violation's already been made. So your time to appeal that I think is long past. So this is a fine assessment hearing. The testimony today is whether
or not the property is in compliance. >> Right. So the the question is what when he was asked whether or not there's something that's like if you're seeing some type of wood chips that are here. The question is whether or not that's compliance or not. Right. I understand. But he was being charged with piles
storing manure and transporting manure. >> Right. And we're be and we're being asked to rem either do the FDA or remove the piles. We've removed all the piles. The question now is coming down to a sense of degree, >> right? Have we gotten it down to where
it was about at the time before he started, right? Does it have to be broom swept clean or does is that sufficient to show that it's been the piles have been removed? So the point was that we
were being charged with importing, storing, and stockpiling, right? All the pictures I'm getting ready to go through with you will show those stockpiles, but now they've been removed. So our position is we're showing compliance and they're saying that we're not. That's
what that's what my argument is. >> Go. Let me let Mr. Fields continue and then I'll I'll let you respond, Mr. Curts. So, Miss Thomas, regarding the >> You're on. >> I'm on. >> So, regard other than this issue on the
east side of the parking lot >> on the west side of the parking lot, >> you showed the magistrate a hearing with like a tape measurer or something, >> right? Yes. >> And you acknowledged that that tape measure it went down to the bottom of the ditch, right? >> Correct. Could you tell that that ditch
had been recently cleaned out to help to improve the water flow? >> Yeah, I don't know if it would include the water flow, but yes. So, you could tell it had been cleaned out. >> Okay. So, do you know how far down it was rem how far that it was dug down? >> As I stated prior, yes, approximately
about maybe 12 in a foot. >> And do you have any type of a a survey or any type of a measurement to show what it was before to what it is now? No, just previous pictures from history. >> Is it fair to say that you're
speculating as to the amount of material that was removed and the the amount of distance that was that came out of the ditch? >> No, I'm not speculating. I know what I see. >> I understand. But my question is what was there before and what is there now?
How much was removed other than a guess? Do you have any type of objective data measurements or any type of you have a town engineer, right? >> Yes, sir. >> Did the town engineer who went out there, did he take any type of measurements other than sticking the the
measurement down into the ditch? >> No, sir. >> And this is an engineer. >> Yes, sir. >> And who's given us an email who's not here to testify today, right? >> Correct. >> Okay. So, as far as the difference between what was actually
in the bottom of the ditch and what was there now, you walked the pad on the west side of the property, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. I did that and I can't testify, but um Mr. Santana walked it this morning. Did you see that at the top of
the pad on the west side that there was a lot of dirt there? >> Material? Yes. No, I asked about dirt. Specifically dirt. Did you see dirt on the west side of the property?
In addition, there was some topical um debris. Do you know what that debris was? >> No, sir. >> Do you Did Mr. Santana tell you what it was? >> Yes. >> What did he say it was? >> Something to do with palms.
>> Did he tell you why that had to be put there? >> No. Did he did you see large equipment on site? >> Yes. >> Do you know whether or not that large equipment had to go into that western section of the property? >> I don't know that.
>> Was it's the pictures we're seeing it's been cleared and leveled. So would you assume then that large equipment went in to get that material out and to level it? >> Yes. Do you know whether or not they were having any type of problems with
the the heavy equipment sinking into this the that surrounding area? >> No idea. >> Do you know have any elevation like a survey elevation showing what the elevation was before Mr. Santana started
the work and after he started after he completed the cleanup? >> No. So there was an an assertion and I think it I I think it was Mr. Curse I'm not sure that was either greater than 6 in
or less than 12 in somewhere in that range. Do we have is there any um survey or notation any scientific evidence showing what the difference um is if any?
>> No, other than me measuring >> from the bottom of the d of the ditch. >> Correct. >> Okay. But you you will at least acknowledge that that doesn't give you a fair and accurate reading of what act if there any is if there is an addition that
doesn't tell us what that addition really would be. Correct. >> Correct. I stated that Do you know whether or not Mr. Santana on behalf of his companies went back in to the property after Friday?
>> I do not know. >> Did I Did I forward some pictures to you over the weekend? >> Yes, you did. >> Okay. Did those pictures did I was there a representation that those pictures were taken after Friday? >> Yes.
>> So after you went out and forwarded your pictures to me, Mr. Santana went back out, mobilized again, and performed even more work on the property. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, as far as the the stop work
order, there's there's no allegation that he ever brought any manure, any more stockpiling of material after the stock work order was issued. Is that correct? >> I'm sorry. Repeat your question.
>> After the stop work order was issued, do you have any evidence that Mr. Santana imported any more wood shavings that would contain manure? No. >> After the court issued its final order,
did or do you have or strike that after the court I'm strike strike that after the magistrate issued its final order? Are you aware that Mr. Santana began a process of removing a substantial amount of organic wood chips and manure?
>> Yes. And in some places, which we can see in the the case file, those piles were 12 feet or higher. Correct. >> Yes. >> Substantially covering the property. >> Yes. >> So, as far as complying with the
magistrate's order, all those piles have now been removed. >> Correct. >> The piles have been removed. Yes. >> Okay. And so the on the east side as far
as where the piles were, you're find finding at least at the level ground level that's sufficient to the town. >> Yes. On the the east side. Yes. >> Okay. And I forwarded also to the town a copy of an email from the Department of
Environmental Protection. Right. >> Yes. I saw that it's in the file. >> Okay. So, in the file there's an email from from what appears to be Denise Swack. You know Denise? >> No, sir. >> You know who she is?
>> Yes. From her email. >> All right. This one says she's from She's with the Florida Department of Health, >> right? >> Yes. >> And she's contacting what appears to be Lauren. Do you know who Lauren is? >> I do not. you know if she works for the
Department of Environmental Protection >> according to her email. Yes. >> And in that email they're saying that again this was the entity that initiated at least the the state claim and they notified the town and the town got
involved for a town claim. Is that correct? >> Town claim >> town of Luxahe Gross the violation of stopwork order. Well, we issued the the town issued the stop work order before us even speaking
to anybody at the Department of Health. >> Okay. Well, you're at least aware and it it's in the in the case file. You're aware that the town or at least the Department of Health has found that as far as the stockpiles and the state
violations that we are now in compliance and they they are stopping that investigation. You're aware of that? I'm aware that they are stopping their investigation. >> That's on the question list. So, as far as the west side of the
property, again, pictures are in the in the in the file, but the piles have now been removed to grade level. The question is, what is grade level? Is that fair to say? >> Yes, because there's still material there.
