I Okay. Good morning everyone. I'm going to call to order the uh Martin County Code Enforcement Magistrate hearing for um August 20th, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. If you'll please rise, join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Be seated. All right. Pretty
chunky docket we have this morning. We're just going to go uh take the folks who are here first so that uh you all don't have to wait. And the first case I'm going to call is the uh Freriedman
and Hanner case. It's ENG 202540039. Uh it's a violation case. And all right, Mr. Marcus, you're going to testify if you raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, all truth, and nothing but the truth. So, if you got me, I do.
Okay. And whenever you're ready. My name is Frank Marcos and I have been sworn in. I'm an engineering compliance analyst for Martin County. The respondent, Jeffrey Freriedman and Michelle Nancy Hanner are not present.
This case concerns a property at 4700 Southwest Cherokee Street, Palm City, Florida 34990. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property
owner is Jeffrey Freriedman and Michelle Nancy Hanner. A copy of the property appraisers records of ownership is county's exhibit one. Okay. On April 23rd, 2025, I inspected the
property at 4700 Southwest Cherokee Street. And at the time, I observe the ditch on the Cheroke on the Cherokee Street side being filled with dirt, several piles of fill brought onto the property and the installation of a paper cover driveway without a permit. On
April 24, 2025, a courtesy letter was emailed was mailed to Jeffrey Freriedman and Michelle Nancy Hanner. A copy of the letter is marked as county's exhibit 2. Okay. During my initial inspection, I photographed the property. The
photographs show what I saw then and they are marked as ex as as counties exhibit 3 to11. All right. If you'll just go ahead and narrate as we go through these photos. So this is the fill that was brought onto the property. You can see the pavers uh laying on the side for the
installation of the unpermitted driveway. See here the culver that was installed without a permit. Uh also the ditch uh on that side has been filled freshly filled with dirt.
Uh you can see uh the ditch from east to west filled and some of the area on the private property also has been filled as well. Another shot of the same from the west to east. more of the pavers and um a partial
installation of the driveway. That's seven. Okay. Um there you can see where the fill end and uh the ditch as as it was originally done. All right. And starts is that still on
their property or is it at the edge? It's at the edge. Okay. So, they went all the way to the end of their property or more of the same. Uh the installation of the PA driveway. Um this is a picture I took later on after a rainfall. Um shows
the the the water not draining accordingly. That's 10. And then 11 is the same another shot from west to east showing the same thing. Okay. Okay. Based upon the investigation, I
issued a notice of violation to Jeffrey Freriedman and Michelle Nancy Hanner Mark as county's exhibit 12. In the notice, I cited the following Martin County Code violation general ordinances. Martin County Code section 4.343
application for an excavation and fill permit. In the notice of violation, the respond the respondent was given 15 days to apply for an excavation and field permit and was informed of the need to contact Martin County Engineering Division upon
doing so. On May 23rd, 2025, I checked and no permit had been filed since since compliance was not achieved. On June 9, 2025, a notice of hearing was issued and sent via certified mail and is marked as
county's exhibit 13. Okay. A copy of a notice of of the notice of hearing was posted at the county's administration building and at the property. A photo of the posting and the affidavit of posting are marked as
county's exhibit 14 and 15. Okay. And the um in 15 the that building is the on that property, right? It's at the property within the property. Okay. The return receipt was received on June
10th, 2025 as unclaimed and is marked as county's exhibit 16. Okay. No call or letter from the property owner was received within the time allowed. On August 19th, 2025, I checked
and I saw that the cited violations had not been corrected and no permit had been applied for or issued. And this is marked as exhibit 17 and 18. Okay. I've got last exhibit I've got there is 16. Okay.
Um tell me about 17. Well, I just went to the property, took pictures of the of the same site that you saw before, and it has not been corrected or a permit has not been filed. I don't have any records of a permit being filed. All right. Let me just ask anybody here on behalf of Mr. Freriedman or Miss
Hanner. Looking out, seeing no one, will you just show those photos to the uh to the county uh attorney and then let me look at them. Okay. And we can add them. That one. That one. Sorry.
Mr. Paparrowski, I don't have them with me. I have them in the T drive if you want. The thing is I probably did it after you guys closed it. Okay. They're they're going to be in your in your uh electronic file, which
is fine. I mean, that's fine. Uh public works all the way down. probably works. Administrator engineering enforcement
deep down in the file. Yeah. 4700. Let me see if I find them here. I don't have a copy uh on the D drive. I have one on the local drive I can provide to you. Uh I have it up in my office.
I it may not be necessary. Your testimony is that you went back out there on what date? Uh yesterday. Okay. So you were out on the 19th and what did you observe? I observed the ditch still the same conditions. It was
filled and the driveway was still there. Um unfilled was still on the property uh spreaded. All right. So, but no permit has had been filed. Okay. So, let's um let's just stick with 1 through 16. Okay. Okay.
Go ahead. You can finish up. I requested that all the county's exhibits be uh received into evidence and based upon the testimony and evidence, I request that the respondent Jeffrey Freman and Michelle Nancy Hanner be ordered to comply with the cited
provisions of the Martin County Code by September 30th, 2025, and if not in compliance by then, be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 for every day the violation continues thereafter. The county has incurred a cost in the amount of 575
conducting the investigation and request that the county be reimbured this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing. Okay. Couple questions for you. Um the date of September 30th, you believe they can achieve what they need to achieve by
that time? They could apply for a permit and um it might be a little longer than that to have it reviewed once applied. All right, let me just see. This says apply for and obtain a permit. So, uh we thinking
October 60 days will be will be uh something that would be you know um so if they applied say next week or the week after then the September 30th would work. Uh I would say 30 days after that uh
would would have to have it completed. And my interest in that is to make sure that that this date is sufficient so that they don't fail because they can't do it. Correct. 30 days is fine for the for for applying but not for obtaining the permit. Uh I would think 60 days will
allow them to complete the process. All right. So, so October, let's say the pick a Friday in October. Um, how about October 24th? Correct.
Okay. All right. I'm going to elineate this and let me just make sure county attorney's okay with that. Yes, magistrate. Okay. All right. So, um,
still no one here on behalf of Mr. Freriedman or Miss Hanner looking out seeing no one. Uh without objection, I'll accept into evidence the county's exhibits 1 through 16 in this case. Based upon that evidence and your testimony, I'll find that a violation of
section 4 343 uh of the Martin County code exists on the property in order compliance on or before October 24th, 2025. failing what you find in the amount of $100 per day will acrue and
I'll further award costs in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing and it is so ordered. Thank you. Thank you.
Okay. All right. Uh, the number two case is the Ralph case. And Miss Witz, are you going to testify? Anybody here on behalf of Frederick Ralph or Joe Anne Ralph? Okay. All right. Very good. Um, Miss
Switzer, if you raise your right hand, do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, help you God. I do. Okay. Let's see what we've got. This is case ENF204. 1000833
Frederick and Joanne Ralph R. U3. Okay, whenever you're ready. My name is Kelly Switzer and I've been sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondents, Frederick J. Ralph and Joanne Ralph, but Frederick Jr. is present. Um, this case concerns a
property at 7774 Southeast Bay, Cedar Circle, Hobound, Florida 3455. This case was not generated from anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owners are Frederick J. Ralph and Joanne
Ralph. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit 1. On October 22nd, 2024, Michael Joseph, a code compliance investigator for Martin County, conducted an inspection following Hurricane Milton and found a property with a damaged roof. At the
time, he photographed the property. The the photograph accurately shows what he saw then and is marked as exhibits two and three. Damaged roof, tarp on it. And that's just another angle of the roof from the side of the house. Based upon the
investigation, Michael Shanahan issued a notice of violation to Frederick J Row and Joanne Ralph on January 29th, 2025. The notice of violation is marked as county's exhibit 4. In the notice, he cited the following
Martin County violation section uh 21.115 Bruce and Drainage General Ors's Martin County code. In the notice of violation, the respondent was given until February 27th, 2025 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code
enforcement upon doing so. Compliance was not achieved and notice the hearing was issued by certified mail on June 20th, 2025 and is marked as county's exhibit 5. At the time of posting for the July hearing, I also took photos of the
property. The f photo from my July 2nd, 2025 visit showing the roof is still damaged is marked as county's exhibit 6. At the time of at that at that time, the owner also asked for an extension to work out issues with his insurance company. Therefore, an amended notice of
hearing was issued by certified mail on July 15, 2025. The amended notice to appear is marked as county's exhibit 7. the return the return receipt was not received. Therefore, on July 31st, 2025, I posted the property and at the Martin
County Administrative Building, the postings and the affidavit of posting is marked as counties exhibit eight and nine. So, eight is my posting or affidavit and nine is my posting.
No call or letter from the property owner since July 2nd, 2025 was received. Therefore, on August 19th, I conducted a permit search. A screenshot of the permit search is county's exhibit 10 and that's showing no uh roof permit in
in process. I also went to the property again on the n August 19th, 2025 and saw that the cited violation had not been corrected. At the time, I photographed the property. The photograph accurately shows what I saw then. It is exhibit 11. And there's the roof damaged. I request
that all the county's exhibits be entered into evidence and based upon the testimony and evidence, I request that the respondent Frederick J. Ralph and Joanne Ralph be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by September 30th, 2025. And if not in compliance by then, be
required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 for every day the violation continues thereafter. The county has incurred a cost in the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and requests that the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing.
That concludes my testimony. All right. Okay. And um and you say you have not been in touch with Mr. Ralph. Not since I posted the property for the prior hearing. Mr. Ralph, come on up here if you will and come up to the podium right here.
Good morning, sir. If you'll raise your right hand. Good morning. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, I'll help you got it. Yes, I do. Okay. And your full name, sir? Frederick J. Ralph. Okay. and you live at the property
that's been cited in the in the case. Okay. Um I What's the What's the story? What do you have to tell me? I've been fighting with the uh mortgage
company, insurance company, and they keep putting things off. They uh ask for all kinds of documents. in order for them to send money to me to get work done and they want permits.
They want uh lists of materials and all. And finally, I got a roofing company that is going to uh give them all lists and they're still holding things up.
Okay. How long have you been working with your insurance company? Ever since day one. Okay. A little over nine months now. All right. Um, which insurance company is it?
Uh, uh, American Security. All right. Um and and who is your roofer? Right now the uh the people that are filing for it is code red.
Okay. All right. Um you understand the county's interest in this is to make sure one that your home is safe and two that you comply with the the county code. Yes, I do.
