##VIDEO ID:cskowfo41Zs## e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e are e e e e e e e e order the Martin County Code magistrate hearing for January 15 2025 if you'll All Rise join me in the Pledge of Allegiance Pledge ALG to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible liy and justice for all okay please be seated all right uh I am going to try and make sure that I take everybody that's here first so that uh we can get you all out of here and we'll have more cases uh uh other than in addition to the folks that are here so I'm going to call uh the first case which is um respondent is Lawrence H grub and Dana Collins and it's NF 20241 0023 and it's um alleged violation U of Permitting uh under Section 105.1 of the Florida building code and good morning and I see you are represented sir yes sir okay U if you make your appearance morning Ron my name is Joseph grao attorney ER in Stewart representing the property owner Mr grev yes sir Welcome to the proceeding all right uh this is a violation hearing we're going to hear from the county if they make a primacia case Burton will flip to you as the respondent and then um and then we'll go from there I'll I won't even bother I'll swear you in later of assuming that uh that U the Cy's made their case so let's go ahead and listen to the county officer counselor raise your right hand do you swear confirm the testimony about to give it be the truth all truth and nothing but the truth so I'll be G I do all right and whenever you're ready you can begin okay my name is Chris counselor of B sworn I am a co-compliance investigator from Martin County the respondent Lawrence H grub um as a representative of the property is present the case concerns the property at 3364 Southeast endale Street in steart Florida which is located within Martin County this case was not generated from an anonymous complaint according to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County the property owners are Lawrence H grub Dana Collins and Teresa Collins a copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is County's exhibit one on January 26 2024 I inspected the property for an expired permit application for a application for BL 2023 50659 for a carport what I observed was that a carport had already been completed without a permit uh the expired permit letter is County's Exhibit 2 at the time I photographed the property the photographs accurately show what I saw then it's counting exhibits three and four three is a cport in question to the right count exib four just another view of the of the carport okay and those are photos that you took correct at uh based upon the investigation I yed notice of VI violation to Lawrence H grub Dana Collins and Theresa Collins on February 2nd 2024 mark this County exhibit 5 in the notice I cited the following Martin County code violation section 105.1 Florida building code permits when required as adopted by section 21.1 General ordinances of Martin County to obtain a permit for the carport an no of violation respondent was given until March 4th 2024 to correct the violation was informed of the need to contact Martin County Code Enforcement upon doing so on February 12th 2024 the owner applied for a permit for the carport which is permit application BL 2024 02054 a screenshot of the permit is County zibit 6 okay and what's that screenshot telling us uh that's basically saying that um upon here upon getting my VI violation letter he did start the process to get a permit for the carport all right and I would tell you it's almost impossible to see it there but on the computer that I've got in front of me I actually can read it okay and basically at the time the status was waiting on applicant all right so it's um all right so it's a residential screen room or shed or cardboard waiting on applicant and that was dated this was for back on February 12 2024 got it with you okay six I have met with this I have met with and spoken with the property owner on several occasions granting extensions in order to give him the time obtain to obtain the permit for the carport as of July 22nd 2024 the permit was denied by zoning for not meeting setbacks since compliance was not achieved the owner was sent a notice of hearing of C by certified mail on August 27th 2024 for the September 18 2024 hearing it's marked as count exhibit 7 the owner requested an extension because he had requested to go before the neighborhood advisory Council board for Golden Gate to request alternative compliance in order to keep the unper permanent car port in December the N uh the neighborhood advisory Council board referred the decision back to uh the decision of making alternative compliance back to County staff so since compliance was not achieved an amended notice of hearing and a notice of violation was issued by certified mail on January 2nd 2025 and this Mark this County zit 8 a return receipt was not received in time so on January 3rd 2024 I posted the property a photo of the poting the f David a posting or mark this County exhibits N9 and 10 nine is my posting 10 is my Affidavit of posting therefore I went to the property again on January 14th 2025 and saw the decided violation had not been corrected at the time I photograph the property the photograph accur show what I saw then it's marked this County zibits 11 and 12 11 is the cport still stands just a different angle and a screenshot of the permit status is County zibit 13 which is the permit is currently still in review pending the decision of of whether or not the county is going to Grant alternative compliance for not meeting setbacks for the structure okay so it's currently in review it's in review but it still it still hasn't passed the the zoning requirement so even though it's the status is in review uh as of the last record for the Martin count is that it's been denied its zoning approval so so the Golden Gate neighborhood board sends it back to staff and what does staff do with it staff is making is making a decision or whether or not they're going to Grant the alternative compliance but their their last decision on the case was that it was denied okay but it's still in front of them there's no final it's back in front of them the first time it went through them they denied it so then they try to appeal for alternative compliance and that's the part that's currently pending Okay so why shouldn't we wait until they make a decision what if they say yeah that's fine by us um and I don't know I don't know who on the staff would do that but but suppose um um the the development director decides that it is fine then there's no violation right if the permit was issued like as I said I'm just going by the last decision the county made was that they denied the zoning revision okay so the permit's not issued I still he's been given the option of taking it down also so okay but it's kind of a catch22 you can't get a permit unless you get the zoning approval and and so and there wouldn't have been a case if he hadn't built it without a permit got it I I understand yeah yeah so um it's just the based off the length of the case the case was started a year ago so okay it's been back and forth so I reest they C it all counties exhibits be received in evidence based upon testimony in evidence I request that the respondent Lawrence H grub Dana Collins and theres Collins be ordered to comply with the CED provisions of the Martin County Code by December uh by February 28th 2025 if not compliance by then be required to pay the amount of $100 a day per day until the violation is corrected the county has incuded the cost of $575 conducting this investigation that concludes my testimony okay um Mr grao any objection to my accepting into evidence the County's exhibits 1 through 13 no you're all right so without objection that's the ordered um well I understand the County's position they're they're