>> I understand. But the question for me is and for the magistrate is what is the grade level? Is there anything that the town has that establishes what that bare minimum that foot that footprint is? What the the um
the elevation certificate or anything that says what it was before we cleared that property? >> No, we don't. No, the town does not. As far as we are here today, we have no scientific data showing the difference
between what it was then and what it is now. >> Scientific data? No. >> Was that property? Do you recall what the property looked like before we started putting the um the piles in? Was it a wooded area?
>> It was flat. There was no piles on it. Were there trees on it? >> Trees. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Those trees have now been removed. >> Yes. >> You're looking at me funny, but you're not It wasn't cited in here as tree
removal. >> That's for a later date. >> I understand the case that never ends. But as far as the violation for what we're here on today,
you're saying that the what's on there? Well, strike that when you walked on there again, you saw that there were areas that were bare sand areas on the west side. Correct. >> On the west side there
still material >> on the west side. Whatever material it is, it is it's there's material there. >> The material I'm speaking for about first is the sand or the dirt. Do you know whether or not that sand or dirt
was there before we started our work on the property? >> I would say yes because dirt would have to be there. >> No, you don't have any evidence that we imported dirt. I guess that's my question. >> No, no evidence of that. So when you're
walking on the property, you're able to see dirt that's being exposed on the top of that area of the west side. >> Yes. >> And there's also some palm fibers that are beside it intermixed in the dirt, right? >> Yes.
>> Have you done any type of a testing to determine from the tops from the the exposed dirt to what the fiber is how much of a distance that is? >> No. >> Is it fair to say it's less than an inch? I have no idea.
>> No further questions. >> All right, Mr. Fields, do you intend to call any witnesses? >> Mr. Santana. >> All right, go ahead. >> Mr. Santana, come on up here, sir. >> Can we share the same? >> Yeah, you that's fine with me. Is that okay with the town? >> Yes.
>> All right. So, you're going to speak Sir, please state your name. >> Paulo Santana. >> And you were sworn when when we started, right? >> Yes. Yes. >> Thank you, sir. Go ahead. >> Mr. Santana, what's your position regarding Immaculate Ways and Santana Western Private Financial? >> Uh, I am a CEO of Santana Quest Private
Financial and I'm a manager operator of Immaculate Ways. >> I'm going to ask you some short questions. After the stop work order was issued, did you bring in any other manure or wood shavings? >> No.
>> After the magistrate issued it its final order, did you immediately begin the process of re um investigating whether or not to do the FDA or to remove the material? >> Yes. In fact, did you not apply for a an
exemption or a waiver with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in order to try to get approval from them to do what you were doing? >> Yes, I did. >> At some point in time, did you decide not to pursue that any longer? >> Yes.
>> After that pursu after that decision was made, did you begin the process of removing the material? >> Yes. Now, your understanding was that at least from the Department of Environmental Protection, they said you had a piles greater than 12 ft, piles
within 500 ft of a vulnerable water well, and piles height 200 ft within a body of water, >> right? >> Yes. After the magistrate issued its order, tell us the process you went through to remove the material to remove
the pile and then tell us how much time, effort, and money you extended bringing it down. And I'm going to ask you about it current condition. We had hired uh several um hauling companies or we hauled this material out of the property
to um More Heaven and Fort Green. We had spent between the the equipment, rentals, labor work approximately $210,000.
How many? Well, regarding the truckloads that were coming in and picking up the material and going out, can you describe for the magistrate how big those trailers were? >> 100 yard uh capacity, 54 feet long
uh weight capacity of 88,000 lbs. How many of those trailers did you pull use to to take material out of and transport it to a different position? >> 280. >> So
how long did that take you to do? approximately I would have to to guess I cannot have the precise but since the stop order uh uh was issued um weather permitting the the the road
is in construction they have a lots of uh public works being done over there we took off uh last week to remove uh actually a little
earlier for the uh uh um material originally there. Then we had an incurrence of uh trees and debris that the neighbor has pushed that in and then we took another day to
>> tell her about that. >> The let me ask you a question. On the on the east side there is a neighbor that has a lot of land also, right? Yes. >> When we did our inspection, we noticed that there was debris being held with
shavings and manure that was being h houseed on his property, too. >> That's correct. >> Right. >> You clear your property and then this neighbor starts to do what? Clear his property. >> They did a uh tree clearing on the edge
of the the limits of the property. >> And what do you do with that material? he pushes into our uh uh property in order to facilitate the movements of his equipment. >> And did you have to then spend more time to pick up his material?
>> Uh in the beginning, I thought that the code enforcement would would note the difference between the three degrees and the manure after they made the inspection and they were qualifying those piles as of uh our materials. So,
we decided to remove all that material. >> So, that wasn't part of the original um stop work order or even the the order from the I mean the magistrate. >> No, no, that was uh uh uh only uh three
debris and and and organic material from his side of the property. >> So, at least from compliance, you've spent $210,000. You've had 200 some odd 100 yard trucks
coming in and out of there on the dirt road and weather conditions trying to comply with the with the magistrate's order. In addition, we shut down our manure removal uh company that uh we
gave a notice to all our clients that we were no longer uh uh collecting manure and that that segment of the company was shut down since we did not have a place to bring them. >> As of today, you've heard the testimony regarding the
eastern side. You've heard the pictures regarding or you've seen the pictures regarding You see the picture up on the screen right now regarding the the canal or the the ditch. Can you tell the magistrate
how those trees got there and what is along here >> uh on the on the previous visit uh of the the team of Lahachi Bros. There was a bunch of uh people there. Uh the public work
officer uh uh told us that he that we were pushing there was a um higher uh elevation of that margin of the canal in order to contain erosion uh and not
collapse the the the soil until grass can be planted. the uh officials said that we were uh pushing uh um material to the canal. I I object. I said that was the
opposite. But we had reserved a a layer of organic fiber in order to hold the structure of the soil, not to create erosion since we are in a rainy season and that could cause uh uh uh the sand
to move into the canal. Um they were they they said that that was uh not what they wanted. So I bring in a excavator to push it all back. uh out of there and
uh removed from from the canal. Uh and uh as we we was thinking could happen in the first uh rain that had the soil start uh collapsing and and that
occasion that that tree to to fall into the canal. Right. So the pictures we saw earlier about you removing was that being poured out? >> Yes. Yes. The pictures that the the the town has presented there is a pile that
you're going to see not a pile but you're going to see a a a grade of elevation towards the canal instead of a slope in order to contain the the the slope of the water uh away. They have
requested us to remove that all to the dirt grade and and that's what we did. >> And those were the pictures that were shown on the screen that we sent over to them on Sunday. >> Uh that is uh those were pictures taken
from them before uh this Sunday that was taken on their last week uh visit. That's different than what you're seeing right now. This is with the with the organic material uh scrape.
