You okay? You're good. I think there >> good morning. >> Morning. All set. >> All right. >> Well, everybody. >> All right. With that, I'm going to call to order the town of Lachi Grove's special magistrate hearing. It's January 21st. Verizon says it's 9:01. So, we can
get started. Uh my name is Amity Bernard. I'm the special magistrate for today's hearing. The first thing I'm going to do is swear anybody in who's here to testify on any items on today's agenda. So, if you're here for a code enforcement matter, including town staff, and you're going to be speaking on a code enforcement item, you if you could stand if you're able and raise
your right hands. And let me ask procedurally, is there anybody appearing virtually this morning? Okay, very good. Raise your right hands for me if you're going to speak. Do you all swear affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> And sir, in the back, are you going to speak? Do you swear affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth? Thank you, sir. You can all be seated. A little bit about process. Uh it looks like the only case on the agenda today is a violation hearing. So uh the order of things will be that once you hear the case called the town uh most town staff
is sitting in front of me at the table. Uh they will present their case. Uh show me any documents any evidentiary case file that they would like me to enter into the record. Call any witnesses that they intend to call. Uh you can come to the podium here that's to my right, your left. Once the town has concluded its
presentation, called any witnesses that it has. uh show me any documents that it intends to enter into the record. It will be respondent's turn to go ahead and proceed with their presentation. Show me any documents you brought with you. Uh cross-examine any witnesses that the town has called. Once I've heard both both parties uh entire
presentations, I will make a final ruling and you'll get an order that reflects that ruling in the mail. So, uh keep in mind today all of the testimony given is given under oath. Um, with that, I did review uh the minutes from the January 5th, 2026 special magic hearing, and I will sign a copy of those
and return them to the clerk. And with that procedural matter out of the way, I'll turn it to the town to call its first case. >> Do you want to hear the motion to continue first or do you want to move on with the case >> because there has been a motion to continue filed by the respondent, one of
the respondents. >> It it's part of it. So, you can go ahead and call the the case and then we'll >> Good morning. Karen Gardner Young, community standards director. Um, number one, Javiar and Rosa Garcia. Tenants listed, Immaculate Ways, Inc. and
Santana Equestrian Private Financial, Inc., address 147A Road. Case number CE 25-64. PCN number 41414317011060020. violation uh code sections 175-110 permit required 175-125
application for a permit or approval 175-170 general inspections 175-240 violations 175145 Other permits required 175245 authority 175-250 unlawful
continuence 175-310 limitations on placement of fill and also section from the code of Ordinance 18-21 permitted exempt and prohibited activities and section 18-24 tree mitigation. All right. And who's I presume that's
you, sir. So there is a motion to continue. I I was copied on that correspondence from either yesterday or the day before. Um, typically this is a little bit more informal than a normal court court proceeding as you know, but um, the motion was received. So, I will ask the
town, do you want to have that heard immediately or do you want to present your case and then have that heard? I >> think it makes sense to have it heard at this point in time. >> Um, and you make a determination on whether or not to grant the continuence.
Uh, the town is objecting to the continuence. >> Okay. All right. Uh, let's start with this. Give me your appearance for the record, sir. >> My name is Preston Fields of Preston J. Fields, PA and Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, and I represent Immaculate Ways
and Santana Equestrian Private Financial Incorporated. >> Okay. All right. So, go ahead. I was copied on correspondence that you sent to the town um with regard to your request for continuence or your motion to continue.