looking at the technical violation of the fact that a a um permit was required to construct originally and was not obtained prior so that's that's where basically the county is what have you do I need I'm going to swear your witness in if you want yes all right sir 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 help you gu and your full name sir grub and your address your address4 Southeast endale Street Stewart Florida okay all right um it's your honor I may we agree um obviously a permit um was required in in Mr Grub's defense you know not that's an excuse but you know the the neighbor's filled with carports there's some confusion as to whether you know this is temporary permanent and you know all those sorts of things um I think the record shows that Mr grub has made a diligent good faith effort you know ever since he received the notice of violation um to obtain a permit um you know the violation was roughly around the 2 the applic was made on the 12th um and as as noted the the the difficulty's been compliance with the 5 foot setback I mean that to leave the carport where it is you know is it's not possible to comply with the setback and obviously and also given the configuration of the property there's no place to move the carport to comply with the setback let me ask you this look at exhibit 11 if we can put that one up and yeah expand it the the cport that is on the right hand side of that photo uh looks like it's a kind of a temporary structure is it or is it not Mr grub okay so and if that were removed would you meet the setb requirements no sir because they're telling me the carport has to be 5 foot behind the front of the duplex which would be over to this it would be to the right side oops excuse me to the right side with there's not enough property there to put a carport okay this carport I I would like to State for the record I purchased we purchased the property May 5th of 23 this carport was there when we purchased the both of them I'm I'm looking at them as two different structures harpon my understanding your honor is that code enforcement can't do anything with the these temporary carports and they're all over the neighborhood but but that's not an issue the the the the the only one that is at issue here is the one with the metal roof yes sir okay and and um the County's problem and and correct me if I'm wrong county is that it sits in front of the building instead of on the side of the building correct yeah because of and there's no room on the side of the building for that struct is that no no he has no yeah he correct it's basically too long because of where the house is placed cuz he can't move it back far enough because the house is there so it's encroaching the setback it's encroaching on is the the front one which is why and then because it's in the CRA they've it's even shorter so that's what's stopping it from passing review okay so so the staff can't pass it unless um it looks like there's some sort of variance process through this neighborhood board Yeah so basically Golden Gate is under a CRA yes and it has its own board so in December Mr grub appealed to them and the CRA board decided that um they just decided not to make a decision the decision that that was made at the hearing was that they referred the decision of alternative compliance back to staff okay but but does staff actually have the ability to Grant a variance if I can weigh in just just to clarify this a little bit basically the um CRA is an appeal of the original decision that it's non-compliant has to be removed and their decision was we're not going to we we accept that we refer it back to and we're not going to change it so basically it's not a start over again it's just um in in in legal terms it would be a denial of the appeal the original Stand the original finding stance okay all right so all right your honor I I'm I disagree kind of with the characterization of what the neighborhood advisory committee did um and we you know I've got a copy of an email from the committee um back to Mr counselor after the decision or the the no decision where they elected you know not to approve not to deny and said essentially what they did is they said we just need further guidance I don't believe that they said hey we're sending it back to the county for you guys make the decision they said well we just don't have enough guidance on what we should be doing and how to handle this and we could we can introduce this into evidence I mean essentially what what we would like I mean we think we're I I don't know that the permit was denied I mean I'm not you know I I just don't know that but either way we would just like sufficient time um you know for the county to to respond to the request of the committee and have time to go back to the committee you know with what the information and the guidance they're requesting from the county to see for a decision or to seek an an actual variance um without the you know because he's obviously Mr grub is working to to try to get this permit issued all right may I see that correspondence sure um actually you can put it right down there I think and if if we do this right we can actually look at it all of us look at it okay so let's see it is a okay what's that pull you said you have some yeah all right so it looks like they basically kind of kicked the can down the road um and if I understand her three points her numbered points there uh she's asking for some sort of Le legal guidance can a duplex outside the CRA have a carport in a driveway to why or why hasn't legal meaning County Attorney's Office been involved and three why are so many other carports with Canvas OR cloth awnings allowed to remain in place so I mean it looks to me like that that this isn't necessarily right for a decision from me um I mean it it would be easy for me to say you built the thing or had it built without or bought it that way without permits and therefore you got to have a permit to install it so you're in violation that would be easy but I I'm hearing what you're saying and uh it looks to me like you've requested some sort of an appeal and that's not done yet your honor we have somebody from growth Management on call to uh to testify and explain further if necessary do do you think it's going to make any difference it'll clarify what the position what the uh what the uh what the position is as this communication and and you know where it is in as far as decision on because they're the ones who make the decision so Mr colando is seeing if he was supposed to be present find somebody out in the hallway okay we'll wait a couple of minutes if if not um I I'm inclined to just continue the case because um and and maybe I continue it till till February or or March even maybe the March heing and that would give you opportunity to either either get it squared away or or make a decision as to how to comply I can tell you that based upon the evidence I would find you in violation if if it came to that but as I say I'm I'm willing to continue it based on what I'm hearing I could you I give you a little history so when I applied after we bought the property I applied for a 20 foot wide by 20 foot carport to get rid of the tar carport okay okay after I applied for it we did other stuff to the property which is all permitted metal roof icing insulation impact glass windows pretty much almost $100,000 later I kind of you know just said well the carport can wait what I didn't know is to go over and close out the application so when the application expired that caused the building department to have Chris come out and see if I built a carport this one that you're looking at was the one I bought property I was oh I'm sorry I'm sorry um so I was trying to get one that matches the one on the other side which is has been there since 2013 it's bigger it takes two cars and I could get rid of the tarp