>> It's changed since this picture. >> Yes, the slope changed drastically. >> Okay. So, this is not what it looks like now. >> No, this is what it is right now. >> Okay. So, what what is the brown stuff right here? the the brown stuff. It's a combination of um wood shavings, mulch,
debris, some dry uh uh leaves and and everything that the wind might bring it in there uh uh with the the the everything that is in the property. >> But what what is the purpose of that being at that location? Well, before we
remove the purpose of being at that location was to give structure to the soil, not to collapse into the canal. >> And as of today, regarding the western side, we w did we walk it this morning? >> Yes. >> And when you walked to the property this
morning, did you see the sand trap sand areas that were open and exposed? >> Yes. Were that were they substantial on that piece of property on the west side? >> They are substantial less than desired
since the uh we we need to start planting grass there uh as more as we as quick as we can to to reestablish the the structure of the soil. >> And as far as the remaining um f there was a a testimony regarding coconut
fibers. >> Can you tell magistrate what that is? Uh we in order to keep doing the removal over there and trees, we have to put uh uh big equipment that start sinking on
the entrance of the the that part of the property creating big holes and those equipment can make uh uh uh damage if it's not properly structured. In order to not add any type of permanent of uh
mineral material, we use uh palm tree fiber that gives uh a lot of uh sustainability to the soil to make a a a hard ground. So the machines could perform their job without uh uh destroying the the the
natural drainage of the property. So, as far as the amount of that's on the property, as far in that area, would you say it's one inch or less? As far as the coconut, the fiber, >> it is one inch or less, sometimes
nothing, sometimes a little more. It's just a normal uh layout of a organic structure in order to to keep the soil uh fertile. And regarding you saw the picture regarding the ditch and they looks like either a tape measure or a
yard stick in it. >> Yeah, that's a different ditch. That's the ditch from the phone. Yes. >> Can we can we find the one that has the ditch with a yard stick or the tape measure? >> There you go. >> So, at the bottom we see fresh dirt, right? >> Mhm.
>> Yes. >> Yes. When was that ditch rec clean or when was that ditch cleaned out? >> Uh right after uh the the visit from the the town. They said they were not in
agreement with so we we also per request of the owner wanted to keep the the that thing clean. We removed and pull everything. There was a way to to get again same way we need to get the
the the dirt down but we cannot uh uh outer the structure of the soil otherwise in two or four rains Mr. Garcia is going to have all his dirt drain to the to the main canal. >> So in one of the pictures we saw that
the canal that had a collapsing tree. This ditch connects that part that that this excavated part of the ditch connects to the ditch that had the tree falling over. They have initially they start
from there is a lake on the neighbor property that fills that that canal where the the the tree is done that with a big overflow will migrate to this and ultimately to uh the street canal in
case of a big >> besides a road. >> Correct. >> Okay. So, as far as the topography goes, the safely go, if you not change the slope, you just cleaned it out. >> Just cleaned it out and and and add some structure. We we we wanted to plant uh
and see uh grass, but we don't have time enough with the machinery going up and down, then it would be plant the grass and lose the grass. So, we needed to just finish it in order to to get the the the vegetation back up. So finally regarding the m the the palm material
that was not there when the citation well that was the palm material there when the citation was issued for >> no the pal was not there >> it has nothing to do with manure >> no >> regarding that material
um do you believe that you have complied with the magistrate's order to remove the piles and all the material and is it down to as close to grade as it can Yes, I do believe that we has done the
unhuman effort for working seven days a week non-stop and preserving as I said uh normal normal uh uh way to preserve soil uh uh slope is with grass and
roots. we did not have that type of uh uh resource and the right time with the machinery going. So the the the bare minimum of organic material that we kept there is in order to re uh reforest the
the the beginning the what was there in the beginning as uh grass or any other uh plant that Mr. Javier would uh desire to cultivate. So if you were to go to a sock farm, order a group of pallet,
several pallets aside and lay them down, each piece of sod is going to be anywhere from 3 to 4 in tall. >> Uh yes. Yes. Especially if they're applying on totally raw material. I would say between two and three inches. Yes.
>> So if you were to compare the sod to what's there now, what's there now would be less than the height of the sod. >> Pretty much the same or less. Yes. >> Okay. I have no further questions. >> All right, Mr. Curts, do you have any cross-examination of this witness? >> Yeah, just a couple questions. Um, Mr.
Santana, it sounds like you did a ton of work out there and you've been uh very diligent about trying to remove the material. Um, in fact, by my calculations,
280 trucks, 88,000 lbs. That's over 24 million pounds of material that you have removed. Is that a fair statement? >> I have to do the calculations. We have that all documented by the receiver.
uh uh uh I do not have this number to tell you right now but we can perform a calculation as of right now if you just repeat the numbers we have it was all >> so 88,000 times 280
>> trust me on 24,640,000bs >> 24 tons uh 12 tones that's what you you you would you would go down to >> that's what that's >> got three zeros for the tone and by a half uh what was that the 12 tones
>> I I I as I said I can provide you the the the reading >> okay but it was a lot of work >> a lot of work >> a lot of work um on the west side of the property >> as I understand your your testimony
um or the um you did leave some material there, correct? There's material on the on the west side of the property that you did not bring in, but was existing on the property from your efforts originally to
put in the um uh the manure piles and chips. >> That's that wasn't you. I'm not sure I understood it. Thought you changed it though. previous question. >> All right. Um, did you spread the material on the
west side of the property? >> Uh, define material. >> The material would be the wood chips and manure. Um, and the as it had decomposed. >> We got to let him answer the question. >> Well, I mean,
>> it's a simple question. Did he spread any of the pile material onto the property? That's what >> was there. That as part of violation >> is that that's what I heard you said you heard. Is that correct? >> Yeah. No. No. The material that was spread there is remaining organic or
palm trees that was mixed in order to create f No, the we don't >> Where did the organic material come from? >> Palm trees grinded debris. >> Where did the palm trees come from? >> The the property. >> So you cut down palm trees.
>> Yeah. They they they they fell off. Yes. You cut down palm trees. >> Yeah, >> that I'm just Is that That's correct. >> There was there there was several palm trees there that was laying in the ground and we did we did uh uh >> by by several how many are you talking
about? >> I don't know. >> Eight. >> Could be eight. 10. Well, he's saying more than that. >> That is objective relevancy because I think you're watch I got a code enforcement officer over there that's implied that they're going to have
another charge assuming found. >> I would ask Mr. Curts to keep the testimony limited to the merits of this case, but I hear >> it. It does, your honor, it does go to the merits of uh the case. He's indicating that um the material that was
out there was the palm trees. So, I'm just trying to ascertain how many palm trees there were. Um and you said there are more than 10. I I do not have this information but uh Mr. Garcia is signalizing that was more than that.