So I guess if you want to uh say what you want to me to hear regarding that motion, I'm happy to hear that. >> Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Um to try to summarize it as best I can, but I need to point out a couple things. Um I I went through the current status
of both the law and state proceedings as well as these current proceedings. And the reason I'm moving to continue is because it's this proceeding that we're here on today is be is much larger than just the town of
Luxahhatche Groves's um code enforcement issue. We have the state of Florida involved both through the D and the Department of Health. My client is an agricultural uh company that is in the process of producing um transporting, producing and packaging and distributing
certain byproducts of equestrian equestrian animals. And in that process, there's a curtain there's been a change in the law. House Bill 211 has been passed which um clarifies what farm products means and
it allows for my client to transport in store process and distribute manure and he is in the process of doing that and under the the the current um chapter 163
and chapter 823 of the Florida statutes he qualifies as a farm um with under the farm exemption it qualifies as the agricultural company. So, we're in the process of going through the
registration. My client has provided uh the town has a copy of it. I'm sure we have applied for a reg we have registered not applied. We have registered with the state of Florida. They have come out and done two inspections and I've let this is all in the motion in the motion. In the first
inspection after after um multiple events have occurred the town I mean we get sued by a competitor and the DP comes out and investigates. Not only did the T DP get sued but they've been uh
the competitor has asked the town to come or the the state to come out and investigate us. We believe that the town is notified about that investigation. The investigation comes out, the inspection comes out, looks at the property, gives us a clean bill of health. 3 months later, a second
inspection comes out, and now we have to do a couple more things, right? The piles of the manure and the sha bed shavings are a little bit too high, which we've agreed to take down. Mhm. >> The um there's a question regarding whether or not the placement of this product within 200 feet of a body of
water in 500 ft of an alleged potable um water well is a question and we were working with the town to not the town with the state to work through a mitigation plan. So we're in the process of doing that and in fact the town with
the state and my client and I last week in were involved in a large Zoom conference where these issues were dis discussed. We have we are putting together a mitigation plan in order to allow us to do what the state wants says
we need to do. Right. I've gone out to the site again. I we'll get into that later if the motion is not um granted. But we're in the process of putting together that mitigation um plan as well as seeking to make sure the state approves that. We need time for that in
order to be able to defend this case. We need time to be able to show to the state that the mitigation plan is workable and approved. In fact, there's actually again there's multiple uh parts to this, but there's another part in another town where they're having another meeting where the D is dealing
with mitigation plans. So, I think that the state is trying to work with a different um people such as my client in order to try to address how how do you process this material? So, there's a larger picture than just us. So, we're
working with the state. We're trying to work with the town in order to try to make sure we can at least say that we've complied with the state because if we comply with the state, it's going to be our position that we may not be subject to the reg the regulations that are being levied against us. But until we
get that issue resolved with the state, we can't defend ourselves. So, we don't have the opportunity to truly be heard until the state makes that ruling. Now, just so you understand, and I've I've been in constant contact with um Mr. Curts, and we've we've done this. Once we got the stop work order, right, as
far as is there any prejudice to the town, there's not as far as the stop work order, we when that was issued, my client immediately stopped working at a great cost to his business. He stopped. Right. So, he's not only is he in
compliance with the stop work order, we've told the town that we're in the process, we've hired two trucks, drivers, we're renting a front-end loader to go through the process, which we object to, but we're doing it anyway, that we're we are removing the items,
the bed shaving and the manure from the property. We've told them it's going to take about 60 days while we're still working with the state, but we told the the town that we are we are actively trying to get this done. And we've asked for a period of time to do it. So, what
I'm asking you, Miss Bernard, is this. Uh, I need a continuence. I'd prefer to have a 60-day continuance. That would allow us to do a couple things. a would allow us to bring the property back into theoretically um compliance. We're we're
objecting to compliance issues, but at least the m the material would be off the site. We would then be in compliance with at least the removal of the items. So there that the harm will not be there any longer. Number two, we need the opportunity to work with the state to
see if we can prepare a mitigation plan that would be approved. If not, we we'll address that later. But those are the primary reasons. And if you were to deny it, the reason we would be severely prejudiced is we would just not have the
opportunity to pre to present our case to you properly. And I I will note that if you look at the time periods between the stopwork order, the notice of violation, and this this uh hearing, I
think it's roughly two roughly three weeks. We have we have been in constant communication with the town. My client has been constant communication with his engineer. We've been getting people ready to get on site to start taking care of this material. We've not been