one that's kind of what started this whole okay thing um that's pretty much you know the story in a nutshell okaye you didn't build them no that one that one was there I was which which one was there the one on the left well the the one on the right you you I have to keep putting a new tarp on it they only last six to eight months but I tried to keep mine looking good where they were both there yeah they had yeah okay so and you bought the property when May 5th 2023 okay and and you believe that these were built in 2013 well there's one not in the picture that's was 2013 according to the pra website okay all right good morning good morning if you'll raise your right hand do you swear our firm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth all truth and nothing but the truth so I hope you got I do all right and your full name and your position Peter Walden Deputy growth management D director okay Mr Walden I understand you may have some insight into this situation yes this uh this uh carport was brought to our attention by code en ment uh they did apply for alternative compliance with the CRA it went to the local NAC and they did not make a decision they kind of put it back towards the director to decide whether or not we would make um grant that alternative compliance uh the answer was no that it it does not meet the uh guidelines for that and um that's where we're at right now it's it's been turned down for alternative compliance when I look at the email from is it Joanne laerta or Jo Joy Le yeah okay who's the chair of that committee uh it looks to me like she's actually asking for guidance not not a decision by the staff but but guidance because I don't know that can you tell me that the staff has the ability to either Grant a variance or not you want to answer well the the growth management director it's not a variance it's alternative compliance to the CRA code and the growth management director as code has written does have that ability for everything other than Building height and that type of thing so okay so if someone wants to put a carport in front of the building where it normally would be required to go on the side of the building the growth management director could in fact grant that alternative compliance if it to other criteria as well like being the same design as the house and that type of thing so it's it's a metal carport like this would be problematic whenever it would be visible okay and then and then I guess ultimately um what I'm hearing is that there are many many more of these in the in this particular neighborhood and Community do you know whether those have been Grant granted alternative compliance or no no they have not this is the first one in this area that's come to our attention we do understand that there are other ones that have been out there for years um we respond to them when when they're brought to our attention okay all right your honor Elise Elder Deputy County attorney if you want the code provision for the alternative compliance for the growth management director it's in article 12 of our Land Development regulations I think it's 12.1 um under the applicability section and that lists the standard for the growth management director to Grant or not Grant alternative compliance okay um excuse me your honor I'm not aware that that a decision was made to deny it I mean as far as I know the permit was still in review I don't the the email doesn't say anything about denial Tony was that the the it went back to growth management and was denied I I think what Mr walon is saying is either it would be denied or they've made a decision somehow but you haven't gotten any notice of that right no I think Mr counselor said the per was still in review he did he did so according to our uh program aella it is still in review it hasn't been marked off yet but discussions have been made with the director and he has decided to deny the request Okay so until you get an an order denying it or some notice of it being denied it's still in review basically all right so uh I I was saying that it looked like the the neighborhood committee had kicked the can down the road um and and that's kind of of what I'm going to do as well because I until there's some final adjudication by the by the department I can't tell whether in fact uh the violation will be allowed to stand or not so if and I understand you're telling me that the the department is is going to deny it but it hasn't done it yet and um then the applicant basically has requested relief so I'm going to I'm going to move this to the March hearing and um and by that time you all should have figured out what your relative positions are I've already explained to Mr grub that based on the evidence and the the evidence that I have in front of me but for this issue of the incomplete decision regarding its location um I have enough evidence to find that a violation does exist it was built without permit and that's the simple easy answer so so that tells you you basically now have I you know two months to figure out what you're going to do whether it's to take them down whether it's to um pursue the the appeal of the growth management director's decision or once you get it um but but in any event I expect that we're going to see this case back at the March hearing and and um unless you fully complied which in in this context is either you've got permission to do it or you took them down okay yes sir all right okay all right so I I'll get you an order continuing the the case I've got copies that's that's for them uh thank you Mr Walden you're excused thank you ER okay Mr gr so I'll I'll get that to you do you have a card that you can give me or uh uh here person I don't we do it the other way just shoot me an email and and I'll U I'll get you an order thank you thank you all right oh before you all go Mr grao before you go I'm going to Mark uh you that email that you gave us as respondents exhibit one any objection all right so no objection to it coming into evidence this is in evidence as as respondents one okay okay interesting all right the next case is um is the Caso case it's uh Sergio and Susan Caso case enf 2024 12023 um and uh the respondents were given a citation for engaging in a business without a license and um and this is an appeal of uh of that uh citation so what have we got I go first who goes first I'm going to hear the counties first and then I'm going to and then I'm going to come to you okay so um if you actually you can all raise your right hand so if you will do you swear affirm the testimony about to give it be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you go I do all right and your full name Sir Nicholas Michael Fisher okay Mr Fisher you're going to testify and um and gentleman ser Cento Martin Silva Martin Silva okay and what's your relationship here just helper okay you work for Mr C I hired him I'm PID he's the recipient of this of the citation okay got it and it's Martin Silva okay all right let's hear from the county and then we'll go to you go ahead morning your honor morning my name is Nicholas Fischer and I have been sworn in I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County the respondent Martin Silva is present this cons case concerns the citation numbered enf 20241 12023 issued to Martin Silva at 5273 Southeast Hall Pines Way Stewart Florida 34997 in Martin County Florida on December 5th 2024 I observed a wooden deck being built I made contact with Martin Silva and the property owner Mr Sergio Caso property possessed a homeowner Builder permit with no listed licensed contractor on the permit the property owner stated he hired Mr Sila to help build the deck and was paying him daily for his work Mr Silva does not possess a valid contractor's license either through the State Department of Business and Professional Regulations or through Martin County I informed