Okay. Um it it may mean coming out of pocket if you have to. Um that's the homeowner's ultimate responsibility. They're working with the um property managers also
uh to get the paperwork all done and permits given out. All right. So, let me just see. Your property is in the preserve. That's correct. Okay. All right. So, there is a homeowners
association. Yes. I you know, obviously with with Hurricane Milton and the tornadoes that spun off of that, there was significant damage down in the Oh, yeah. southern part of of Martin County. But nonetheless,
um I matter of fact, I think this is the first case I've had where where anybody was in a situation um that they couldn't or didn't comply prior to this time. Now, I I mean, some
some of the damage was much more severe than yours. Some of those lots have been scraped and and the houses and buildings gone. But but nonetheless, you still have this responsibility. Do you understand that? Okay. All right. I uh the county has
asked for you to comply uh by the end of September, September 30th. And uh my inclination is to push that again. another month or so, right? Give you time,
one to either get the insurance company to agree to pay the roofer or you to contract with the roofer directly and get the the roof repaired or replaced. They um had asked me to get uh the
contractor code red to uh show them uh proof of insurance and a material list for them to get started. Yes. So, we're just waiting for them to send us a check. Okay. All right. So, that's that's good.
You you if if that's the case, then you should be able to comply by the end of October. All right. I'm I'm going to um You don't have any objection to the county's exhibits 1 through 11, the exhibits that Miss Switzer showed? No.
Okay. So, without objection, I'll accept those into evidence. And based upon that evidence and Miss Switzer's testimony and and Mr. Row, your testimony, I'm going to find that a violation does exist on the property. The roof needs to
be repaired or replaced. and um that um you need to achieve compliance that is do the work and and get it completed by October 31st, 2025 failing which a fine in the amount of $100 per day will
acrewue. Actually, it's just to get an issued permit. Yes, your honor, if we could do the order is not there. It's just to get a permit and we would prefer to stay with the 30 days being we're back into another hurricane season. Now, if another storm comes along with the roof and that condition, it's going to cause
So, the county is asking for actually less. They're not asking for full compliance. They're only asking for you to get the permit, the building permit, right, by September 30th. And hopefully they
according to the property manager they were given all the paperwork for permits. Okay. So the property association your your homeowners association's not holding that up. No. Okay. So matter of fact they're even helping me
push. All right. Well I I think you should be able to achieve this then by Okay. Thank you. I understand now what you're asking for. It's different than what I was um thinking about and that would have been
to actually complete the the construction. And so I'm going to I'm going to change that. Then I will I will follow what the county has requested and that is uh to obtain a building permit by September 30th and then thereafter of
course you have to have to complete the work. Um okay. All right. So, based based upon the evidence, I find that it is appropriate to um to require that you obtain a building
permit by September 30th, 2025, failing what you find in the amount of $100 per day will acrue. And I'll further award costs in the amount of $575. Okay. um to the county and basically that that covers the all the costs of of
being here. All right. Um and that's to be paid basically upon entry of the order. So all right. Uh Mr. Ralph, sorry for your sorry for your trouble, but um hope you
get to get it done pretty quickly. Hope too because I keep telling them the season is here. Yeah, exactly. And and the roof was uh you might remind them that totally compromised. If we if we have another storm and it
and it affects your home, they could have a much bigger claim than um I keep telling the one they have. They don't want to listen. Yeah. Well, good luck, sir. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Let's see.
All right. Next case is the Nunes case and this is um Daniel Nunees. Mr. Nunees, you here? Okay, good. This is case ENF 2025 03. Sure. 0587.
Respondents Daniel Nunees and Miss SPI, you're going to testify if you raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, I'll help you go. I do. Okay. My name is Maria Espa and I have been sworn in. I'm a code compliance
investigator for Martin County. The respondent, Daniel Nunees, is present. This case concerns a property at 3339 Southeast Fairmont Street in Stewart, Florida and Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. According to the official
records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is Daniel Nunes. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit 1. On March 6, 2025, I inspected the property. At that time, I observed trash, a shuttered window, and
a new door without a permit. At that time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as count as exhibits 2, three, and four. I'll zoom in for you. Two shows the trash in the front and you could barely see it, but there is a
window that has shutters. Three, I'm going to zoom in again. The door handle on number exhibit 3 is on the left. Now, on the GIS of May 2024, you'll see that
it's on the right. H based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to the owner on March 21st, 2025. Marked this county's exhibit number five. In the notice, I cited the following Martin County code violation. Section 21.1 to1.2 openable
windows general ordinances Martin County code. Section 67.201b nuisance declared trash etc. the general ordinances Martin County code and section 105.1 permits when required incorporated by section 21.1 general
ordinances Martin County code in the notice of violation the respondent was given until April 21st 2025 to correct the violations and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so I went back to the property on June 3rd 2025 to post a
notice of hearing for the July hearing when I noticed new violations S the follow-up photos are marked as counties exhibits 6, 7, and 8. Six shows rotted sighting.
Seven trash is still there. Now, we have high grass here. Behind that, you could see where there's um the the siding still rotted there. And number eight, this is the side of the house which has more rotted siding. Therefore,
on June 5th, I amended the notice of violation and gave the owner a new compliance date of July 7th, 2025. In the amended notice of violation, I added section 67.201A, Nuisance declared weeds undergrowth general ordinances, Martin County code,
and section 21.110, general exterior structure, general ordinances, Martin County code. And the amended notice of violation is marked as county's exhibit 9. On June 27th, I met with the owner on site. I explained the exterior sighting
violation and he stated he would get a permit and get it done. The shutter, trash, and the grass violations were all corrected. He opened the door so I could take several pictures to show the assistant building official to determine if a permit was necessary. Later that day, the assistant building official
determined a permit would be needed for the door. I gave the owner additional time so he could get the permits he needed. Therefore, I issued by certified mail and regular mail the amended notice of hearing for the August hearing. The amended notice of hearing is marked as
county's exhibit number 10. The return receipt was not returned. So on July 22nd, 2025, Officer Shanahan posted the property and the Martin County Admin Building. The affidavit of posting is marked as county's exhibit number 11.
Therefore, I went back to the property again on August 19th, 2025 and saw that the door permit violation and the trash violation had been corrected as well as the grass. The exterior damage violation remains. At that time, I photographed the
property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as counties exhibits 12, 13, 14, and 15 is a permit history. 12 shows a sighting on the side. 13
is the front, 14, and then 15 is a permit history that the last permit was the one for the door. I request that all of the county's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the testimony and evidence. I
request that the respondent, Daniel Nunes, be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by September 30th, 2025, and if not in compliance by then, be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per day for every day the violations continue thereafter. The county has incurred a
cost in the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and request that the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing. All right, looking at the dock, what are we down to now? He we got a permit for
the windows and door. He has all the violations corrected except for the sighting permit. Okay. So, it's the 2110 general exterior. Correct. Okay.
All right, Mr. Nunees, come on up to the podium. Um, wear a hat in here. No hat. Okay. If you'll raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I hope you got Okay. Very good. Full name, sir? Daniel Nunes. Okay. And your address? 3296. I own that property myself and I also rent that other property. reside at
at 3296 um Martin Street. Okay, that's where I reside. All right. Okay. Uh you've you've heard the county's testimony. Anything you want to add, clarify this? I want to this is the third time I've
been coming over about this matter and taking the day off. I took pictures of uh my surroundings around the house. I have this violation. Like she said, I've been following up. If I say the wrong words, I'm going to excuse myself right now cuz you guys have, you know,
all the knowledge. I don't as a resident. And I'm here to clarify this and be able to walk on. The only thing we're here about today is the is that exterior siding, you know,
down at the bottom where it's all um open and broken. Okay. So, this has been a nightmare from the very beginning about an aerial photo that they sent me. A thing I noticed on my door. I went and
took care of that about the grass on the little corner that was uh overgrown. It's raining season. You let it go for two weeks, it overgrows. There are houses 78. That's when it was built. It's an old house.
Um I'm getting nervous here. Okay. Uh don't be. You're good. Okay. So, I comply with almost everything from the very beginning for 4 months. Like I said, taking a day off to do this, taking a day to verify this, even to
talk to uh the investigator next to me and everything has been done. that that that door that I replace. I looked it up and he tells me that as long as I don't do the house as long as I don't change any of the houses, I could just go to
Home Depot and replace my door. So, I went and when I bought the the door cuz it got twisted through time. So, I took care of that. I it says in here that you don't require a permit as long as you don't remove anything from where it's
going to be replaced. Yes. So I went through that and later on I got caught saying that I needed a permit. So I went and applied for a permit. We talk a little bit about when I went and apply for a permit that she went and look to the house. We talk a little bit
about uh the rotting wood. I said right now it is too hot, but my plans are since it's an old house, my plans are later on to remove all that wood, replace it. I do roofing as well with a whole bunch of different uh companies
and replace my windows because they're very old windows that was mentioned. And the way she presented this right now is like the door. It wasn't presented in order the way it was talked, the way we sold things. The
very last thing that I remember was the permit for the door. So, I went and apply. They say you need a door. Okay. Well, the door is on already. This is after the fact that I went and got the permit. Yes. Um, you understand though that all of those
other things have been cleared? Yes. That's that's what um I have a I have a subcontractor that I went I went and had a conversation with her 3 4 days ago last week. Okay. And she told me that to get a subcontractor.
I work at this place in Miami date uh doing a power u a water treatment plant. So it's far away from me right now. And in order to be here I had to excuse myself while the job over there very strict company. three excuses and you're
out of there. Very good job. I don't want to really lose it or something. And we talk about replacing the wood. And I said, "Okay, let me replace it. Let me let me replace it later on." I got a subcontractor here that she I went and paid for the permit yesterday
for the wood for replacing the siding. The siding replacing the siding. And I wouldn't like somebody to come into my house and investigate or come over and leave all these uh things in in front of my yard
and and be able to investigate something else or look at something else. If you don't we're down if I go to your house, I'm not going to complain about things I don't like. I just walk on. Okay. But understand down to the siding. That's all it is. So, if you get the
permit and get that taken care of, then I think we're we're good. I have pictures here of uh if anybody would like to see them. I have pictures here of uh my surroundings, see how it is and see I don't live there, but my my
tenants do, see what they go through just about every day of seeing their backyard. My backyard looks good. My front yard looks good. That little debris that she was talking about, it is debris that one of the guys work doing
marble and he had a couple of uh sheets in there. She told me to put them in the back. I had to get two more guys in order to help me carry it cuz that thing is heavy. That's the type of work he does. So sometimes he had leftovers or pieces that he might use later on. So he
went and set it next to the mango tree that is in front of my house. And I try not to have any debris or nothing in there that will I've been a member for I was I used to be a member for the community at Golden Gate when it was a Spanish community related.