sitting still, right? We have been actively pursuing this. So there's from our position there's no harm to the town if we are actually doing it, right? Removing the items. And in fact, we have agreed uh I told Mr. Curts, we've agreed
that my client will allow town people to come on and monitor to make sure that we're not actually bringing on any new material. The only thing we have to do is get it the material in. We have to kind of we have to kind of chip it to
get it up into the trucks and then we're taking it off. So, my position is I need I'm asking for a continuence. I'm asking for a 60-day continuance. If you deny it, we're going to be unduly prejudiced. If you grant it, town will not be harmed
because we are actively pursuing the cleanup. And with that, I'll leave it unless the >> town. Thank you. I appreciate that. So, let me ask the town. The difficulty in hearing these uh first is that I have no factual information about the case. So, I don't know how the case was cited. I don't know if he's testifying accurately
as to the timeline. Uh so, I'm going to ask the town to respond because I just simply don't know uh if what he's saying is true because I haven't heard any testimony from the town. So, let's address the issue as it relates to timing um and his assertion that there's no prejudice to the town in granting a
continuence. What is the town's response to that? >> Um there is prejudice because there's ongoing violation um with respect to the storage of manure on the on the property. Um the manure is piled at
heights of up to 15 to 20 feet. um that's a violation of R 175 110 in that um the topography of the property has been greatly altered. Um I think you
basically have an admission um from the attorney for uh one of the respondents um to that effect. As you read their their motion, they're indicating that they have um done things that would
alter uh the topography of the land. That's what this case is particularly about. The solution is one remove all the material um or in the alternative go through our um application process for
an FDA which your magistrate is very familiar with hire an engineer um and um get permission uh to alter the land. Um
so right now there is vast quantities of manure on the property. Those quantities of manure are um as indicated by council located within um 200 feet of open bodies of water and 500 ft of portable
water wells. There in fact is a portable water well on the property itself. So there is no way that manure could be stored um in a location on that property that is beyond 500 ft of a water well.
>> Okay. So we're very clearly getting into the merits quickly. How was this case cited? Is this a standard violation or was this set on some other course based on the testimony of respondents council that he was given two weeks between the notice and this hearing? Is that accurate? Your honor, let me say that
this this property was previously cited um the owner of the property was previously cited uh back in the May time frame. Your honor entered an order, I think it goes on June 2nd, um finding a
violation because of the storage of materials, the case file. I haven't seen it, but I' i've >> there's a we're assessing fine and there is an order finding violation. >> I'm not saying that's not there. I'm saying I do that >> I you can't give it to me right during
the middle of a hearing. >> What's what's the assertion, Mr. Curse, that this is a repeat violation or something? >> Um that this case has not been going on since um August. This case uh have been going on since May. There were
complaints that were um issued. There was an order um entered by yourself. There was an order assessing fine entered on July um 7th that goes back to the July 3rd period. There currently is
an outstanding um fine assessment of $100 a day. Um so yes there is a component of this that is a repeat violation to give you the file so that you have that for reference. >> Okay. Did the did the prior case that
was heard pertain to these same code sections? >> No it's it pertain to the manure placement on there is 30 43 and 30-44. the um respondents have made application
with the state for um a a blending site, manure blending site. >> Technically, it's an it's a registration. >> Let let me ask you to let him continue and then I'll give you a chance just so the record here picks up everybody. >> It is a registration, but it is subject
to approval. it has not been approved by uh the state of Florida. Um within that registration, they indicated that they were going to have the manure operations
um in the area that was the subject of the previous violation. Subsequent to that, they expanded the operations beyond the area of their registration
um coming to the um western edge of the the property um and also putting manure um along the northern and southern um boundaries of the property. whereas the area of the application
um for registration is in the western portion of the property. They've also exceeded the the western boundaries. So there is an element of um a repeat violation. The original case was just brought against the owner of the
property as indicated um by council and I think in in council's motion his clients and he does he does not represent the owner of the property. He represents um the the lees
um they have leased the property for these manure operations. the um so you you have a situation in which the area was expanded, a stop work order was
entered um on the property for the placement of manure as well as the 175 and 110 uh 175 110 violations for the FDA. Um that was I believe on December 29th
or 30th that the start work order was entered. Um to the best of our knowledge they have complied with the stop work order in that they are no longer bringing manure onto the site. What is before you today has to do with the um
FDA violation and the transition of this property from flatlands to um rows of material that are upwards of 20 ft in height. Um as to
Mr. um Fields's argument that 163.3162. Um >> well, let let me ask you to stop there. I'm still not clear on how this was cited. So, was this a standard violation?