them of the unlicensed contractor violation under Section 4349 of Martin County's ordinance and issued Mr Silva a citation for engaging into business/ acting as a contractor without a license Mr Silva complied and provided his driver's license for the citation issuance the property owner stated he would pay the citation for Mr Silva the following day the citation is marked as County's exhibit number one just okay at that time I photographed the property the photographs accurate shows what I saw then and is marked as Cy exhibits numbers 2 through six exhibit number two just a front-facing view of the property on the left hand side you can see where the deck is being built exibit number three up closer view exibit number four some tools Lumber so number five just a photo copied or a photo of the citation with Mr Silva's ID uh that has been redacted just to show that it has been issued to him subit number six just a closer up view with the citation number and his redacted driver's license I have also attached the submitted permit application and homeowner Builder disclosure statement showing that no licensed contractor was added to the permit and that the homeowner understood that he could not hire an unlicensed contractor as County's exhibits numbers seven and 8 exhibit number seven the permit application at the bottom showing that no contractor's information was submitted St number eight the homeowner Builder disclosure statement a copy of the written request to contest the citation or counting's exhibits numb nine I request that all the counting's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the test imunity and evidence I request at this time that the citation be upheld okay um Mr Silva let me just ask you uh any objection to the exhibits 1 through N I was just helping I wasn't I wasn't contributing to be I wasn't contributing to be a contractor or a GC I was literally just okay no that's not what I'm asking what I'm asking is the county has presented exhibits one through nine in this case any any objection to any of those no no okay so without objection I'm going to accept into evidence the County's exhibits 1 through n in this case and now that helps us so that we can talk about them um do do you don't reside on the property right no okay and Mr Cento do you reside on the property my home it is your home okay and I'm living there right at the moment no you own the home I I I understand that I saw that from the property appraiser okay report but you don't live there not at the moment I plan on moving in where do you live boka okay all right and I'm looking at okay so you um basically applied for an owner Builder uh permit which was granted is that correct correct the permit is issued and it is an owner Builder permit all right and so and Mr Caso hires Mr Silva to help him correct all right so maybe I'm missing something where I would direct you to the you owna build closure statement paragraph number 8 which addresses this exact situation I understand that I may not delegate the responsibility oh that's paragraph 8 that's paragraph 8 okay for supervising work to a licensed contractor who is not licensed to perform the work being done okay are Mr Silva are you licensed contractor sir okay um and any person working on my building who is not licensed must work under my direct supervision which he was and must be employed by me which he was which means that I must comply with laws requiring the withholding of federal income tax and Social Security contributions under the federal Insurance contributions act so basically you you've got to um be mindful of that and must provide workers compensation ation for the employee I understand that my failure to follow these laws May subject me to Serious Financial Risk okay so if if I understand this correctly Mr Silva you weren't are you an employee or are you a contract employee employee and um and do you do other work for Mr Cento no only here yeah I just hired him to help me all right the moving digging the holes nothing structurally so when I arrived at the property Mr Silva was actively constructing the deck on the left-and side uh his brother was also present at the property working on the deck in the rear okay Mr Silva when it states in here that you have to be an employee that's a W2 employee and you have to take out Workers Compensation Insurance in his name um if you don't have that then he's not an employee so any help that you would then hire as you've just stated to help you build construct alter any sort of work on your property that would be required to be constructed by a licensed contractor you would need those things otherwise he is unlicensed if he does not possess a state license for example a cgc license a general contractor's license or a local license say to be a Carpenter that would qualify him to do the work um without being a W2 employee of him in this case for an owner Builder permit okay so let me let me make sure I understand the County's position say um say I'm in my 70s and I want to build a deck and I I um have difficulty carrying Lumber and so I get down to the local corner and hire a day laborer and um I say can you help me do this uh I I'm responsible for it as an owner Builder but I need help I I can't do it myself they would have to be a licensed contractor okay but that person would have to be a licensed contractor correct so I can't just go hire a day laborer you cannot on a homeowner Builder permit you're taking on the responsibility to be your own own contractor for the purposes of pulling the permit but anybody that you hire that you have come onto your property to assist you in the construction of your project if that project requires a licensed contractor to be able to do the work that person would also have to be licensed okay that is that is much further than I have ever seen the law taken as far as the County's position on this most jurisdictions would would view it differently let me let me just say that um well your honor if I could weigh in as as your hypothetical there's a difference between hiring somebody to help you move some heavy objects and hiring somebody who's actually doing the construction work people who do construction work are holding themselves out as a contractor as someone who does Contracting work which is the degrain of an unlicensed somebody holds them out a person who's actually building something is holding thems out to be a contractor okay you know under the definition of unlicensed contract I think that's a possibility yeah Mr Silva what do you normally do for a living are you employed by people to help them with buildings or do you do something else I am actually a barber and a nurse a barber a nurse and a nurse okay and how did you wind up working for Mr casimo you start needing some help moving things around because of his age and that's it okay Mr Caso how do you know Mr Sila he was referred to me by my daughter and how does your daughter know Mr Silva friend friend okay so I just needed some help so you say to your daughter hey you know anybody that could give me a hand give me a hand doing this and besides it Max and Mr Silva pops up right okay um wow oh let me clarify he said that if I was technically doing this for free he would have never filed me a citation that's his his actual code if he wasn't getting paid it would be okay but being I was paying him it's a problem so I thought you know Lincoln got rid of slave labor back in the 1800s well I I mean and and the County's position is is that if if this was a freebie from a neighbor who says sure I'll help you I'll help you build it you're good to go so if he's not paying him as defined in Florida statute 489 which governs the construction industry then he's not legally a contractor as that defines it the problem is though initially when I arrived at the property Mr Kento was not even present at the property you