Mhm. And I got rid of I I stopped going through all those meetings and knew a whole bunch of people from the county, from permitting, from police officers, from all this to better the community. And the reason I quit was because all we
did was talk about it and never got anything done. Now I see a lot of changes, but they're going so fast that who needs an investigator like you saw how she took the picture outside of my house into my property. Let me stop you. Okay. Okay. Because I I don't think much of
what you're telling me is all that relevant. What what we need to know is are have you applied for the permit to get the siding fix? Yes, I have proof of the payment. I have proof of Do you have a contractor to do that
work? Yes. Not a contractor. I told her, "Give me the permit and I will find the the people because now and day you get a subcontractor to do any kind of work like that, they want to take a whole bunch of money that is not okay. You understand? You don't live on
that property? No, I don't. Okay. I'm pretty sure this girl is going to have somebody who's going to give me an estimate, but the permit has been issued. Uh yesterday, I have uh like seven, eight calls that I tried to get in touch with her. I couldn't reach her or nothing. And my time is limited at
work in order to make for me to make a phone call. If they see me making a phone call without asking, I will be reading up and giving a three days off. And I don't Yeah, you don't need that. Okay. I I got it. Okay. So, you're you're not disputing the fact that the siding needs
to be replaced? No. No, I never had. I say later on I will replace this and also get a permit or try to get a permit in order to replace that the all the windows in fact including the the the side sliding door
in the back. We aren't here about windows. Okay. Okay. So, that was something that I had mentioned also. You told me to tell the truth and that's what I'm doing right now. Focusing the truth one thing. Okay. Okay. So, we've got uh the siding and uh the
county is asking that you correct that by September 30th. So, a little over a month. Okay. When we talk about the uh door permit, I said I will get the permit. In fact, I went the same day. Okay. It's It's
But then a couple weeks later, I got another once I issue that the permit. I have trouble with Home Depot with the number or identification number or paperwork that the county require. And like I say, by working so far away in
Fort Lauderdale, I couldn't come back and get the paper from Home Depot and turn it into um the building department. Are you talking about the product approval? Correct. the private approval. I went and got that after. Okay.
Okay. Because the door was put after. In fact, the permit was done after. Well, look, I for lack of knowledge, not knowing that I need a permit. I'm looking at a permit that was issued to you. Okay. in uh
and two weeks after that, that's when that's when I got the the letter saying that I also needed a permit to change the rotten wood, which is less than 6 in. You saw it in the picture. No, you need you'll
But I do I'll do I'm aware of you know that I need to change all that. Okay. All right. Good. All right. Any objection? No objection. I'm thinking to the county's exhibits. They're all you you saw them. What do you mean?
It would be some sort of a legal objection to the county's exhibits. Can you explain that a little bit better? Yeah. Well, I'll try. Okay. Um, the county has presented 15 exhibits
today. In this case, you saw them on the TV. Did they accurately show what occurred? You saw the photos, you saw the the documents. I guess they did, but I think the days are a little bit wrong. The way she represented the grass, the way she
represented the window, and like I said, things been processing the way she showed them is not processing on the on on on the month, my month date. Okay. But that's kind of my job to kind of figure out, okay,
what the what the story is. and you've told it to me your way and and I I think I got it. So, without objection, I'm going to accept these uh exhibits into evidence. That way, we can use them and I'm going to based upon that evidence,
your testimony and and uh uh Officer Espott's testimony, I'm going to find that this one violation still exists on the property. And that's the like I said I noticed that after I went and got that permit. I'm like I'm getting caught by I'm getting another
violation. I got that other violation after. You should be fine because um if when I execute this order, it's going to require that you comply by September 30th. If you do, then there's no fine.
If you don't, then there's going to be a fine of $100 a day starting October 1st. I've been hearing that for the last five five months, four or five months since we started all this. Like I said, I want to finish this and and finish this nightmare. All right. Every time I call, I get the
same thing. If you don't do this, it's going to be a fine. It's going 5,000. The court is going to cost me 6,000 600 and every day is going to be a 100. So that's like it put pressure on you. Okay. But understand too
and I tried to avoid being here right now. I'm already losing money by taking my time off and being here. All right. So we don't want you to lose any more money. I am going to charge $575 in cost to be paid to the county.
So you have to do that as I was told that and I that's see that's what I was trying to avoid from the very beginning. But by not having the proper paper stipulated to it, the proper paper on hand that Mr. Nunes,
if I can just break in a little bit here. Um, Mr. Nunees had presented some photographs here. Yeah. For exhibits. Mr. Nunees, are these photographs other than two of them of other people's houses around you? Yes. Okay. I'd object to this as being irrelevant. Yeah. That's that will I'm not going I
don't need to see it because I come out and that's what I see on my neighbors and I see my house and I you've shown those to the county and and I'm sure Miss Espott's familiar with that neighborhood. So she knows that there may be other violations
that's not relevant to this issue. I've executed this order and so now we'll get you a copy of this, but make sure you pay attention to it and get the permit, get the get the work done, and then you
can go about your business and go down to Fort Lauderdale and make money. I thought I was straight on it cuz I went and got the permit. And after the permit, I was told, yeah, you still need to change that rotten wood. You do. And I did say, well, we only
mentioned that she I wasn't told that I had to change it. That's the reason I haven't changed it because I wasn't told. I got a letter after the permit for the door. But but understand you are going to have to do that. So, and that's what this order basically. I will I will take care of it in order
to end this nightmare cuz it's been a nightmare to me. Perfect. And if I had to spend the money, I will spend it. But I think it's not fair for me to Okay. come in to court and pay that amount that was given for something that
is so simple on a 70 60 year old house. I I understand your feeling, but bear in mind the I've now ruled and you're going to have to I will take care of it. I will take care of it just like I have taken care of everything. Go ahead and get your stuff and off you
go and I'll um I'm going to move to the next case. Okay. Thank you very much. All right. Good luck to you. Thank you. All right. The next case is the Decker case. It's John Allen Decker. Somebody here. Okay. Very good. It's ENF 2025
030167. Oh yes. And um and Miss Espat, you're going to testify again. Go ahead. And um sir, if you want to if it's easier for you to come up a little so
just so you can look at the evidence up there. My name is Maria Espay and I have been sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator from Martin County. The respondent John Allen Decker is present. This case concerns a property at 3286
Souththeast Evergreen Avenue in Stewart, Florida in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser in Martin County, the property owner is John Allen Decker. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership
is county's exhibit 1. On February 26, 2025, I inspected the property. At that time, I observed windows and doors missing. At that time, I photographed the property. The photograph accurately shows what I saw then and is marked as counties exhibits
2 through 5. I'll zoom in. Two appears that this door is missing. This door is missing. Three is the other side of the building. I
guess this would be the main entrance. A door is missing. Four is the other side of the house. Windows are missing. I believe the garage door is missing. and five is just a closer view.
Shortly after the inspection, code code enforcement administrator John Colando spoke to the owner and the owner was granted an extension to have his permits issued. I did a follow-up on April 7th, 2025 and seen that more windows had been removed. This inspection is county's
exhibits 6,7 and 8. I'll zoom in here. Six shows these are now missing. Seven, these were there on the first inspection. These three and they are no longer there.
And eight, it's just a view from the other side. Same three. Same three. Yes. Okay. Compliance was still not achieved. So therefore, based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to the owner on June 11th, 2025. Marked county's exhibit number nine. In the
notice, I cited the following Martin County Code violation. Section 21.110, general exterior structure, general ordinances, Martin County code. Section 21.1:1, Windows, skylight, and door frames, general ordinances, Martin County code.
In the notice of violation, the respondent was given until July 11th to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County Code Enforcement upon doing so. Compliance was not achieved and a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on July 18, 2025 and is marked as
county's exhibit number 10. The return receipt was not returned. Therefore, on July 22nd, 2025, Officer Shanahan posted the property in the Martin County Admin building. The affidavit of posting is county's exhibit number 11.
I went back to the property on August 19, 2025 and saw that the cited violation had not been corrected. At that time I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as counties. Exhibits 12 and 13 is a permit history.
12 and 13. No permits have been applied as of yet. I request that all of the county's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the testimony and evidence. I request that the respondent John Allen Decker be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin
County Code by September 30 of 2025. and if not in compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per violation for every day the violations continue thereafter. The county has incurred a cost in the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and
request that the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing. Okay, sir, if you want to come on up. You raise your right hand. You swear affirm testimony about to give will be the truth whole truth and nothing but
the truth. I do. And your full name, sir? John Allen Decker. And your address? 3256. It's 56, not 86. 3256 Southeast Evergreen Avenue, Stewart, Florida, 34997. All right. And is that where you reside
or is that Yes, sir. I have This has been I had a demo permit. We're I'm doing a homeowner builder on it. Um I've been so I'm behind all the time. Um so I reside in the back. I have a room and a everything a room, working bathroom, all
that in the back. The center of the house was built in the 1800s. Actually, the whole entire house, the windows and everything, there was no code back then. So, the the county has been gracious enough for to me to let me keep going
and building at it. Um, okay. I'm looking at though a demo permit that still hasn't concluded, but I thought we did. But it's October of 2022 and it's expired. So apparently what happened was
you you may have gotten started but probably didn't call for any inspections. I I mean I'm I'm kind of guessing at that. Okay. And and if they don't hear from you in after 6 months then they put it in an inactive status and eventually it
expires. So, so what I'll do is uh after concluded day, I'll go call code enforcement and we'll we'll get that taken care of. Well, actually, he's going to need to go to the building department, right? Correct. But the the demo, if I'm not mistaken, is not for the windows and not for that part of the building. That has
nothing to do with the windows. So, maybe you need a whole new permit. Yeah, I do. Um I did apply for the permit. Um I put the paperwork in. Okay. It's not here. I We're looking at it. I'll go do it again, sir. I did it. I I
just twice now. I did apply I apply two weeks ago. Okay. Well, it's not on in the system for sure. Okay. Uh just give me I I know I'm going to get fined and uh give me a month and
I'll I'll go right over immediately and play. Your honor, we're just checking the records. It might be under a different address. There's some addressing issues with the property. Okay. Okay. There is a window and door permit waiting on applicant and it's for this
property. Correct. And it's for the for this PCN number. All right. So I if if that's the case, that's good. But it's still not a completed action. Okay. So
it's the numbers. I need the the numbers for the windows. That's what I'm doing right now. All right. Are is it your intent you're going to replace those windows? Obviously, you can't weatherproof the building otherwise. So, oh, it's all going to be weatherproof when I do it.
Okay. All right. Um, let's let me just look at the proposed order. Repair or replace damaged exterior of the structure. See, I have to have windows and doors that are operable and
Yes, sir. because that's part of the code. Replace all missing windows. Okay. So, both of those actually do exist. Okay. Um, no objection to those exhibits. Okay. So without
objection, I'll accept into evidence the county's exhibits 1 through 13 in this case based upon Miss Espott's testimony and your testimony. I'm going to find that violations as charged do exist on the property, but it sounds like you're
moving along because you've you've already got your permit application in but not not completed. Okay, so that's good. And if I give you until September 30th,
does that sound doable to replace those windows? Have them in? Yep. I'll do my best, sir. That's kind of pushing it, but about uh what 40 days or thereabouts.