>> Um and did you get a permit for the removal of those? >> No, they were they were laying in the ground. I did not have removing anything was the is that uh uh uh I I don't I don't get the the still the the form of
the question. So I would I would request like a it's it's previous definition of which >> material you were talking about. >> So uh there is there is pictures of material on the west side of the property. You've indicated that there is
material on the west side of the property. You've said it is organic in nature. You've said a portion of that is um from the palm trees. Is it your testimony that the entirety of that um material that is shown on the various
pictures is palm trees >> on on the west side >> a big a big portion of that the entirety as I said it's too broad and burdensome to the definition of material could be sand could be could be uh but so so if
we could >> establish which material we are talking about it would help me to answer the question. >> Well, let's talk about the the material that would have been the remnants of the piles of uh chips and manure that you
had stockpiled on the on the property. Is any of that material spread on the west side? >> No, that's >> none. That's your testimony. >> I cannot answer this question. How can I test? There was a, as you said, millions
of pounds over there. And he may have uh uh wood shavings there as any other farm. Right now, we have probably I don't know 100 farms over here that has the same amount or way more of wood shavings in the ground.
>> If if I had the the file for a second because finding the pictures up there, I think might be more difficult than if I asked him about that up on the screen. I'm going to show you a picture and I'm going to try and get it up on the screen
so that people can follow along. That's the one. >> Yeah. Any way for us to flip back? >> Uh, no. >> Okay. >> Sorry. I know it's in a PDF file. >> Um,
can you verify? Maybe I go this No, no, it's verified. That's the same picture. >> The the picture up on the screen is the picture that I'm showing people. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> This material here. >> Mhm.
>> Can you tell me what what you believe it consists of? >> Soil, debris. Some you see there's still remaining parts of uh debris of palm trees here.
You may have very insignificant amount of uh wood shavings from the the the scraps over there, but I would say less than 5% and I can
testify as of right now under oath that is way less than the proper the parcel of the property that code enforcement has cleared. What was the process that you
utilized to get that uh material into this state? What was the process that you utilized? How did you get that to be as it shown in the picture? >> What's what uh please define the state the the how it got flat? How got the
size? >> How you got it? What did you do to get it into this condition? the the front loader and the bulldozer needs to scrap it to remove that all with very
carefully not to alter the the structure otherwise you're going to be creating swimming pools here of the the thing. So it's all coming from scrapping and loading from the front part. So just
>> was was the entire I mean I'm sorry. So she you can't she can't see it. What you're >> I can see it on the screen. >> No, she you can't see what he's doing. Well, he's he's got to be able He has explained it on this one. You got to tell her what so she can see it. >> I can't I can't.
>> She's explaining to me what you're pointing to in the photographs. I'm looking at the same photograph on that screen in front of me. >> You scrape from the top to the bottom. Right. Okay. Right. >> Yes. And then the front loader pushes uh
into a big pile in order to be either removed to the loading ramp or depending on the size of the truck being loaded by now. And the bulldozer keep pushing. And we as as we said, we
need to respect a little layer in order not to be making holes on that thing and and removing uh existent fill uh in not to create puddles and and and and
uh undesired uh water retention. And so the entire area that's shown in that in this picture >> Yes. >> prior to it being flattened out, it was covered with mounds of uh material that you had brought in. Correct.
>> Yeah. That the picture speaks for itself. They were they were uh uh over there. That's why we are here. >> And so it was that entire area and then you brought it down, leveled it all. >> Yes. As you can see
>> and is it your test your testimony is that there is some material that you had brought in left in there? >> It would be very minimal. Was the was the property when you when
you brought uh the material on in the beginning and you started operations was this property that flattened? there was uh still normal uh uh
structural accidents for the roots and whatever were previously and then we just uh remove and and in order to give a satisfaction for the compliance we have repeated over and over again the
extra scrape required by you guys. And was there a a period of time that I understand that when you guys were having your machines go in there and remove the material that they uh the the the equipment was sinking down into?
>> Yeah. Right in front here. It's already really bad part. Whatever you go in here, the the the it's like a it sinks. >> So that was a lowlying wet area. We don't know if it was uh uh because of the rain,
>> because of a broken pipe that we had here or but that was this this part of the the soil was not as uh uh prepared to hold those 28 tons uh
machines uh uh as >> and so to correct that situation, what did you do >> after we we we got we got some palm trees that were laying in the ground and we just grind it and lay over here to
give the structure of the soil. >> Um, and to follow up on questions that Mr. Fields asked Thomas, um, throughout >> Yeah. Can you get back to the microphone? Thank you. throughout this
throughout this um process in the beginning did you do a a topographical survey of the property? >> No, I did not. >> Okay. And you haven't done a topographical survey since >> always operating under uh agricultural
uh guidance. >> Did you hire an engineer to um do a flood plane development application for you? Uh, I called you, we spoke by the phone and I asked you if
I should do the flood plane application and you said to me if you are removing it all, you don't need to do that. >> That was an option. >> Correct. Removing it all. >> That's that was done pristinely.
So, you have not hired a engineer um to do a flood plane development application? >> Since you told me I did not need one, I did not. >> Not questioning your reason. I'm just confirming that you did not. >> I am reconfirming that I did not
>> per your instructions. So, you don't have any evidence as to the topographical condition of the property before um you began your operation? >> I don't have. Do you?
>> Yeah. All right. >> Thank you. >> Any further? >> No further questions for this witness. question. >> Regarding the bare minimum, was there any way you'd get the remaining material
that that that bare minimum material that may show up on the surface to get it off without removing top soil? >> It will alter uh drastically topography if we go to dig that deep. I would I
would say that the the remaining material is probably less than 1% what uh you are in the surface and and it's consistent with all equestrian activities uh uh in the area.