were out way retrieving Lumber I was retrieving Lumber Mr Silva and his brother were at the property constructing the deck not just helping but constructing the deck as you can see from exhibit number three I'm doing the supervision and it states that as long as I supervise and and also States work I mean I I'm sorry I was getting I'm not going to let you guys argue among yourselves but it but in fact um I I think when you read that that long um page it it does tell you that you need to directly supervise right but I mean I went to your Lumber yeah I'm sorry that that happened you know you just happened to pop up the one moment or one hour that I was missing I I I mean it's it's a technical violation um you weren't there he comes along and sees him and but then I they called me I came back with the Lumber you you noticed that the I had a van full of lumber when I got back and your contention is that that um Mr fiser that that under no circumstance except as a as a gift as a friend he could Mr Silva could help correct okay unfortunately the violation is clear um what defines a contractor someone who's receiving payment and response to performing Services related to the construction industry as you can see there's no contract I'm sorry but I unfortunately as he's paying Mr Silva and Mr Silva is helping and Performing the work being done and he does not have a license what needed is the reason why the citation was issued okay I and I hate this but I am going to find a violation the the violation I I understand it it's and I can tell you Mr Fisher this is as far as I have ever seen this statute taken but but there is technically a violation yep there is um and and it's you can cure it in the future uh simply by not um paying Mr silver or anyone else um there's no record of me you'll figure that out I'm I'm sure you will but nonetheless um based on on the evidence I'm going to find that the violation does exist I and I'm going to uphold the citation I it's and I'm so this gentleman could come to cannot come to provide for his family he's got to work for nothing that's basically now on top of everything else he's got to pay a $500 like I said you'll figure that out um I I'm sure that if Mr Silva wants to continue helping you you'll figure it out or you may find somebody else but um but so long as as um the the evidence indicates that there the violation existed so what was the what is the violation that he's that I wasn't there at that moment that's part of it but the other part was that you paid him and he's not a contractor it's it's as you said I mean you're 70 years old I'm I'm almost 70 years old you need help to do the I totally get it whatever you know totally get it I don't think it's proper but you know what am I going to do but yeah it it's as you said it's really taking it to the extreme let me ask you a question so I would need to hold insurance or or a Bly what what he said about the insurance thing even if I was helping for two days you can't even get insurance within two days to get to get accepted to even work anywhere as workers comp but but the contractor licenses have got a whole series of things that you would be required to do work comp and and other things but but that's not the issue other question is what can you do for it sorry well you wait a minute you you've got two other jobs you're you're a barber and a nurse four kids a that still doesn't hold up you want to be a contractor you go figure out how to be a contractor but that's what I'm asking but that's not and and I'm not here to tell you how to be a contractor I'm just looking at the at the statute and at the violation and what was done so Mr Silva the contractor's information post this um and how to obtain a license yeah okay I I'm the I'm going to call this case I think it's done I'm going to uphold the violation I understand I just want to clarify a couple of things from my own head it it won't be necessarily with me I understand but I'm the homeowner right yes why is he being violated I mean fine cuz cuz he was the one that was caught doing the work without a license I he caught me with a drill in my hand and I wasn't doing no work it's it's done we're done thank you thank you have a good day take care okay all right sorry everyone these cases are just taking a little longer than usual all right I'm going to call the copelan case Lisa copelan it's case enf 2024 9453 um Miss copelan is that you all right okay this is a violation case we're going to hear from the county first they make what the law calls a primacia case meaning if everything they say is accurate and correct and shows me that a violation uh exists then it's the burden then comes over to you and I'll swear you in and and we'll go from there okay okay all right so miss Carrasco um if you raise your right hand whatever you find that one what is that you good yes sir all right do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give will be the truth all truth and nothing but the truth so help you go I do all right whenever you're ready my name is Deborah carasco and I have been sworn in I am a code compliance investigator for Martin County the respondent Lisa Copeland is here the case concerns the property at 3410 Southwest Noble Avenue Palm City Florida the Martin County in Martin County Florida the case was not generated from anonymous complaint according to the official records of the property appraiser the property owner is Lisa Copeland a copy of the copy of the Property Appraiser's record of ownership is County's exhibit one okay on September 17th 2024 Code Compliance investigator Kelly Switzer inspected the property at that time she observed the property and found some camper found a camper hooked up with power sewer and water along with dock pilings and other trash and debris along the side of the property at that time she also photographed the property the photographs accurately show what she saw then are marked as counties exhibits 2 through 6 so those are the pilings in front of the house another picture the pilings are the those pilings are they on public RightWay they are okay number five is the camper and the other side of the camper based upon the investigation she issued a notice of violation to Lisa Copeland on September 24th 2024 marked as County's exhibit 7 in the notice she St cited the following Martin County code violations section 3201 c2h accessory uses RVs by Zone District Land Development regulations Martin County Florida and section 67201 B Nuance declared trash General ordinance of Martin County okay in the notice of violation the respond was given until October 22nd 2024 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 October 28th 2024 and is marked as Count's exhibit 8 the return receipt was not received and November 27th I posted the property and the and the county admin building the Affidavit of posting is marked as County's exhibit 9 it was at that time Lisa copelan requested an adjournment of the hearing to be today January 15 2025 on January 2nd 2025 an amended notice of of amended notice of hearing was generated it was dated to be mailed on 13 of 25 I also generated an amended Affidavit of posting and posted the property and the County Administration Building on the same day the photographs are marked as counted exhibits 10 through 12 and that's when I posted the property okay that's 12 y yes sir okay I again went to the property on January 14th and saw that the cited violations had had not been corrected the photographs accurately show what I saw at that time and are marked as counties exhibits 13 through 17 okay 13 so yeah the are some other he moved them from they were closer to the roadway he moved them to the side of a garage so it's these items back in here okay and then this is the pilings again are still yep as of yesterday and this is the trailer or the RV both sides of it okay is that that