I know cuz it's hurricane season. Sir, let's just do the 30th. That's if you can give me a few extra days. Yes, sir. I'd appreciate it. All right. Any any objection to to moving that out? All right. I'm I'm going to say the end of October, but bear in mind, we are
right right at the end of at the top of the hurricane season and Yeah. And I if I have to, I'll board it all up. All the windows are there. All right. Just been waiting before I'd stop. So, it's doing the work because the Yeah. And you're doing it yourself. So, Yes, sir. All right. I'm going to I'm going to
give you to the end of October to complete it. Thank you. So, it's um October 31st, but um you know, for your safety of your own building, you'll want to get it done fast as possible. And the safety of the community, too, because it's got the
holes, right? And I don't need a hurricane ripping the roof off and all that. Nope. All right. Um, so October 31st, 2025 would be the compliance date failing which a fine in the amount of $100 a day will acrew and I am going to
award costs in the amount of $575 because we've all had to come to this hearing. So, all right. Yeah, I should have done this before got this far. All right. Um, good luck to you and hopefully all this happens uneventfully.
Yes, sir. Thank you. He just shut up. You want to go first? Be here first. Okay. All right, let's see what we got. [Applause] All right. You're here on the Monaco case? I am.
All right. and um Jackson, I'm appearing for Rosanna on behalf of for Ros Roxanna Ross on behalf of the homeowner David Monaco. All right. And I'm sorry, tell me your name again. Germaine Jackson. Wayne Jackson. Germaine. Germaine.
Yes, sir. Thank you. All right. And um Mr. Jackson, are you an attorney? I am. Okay. and your client David Monaco.
Okay, great. All right, very good. All right, this is KCNF 2024 uh 1000787. The respondents are David and Valerie Monaco and uh we'll know for the record that Mr. Jackson Germaine Jackson has
already made his appearance. So, and it is whenever you're ready. Switzer. Thank you. My name is Kelly Switzer and I've been sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent David A. Monaco
and Valerie O. Monaco is are not present. However, a representative for the property owners is here. This case concerns the property at 7540 Southeast Bayers Circle, Hopetown, Florida 33455. This case was not generated from an
anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is David A. Monaco and Valerie O. Monaco. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit one. On October 23rd, 2024, I inspected the
property during an assessment following Hurricane Milton. The at the time of the inspection, I found a damaged roof and broken windows. At the time I photographed the property. The photograph accurately shows what I saw then and is marked as county's exhibits two and three.
So there some boarded windows here and the tarp on the roof. And then three is just another um angle of the boarded windows. Based upon the investigation, Michael Shanahan issued a notice of violation to David A. Monaco and Valerie A Monaco on January 29th,
2025. The notice of violation is marked as county's exhibit 4. In the notice, we cited the following Martin County Code violation. Section 21.115, roofs and drainage general ordinances. Section 21.121.1
glazing general ordinances Martin County Code. In the notice of violation, the respondent was given until February 28th to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County enforcement. Upon doing so, compliance was not achieved and a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail
on May 6, 2025 and is marked as county's exhibit 5. On May 27th, I took follow-up photos to show the roof roof damage. My follow-up photo is marked as county's exhibit 6. On June 16, 2025, I received an
extension request to address the issues with the insurance company. Therefore, I sent an amended notice of hearing on July 8th, 2025. The amended notice of hearing is county's exhibit 7. The return receipt was not received. Therefore, I posted the property and at the administrative building. The posting
and the affidavit of posting are counties exhibits eight and nine. My posting and my affidavit. I went to the property again on um August 19th, 2025 and saw the cited
violations had not been corrected. Um therefore, I um photographed the property I'm sorry, 10 is be the uh permit status, excuse me. And then 11 is going to be my follow-up photo from the 19th
yesterday showing the roof still damaged. All right. And and I'm sorry, go back to exhibit 10. permit status. No, no, no open permits for the the windows have have been issued, but there's
nothing for the roof. Um I I'm sorry. That's I got a little off track. Um to the August 19th to show that the approved window permit is now issued and no longer in violation. However, there is no roof permit on file. The
screenshot of the permit history is 10. So I request that all the counties be ev counties exhibits be returned received into evidence and based upon the testimony and evidence I request that the respondents David A. Monaco and Valerie O Monaco be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin
County Code by September 30th, 2025 and if not in compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 for every day the violation continues thereafter. The county has incurred in a cost of an amount of $575 conducting this investigation and requests that the counties be reimbursed at this amount at
today at the conclusion of today's hearing. This concludes my testimony. Okay. U Mr. Jackson, welcome. Um any objection to exhibits 1 through 11? No objection to All right. So without objection, they'll be accepted into evidence. And Mr. Jackson, what have you got for us? Um,
it appears that uh, as she said, the compliance with the windows has already been taken care of. The roof still needs to be repaired. Um, it appears that everything has been submitted to the homeowners association and um, the homeowner is waiting on approval from the association for the roofer so from
the roofer so that they can move forward with the repairs. So, at this point, we're just requesting I know she's indicated compliance by September 30th. Requesting until October 30th if uh, if that is appropriate. Okay. Um any objection on the part of the county?
No, your honor. All right. Okay. Um I'm based upon your representation and um testimony and evidence, I'm going to find that violation as charge does exist on the property and I'm going to order compliance on or before uh I'm going to
say October 31st. Okay. and um failing which a fine in the amount of $100 per day will acrue and a further award cost in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing. And let me
just dig that one out. Let's see. Monaco. [Applause] Okay. All right. Um, we can give you a copy of this order before you go so you can take it with
you. Okay, very good. Um, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Uh, six is the Jacob Community Center LLC. Anybody here on their behalf? Okay. Um, if you want to
come up a little further, you can watch on that monitor. Maybe easier for you. All right. Okay. And let's see. Um, Miss Krasco, you're going to testify. Raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm testimony you're about to give will be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, off you go. I do. All right. Whenever you're ready. My name is Deborah Krasco and I have been sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent Jacob Community Center LLC is present.
The case concerns a property at 6155 Southwest Leighton Farm Avenue, Palm City, Florida in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser, Martin County, the
property owner is Jacob Community Center LLC. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit 1. On December 17th, 2024, I inspected the property. At that time, I observed work had been done. Um, it looked to be an
addition to an a building. I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as count as exhibits two and three. The following day, I put a door tag up and took more photos
which are exhibits four and five. Okay. posting. If you can see, it goes all the way to this sign there, which will come to play later. All right. The new the new wood Yes. is what your
Yes. has been Yep. From where the sign is all the way out. Okay. Got it. Yep. That is correct. I did a reinspect on 127 of 25 and it is marked ex exhibit six. Just showing that it's
still there and it looks like they finished it at that point. Um, I had noticed that there was an application for a permit and that is my exhibit seven of permit history
which up until I believe yesterday it was still awaiting plans. Um, and then on 6:30 of 25, I took another photo because I was told that the structure was going to be removed. And
that photo is marked county's exhibit 8. So, it was still there. Based on the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to Jacob Community Center on July 22nd, 2025, marked as county's exhibit 9. In the notice, I
cited the following Martin Code violations. Section 105.1, permits when required by section 21, general ordinances, mountain Martin County Code. Okay,
that's my exhibit nine, the notice of violation. In the notice of violation, the respondent was given until July 29th, 2025 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so. Due to the fact that the case has gone
on for so long and compliance had not been achieved, the notice of hearing was issued by certified mail also on July 22nd, 2025 and is marked as county's exhibit 10. The return receipt was not received. On July 28th, I issued an affidavit of post
and posted the Martin County admin building and the property itself. The photos are marked as count as exhibit 11 and 12. So that's the affidavit of post and then just another of the posting. And then
exhibit 13, they had actually taken out the windows and the doors. Well, most of the windows except for that last one in the back. Um, so there is, excuse me, there was an exchange of emails and phone calls with the actual property owner. Um, and the
gentleman here today. Uh, the discussion was that um, again that it was going to be taken down. So, however, that was not done and I posted the property. Those two photos are as of yesterday, right?
Um, that one is the 29th 28th of July. So, again, I went on yesterday. Okay. Which is my exhibits 14 and 15. 14. And the cited violations had not been corrected. meaning while they took some
of it down the original photo that I showed you, it went all the way to this. Yes. And so that had not been taken down. So that's why we are here today. All right. And the roof was there, right? Correct. Okay. So I request that all the exhibits be
received into evidence based on the testimony and evidence. I request that the respondent Jacob Community Center LLC be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by September 30th, 2025. and if not in compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 for every day
the violation continues thereafter. The county has incurred a cost of 575 conducting this investigation and request that the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing.
Okay. All right, sir. Come on up. You raise your right hand. Do you swear a firm testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? will help you govern it. Yes, sir. All right. Your full name? Christopher Corey. Cor Corey or Gory?
Corey. C O R E Y. Okay. And Mr. Corey, what is your affiliation with Jacob Community Center LLC? So, the Bigger Pitch Foundation is the tenant responsible for this uh issue.
Okay. And how do you fit into this? You So we're the tenant. So you are the tenant or the Yeah. So the foundation is the tenant for the building. Okay. And this was our fault. So I'm here in the property. Gotcha.
Gotcha. Gotcha. All right. So um what is your intent as far as the property is concerned? So uh we messed this up really bad and um it's our fault. So here to pay the fine and and as so the the kind of
interesting how it started. Um so we have volunt a lot of volunteers and the volunteers were changing the salt in the uh in the water system and um the these really nice ladies they they ran into a snake one day and um I was out of town
and another volunteer said, "Well, we'll enclose the water system so no snakes can get in." When I got back in town, this is kind of why I laughed when I saw the first one. They had built a lot and I asked them, "Hey guys, do we need a permit?" And they go, "No, no, you shouldn't need a permit. There was a
roof." Uh, and then I found out via the the notice that we did need a permit. And then started a uh what I would call an amateur hour of trying to fix this problem. Um, which has gone through multiple iterations. Uh, first we were
going to take it down, but then they said, "Oh, it would be terrible to take it down. It looks great." So, we had a volunteer submitted application that uh that was incomplete. Um um Miss Mrs. Carrasco told us that and then uh and
then we say, "Okay guys, well, we're going to get in big trouble here, so uh let's continue to take it down." So, we did, but then, you know, she told us we did well, but not well enough, right? The the things is still there. So, uh, so we actually brought in a professional
who submitted the application yesterday, Pioneer Screen. Okay. And, uh, and they said, "No, don't take it down. We can get it fixed. We'll get the permit in." And then the permit was rejected this morning. Uh, so as of as of right now, one of the things I saw was that there was some additional
issues um that I I don't understand. So, um I'm I'm going to work with Pioneer Screen and see if they can if they're fully confident that they can get this issue fixed. Um uh I I just request for as much time as possible because it's uh
it's uh you know, it's been a little more complicated than it should have been. So, you really don't ultimately know what what the end product is going to look like because it depends on how you work things out with Pioneer Screen and the county.
Yes, sir. Okay. Got it. Okay. I I Okay. And you don't have any objection to exhibits 1 through 15? No, sir. All right. So, without objection, they're accepted into evidence. Uh what the county is asking is that you
obtain a permit um by September 30th or remove the structures. So I mean if you if you get a permit for the addition then you're good to go.