>> All right. Any other witnesses you intend to call? >> All right. Mr. Santana, while you're standing there, that photograph there, what what is the the thickness of the material? You can tell a very distinct difference between the white sand and the the brown and
>> minimum. Sometimes on the the the the photograph, you will see a little layer that goes on top like let let me try to explain this way. So that that would be uh you want to that would be the surface
and that would be the thickness of the material. So if we if we lay that on top like this it will remain this thickness. But if you see this way when this follow the structure you might have a wrong
impression that we have here a foot or a two foot of thickness. But if you just scratch with your nail right here, you'll see that the sand is right. >> Okay. >> These photographs, this one and the next couple were taken by the code officer,
right, yesterday? Is that correct? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Mr. Santana, does this does it still look like that today? Or Mr. Fields, do you have a photograph of that exact area that looks different? >> I don't have a do not have a photograph at least. No, that's that's I would say that that
>> that's how it looks today. It could be a little darker as it as it gets older. It will be should be Yeah, that's that that's uh
that should be about that >> a question on that. Was there anything? >> No, I got a couple more questions and then I'll let you go back. So this photograph where is this photograph in relation to that area? >> Let me just
>> you can both of you can all three of you can >> all four of you here. >> This is from B. This is from B road. >> No but explain to me in simpler terms where is this where is this compared to this?
>> That's not the same area. Correct. >> Exactly the same. So that comes you see here from the people and this picture has been taken from this site. >> So where is this on here? >> That picture that picture I think is from the driveway. >> Correct.
>> This picture is from the >> but it's the same area >> this is the beach that was it was uh uh uh clean as you can see here the the the where more or less the the >> white dirt comes. But this thing
sometimes uh uh fall into it. So you're going to have this thing uh it doesn't mean that we have this all the way here. This is a this is a fine line over the >> as you can see right here. That's we're
talking about the same uh location and right here you will see where the the the bottom of the the the soil is. >> So Mr. Fields come back up here because I want I'm going to this next picture. So, so there's a there's a very distinct difference in the color of the material,
right? This is the manure and wood shavings, the orange material, correct? >> Any wood shavings that that that that was uh uh strike here from the the bottom. >> And this is the same rectangle as this rectangle and that rectangle, right? Just taken from a different angle. >> Okay. >> You you you mentioned that 100%
accurate. You see here you can see the distinguished of what is the wood shavings and the and the the the remaining uh uh old material and the distinctions between what's sitting over there. >> And does it look like this today?
>> This was taken I think yesterday. >> Yeah, this could be a little a little uh uh it depends like looking even better today because you'll see and then this >> and one final question. What are these piles?
>> This is uh uh soil uh u soil soil soil nothing to do with there is uh some that will be spread to be able to get plants back with it.
>> Okay, perfect. Thank you. All right, Mr. Fields, I'll allow you yet another question. >> The last picture you were just looking at, >> you were showing the difference between the the the little bit of wood shavings and then what the work that had been done.
Right there. Yeah, perfect. Right there. So, when was it when was the last time any work was done on leveling that piece of property? >> Uh, last time I I I worked there was uh
last Sunday 10:23 p.m. >> Okay. So, over time when it rains, the rain's going to make everything go down, right? whatever organic debris there may be,
what would you expect to happen to that organic debris? >> If if he plants uh uh anything, it will be consumed by the the and mixed by the the roots that's going to come. If it stays there for a while, you will probably
degradate a 60 70% and then the remaining humic acid will will blend into the the the scent. >> So as far at based upon the current condition of the property, do you
believe that you're in complete compliance with the court with the magistrates's order? With all the respect, we are returning the property in a way better condition that we got. And this is the most uh uh valuable uh soil in the entire rural area of Flux
Ax. No further questions. >> Mr. Herz based on additional testimony. >> Yeah, just a a couple questions of Miss Thomas. Um, if you could pull these up
on the screen. >> Yep. Be happy to. >> And perhaps you can even just testify from there as to what you're showing the magistrate. Can I set stamp nia?
Is this on? >> Mhm. >> Okay. So, what I have up on this screen right now is 1470A Road and I'm going to scroll down. >> When was that picture taken? Do you
know? Um, that is 2026 according to the property appraiser. >> So, >> and you're going to show us a 2025 >> and I'm going to show you 2025 >> and that's
>> that is 2025 and that is the west side of the property. So, it appears that there's grass there. and trees. >> Sorry. If she's testifying, let her testify. She's just arguing now.
>> No, I'm just making a point >> now. She argue with me. But but if she she can say whatever she wants and is object to this. This wasn't part of the file, but presumably I'll stick it in now. >> Can you blow that up a little bit so the
magistrate can see? Okay. >> So, that was the original state of the property prior to their uh manure operations beginning. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> So, because that's additional testimony,
Mr. Fields, do you have any cross-examination of this additional witness testimony? >> I do. Miss Thomas, as far as the elevations on this property, again, you still don't know what they are. >> Correct. >> You don't know if whether or not where
this this grass that's being depicted on here, what in relationship to what it looks like today, what the elevations are, and whether or not they've changed. >> Correct. So, as as far as we are here today, do you have any evidence other than the one measuring stick that says
that the elevation is not the same as it was beforehand? >> No, I do not. >> Thank you. No further questions. >> All right, Mr. Fields, let me ask a few more just questions of both sides. So, Mr. Fields, your testimony earlier was
that you believe that uh Mr. Santana's in compliance or has brought the property into compliance. What's the date that you believe that has occurred as of? >> Yeah. Um it was just after um I think we we were here for the hearing and I think
it was just we needed a little bit extra time and you granted us a little bit extra time. Um so I would think that probably by it would The answer is June 3. And I base that upon the email from the Department of
Health to the Department of Environmental Protection. And we we explained why it took a little bit longer, Yarnner, because we had to go back out and do a little bit more work from the neighbor. But that's >> but that email says that the property
that 90% of the material has been removed, right? Not 100%. So how could there then be compliance if 10% of the material remains? >> I'm going I I'm trying my best not to make the substantial argument, your honor, but
>> no, that's that's fine. I just want to be clear that the de I guess from my chair, the D is looking at something different, right? The code case is its own matter. The D matter is its own matter. So >> I think answer the question I think technically the answer would probably be this Sunday. >> Okay,
>> that would be June the >> 7th. That's the date of your photographs, right? >> That's uh I think that's correct. >> That's what they're on there. Yeah, June 7th >> with with the explanation of why it took a little bit longer, but June 7th.
>> All right. Is there anything else you'd like me to hear? >> Argument, not not EV evidence. >> Yeah, e either one. >> The argument would be that that that even even with the fi for the fine amount, my client has testified he spent
over $210,000 in order to to bring it to a condition he's testified to is better than what it was. He's prepped it. He's flattened it. It's level for the owner. Now he can plant whatever he wants to on it. number one. Number two,
again, he's lost substantial income. We didn't challenge the um we didn't seek the waiver of the D. That's that's not before you, but he has given up a lot. He has spent a lot. He has worked diligently to bring the material off.