trailer is that in the front yard it's in the um it's on the side it's on the side of the house but yeah I request that all of the County's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the testimony and evidence I request that the respondent Lisa Copeland be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of Martin County Code by February 28th 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 incured a cost in the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and request that the county be reimburse this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing okay all right I'm sorry the date you set for compliance is November 28th 2025 I'm sorry February February February yes feary say November is a long time yes it is oh yeah that sounds good to me I'm sure okay um Miss Copeland if you raise your right hand sir uh you going to have any evidence to give or no okay all right um 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 become yes and your full names uh Lisa Anne Copeland and your address um I own this property I don't reside there fulltime I reside at 8419 Southeast Croft Circle in hop sound okay and sir your full name John White loock tell them and where do you reside at the at that property okay this property the one we're looking at yes okay and and what is your and that's your affiliation with Miss we are copelan we are boyfriend and girlfriend for 15 years okay got it all right good um okay any objection to my accepting in evidence that counties exhibits 1 through 1 in this case um no sir I I was aware of the wa without objection I'm going to accept into evidence the county give us 1 through1 17 now we can talk about okay okay so tell me so um I was not um I did not get notice of this today's hearing I was aware I did get at my residence the December um hearing I did contact UM John letting him know that I was in a serious car accident on December the 15th I got rear ended at a stoplight doing at 45 mil an hour I am still in severe pain and um I've you know not gotten a lot done in the last month to put it lightly um I did not know about this hearing until um 2 days ago um I just would like to um go back a little bit as far as the pilings and the um the other it's it's not trash for one thing um these are very expensive brand new pilings um I also own a property at the end of Noble Avenue new with a dock um I was issued a permit May 20 21 um I renewed the permit um you Ron I would object to any testimony about this other the case that has nothing to we we' already actually heard that case um well that's why the pilings are in the front yard um I was and I was uh let me just respond to to Mr tuy if there is some relevance between why the pilings are here and I will hear it okay okay so um you know I'm very offended that this is being called trash because this is very expensive um dock material I was issued a permit in May of 2021 to um repair an existing dock that I own at the end of the street with this property let me just stop you just a minor point and it may may help you with your understanding uh the section 67201 B is a is a very broad section okay and it starts with trash okay and that's why when when the county talks about it okay 6720b we all know as track okay well well but but trash and then it goes on very expensive for like very different points of of things including materials that are that are placed there but not used at the time thanks for clarifying that I mean otherwise we all might look at that and say oh well that just indicates that there's construction ongoing somewhere yes but but in fact if it just sits there right well the reason it's falls under 67 um they they issued me a permit and then took the permit back we actually have a a meeting with commissioner cry regarding this um situation so when they asked me to remove the pilings and dock material from the actual lot where the dock is we had no other choice but to bring them to the residents I don't know where else I'm supposed to do with this until we can get the permit um reissued for what it's originally purchased for was to for the dock so I'm kind of between a rock and a hard place I'm sorry why did you move them um well because they were at the property where the dock is at the end of the street and then we were told that they had to be removed from that property okay was there a was there an order I didn't did either either magistrate wereb or I issue an order that said there was a violation we were just trying to comply with code enforcement I've certainly okay um we were yes we did what we I had no other choice but to bring them there but you moved them from one bad place to another bad well I think they were what I understood was because the the prop the land down there was so um small I we moved them so it would not be a part of the easement and that was compil you signed an order on the other property with the trash on the October 16th um hearing of of last year uh for the piling for for the same reason that there with no ongoing that other case has been adjudicated the permit has been denied there won't be a permit issued for the dock on that property it's actually still ongoing we have a meeting with the commissioner of why our permit was issued twice three three times it was renewed and then when I went to renew the purchase the the permit after actually getting the material they denied the permit so it was issued three times and then taken back saying that now all of a sudden um there will be no permit so here I am with all of this doc material and we're still it's still an ongoing process we we uh have a meeting with the commissioner um regarding this situation your meeting uh we just were here actually yesterday and to plead our case in front of all the Commissioners and were um got a response from commissioner campy that they were arranging a meeting for us regarding this situation okay so you came and spoke under public comment we did yesterday yes all right it wasn't an agenda item uh no okay so you came and talked to it was the only way that we could just get the reason why I was issued a permit three times and then all of a sudden when I finally have the material to get the work done they um denied the permit and now they're emphatic about telling me there'll never be a a permit issued which we just want to know why and how how can you issue a permit three times and then all of a sudden say you're you're never going to get a permit you're never going to be able to repair your dock we have no answers so that's what we went to the commissioner for the answers in October on October 16th I issued an order that basically I guess talks about this other property and said yeah under 67 2011b you you can't have those those polls there you got to yeah well the PS should be in the water um that our permit you moved from one property to the other I didn't know what else to do with them sir that's um but but I I didn't okay your H may may I so sure we were told if that the the the pilings were an eyesore to our neighbors and to move them from that location out the water so we we moved them down to our to our property and put them where the where they are at this moment and with that said with the p pilings should be in the water at this time all we want is to repair the dock and put the pilings in the water where they're supposed to be can't both talk at the same time we were told that we can't even repair the dock after a hurricane broke it in half I cannot repair a dock that's been there for over 25 years and that's what the county told you that's what they're telling us at point that we cannot even that's why the commissioner is um and I don't know the answer to that but I but it's ongoing sir your honor if I can remind the court at the October 16th hearing the building the director testified rather at length about the entire situation with the property and the