Otherwise you got to tear down what they built without a permit. Okay. You understand that part? Yes, sir. Okay. All right. And I I looks to me like that's doable by September 30th. So that's that's where I'm going to land on
that one. Um so based upon the evidence um and your testimony, sir, and and um Miss Carrasco's testimony, I'm going to find that the violation does exist on the property. I'm going to order you to comply by September 30th, uh, 2025,
failing which there'll be a fine of $100 per day starting October 1st and going forward until it comes into compliance. And I am going to award costs in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the
conclusion of this hearing. So, and it is so ordered and you can take a copy of this order with you if you like. It's probably a good idea. Let me just Thank you.
Thank you. Mr. Corey, don't get away until you get a copy of this. Okay. All right. There you go. All right. Let's see. Where are we? Looks like we've got the Hayes case.
Yes. All right. This is case number ENF2041000789. Thomas and Donna Hayes. Anybody here on behalf of Mr. Miss Hayes or? Nope. Looking out. Not seeing anyone. Okay. Whenever you're ready, Miss Switzer, you've already been sworn in.
My name is Kelly Switzer and I have been sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent Thomas F. Hayes and Donna J. Hayes are not present. This case concerns a property at 7546 Southeast Bay Cedar Circle in Hopetown, Florida 33455.
This case was not generated from from an anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is Thomas F. Hayes and Donna J. Hayes. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit one.
On October 23rd, 2024, we conducted damage assessments from Hurricane Milton. At the time, I observed a damaged roof on the property. At the time, I photographed the property. The photograph accurately shows what I saw then and is marked as county's exhibits two and three. So,
this is the front of the house. That's the side of the house. Okay. This is Milton roof day, isn't it? Looks like it. Based upon the investigation, Michael Shanahan, co- compliance investigator for Martin County, issued a notice of violation to
Thomas F. Hayes and Donna J. Hayes on February 29th, 2025. The notice of violation is marked as county's exhibit 4. In the notice, he cited the following Martin County Code violations. Section 21.115, roof roofs and drainage, general
ordinances, Martin County code. In the notice of violation, the respondent was given until February 28th, 2025 to correct the violation and was informed the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so. Compliance was not achieved and a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on June
20th, 2025 and is marked as county's exhibit 5. The owner requested more time to work out issues with his insurance company and contractor. Therefore, on July 9th, 2025, I sent an amended notice of hearing. The amended notice of hearing
is marked as county's exhibit 6. The return receipt was not received. Therefore, I hand delivered the notice. The affidavit of hand delivery is marked as county exhibit 7. At the time of hand delivery, the property owner stated he would uh work
on getting his permit issued or getting a getting a permit for the roof. Therefore, on August 19th, 2025, I conducted a permit search. The screenshot of the permit status is marked as county's exhibit 8 and that's showing those no open or even applied for permits for the roof. On
August 19th I 2025 I also went to the property to see the if the cited violations were corrected. The photograph accurately shows what I saw then is marked as exhibit 9 and that's the front of the house with the tarp still on it. I request that all of the county's
exhibits be received into evidence. And at this time, we are in contact with the owner and are requesting a continuence to the September 17th, 2025 hearing date as the owner is working with a new contractor to get a permit for the roof. And this concludes my testimony.
All right. All right. So, um, and I see the Hayes are not here, but I'm sure they don't have any objection to you continuing their case, uh, to the 17th of September. Yes.
All right. So, we'll move it we'll move this matter to that uh docket and I will issue an order uh continuing. I know we've got one case that we we know uh we did continue from the uh July hearing.
We're going to talk about that later, but but I will issue an order uh continuing this to um September 17th. Okay. All right. And let's see
did the row case. This one is the Reed and Fitzgibbons case. CNF2025020730. Alexander Reid and Bridget Fitzgiven are the owners. And again, Officer Switzer, whenever
you're ready. Okay. My name is Kelly Switzer. I've been sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator from Martin County. The respondents, Alexander Reed and Bridget Fitz Simmons, are not present and have entered into a stipulation of agreement. This case concerns a property at 1 19041
Southeast Bars Drive to Questa, Florida 33469. This case was not generated generated from anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owners are Alexander Reed and Bridget Fitz Simmons. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is
county's exhibit one. Revisit it. On February 17th, 2025, I found a new shed in installed when looking on an aerial for another property. At the time, I took screenshots of the aerial area of the aerials in 2022 and 2024.
The photograph accurately show shows what I saw then and it's marked as two and three. So this is from 2022. This is the um in question is in the backyard. And then from in 2024 the shed installed on March 7th 2025. I went to the
property took photos of the shed. My photo is marked as county's exhibit 4. And the shed is this is the actual rear of the property. That was where I could see the shed. Based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to Alexander Reed and Bridget
Fitz Simmons on April 1st, 2025. The notice of violation is marked as county's exhibit 5. The the notice of uh in the notice I cited the following Martin County code violations. Section 105.1
Florida Building Code permits when required incorporated by section 21.1 General Ors's Martin County code. In the notice of violation, the respondent was given till May 1st, 2025 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so. Compliance
was not achieved and a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on June 6th, 2025 and is marked as county's exhibit 6. A permanent application was applied for but yet but as of yet the owners requested more time to complete the
permit process. Therefore, an amended notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on June 9th, 2025 and is marked as county's exhibit 7. The return receipt, I'm sorry, um as of August 18th, the property owners have entered into a stipulation of agreement
and have the and the agreed fees of 350 have been paid in full. I request that all the county's exhibits be received into evidence. And based upon the testimony and evidence, I request that the respondents Alexander Reed and Bridget Fitz Simmons be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the
Martin County Code by November 26, 2025, and if not in compliance by then, be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per per day per violation for every day the violation continues thereafter. And this concludes my testimony.
Okay. Uh so without objection accepted evidence the county's exhibits 1 through 7 and looking at the stipulation that recites um exactly what you testified to and note for the record that $350 in
administrative costs have been paid to the county and that the uh stipulation is signed. And I'm going to ask you, I see your your signature, Miss Switzer. The signatures that are on
were those of Mr. Fitzger and Miss Fitzgib? Yes. Okay. The owners. All right. So, I'm going to find that it is appropriate to approve the stipulation and execute the agreed
order. Okay, that's good. [Applause] November. Okay, great. Um, let's see next also your case, the Thompson case. Yes. And this is case number
ENF202530461. And the respondents are Harris and Amanda Thompson. And whenever you're ready. Okay. My name is Kelly Switzer and I've been sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondents Harris G. Tom Thompson and
Amanda A. Thompson are not present. This case concerns a property at 1 19884 Southeast Water Grass Drive in Jupiter, Florida 33458. This case was not generated from anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property
owners are Harris D. Thompson and Amanda A. Thompson. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit 1. On March 10th, 2025, an expired permit letter was emailed to Pool Builders Plus, Inc. A copy of the
letter is marked as county's exhibit 2. On April 2nd, 2025, I was unable to access the community. Therefore, I sent an email requesting that the contractor reactivate the permit. The permit was not reactivated. So, based upon the investigation, I issued a
notice of violation to Harris D. Thompson and Amanda A. Thompson on February 24th, 2025 and is marked as exhibit 3. Where did I go? In the notice, I cited the following Martin County Code violations. Section 105.1, Florida Building Code permits when required
incorporated by section 21.1, General Orances Martin County Code for an expired permit for a new swimming pool. In the notice of violation, the respondent was given until May 26, 2025 to correct the violation and was a form of the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so.
On May 30th, 2025, I checked the permit status and the permit remain remained expired since complying was not achieved. I I sent a notice of hearing. Uh, sorry, bear with me.
Hold on just a moment. Okay, this is I don't have my first uh notice of hearing. My apologies. The owner reached out to me and requested that I apologize. The owner reached out to me and requested an extension on their July
2024th, 2020 July 24th, 2025 hearing. I issued an amended notice of hearing for the August hearing date. The amended notice of hearing is marked as exhibit 4. Mhm. The return receipt was not received. Therefore, I posted the property and at the Martin County Administrative Building, the posting and the affidavit
of posting is marked as county's exhibits five and six. There's the posting and that is actually at the address. Yes, it is. I finally I was able to get in. I got a new gate code for the property. Okay. And my affidavit.
No contact has been made since my data posting by the owner or the contractor. Therefore, I checked the per permit status again on August 19th, 2025 and saw that the cited violation had not been corrected. A screenshot of the permit status is marked as county's
exhibit 7. It's showing as expired. Um, And number eight is a screenshot of the pending and completed inspections with the final inspections still pending. I request that all the county's exhibits
be received into evidence and based upon the testimony and evidence, I request that the respondent respondents Harris D. Thompson and Amanda A. Thompson be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by September 30th, 2025, and if not in compliance by then, be
required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 for every day the violation continues thereafter. The county has incurred a cost in the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and requests that the county be reimbured this amount at the end of the conclusion
of today's hearing. This concludes my testimony. Okay. Have you spoken with the Thompsons? um just that the day of posting um she ended up coming out and talking to me the property owner um and she said she was just going to give it
to her husband and that's the the last I heard and I have not heard from the contra contractor as well. Okay. [Applause] All
right. It looks like from exhibit 8 that pretty much it's completed. Yeah. Uh there there was a condition on their permit that was preventing the final from taking place and that condition still exists. So they were unable to schedule the final and the
pool company said they were working on it and that again I have not heard from either either party. Okay. All right. and uh looking out. Nobody here on behalf of Harris or Amanda Thompson. Seeing no one. Without
objection, I'll accept any evidence. The county's exhibits 1 through eight in this case. Based upon that evidence and your testimony, I'm going to find that the violation as charged does exist on the property in order compliance on or before September 30th, 2025, failing,
which a fine in the amount of $100 per day will acrue and a further award costs in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing. And it is awarded.
Okay. All right. Next one is the Campbell case. It's case ENF2025060 085. James E. Campbell and Rhonda Campbell. And Okay.
Okay. My name is Kelly Switzer and I've been sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondents, James E. Campbell II and Rhonda L. Campbell are not present. This case concerns a property at 1 19070 Southeast Robert Drive, Tquista, Florida
33469. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is James E. Campbell II and Rhonda L. Campbell. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit one.
On June 3rd, 2025, I inspected the property and at the time I observed a property with tall grass and trash. I at the time I photographed the property and the photograph accurately shows what I saw then and is marked as exhibits two through five.
So, this is under the carport. Um, there's a lot of trash down just laying around the driveway. Three is just another angle of the front front driveway. He's got netting and trash all along the side.