And again, I can't say this, you would know, but I would venture to say he's done a yman's job of getting the stuff off. He's probably gone far and beyond what most people would have to do in order to to
bring it into compliance. I would say if you find a viol I mean you found the violation I would say that it I would ask that you would find him to be in compliance number one. Number two that the the town has not established that he is not in compliance. The testimony is
it's less than one inch on the west side. Right. the west side of the elevation is less than one inch of increase. As far as what the actual arguments were for the actual charges, he stopped bringing in manure after the stop work
order. So, this is more of a kind of like a cleanup situation and he's cleaned it up. The only way he could get it any cleaner if he takes out a big broom and broom sweeps it. And again, I'm not trying to make light of the situation, your honor, but that's really where it is. And as far as the issue
regarding the waterway, his testimony was and it's unrebuted that the tree that by clearing it out what he was asked to do that it's already fallen over in the tree's already fallen over into the water. They did not push it in. So they're not doing anything regarding
the waterway and that was not even part of the charge. So as far whatever he was charged with, that's why I went back to it in the very beginning. dumping, hauling and storing and piling of manure. All that's gone. West the east side is in comp agreed compliance. West
side we say it is in full compliance and we would ask that no fine be given based upon the financial impact he has spent to get in into compliance. That would be it. >> Okay. Let me hear from uh the property owner.
Mr. Garcia is a translator. Are you available to to translate? I just want to give him an opportunity. I don't know if he intends to to speak here this morning, but um Mr. Garcia, is there anything else you'd like me to hear? >> Okay. Nothing.
>> What can I ask question? >> Okay. >> Mr. Garcia, do you think that Mr. Santana has cleaned up the property to about the condition it was when he took over the lease? Yeah, I do. >> Okay. All right. Thank you, Mr. Garcia.
Let me ask the town uh what its position is relative to compliance and what the requested remedy is today. >> Um honor, with respect to compliance, um as testified to by uh Miss Thomas, as
reflected in Mr. Kluff's uh memorandum that is part of the file. There remains uh especially on the western side of the property uh material
uh that changed the topography of the property. And it is not just an inch. It is um probably 6 in to uh a foot of material that is on there. That's evidenced by the pictures that are in
the file. Um, and you heard testimony from uh Mr. Santana that in order to level that area, he pulled back from the existing
um piles and leveled the the material. He also added um material in the form of uh the remnants of trees. Um, and so those things alter the topography
and those things require an FDA, a flood development application, um, in order to, uh, make sure that the drainage does really work. The alternative is to get it down to grade
as they did in the um, eastern side of the property. Um, and they are not yet in compliance. There is no doubt that they have done loads of work on on this. They have been diligent in their uh
approach. Um just as diligent as they were when they brought the materials in in the first place. Um so uh they are the they and the property owner because the property owner signed a lease to
allow them to to do this. They are the reason that they had to exert such tremendous effort to remove the material. It was because they exerted tremendous effort to bring the material in. Um and they did that
without the benefit of a floodplane development application. Um your honor found them to be in violation. Uh the cure remains um as has been done uh in other cases in the in the town is to
eliminate um that material and if broom sweeping is necessary, broom sweeping is necessary. >> So let me just ask a followup. I just want to be clear that I understand. So compliance is not my order doesn't say bring the property to grade, right? My order says remove either remove
>> the manure or get an FDA permit. Okay. So, >> I don't care what the grade is >> relative to compliance. I care whether the material is completely removed. Right. So, I just want to make sure that the town is not >> withholding compliance based on a grade determination rather than complete
removal. >> No, but there could have been a com they could have done a combination of remove the material and then say, "Oh, we've got this much material left and we would like to leave it in place." But you would need a flood development application in order to say that we raised that by that's interest right
that doesn't preclude complying this code enforcement case. >> No, this this code enforcement case required one of two things or a com or it could be the combination that I just described. One was remove all the material um and that was the route that they
chose. They could have filed an application um for an FDA to allow the piles and take care of the drainage. They also could remove as they have done a portion the vast portion of the
material and said right now we have raised the elevation by 3 in. We think it's porous and we think an FDA would satisfy and leave the remaining material there. That still remains their option.
Right. But the so >> and and it would be it would be compliant with your with your order. It wasn't an eitheror. Um it could be a combination, >> right? But I want to make sure that the
town that that I'm understanding is saying the issue at this point in time is they have not removed all of the material. That was the um the way they chose to to come into compliance. Our position is that they have not done so. I understand that. But what I'm what I'm the crux of what I'm getting at is if if
they go out and do an additional scraping of the remaining orange material that is depicted in the photographs, the town will comply the case. Is that correct or incorrect? >> Yes. If they get it all up >> regardless of whether the tree the the trees >> opened up tree material was brought in that that should have an FDA permit.
That's a separate matter. >> It's a separate matter. >> Okay. So, the town will not withhold compliance if there is an additional attempt to remove the the what's left in invisible in the photographs. >> Just correct. >> Just for we were just Can we We're going to need to identify that one photograph
because I think that's the only one that any testimony to that was at the corner. If I can Can I approach? >> Well, there's two. I'll hold them up so that we're all in this. There's this the three I showed you guys earlier. You can clearly still see that there's some orange material, but let me ask everybody to approach
again. So, this is the canal. I don't care about the tree, whether the tree is in the water. That's I don't know how the I don't I don't I'm not concerned with how the tree got in the water, but I am concerned with this orange material. This is still the material. >> Yeah. you know there is
I can't say but it could be there's highly possibility that it could be and there is one shaded skin we can see that so that that's this is what I'm concerned about the part where you can clearly it's very visible in the photograph so you can tell where there's still orange we've talked about it in this photograph right
>> and there's still some here you've done I would say probably 98% based on what I can see in these photographs but it does appear there's still a little bit left on the top >> no one respect Effectfully to be able to remove that we will need a blower so we
don't start again the the the because everything that we move becomes material definitely not orange >> how you do it I I don't dictate >> and I would tell you as experience of those pictures I could be speculated it's going to be
probably two bags this size >> but just I'm quick this is less than probably this is probably topical. This is probably less than an inch of height that we're dealing with. So we're if you were to rule that way, obviously you're
saying go back out and take off one more inch. >> I'm saying that the the choices that you had in the prior order were to either remove all of the manure, wood shaving material, all of the piled material, or obtain an FDA permit. The testimony this morning is there's no FDA permit. The
photographs show that as of yesterday, there is still material on the site. I understand it can be done with a shovel and not a front end loader or large equipment. That's fine, but it's got to be gone. If you want the town to comply it, it's got to be gone. Um, that that's
the evidence that I have in front of me. I asked both of you if you had additional photos that show that this is different today. The testimony was no. So, >> but I I've heard everybody's sides, so I think you're very very close. But the testimony and the evidence I have is that there does remain a bit of material
left on the top. I understand there was a decision to be made about filling the material so that the heavy equipment could get there. That's a decision. But you've got to get this orange material that is still depicted in the photographs in both sides photographs removed. this photograph. This photo
>> I'll make >> and this photograph >> that here I have our picture. >> Well, it's the same area, right? So, you can see >> this is the back. This is the front, right? >> The remaining from the the two that they they push out. >> I think it may have been the picture
from the front of the from the right. >> That's from Abram, the one in your right hand. I don't see very much orange on this in this photo, but I'm not going to my order is not going to say from here, here, here, here, and here. That's for
you guys to determine. Uh, but what I can see is that there still remains which clear wood shavings, which was the same material. I compared this photograph against the original photographs. It appears to be the same material, and your own testimony was it's the same material. So, there's very little of it left. Shovel it off. Get
it, get rid of it so that the town can comply the case. that that's all that I think needs to be done. As you indicated, you've done quite a lot to get the material gone. So, let's everybody go back to their podiums. >> Just requested maybe those two pictures be attached as copies.