dock and the uh the denial of the permits the issuance and and subsequent denial of the permits sir I was never given a reason for the denial of the permit after it being permitted to us three times how can you deny when you finally get the material to get the work done I can't answer that and I don't know the the answer it's not my Pur and that's why I went to the commissioner sir so so I issu the order in October you move the pilings to this other property basically right I got that right all right now what about what about the other situation and that's the uh campers um in a stored state with no one residing on the camper yes sir um that camper is leaving and it will be gone within 2 weeks so so I have made arrangements for that unfortunately I it couldn't happen before today's hearing as I stated before I never got the notice of today's hearing um as after my accident I did not get the letter at my house about today's hearing John didn't you know I just found out about this the camper is leaving and will be gone within two weeks okay all right good um if I can make a clarification on that yes to swear me in first sure you you've got a mic there right okay uh do you swear affirm the testimony about to give will be the truth all truth of nothing but the truth so off you got I do full name John colando code enforcement administrator okay um when the email came to me about the accident I did respond to that one and said we would move it to today's hearing at that time unless we decided to come into compliance so I believe she was notified of today's hearing right you said it would be um 30 days but you didn't give me the exact date I have the email I can provide that email all right I it it's not an issue because you are here yes sir so I did find out about it but not in enough time to prepare um what I would you know normally come more prepared to to a hearing but honestly I'm not sure there's anything to prepare I mean I can tell you that that I've got an order that I issued in October that said you got to get rid of the the pilings from the other property yes sir from the other property well you did that did but you moved them to another property yeah we were hoping to get the permit resolved so the the pings could be in the water where they're supposed to be and at this point um you know we're still working on that so I'm still hopeful that I can repair the dock as was intended um I guess what I'm telling years ago I don't appreciate the Cat and Mouse I mean it if you were going to remove the pilings they should go to a proper storage area I don't know where that is that's up to you as a as the homeowner to figure that out right public RightWay is not is not the right place to put it right I mean and my apologies to the court sir the county absolutely could come and just take those away okay yes sir if they wanted I appreciate the time to come into compliance with that February the date uh will be sufficient for that and I appreciate the time I'm I'm going to find based on everything I've heard uh all the exhibits plus the testimony that violations as charge do exist on the property and I'm going to order you to comply on or before February 28th 2025 failing which a fine in the amount of $100 per day will ACR and I am going to award costs in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing can I have time for that sir for the payment no ordered um it's due now uh you you pay could you give me some time to I'll pay it um pay the fine your honor I'll pay the fine yeah okay it's due now so yes sir all right that's the old one there's the new one uh we can actually give you a copy of this if you if you like that way you can take it with you we don't have to deal with your honored mayor have two minutes or one minute please I was told by Mr colando that if I moved the property moved the pilings from where they were and moved them up to the house that that would solve the problem for the property for where it is and if if at that point they would issue another notice which is what I said fine hopefully that the permits will be taken care of by them because I thought that was nobody been able to give us an answer for why they took away the permits to begin with there's some there's some very shady stuff going on in in this department over here and we're trying to get to the bottom of it through the Commissioners I don't know exactly what it is but we will get to the bottom of it they're breaking some laws and I'm not sure what they are but we will get to the bottom of it how do you even suspect that I've all their emails I've got all the correspondents we issued three permits yeah so yeah that's beside the point for this court and I apologize for the Outburst for sure do you have a response to I do um he is correct I said that would if he moved them from one property to another property I would have to comply the one property but I did tell him at that point I would start a case on the other property it is a cat and mouse but I couldn't really um do much else on that but I I did tell him I would do that and that's exactly what I so we're not trying to play cat mouss we're trying to comply and that's what we were told to do and that's what we did okay we've got over $50,000 worth of building supplies sitting on our property because they took away permits that they had no right to take away okay that's where we're standing right now so if we're in violation for doing something wrong I can assure you they're doing a lot more and you're going to you're going to talk to your county commissioner and yes we'll see how it plays out and okay and and you're still going to impose the fine yes sir yes sir the violation does exist I don't appreciate the fact that that three months later uh it goes from one one parcel to another told you that he told us that we could do that what he what he told you and I heard because I listened to it carefully is that that if you did do that that he would initiate another case against you but your honor no nobody no of our nebor neighbors are complaining the only people are complaining are them okay not one complaint from a neighbor that's not relevant it is no it is not relevant the law is the law the way the ordinance is constructed so thank you sir good luck where do I pay the price okay um the fourth case is uh Evelyn comto and it's case enf 2024 06615 also a violation case and um Miss SBI you're going to testify okay and gentleman in a minute asbi if you 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 so I help you go I do all right whenever you're ready my name is Maria espat and I have been sworn in I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County the respondent Evelyn R Comstock is not present this case concerns the property at 4962 Southeast pompo Terrace in Stuart Florida and Martin County Florida this case was not generated from an anonymous complaint wait a minute did you say is not present correct these are relatives okay got it okay but she's represented I am assuming so okay all right according to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County the property owner is Evelyn R Comstock a copy of the Property Appraiser's record of ownership is County's exhibit one on June 18th 2024 officer counselor inspected the property at that time he observed trash High Grass and inoperable vehicle at that time he photographed the property the photographs accurately show what he saw then and are marked as counties exhibits two and three this is the uh trash I believe this is an inop exhibit 3 some high grass in the back okay based upon the investigation he issued a notice of violation to the owner on August 1st 2024 marked as Count's exhibit 4 in the notice he cited the following Martin County code violation section 67. 2011b nuisance declear trash Etc General ordinances Martin County Code section 91. 