Uh, four is the side of the property with the tall grass. And then five is another angle of the grass. Based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to James E. Campbell and the second and Rhonda Elamble on
June 4th, 2025. The notice of violation is marked as county's exhibit 6. In the notice notice, I cited the following Martin County code violations. Section 67.201A, nuisance declared weeds, undergrowth, general orances, Martin County code, and
section 67.201B, 2011B nuisance declared trash etc general ordinances Martin County code in the notice of violation the respondent was given until June 25th 20 2025 to correct the violations and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code
enforcement upon doing so compliance was not achieved and notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on July 11th 2025 and is marked as county's exhibit 7. The return receipt was not received. Therefore, I posted the property and at the Martin County Administrative
Building. My posting and affidavit of posting are marked as exhibits 8 and nine. So, there's my posting and my affidavit of posting. At the time of posting, I also conduct a follow-up a follow-up. The photos of my
follow-up are Maris Countyy's exhibits 10 and 11. So, there's the grass getting taller and then there's more trash in the front yard. I'm not exactly sure what this structure is. Looks like maybe a trailer of some sort. No call or letter from the
property owner was received within the time allowed. Therefore, I went to the property again on August 19th, 2025 and saw the cited violations had not been corrected at the time of at the time I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then is marked as county's exhibits 2
through I'm sorry, 12 through 14. So, this is 12. Um, this one side of the property, still tall grass. Um, there's some stuff in the back laying around. 13 is the other side of the property. There's tall grass in the back. Looks
like he did mow in the front area, but the back is still tall. And then here's the trash that trailer thing. And then now there's a tarp over top of everything. Um, at the time I request that all of the county's exhibits be received into
evidence and based upon the testimony and evidence I request that the respondents James E. Campbell II and Ronda L. Campbell be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by September 30th, 2025. And if not in compliance by then, be required to pay a fine in the amount of
$100 for each violation of each violation per day. The violation continues thereafter. The county has incurred a cost amount of $575 conducting this investigation and requests that the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing.
Okay. Anybody here on behalf of James or Rhonda Campbell? Looking out, seeing no one without objection, I'll accept into evidence the county's exhibits one through 14 in this case. Based um upon that I'm
going to find that compliance needs to be achieved by September 30th 2025 failing which will find in the amount of $100 per day will acrue and a further award costs in the amount of $575 to be
paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing and it is so ordered. Looks like the camels went fishing instead of mowing their lawn. I guess so. Well, before before officer Schwitzer leaves, the county has an application um
a recall on what was number seven on today's docket. Uh Hayes, um it's my recollection we didn't enter the exhibits into evidence. Uh exhibits one through nine. Well, I continued the case and um actually um
what I would prefer is to hear the case new on rather than accept into evidence because then it's like well I could rule um based on evidence. I'd rather you repeat everything. So you you're going
to see that again. All those exhibits I I don't I actually don't have them in front of me. Never did. And um well we we went through the entire case, your honor, we presented all the all the exhibits. Yeah. And um I let me just tell you in
in other jurisdictions what what I if I'm going to continue a case, I don't typically hear the evidence. Uh I can accept it, but the folks weren't here. And um since
you continued it, I'll bet you probably told them they didn't need to be here, right? They were they requested they couldn't be here. Okay, let's let's hold off on the evidence. I'm I I would rather do it that way. I'm not going to accept
uh India evidence, those exhibits one through nine. You'll present them again, okay, if need be. Otherwise, they're good to go. Okay. Thank you. All right. and and thanks for calling that to my attention because I had really lost track of that. But
okay, um let's see where we go. Uh next is the Ristoff case. It's um case number ENF2025030162 Ristoff Holdings LLC. It's H R I S T O V.
And Miss Espot, you're going to testify. And you've been sworn in. Yes. Let me just catch up with you here. My name is Maria Espia and I have been sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent
Holdings LLC is not present. This case concerns a property at 2992 Southeast Golden Gate Avenue in Steuart, Florida in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is
Ristoff Holdings LLC. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit 1. On February 26, 2025, I inspected the property. At that time, I observed trash, high grass, unpermitted work on the side of the house, on the back side
of the house, and a damaged fence. At that time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw. Then marked this county's exhibits 2 through five. Let me zoom in. So two here's a damaged fence. There's
high grass. There's uh trash everywhere. And then right here, you can barely see it, but right here there's a door um to the back patio. I guess it was enclosed. based upon the investigation.
I'm sorry, I skipped a few exhibits. Uh, number two is a different view of exactly what we were looking at. I'm sorry, number three. Number four, it's just showing you that some of the there was items scattered throughout the ground,
uh, bottles and and different items. Number five is just a further I moved further back to give you a better view. Based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to the owners on March 7th, 2025. Marked this county's
exhibit number six. In the notice, I cited the following Martin County Code violation. Section 67.201A, Nuisance declared weeds, undergrowth, general ordinances, Martin County code. Section 67.201B, Nuisance declared trash, etc. General
Ordinances Martin County Code. Section 105.1 permits when required incorporated by section 21.1 general ordinances Martin County Code and section 21.99 Accessory Structures General Ordinances Martin County Code.
In the notice of violation, the respondent was given until April 7th, 2025 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County Code Enforcement upon doing so. On May 16th, 2025, I did a follow-up inspection and seen violations remained
except for building without a permit. These inspection photos are marked as county's exhibits 7 through 12. So in seven, you can see that door was removed. The trash remains, the high grass here remains. Eight,
um, I would say that's trash on top of the roof. Nine is the other side of the house. So, the initial picture you saw was on the side of the road over there. And this is the other side of the duplex where where
it was enclosed before. 10. Just some additional pictures of the initial side you saw. 11. A closer view. And 12.
Since compliance was not achieved, a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on May 23rd, 2025, marked this county's exhibit number 13. I followed up on June 17, 2025. During this inspection, I seen that a new fence was placed on the property. The
inspection photos are Marked County's exhibit number 14. So, where the fence was damaged, or actually there was no fence. Um, it was partial fence and then it was damaged. This is a new fence. You could see the
part that's not painted if I zoom in. Due to the new fence, I amended the notice of violation on June 20th, 2025. The amended notice of violation is marked as county's exhibit number 15. The violation code remains the same from the initial notice of violation of
105.1, but on this amended notice, I informed the owner of the new fence requiring a permit. Compliance was not achieved. Therefore, I sent an amended notice of hearing for today's hearing by certified mail and regular mail on July 15th, 2025 marked this county's exhibit
number 16. The return receipt was not returned. Therefore, on July 22nd, 2025, Officer Shanahan posted the property and the Martin County admin. The affidavit of posting is marked as county's exhibit number 17.
No call or letter from the property owner was received within the time allowed. Therefore, I went to the property again on August 19, 2025 and saw that the cited violation had not been corrected. At that time, I photographed the property. The photograph accurately shows what I saw then and is marked as county's exhibits
18 and 19. And actually, the unpermitted fence and damaged fence violation was resolved. The grass was mowed as well. The only violation remaining is the trash. And number 18 shows the trash. Okay.
Still there. So 105.1 is now cured and yet. Okay. Correct. And the weeds and number 19 and and the accessory structure. I request that all the county's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the
testimony and evidence. I request that the respondent be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by September 30th, 2025 and if not in compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 for every day the violation continues thereafter. The county has incurred a
cost in the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and request that the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing. Okay. All right. Anybody here on behalf of Ristoff Holdings LLC? Looking out,
seeing no one. Without objection, I'll accept evidence. Counties exhibits 1 through 19 in this case. Based upon um that evidence and your testimony, I'll find that a violation of 67201B trash does exist on the property. Water
compliance on or before uh you said August. No, I'm going to say September I'm gonna say September 31st in this case. September only has 30 days.
30th. 30th. I knew that. October's 30th. I can read the calendar. Thank you. Remember the song, which I never did. I don't remember the song either, but I I do remember September 30th, the end of
our glorious fiscal year. Um, okay. And I am awarding cost in the amount of $575 in addition to
the fine if and oh and the fine is $100 per day if not u if not taken care of by September 30th. Okay. Good. All right.
Oh, another rooftop holdings case. It's case number ENF2025 051164-01 Rustoff Holdings LLC. Different property. Different property. Okay. All right. My name is Maria Espa and I have been
sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent, Ristoff Holdings LLC, is not present. This case concerns a property at 257 Southeast Norman Street in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint.
According to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is Ristoff Holdings LLC. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is counties exhibit one. On May 28th, 2025, I inspected the property. At that time, I observed bees
in the back of the shed. The shed to appear to be lived in. Also, the house appeared to be divided into several units with several entrances instead of a single family residence. The neighbors also confirmed all the units were being rented. Later in the case, you will see in the exhibits that confirmed this as
well. There was other violations such as trash, high grass, fascia, exterior damage to the house, and boarded windows. At that time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then. Marked this county's exhibits 2 through 15.
Two is a boarded window. There's exterior um damage here. Number three, more trash on the side. You can see the shutters as well. Four is the front view. I will zoom in
for you. If you look at the right side of the home, it's full of uh items. Five is just showing you the other side of the property. There's some shutters there. And then there's two doors here,
including the front doors. Three. Six is back to that front view to the right that we were looking at. Seven is the back of the property. Eight. Behind the property is the shed that's being lived in, including some
pieces of trash there. Nine, more trash on the side of the home. 10 is another view of trash and buckets and uh pieces of wood. 11 is behind that um greenish looking
shed. This is in the back of it where the bees are. You can't see it on a camera, but I could see it in person when I was there. And 12 is just another view of where the bees and the beehives were. 13.
Oops, I'm sorry. There you go. So 13 shows you this is the main house and this is the shed in the back and all the rentals. This is showing you basically where every front door is to enter each unit.
14 is the property appraiser drawing that shows you it's a single family residence. It's a threebedroom, two bath and this is the home. 15 is the shed
on the property appraiser. Based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to the owner on June 4th, 2025, marked this county's exhibit number 16. In the notice, I cited the following Martin County code violation. Sections 21.145,
Infestation General Ordinances, Martin County Code. Section 3.11, Permitted Uses, Land Development Regulations, Martin County, Florida. Section 67.201A, Nuisance Declared Weeds, Undergrowth, General Ordinances, Martin County Code.