>> There was a standard violation on the uh 175 charges in addition to the stop work order. The 175 violations were cited on December 30th and given 16 days to correct the situation or attend this hearing uh
today. >> Okay. >> The remedy that would have been possible um would have been the removal of the materials um if they want to go through the FDA um process obviously that would
take uh longer than um the uh 16 days. Okay. So, I guess what I need to do is I need to look at the documents. So, I need the town to put on its testimony as it relates to the documents so that I can have you show uh council the documents and look at the notice of
violation itself. So, before we get to that, I did not understand, sir, that you represent the tenants. So, are are the property owners also here? >> My my my client can testify, but the answer is no. Mr. Garcia is undergoing dialysis today. he cannot be here.
Right? I can't I can't say to you that I represent them, but that's another reason why this matter should be continued because he cannot be here answering the question. >> Mr. Garcia has had notice of this just as everyone else has, >> which is what I also need to see in the
file. So, let me have the town put on its its uh testimony as it relates to service and the evidentiary case file, and then I'll have the town show you the case file before I look at it. So just would you does anyone have an objection if I sit at the table so I can spread my stuff out?
>> Okay. >> The only thing I would ask is that if there's a way to get him a microphone so that he can be picked up on the recording. >> Thank you. um to save time
if I could have a few minutes with um council to see if we can stipulate to some of the facts because as I indicated to it seemed that there is basically an admission to a number of things and I'd like to streamline the presentation if possible. >> Okay. Um so would you ask are you asking
for a two or three minute recess to speak outside? Is that >> five? Okay. So, I'll recess at 9:22 for 5 minutes. The hearing has been recessed for 5 minutes. Yes, sir. So, you have five minutes. Come back at 9:27.
They should go All right, I'm going to reconvene the hearing. Is your recording still going? >> Yes, ma'am. Okay, I'm going to reconvene the hearing. It is 9:33. So any updates for me or does the town want to proceed to uh having the whoever from town staff testify as to the
documents so I can take a look at the NOV? >> Um there will be we have stipulated that the as to the ownership of the land and the fact that there is a lease on the property that runs to Mr. Fields's
um clients. I have a copy of the the lease agreement that I can give to you. Um so that you understand the dependency situation >> and any stipulation as to service.
>> Um do you stipulate that your client has been served with this case? >> My client has been served. >> Okay. >> And what about Mr. Garcia? Do you not represent? >> I can't I I just can't do that. I don't. >> All right. >> Okay. So, with that, let me ask the town to have uh is it the code officer going
to testify to the service of documents and the documents that were served? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you. >> I'm Good morning. I'm Tiana Thomas, lead code officer for the town of Laha Groves, representing presenting case 25-64
in reference to property located at 1470 A Road. Um, we did I did mail the uh notice of violation, notice of hearing dated December 30th, 2025
to Javier and Rosa Garcia. Um there is affidavit of service uh in the file for your records. I have the file up there in the Manila folder for you. Um and then I also have an affidavit of service
for the posting of the tenants where their address is at 1362 E- Road. Um and their notice of violation notice of hearing was also posted at 1470A Road and posted at Town Hall.