>> Whatever order you're in, >> so I'm not going to do that because the the photo I don't know if there's photographs of the entire site, right? So, I don't know if this is every single area. That's not the way code enforcement typically works, right? They're >> that's what that's what we're here for today, right? That's why that was their
testimony and you're finding that that's still shavings and we're trying to comply. >> Do do you have photographs of the remaining portions of this uh west area then that that show that there's no orange >> pictures this morning, but I I can't I
took them this morning on my on my telephone. I can I'm happy to come up and show you my pictures and and give them to Mr. Curts. I again I'm not going to attach photographs, but I have had the town testify on the record that compliance is not going to be withheld in this case because of the groundup
tree material. The only thing remaining at issue is the remaining wood shavings that have been testified to by your client that still remain on that west area and in the area on the canal in the canal bank there or ditch whatever you all call that
because there's even photo there there's even you know your own photo here still shows some orange >> yeah Mr. cards you can approach as well. So if there's orange, if there's still the material that was at issue in the violation order in this photograph,
shovel it off, get rid of it, and then call for reinspection. >> This is east side. We're only dealing with the west side and that one canal point. Fine. But you understand what I'm saying? >> Yes, your honor. I understand what I'm saying. >> All right. So, does the town Is there a cost
recovery sheet in here? >> Yes, ma'am. >> And what is the cost for today's hearing? >> Well, it was in relevance to because we continued it to allow time. So it's the 40966. It was Yeah. from >> So one one >> one. Yes.
>> Were the administrative costs from the prior hearing paid? >> No, actually no administrative costs have been paid at all. >> Well, there was only one, right? >> Well, from the order finding violation,
those were not paid either. >> That's the one I'm asking about. >> Oh, sorry. There typically aren't um administrative costs when both sides agree to a continue. Right. So, >> right. Correct. So the violation order costs were 466.
All right. Uh does somebody have a calculation of how many days there are between May 19th and today? working on it. Thank you. >> How many days are between May 19th, 2026 and June 19?
>> 21 days. All right. Anything further from either side? >> No. No. >> All right. Hearing that in case C25-64, I've already admitted the uh evidentiary case file
which includes respondents exhibits which are marked uh in the record. I'll find based on the notice documents in the case file which include uh an affidavit of posting for the prior order
that set today's uh fine assessment hearing date that the town had legally sufficient service to proceed with today's hearing. I'll find based on the testimony of uh town code enforcement staff as well as the
testimony of uh Mr. Santana, the tenant on the property that the respondent remains in violation of sections 175 110 1751 125 175 170
175 240 175 145 175 245 175 250 and 175 310 for the uh manure and shaving material that remains on the west side of the property and
along ong the uh canal as evidenced and documented in the photographs that are included in the evidentiary case file which are dated June 8th, 2026. Um my prior order finding violation was from February 18th. It required
respondents to comply with the listed code sections on or before May 18th of 2026. Having found that the violations remain as of this morning's hearing, I'm going to assess a fine uh for the 21 days of non-compliance.
21 My prior order allowed uh fine amounts to be set at up to $250 per day. Given the testimony that I've heard from Mr. Santana and the amount of money that he spent to remove what appears to be uh nearly all of the material. I'm going to set a fine amount of $150 per day. So,
I'm going to set a fine of $3,150 for those 21 days of non-compliance. That fine amount will continue to acrue at the $150 per day. Until compliance is achieved, I would encourage uh Mr. Fields and Mr. Santana get the remainder of that material scraped off and called
the town for reinspection so that they can comply the case. Um, I'm going to reaffirm the administrative costs for the original violation hearing from February in the amount of 40966 as the town has indicated that those will be not paid. And I'm going to assess uh
administrative costs for today's hearing which are also in the amount of 40966 payable within 30 days and you'll get an order that reflects that. Again, get the limited amount of material off and and call for compliance. Okay. Nice.
>> Thank you, sir. All right. Next case, please. >> Next case is number 10 FF L Okachobee LLC. Case number CE26-3. Address 13771 Okachobee Boulevard PCN
number 4141431701-5130010. Violation section Florida building code 105.1 building code building permit required 20-010 outdoor storage 20-017 prohibited uses 05040A
permits required expiration of permits and development orders code of ordinance 18-24A tree mitigation code of ordinance 18-21A1-2 tree vegetation removal I Jeff, you want to handle?
>> Uh, yes. Miss Edwards is on the um on the video. Uh, her client has um requested a continuence um based on witness unavailability.
Um they have been cooperating and we are very close to um I think a stipulation on this matter. Um, so we are not objecting to a continuence to of this case to the July 14th meeting. I think
that's the July 14th. July 14th meeting. >> And the town has received a request to continue. >> Yes, we did. >> All right. Ma'am, your name on the computer. Good morning, your honor. Katie Edwards Walpole of the law firm. Katie Edwards
Walpole, PA. on behalf of the respondent. >> Thank you. And that you you heard what Mr. Cart said. You requested continuence. Is that accurate? >> That's correct. >> Uh refresh my memory. Was what do you have
in the way of service? Was there actual service at the prior hearing? Or Miss Walpole Edwards, are you willing to stipulate to service for this morning's hearing? >> Correct. We've received service. >> Okay. All right. Anything else, Miss Edwards? Walh told.