Section 67.201B, Nuisance Declared Trash, etc. General Ordinances, Martin County Code. Section 21.121.2, two, openable windows, general ordinances, Martin County Code, and section 21.110,
General Exterior Structure, General Ordinances, Martin County Code. In the notice of violation, the respondent was given until July 4th, 2025 to correct the violations and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so. Compliance was not achieved and a notice of hearing
was issued by certified mail on July 15, 2025 marked this county's exhibit number 17. The return receipt was not returned. Therefore, on July 22nd, 2025, Officer Shanahan posted the property and the Martin County admin. The affidavit of
posting is marked as county's number exhibit number 18. I went to the property on August 6th, 2025 to try to make contact with anyone who lived there. Upon arrival, there was trash in the front of the house. The trash included household items. On the side of the house, there were three men who
appeared to be remodeling or repairing one of the rental units. I knocked on the front door and a man that was named Juan came to the front. He confirmed that all units were rented and that he lived in the shed. He stated that the trash by the road was from people who
used to live there in the unit that he and the other two men were repairing. He walked the property with me and I photographed the rear unit he was repairing. I left my business card for him to have the owner call me. And these photos are marked as count as exhibits
19 through 23. 19 was the front of the trash of whoever lived in the back unit prior. 20 is looking from back to front. That's the first unit as you walk in. And they
were in the one next to it instead. 21 is a rear view and you can see the exterior damage still existed right here along with uh the trash. 22 is as soon as you enter the rear
unit, it has its own bathroom. To the left is like a kitchenet and to the right is just one whole room. No call or letter from the property owner was received within the time allowed. Therefore, I went back to the property again on August 19, 2025 and
saw saw that the cited violations had not been corrected. At that time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as counties exhibits 24 to 29. Um, the openable windows violation, the shutters have been
removed, so that was resolved. 24 shows trash still there, high grass in the back. 25 is um the front to the right from the street. This is what you could still see there.
26 is just another view of the property. 27 is high grass. Um this is the unit that's being lived in and more trash here. 28 is just a side view and you can see
there's trash here of the back of the shed. and 29. The exterior damage still exists and there's trash on the ground. I request that all the county's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the testimony and evidence. I request that the respondent be ordered to comply with
the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by section I'm sorry, by September 30th, 2025, and if not in compliance by then, be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per violation for every day the violation continues thereafter. The county has occurred in a
cost in the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and request that the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing. Okay. Anybody here on behalf of Ristoff Holdings LLC? Seeing no one. Without
objection, I'll accept into evidence the county's exhibits 1 through 29 in this case. Based upon that evidence and your testimony, I'm going to find that violations as charged do exist on the property and order compliance on or before September 30th, 2025.
Um, note that the only um violation that's been cured is the openable window. Correct. And so that leaves us with one, two, three, four, five violations. Yep. Five violations. Okay. So, um, and,
uh, if not in compliance, I'm going to, um, find a fine in the amount of $100 per violation per day, uh, will acrue and and further award cost in the amount of $575
to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. All right. All right. Officer Joseph Penta case.
Okay. This is case number ENF202410520. The respondent is Denise Penta. And uh let's see. Officer Joseph, you're going to testify. If you raise your right hand, do you swear affirm testimony about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth. So, I'll help you. I do. Very good. 520. My name is Michael Joseph and I have been sworn in. I am a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent, Denise Penta, is not present. This case concerns the property
at 5861 Southeast Katherine A, Stewart, Florida in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is Denise Penta. Copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is
counties exhibit one. Good. All right. On November 5th, 2024, Michael Shanahan inspected the property. At the time, he observed roof damage from the tornado and Hurricane Milton. At that time, he photographed the
property. The photograph accurately shows what he saw then and is marked as county's exhibit two and three. There's two Anyways, and there is three at the roof damage there. Mhm.
Based upon the investigation, he issued a notice of violation to Denise Penta on January 30th, 2025, marked as county's exhibit 4. In the notice, he cited the following Martin County code violations. Section 21.115, roofs and drainage. Section 21.121.1
glazing general ordinances Martin County Code. Section 21.99 accessory structures garage door. Uh in the notice of violation, the respondent was given until March 3rd, 2025 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code
enforcement upon doing so. I took over this case May 8th, 2025, and compliance had not been achieved for all violations, and new violations of trash and debris were also observed at the residence. At that time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately shows what I saw then and is marked as
county's exhibit 5 and six. They have the trash debris laying around. Okay. [Applause] Um, extra time was given to the homeowner due to roof permits being received and work being done. I then
went back to the residence on July 28th, 2025 to check on progress. I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and they are marked as counties exhibit 78 and 9. There's a new roof on there.
New roof. More trash. And the trash still remains on the side. An amended notice of violation was mailed to include section 67.201b nuisance declared trash etc general ordinances Martin County code and a liz pendants. A notice of hearing was mailed
via certified mail on July 29th 2025. The amended notice of violation is marked as counties exhibit 10 with the notice of hearing being marked as county's exhibit 11. Okay. So, wait a minute. Make sure I understand. The
roof was permitted. Roof was permitted and installed closed out. So, the only thing left was the trash and debris. Got it. I think we were at the point where exhibit 11 uh the notice of hearing for today's hearing.
Yep. The return receipt was not received. On July 30th, 2025, I posted the property and the Martin County Administrative Building. The posting picture is county's exhibit 12 with the affidavit of posting being county's exhibit 13. Okay, there's the posting
photo and the affidavit of posting right there. No caller letter from the property owner was received within the time allowed. Therefore, I went to the property again on August 19th, 2025 and saw that the cited violation had not been corrected. At that time, I photographed the
property. The photograph accurately shows what I saw then as Marxist County's exhibit 1415 and 16. So trash remains. It's actually gotten worse. Same. I request that all the county's exhibits be received in evidence. Based upon the
testimony and evidence, I request that the respondent, Denise Penta, be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by September 30th, 2025, and if not in compliance by then, be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 for every day the violation continues thereafter. The
county has incurred a cost in the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and requests that the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing. Concludes my testimony. All right. Anybody here on behalf of Denise Penta? Looking out, seeing no one
without objection, I'll accept evidence the county's exhibits 1 through 16 in this case. Based upon that evidence and your testimony, I'll find that a violation um as charge does exist on the property being 67201B trash. and um order compliance honor
before September 30th, 2025 failing which you'll find in the amount of $100 per day will occur and I'll further award cost in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing.
Thank you. Mhm. You all right? Let's see here. We know we're getting toward the end of things when Miss Bradley shows up. That's that's how you that's a clear uh indication.
All right, let's see. This one is case number 07 00017632. Jolie Properties and Investments LLC. It's a fine reduction stipulation. And Miss Bradley, you're going to testify. If you raise your right hand,
do you swear or affirm testimony about to give will be the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So hope you got it. I do. All right. Very good. And let me just catch up here. 632. Okay, whenever you're ready.
My name is Rachel Spradley and I've been sworn in. I'm the nuisance baitment coordinator for Martin County. This case concerns the property located at 8506 Southeast Ulipus Way, Hope Sound in Martin County, Florida. On May 21st, 2008, an order finding violation was issued by the code enforcement
magistrate to JBA Assets Incorporated for violation section 67201B, nuisance declared trash, etc., general ordinance, Martin County code, and section 21.115, roof and drainage, general ordinances, Martin County code.
So, exhibit one is going to be the property appraiser showing that Jolie Properties and Investments LLC is the current owner. Exhibit two is the original recorded order from 2008 that was placed on the
property. Compliance was required by July 9th, 2008. On August 11th, 2025, an affidavit of compliance with acred fines was issued reflecting an outstanding fine in the amount of 1,242,800 plus cost in the amount of $350.
Pursuant to section 1.98B, general ordinances, Martin County code, no code enforcement lean shall be reduced to the value less than 10% of the total fine amount or 10% of the value of the property, whichever is less. The portion of the lean attributed
to cost shall not be subjected to reduction. Uh Marcus A. Dames is the prior owner of the property. Pursuant to a warranty deed recorded in official record book 3506, page 625, Martin County, Florida public records, Jolie
Properties and Investment LLC is the current owner. The respondent has no remaining interest in the property. So exhibit number three is the affidavit of compliance with acred fines that was recorded on the property. And then exhibit number four and this is
where that kind of comes in. Mr. Nicollet is Mr. Dames was the prior owner. Yes. That sold to Jolie. He is taking responsibility for the fines. So he is the one that requested the fine reduction. So staff has determined that a lean
reduction is warranted. The current owners were not responsible for the violation. However, they did bring the property into compliance and Marcus Dames has offered to pay $12,536 to resolve the outstanding fines which
have accured. In addition, staff has considered the $121,860 assessed value of the property. So, he's paying 10% plus the $350. Let me just um
look at these numbers. Okay. So 10% would be 20 4,000. No, 10% would have been $12,186. It's 10% off the property value due to
the fact that it's less than the fine. property value. Gotcha. Okay. I understand. Yeah. I just u when I saw the the million two I went 10% of that is a little more. It's
10% of whichever is less. Gotcha. I remember that ordinance. All right. Okay. So, uh, without objection, I'll accept evidence the county's exhibits one through four in this case. Based upon the evidence and your testimony, Miss Bradley, I'm going to find that it
is appropriate to enter a fine reduction agreed order and approve the stipulation that has been signed. I see Marcus Dames printed name. Is that electronic?
It's that's how it came through. That's why I printed. If you see the next page, it has a screenshot of how it came through. He did it through his phone. said it was an app on his phone that he did. That's why I kind of printed that screenshot showing it did come out of his phone.
Okay. Does not show that it's verified or that it's in um in one of the I'm not sure he apps knows how to do that. Okay. Um, I will
will accept it as an electronic signature based upon the actually I'm going to make that exhibit five. Okay. Yeah. Okay. And uh also note for the record that Miss Riley, you sign on
behalf of the county. Okay. Good. All right. Next one is that's all part of is that a different case? Jolie Properties. It's the same owner. It's the same property. It was a different owner at
the time. So, it's going to be under Rodney Herald on the stipulation agreement. Gotcha. All right. So, this is case number 11 1 um 0048365 Julie Properties and Investments LLC. And whenever you're ready.
Okay. My name is Rachel Spradley and I've been sworn in. I'm the nuisance abatement coordinator from Martin County. This case concerns the property located at 8506 Southeast Eucalyptus Way, Hope Sound in Martin County, Florida. On September 21st, 2011, a stipulation and agreed final order was
issued by the code enforcement magistrate to Rodney Herrell for section 21.121.1 glazing general ordinances Martin County Code. Section 105.1 FBC permits when required incorporated by section 21.1
general ordinances Martin County code. Section 21.111 protective treatment general ordinances Martin County code and section 4.769 site addressing Martin County Land Development Regulations. So exhibit one is the property appraiser again showing
that Jolie Properties and Investment LLC is the owner. Exhibit two is the recorded stipulation and agreement that was put in place back in 2011 for the property. Um compliance was required by November
21st, 2011. On July 28th, 2025, an affidavit of compliance with acred fines was issued reflecting an outstanding fine in the amount of 1,933,600 plus cost in the amount of $300. Pursuant to section 1.98B
general ordinances, Martin County Code, no code enforcement lean shall be reduced to the value less than 10% of the total fine amount or 10% of the value of the property, whichever is less. The portion of the lean attributed to cost shall be subject to no reduction.
Um Marcus A. Dames is the prior owner of the property pursuant to a warranty deed recorded in official record books. 3506 page 625 Martin County, Florida. Public records, Jolie Properties and Investment LLC is the current owner. The respondent
has no remaining interest in the property. And exhibit three is the affidavit of compliance with fines that was recorded. And then exhibit four is the reduction request again from Mr. Dames.