>> Uh the violations that exist. >> Um Diana, before you go forward on on that, with respect to the stop work order, um if you could testify as to the notice and the copy of the stop work
order that you provided to them. I did place a stopwork order at 1470A Road uh on 12225 uh which listed code sections. I could read them. Would you like them right
into the record? >> Are they the same as what's on the agenda? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. Then you don't need to read them unless >> There's additional code sections that are listed on the stop work order. >> Then go ahead and read them. >> Okay. Code sections 175-110 permits required
175-125 application for a permit or approval. 175-145 Other permits required 175-170 general development for which a flood
plane development permit or approval is required shall be subject to inspection. 175240 violations 175-245 authority 175-250
unlawful continuence 175-310 limitations on placement of fill um I did provide also attached to the stop work order where it says see attached
um there was a I guess um just more in detail for the 175 um which is attached in your file there with the work order. It says town of Locks Aachi
Groves on letterhead c stop work order. Um and it also indicates on that that the property was property owner was previously cited for uh town of code ordinances 30-43 prohibited generally and 30-44 permit
and uldc 20-015 permitted uses pursuant to section 175-250 of the uldc any person's continuing work continuing doing such work in violation of this order shall be subject to penalties as prescribed by the town's code of
ordinances and chapter 162 Florida statute that was also listed on the stopwork letter. >> Do you have any questions about service with respect to these matters? >> No, thank you. Uh I just wanted to briefly look at the notice of violation
before we get too much further. All right. So, this was cited as a standard violation. Uh, okay. All right. And Mr. Mr. Fields, you've stipulated to service as it relates to your client. Um,
in and I guess the difficulty in hearing these continuences first again is because I don't hear all the facts. So, it's hard to make a decision on a on a motion uh without all the facts. But given given the turnaround on this notice, this was a very quick hearing set uh from a December 30th notice to
today's hearing. It's what is it January 21st today? Uh that's a very quick turnaround. It's not not uh a typical turnaround on these types of hearings. So, uh I just wanted to review the notice of violation to see if in fact it was cited as uh just a regular
violation, which is what it appears. I don't see any other language in there. So, I'll defer to the town if if I'm incorrect in any way on that. Um but I think given uh I guess let me let me ask this. Um,
I've heard the tenants respondents council stipulate to service. In order to proceed with anything today, I need to make a finding of service as it relates to the property owner. I have testimony now from the code officer that she posted both uh to the property and
also to the tenants property. Uh, so there's legally sufficient service. I'm inclined based on the complexity of this, I'm inclined to grant a continuence. I don't think 60 days is necessary, but I do think uh in order to prepare for the presentation of this
case. Um a 30-day continuance does seem appropriate given um that only 16 days were given uh to comply in the notice of violation. Um so I guess let me ask the parties in
terms of entering any kind of record. The only thing I need to enter for this morning is the notice documents. So are the parties with your stipulation, Mr. Fields, to service, you don't need to see any notice documents. Is that accurate? >> That's accurate. >> Okay. And from the town's perspective, I don't
presume if I'm going to grant a continuence, you wouldn't you don't care whether I enter anything further other than notice documents for this morning's hearing. >> Um that's Yeah, that that would be fine. The one the one thing, your honor, is um
the owner has not made a uh request for a continuence on the case um and they are unrepresented. we have tried to reach out to them um but uh have been unsuccessful in having
conversation uh with them. Um uh and so uh one of the things if you were to grant a continuence um we would want the stop work order to
remain in effect um and be subject to um a penalty for violation of that stop work order in the interim if you're going to grant the continuence. >> Yeah. Yeah, I mean this the stop work order operates on its own um
regardless of how the code enforcement proceeding proceeds. I mean if if we reconvene in 30 days and I make findings of violations that will be the time at which I either grant uh additional time to comply or or start fine learning as of that day. So I think the stop work
order in and my understanding is that that continues to operate regardless until it's removed by the building official or the code enforcement officer. That continues to be in full force and effect. the property owner and the and the lees can continue to operate in a manner that violates that. That's up to them. But I will certainly hear
additional testimony at the at the next hearing as it relates to what they've done between today and that next hearing. Uh and I'll certainly consider that in my ruling at that time. >> Well, if they violate the stop work order, then we would ask for an emergency hearing before you because what they have indicated is that they have stopped work based on the stop work
order. Um we believe that that is true with respect to the continued importation of the manure into the site. Um and so if they violate that um we would be asking to come back before you
on an emergency basis to get an order that would penalize them if they continue to violate the stop work order. >> I I hear that. that I guess my concern is why wasn't this cited as an irreparable v violation then why was this cited as a standard I mean you have the authority to do that you could do
that again I don't necessarily think I have the authority to to enforce a stop work order I have to first consider the evidence and and find make a finding relative to the violation of the code section is not necessarily a stop work order I I hear what you're saying um and I'm certainly happy to entertain an
emergency hearing if that's necessary um but my concern is you have other means is to get an an immediate hearing and that wasn't used in this case. >> You know, we your honor, then what we can do is we can recite them for um
irreparable harm. >> I mean, I but I hear what you're saying and I I understand and I would hope that respondents uh or or tenants council hears the same thing uh that if the the behavior continues uh the town is is is not going to uh take that favorably.