>> No, I I echo uh Mr. Curt's sentiment and appreciate the town's cooperation as well. >> Okay. Very good. Anything further, Mr. Curts? >> Nothing on this one, your honor. >> All right. In case C26-3 uh having received stipulated uh
agreement to having received legally sufficient service for this morning's hearing from uh respondents council and understanding there's been a request for continuence that's been agreed to by the town, I will continue this matter and reset it for uh violation hearing on
July 14th, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. >> Thank you. Thank you. Next item is number five. Arena Dora LLC. Case number CE 265129. Address 3330C
road PCN number 4141431701323003030. Violation section code of ordinance 30-1. Purpose and intent. ULDC7-015 maintenance of swailes and coverts. ULDC05040. Permits required expiration of permits and development orders. I will turn this
matter over to John. >> Yes. >> Suarez, the code officer. >> Good morning, your honor. John Suarez for the town of Lockachi Girls presented case C2605129. in the way of service. The order of
violation, the notice of violation, notice of hearing was sent out certified mail 22nd, 2026. It was posted on the property same day and here at town hall on the same day. We are continuing this case as well.
We've been in correspondence with the property owner to July 14th, 2026. If you'd like to see a service, handing in service now. >> Thank you. And is the respondent present? >> No, they're not. >> And is there anybody else on the
computer? >> There is, but I don't it doesn't say their name. >> Can we ask who they are? >> Oh, they left. >> Right. So, nobody else is on the computer. All right. Anything further? >> Nothing further.
>> All right. In case C2605129, for the record, the respondent is not present. I'll enter the town's evidentiary case files composite exhibit one. Without objection, I'll find based on the notice documents in the case file, which include an affidavit of service that the uh town had good service for
this morning's hearing. I will grant the mutually agreed uh request for continuance and set this matter for violation hearing on July 14th, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. Next item is number 12, Jonathan Wish.
Uh, case number CE 260482, address 14735, Flamingo Drive, PCN number 4141431701342090. Violation section code of ordinance 22-135A business tax receipt ULDC92-015
C. Recreational vehicle use 92-010 permit inspection require um and maintenance requirements 92-020 ARV site and utility requirements 20-035
E11-2 setbacks on May 20th 2026 an order finding violation that section 22-135A business tax receipt and uldc section 20-03 5E1 1-2 setbacks complied no later than
May 22, 2026. According to the order finding violation, a fine in the amount of $150 would be assessed for each day the violation continues to exist past May 22nd, 2026. Respondent is further assessed administrative cost in the amount of $49.66
for prosecuting the May 20th, 2026 hearing payable within 30 days of the May 20th, 2025 order finding violation hearing. I will turn this over to the code officer, John Suarez. John Suarez presenting KC260482. Um, order find finding violation was
mailed out certified on May 20th, 2026 as well as posted on the property. Um, and it was also posted here at town hall. Um, because of the 48 hour time frame, I did call the property owner that day, informed him that he had 48 hours to
comply to tell his tenant. I also text the tenant and we've had back and forth, but it did take them a while to remove the RV from the setback. May 22nd was the deadline.
They removed they removed the uh RV from the setback from the property as a whole on June 4th, 2026. So, it was 13 days out of compliance. The town is seeking $1,950 for non-compliance during that time
frame. And in the case file, >> what about the business tax receipt? >> Business tax receipt. >> I removed that, your honor. Um, there was not a lease on the property. It was actually a friend of the owner.
Um, and he's removing that. It was like a mutual agreement without a lease, but it was a friend of the property owner. So, there was never a lease on the property without he was essentially staying there for free. And the tenant is currently on his way out as of July
15th, I believe, is his move out date. >> Okay. So, you're wishing to remove that section, >> correct? All right. Do you have a case file? >> Yes. >> Thank you. All right. You said they complied on June
4th. Is that the date you complied them? >> Correct. >> Is the respondent present? >> They are not. Were you working with the property owner or the tenant? >> I was working with both. I've, you know,
I've met with the tenant via text and in person, but I've been calling the property owner as well for whatever reason. It just took this long for them to remove the RV or remove from the setback. All right. So, you have photographs from
June 5th that it was gone. >> June 5th, but uh we've been in text communication. So, he sent me photographs on June 4th. So, the town relegated. I told him I would inspect the next day, but you know >> it back to the day before which is the day before.
>> Okay. So that was how many days did you get? >> 13. That's with uh May 22nd the deadline and we'll start on May 23rd. I get so 12 days from the 23rd to the
3rd. You comply on the fourth, right? >> The fourth. Correct. >> All right. So 12 days at 150. Is that >> 1,800? Is that what you had? >> If it's 12 days, yes. >> You have administrative costs for
today's hearing. Yes. $49.66. >> Did the prior administrative cost get paid? >> Not yet. >> Anything further? Nothing further. >> All right. In case C 260482, I'll enter the town's evidentary case
files composite exhibit 1 without objection. I'll find based on the notice documents in the case file which include an affidavit of posting that the town had good service for today's hearing. I'll find based on the testimony of the code enforcement officer as well as the
photographs in the case file that the respondent uh came into compliance with sections. The agenda has so this is only 20-035 E1 and two, right?
>> Make sure that's a setback. >> Yeah, that's what it looks like. >> So the additional So just for the record, the town is removing the violation of 22135A. So that will not be in the order assessing fine and the agenda for some other code sections that didn't be
there. So, this um order will just be dealing with 20-035E1 and 2, which was listed in my prior order finding violation from May 20th. The photographs in the case following testimony of the code enforcement officer indicate that the respondent
came into compliance with section 20-035E1 and 2 on June 4th, which was after the May uh 22nd, 2026 compliance date. Therefore, I'll assess a fine in the amount of $1,800 for the 12-day period
from May 23rd through June 3rd. Uh, I will also reaffirm the administrative cost for the May hearing in the amount of 40966. And I'll assess the town's administrative cost for today's hearing in the amount of 40966 payable within 30 days.
The uh rest of the items on the agenda we are not bringing forth due to compliance. So this is the last item on our agenda. The next special magistrate meeting that um you will be present would be the July 14th meeting. >> Do you want to note for the record those
case numbers and indicated they're pulled so it's clear? >> Yeah, sure. Case number uh CE 26-05128 number one on our agenda. Number two uh number three on our agenda. Case number CE 2605125.
Next item number six case number CE 2604084. Number seven, case uh CE 260598. Number eight, case number CE 2605116.
Uh number nine, case number CE 2605-1141 1114. Number 11, case number CE 26-41. And the last item is number 14, which the um amounts have been paid. So no further action on case number 22070016.
>> Thank you. And for the record, I did review the minutes of the May 20th uh 2026 hearing and I'll sign those uh prior to leaving this morning. Anything further from the town? >> No. With that, I'll adjourn the hearing at 11:31. Thank you.