Okay. Staff has determined that a lean reduction is warranted. The current owners were not responsible for the violation. However, they did bring the property into compliance and Marcus Dames has offered to pay $12,486 to resolve the outstanding fines which
have accured. In addition, staff has considered the $121,860 assessed value of the property. And that concludes my testimony for this one. Okay. And um this is also um approved by Marcus Dames. So I'm going to go ahead
and enter that page as exhibit five as well. All right. So without objection, I'll accept in evidence the county's exhibits one through five in this case. And based upon the evidence, I'm going to find that it is appropriate to approve the
stipulation reducing the fine uh to $12,486. And note for the record that Mr. Mr. Dames has signed electronically and Miss Bradley, you've signed on behalf of the county and and
so order. Thank you, sir. Okay. [Applause] All right. Um, Miss Bush. Yes, sir. Good morning. Good morning. Still morning. Yes, it is. All right. Um, let's see. This is case This is the
Donnell case. Kathleen and Larry Donnell or Donald. I don't see see anybody in the audience. So, uh, it's KCNF2025010528. And Miss Bush, if you raise your right hand, do you swear affirm testimony you're about to give will be the truth.
All truth and nothing but the truth. So, off you go. Yes, sir, I do. Okay. Whenever you're ready. My name is Tamika Bush and I have been sworn in. I'm a co-compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent Kathleen Donnell and Larry Donnell is not present. They have
entered into a stipulation of agreement. This case concerns the property at 4113 Northeast Skyline Drive in Jensen Beach, Florida 34957 in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. And according to the official
records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is Kathleen Dunell and Larry Dunell. A copy of the pro property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit 1. On February 17th, 2025, I inspected the
property and at that time I observed sighting and disrepair and/or rotted rotting on the structure. At that time, I photographed the property. The photograph actually shows what I saw then and is marked as county's exhibit too. Mhm.
Based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to Kathleen Donnell and Larry Darnell on April 11th, 2025, marked as county's exhibit 3. In the notice, I cited the following Martin County code violation. Sections
105.1 FB FBC permits when required incorporated by sections 21.1 general ordinances of Martin County Code sections 21.11 protective treatment general ordinances
Martin County Code which has since complied. In the notice of violation, the respondant was given until May 12th, 2025 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so.
Compliance was not achieved and a notice of hearing was issued by C certified mail on June 2nd, 2025 and is marked as county's exhibit 4. Okay. I reinspected the property and observed that the work had been completed. A
photo was taken and it's marked as county's exhibit 5. An amended notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on July 8th, 2025 and is marked as county's exhibit 6. The return receipt was not received. Therefore, the property and county
administration was posted on July 22nd, 2025 and is marked as county's exhibit 7. On August 6, 2025, a stipulation of agreement and final order was sent to the owners to be signed by Kathleen and Larry Donnell, who agrees to comply with
the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by February 27, 2026, or a fine of $100 per violation shall be assessed for every day the violation continues thereafter. I request that all the county's exhibits be received into evidence, and the owner has paid the
administration fee of $350. Okay. And without objection, I'll accept any evidence that county's exhibits 1 through seven in this case. And um looking at the stipulation,
it recites exactly what you testified to regarding compliance date and um ultimate fine if they fail to comply. And note for the record that $350 has been paid to the county. The stipulation
is signed by Kathleen uh Dell or Donald and Larry Donald and um Miss Bush, you on behalf of of the county. I'm going to go ahead and enter the agreed order and approve the stipulation.
Okay. All right. Next is the Ruez case. It's um ENF2025 020596- 01. The respondent is Ramona Ruez. And whenever you're ready. My name is Tamika Bush and I have been
sworn in. I'm a co-compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondant, Ramona Ruez, is not present and has entered into a stipulation of agreement. This case concerns the property at 1407 Northeast Cedar Street, Jensen Beach, Florida, 34957
in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. And according to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is Ramona Ruez. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit 1.
On February 27th, 2025, I inspected the property and at that time I observed garbage, trash, junk, and debris and unsightly materials stored on the property to include appliances. At that time, I photographed the property. The photograph actually shows what I saw then and is marked as county's exhibits
2 through 4. County exhibit two shows unsightly materials and the appliance. Exhibit three, the same thing.
And exhibit four is the appliance. Based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to Ramona Ruez on June 25th, 2025 marked as county's exhibit 5. In the notice, I cited the following Martin County code violation. Section 67.201b 2011B nuisance declared
trash etc. General ordinances of Martin County code section G246.3 303.6 Six, outdoor appliances, Florida building code, general ordinances of Martin County code. In the notice of violation, the
respondent was given until July 25th, 2025 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so. Compliance was not achieved and a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on July 31st, 2025 and is marked as
county's exhibit 6. Okay. The return receipt was not received. The property and county administration was posted on August 8th, 2025. The affidavit of posting marked this county as exhibit 7. On August 6, 2025, a stipulation of
agreement and final order was given to the owners Ramona Ruez to be signed who agrees to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by December 31st, 2025, or a fine of $100 per day per violation
shall be assessed for every day the violation continues thereafter. I request that all the county's exhibits be received into evidence. The owner has paid the administration fee of $350. Okay. Um let's see. All right. So without objection, I'll
accept any evidence the counties exhibits one through seven in this case and looking at the stipulation find that it accurately uh relates what you testified to and
note that it is signed by Ramona Ruiz on behalf of herself and and you miss Bush on behalf of the county. going to find it is appropriate to um require compliance honor before the
31st of December in this case and I'll go ahead and approve the agreed order. Thank you, sir. Okay. All right. Um, the next one is the AIR case. It's DNF 202531067-01.
And Miss Bush, that's also yours. It's a liar or a lear ltd. My name is Tamika Bush and I have been sworn in. I'm a co-compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent Ay Ltd is not present and has
entered into a stipulation of agreement. This case concerns the property at 11:45 Southeast MacArthur Boulevard in Stewart, Florida 34996 in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. According to the official
records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is Aier Ltd. A copy of the property appraiser's record of ownership is county's exhibit one. On March 28th, 2025, I inspected the property and at that time I observed a
wooden walkover from property to the beach without permits. At that time, I photographed the property. The photograph actually shows what I saw then and is marked as county's exhibit 2. Based upon the investigation, I issued a
notice of violation to AIR Ltd on July on June 27th, 2025, marked as county's exhibit 3. In the notice, I cited the following Martin County code violation. Section 105.1 FBC permits when required
incorporated by sections 21.1 general ordinances of Martin County code in the notice of violation respondent was given. Sorry. In the notice of violation,
the respondant was given until July 28th, 2025 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so. Compliance was not achieved and a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on July 30th, 2025 and is
Martin Countyy's exhibit 4. The return receipt was not received. Therefore, the property and county administration building was posted on August 8th, 2025. An affidavit of posting is marked as county's exhibit 5. On August 6, 2025, a stipulation of
agreement and final order was signed by the owner's AIR Ltd, who agrees to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by December 31st, 2025, or a fine of $100 per violation per day shall be assessed for every day the
violation continues thereafter. I request that all the county's exhibits be received into evidence, and the owner has paid the administration fee of $350. Okay. Uh so without objectional acceptant evidence the county's exhibits
one through five in this case and um looking at the stipulation find that it does relate exactly what your testimony was and I will
agree that December 31st uh 2025 is an appropriate compliance A note also that the stipulation is signed on behalf of Lear U Limited by its registered
agent Irene Caserto and Miss Bush you have also signed on behalf of it uh the county. So I find that it is appropriate then to enter the agreed order in this case.
Thank you special magistrate. Thank you. All right, let's see. We've got a couple little things to do. I've got minutes from June and July. Uh June minutes I have
reviewed. I'm going to go ahead and approve those. The July minutes, unfortunately, I have not had a chance to look at. We'll catch up with those in September. And um so let's see. Today is the
20th. All right. So that's that. Um if it's okay, I'm going to take these with me. Just that'll remind me. And I I remember we uh did continue a case. Yes, your honor. That's correct. July hearing
and tell me about that. Okay. That that was last month. That's case number ENF202530354. Respondent is Jer Jeremy Lamastera. We had called the case. County made an oral application for a continuence. No written order was ever issued. That
matter has since fully complied. So we can just sort of matter for the record that it is closed. Great. All right. Very good. Um All right. June was approved. Okay. So the next hearing is um
September 17th uh 2025. Oh, I can announce one thing. I uh the other day, today's Wednesday, Monday afternoon late, I got a CA a motion
in case number GMD 2025010355 and it's um uh styled as uh in the Martin County versus Meadowrun Property Owners Association and it's Jacob Community Center LLC's motion to intervene and stay the
magistrate's order finding violation. Um, I was hoping we might even alert the county attorney to to uh to that case, but um um
that is actually the one the one thing that um I would like to talk on the record just for a minute about uh before we adjourn. So
if um do you want to recess for a few minutes? We can do that. We can. Yeah. Okay. Let's recess for five minutes and then we'll we'll see uh back on. Okay. So, we're back on the record. It's
um 11 37. Um I I the other day Monday uh afternoon late I got a motion in case number GMD 2025010355
which is county versus Meadow Run uh Meto Run Property Owners Association. And that was a case I had heard um prior and um I had issued an order in that case
finding violation but then um also granted additional time for a Meter Run Property Owners Association to resolve its issue with the back gate that goes goes to
um Leighton Leighton Farms Road and I I don't know whether you're familiar with this case. Um yeah. Yes. Uh magistrate. I'm I'm the one handling that case. Uh they did file
uh a motion in uh the court, the circuit court in its appellet capacity. We filed a motion to dismiss that was granted uh that they don't have any standing. they have to file their order to abate um in
the lower meeting in front of you. Um but they also filed this this this civil action, a separate civil action in circuit court and and u and obviously um I'm going to wait to see if both you and me run uh
respond to this motion before I do anything. What's the motion titled? It's entitled motion. It's Jacob Community Center LLC's motion to intervene and stay magistrates order finding violation. it
it uh was sent to me Monday and I it shows on here it's an 11page memo and it shows that it was sent to Miss Elder as um council for Martin County um on
August 18th, 2025 and to Scott Lee as council for the respondent on the same date and and to me as well. So, um, signed by Christopher Hamilton. Do you not have a copy of this?
Uh, I do not have a copy of that. I do not All right. With that, I can forward that to you if need be, but um, basically I'm I'm going to wait to see if you all um, do respond.
We we will be responding to that motion. Okay. And I there are a ton of exhibits. It's 37 pages. I think we we could run a copy before uh before you leave. Okay. Well, all right. Let's do that.
Run a couple copies of it. All right. Thank you. It's my understanding they're seeking to stay the order uh your magistrates's order about the limited use. If you recall, it was for trucks 40 ft and over as well as other construction, heavy
construction vehicles. Um, they're seeking to have that set aside during the pendency of the litigation. Okay. Um, good.
All right. I think that's all we've got for today and uh we'll see everybody on September 17th and have a good month. Thank you. We stand a