And it sounds to me like you're going to continue with what's written in your motion and removing the manure and making progress towards getting things removed. >> So, just so I'm clear on the record, I I want to make sure because I've got I have a court reporter. Um my client has said and there is no one here that would
testify otherwise of which I've tried to call the code enforcement officer to talk to her about this, but she didn't call me back. But I think that it's undisputed that my client has stopped importing. Right. Um we have waited and during the meeting last week with the
town was avail involved in that meeting we've asked because my client is extremely conservative. We asked is it okay for us to go on and to remove and everyone said yes. So just so we're in this record I've got it today. I don't want them to say oh
you're on there you're doing something you're processing we're trying to get it off the property and we're not taking anything new on. If you find that, then make the allegation. Right. But we're we're we're trying although we dispute the allegations, we're still trying to
remove it to try to give us more time to work with the state. >> Absolutely. We have no objection to the removal of the materials and I've indicated that on numerous occasions to Mr. Fields. >> Okay. Perfect. All right. So having heard all of that uh I'm going to rule
on the motion uh to continue that was presented by the leis's uh council or tenants council rather. So anything further before I make that ruling from either side. All right. So, in case C25-64,
uh, for the purposes of this morning's hearing, I'm only going to enter the portions of the evidentiary case file related to service, which include the notice of violation, uh, and notice of hearing, the affidavit of service that were testified to uh, by Miss Thomas relative
to service of both the property owner and the tenant. And I'll have the record again reflect that uh Mr. Fields has stipulated to service on the part of his uh client, the tenants. So with that, in case
C25-64, I'll make a finding of legally sufficient service based on the notice documents that are in the case file, which I will enter into the record as uh composite exhibit one this for this morning's hearing >> of the tenants. >> I'm sorry.
>> Legally sufficient um service of the tenants >> of both, sir. Yep. Of both. So let me have the record be very clear. I'm finding legally sufficient service uh of both the property owner and also of the tenants property owners by virtue of an affidavit of posting tenants by virtue of an affidavit of posting as well as
the stipulation by Mr. Fields as to service for today's hearing. So only those documents will be entered into the record. I will um put the lease agreement that was handed to me in the case file and I would ask the town uh to bring this case file back at the next hearing. um and I'll enter the rest of
it when we deal with the the remaining portions of the case at that time. So with regard to respondent's motion to continue the code enforcement hearing and based on what I've heard uh from both sides, given the time frame that was given in the notice of violation and the notice of hearing and given the complexity of this case, I'm going to
grant the motion. I'm going to continue this matter and reset it for violation hearing a month from now, which would be the town's February 18th is the date I have. Is that what
the town has? >> Yes. The 18th. That's the third Wednesday. >> Would it be possible? How is the town Is it on on the third Wednesdays? I've got a wedding that my son's flying into from Clemson coming down. Is Is there any way we can do it the week after that? Does
the town have the week after that to do? >> That is not a normal hearing day. >> We would prefer to do it the week before. Or is there an alternative day that you're thinking of? >> See >> what when's your wedding on and off?
>> He's flying in on the um he's either flying in on the 18th or 19th. I'm What day did you say? >> February 18th. Wednesday. >> Okay. I should I'm sorry. I should be okay for a Wednesday. >> At 9:00 a.m. Okay. Very good. That >> I apologize. >> Great. Okay. So, with that, I will uh
sign an order today that uh grants the motion and continues the matter to violation hearing on February 18th, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. Thank you all.