34A General in generally inoperable Vehicles General ordinances Martin County Code and section 67. 20101 a nuisance declared weeds undergrowth General ordinances Martin County Code in the notice of violation the respondent was given until August 22nd 2024 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County Code Enforcement upon doing so I took over the case in November and did a followup in November 8th 2024 and seen the violation still remained and found a new violation of a structure built without a permit my inspection photos are marked as exhibits five and six okay here's the the more trash right here is a structure like an overhang connected to the house that had no permit while it was on the property the attendant said she would clean up and remove the unpermitted structure November 14 2024 I amended the notice of violation adding section 105.1 permits were required Incorporated by section 21.1 General ordinances Martin County Code with a new compliance date of December 16 2024 the notice of violation the amended notice of violation is County's exhibit number seven oh I'm sorry six was the other side of um the boat on the inspection that shows it was inoperable and number seven is the amended notice the unpermitted structure was removed but the trash violation remained since compliance was not achieved a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail December 17 2024 Markus County's exhibit 8 the return receipt was not returned therefore on December 30th 2024 I posted the property and the Martin County admin building and the Affidavit of posting is marked as County's exhibit 9 I went back again to the property on January 14th 2025 and seen the violations still remained at that time I photographed the property the photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as County's exhibits 10 through 18 10 the only violation that was corrected um is that there's no longer an inop as of yesterday okay the boat is now on a trailer number 11 shows all the trash in the backyard and on the side number 12 is just a different view of the backyard with more trash on the side number 13 is a different angle of the yard showing the trash wood and other items 14 in the backyard as well 15 items in front of the vehicle 16 I looking at 15 mhm is that not an inoperable vehicle um they've covered it and so it's allowed to be there as long as there it's covered it remains covered 16 okay 17 is um from the backyard uh to the front yard photo of the trash on the side okay okay and lastly 18 showing that the inop is uh violation has been cured I request that all of the vi all of the counties exhibits be received into evidence based upon the testimony and evidence I request that the respondent Evelyn R comto be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by February 28th 2025 and if not in compliance by then be required to F to pay a fine in the amount of $100 for every day the violations continue thereafter the county has incurred a cost in the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and requested the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing all right um okay gentlem you raise your right hands do you swear or affirm the test Tony about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so hope you got and your full name and address sir Robert comto I live at 9605 libertas way in Port St Lucy Florida okay and Mr comto what is your relationship um I'm to the owner son this is my father grandson okay is my grandmother obviously okay and and Mr comto Gregory comto okay I live at 1291 Southwest Sunshine Street in Stewart all right and you're the owner's son yes okay all right um you've you've heard the county and uh seen what they've presented as exhibits 1 through 18 any objection to those no sir no sir okay so without objection I'll order that those be accepted in evidence um what have you got to tell me so basically um we got a little bit of a unique situation that's going on here um as you're aware it's my grandmother's home she's 99 years old um mobility issues uh my mother over here is her primary caretaker does she reside there yes sir yes sir okay so she resides there um in February of 2022 my sister sister and her boyfriend came into some troubles I guess you could say so my grandmother agreed to let them stay at her house to get on their feet as you know just as a as a kind gesture um shortly there after um my sister's boyfriend his name is Michael he started bringing just all kinds of stuff to the property um it's been an ongoing battle you could say with this gentleman to not bring these things to the house and and do this to my grandmother's home um but we've had no luck with just trying to communicate with him um civy without going a legal route um but now that we've gotten to this stage of the game where it's now involving code enforcement and it's gotten to a level as you can see from the photos that's just absolutely disgusting to to say the least um it's it's really prompted us to take the next step to try to um have him evicted from the property so we have every intention of cleaning this up or giving him the chance to clean it up during this this process um but we would like to ask for sufficient time just because an eviction process could take some time as everybody knows um and if he does not comply with you know removing the items his at that point depending on how the eviction process goes which I do have uh an attorney that's that's going to be helping with this that whole situation but um have you actually filed an eviction we have not started the process yet um because I just recently was made aware of this whole situation by my mother um and that's sort of when I stepped in like you know we need to do this we need to do that and these are the steps we need to take to rectify this situation so we're going to be um go AE we're going to go ahead and file that eviction to start that process and depending on what we get out of Michael the person who owns all of this stuff um we may just bring in a dumpster and just fill it up and haul it off because there is obviously nothing there that that seems to be of value um and and my guess is that you know since he's been doing this for two years and this has been ongoing since June that he will probably not comply so I'm just kind of looking to the Future and thinking that that's how it's going to turn out is that we're going to have to evict him and then pay to remove all of the items let me just to ask you again Michael is your my sister's boyfriend that might okay they're not married no sir okay and what is his last name Snodgrass s n o d g r a SS if I'm correct and I his first name is Paul too I think Paul Michael SN okay and um and your sister's name her name is Sarah comto s a r a s a r a h yes sir all right so um now do Michael and Sarah continue to live in that property yes sir yes they're there right now okay so so there's Grandma Lisa she's there mother lives there and and Sarah and Michael anybody else H uh they my sister has a daughter from another man and then Sarah and Michael also have a daughter so it's the two of them and two daughters two minors yeah two young girls which adds to the uniqueness of the situation with evictions because it it's involving kids and it's it's really quite quite a or sounds like all right um but we have every intention of of bringing this this yard back to and the home itself because the home has some repairs that need to be made as well um and we have every intention of getting this property back to the state it used to be in because my grandmother and grandfather Built This Home in 1978 and so the intention is to to keep this home within the within the family as a generational home that you know will be passed down it's in Rocky Point a desirable area and by no means do we agree that the condition of the home is what would be represented if he wasn't there okay um let me ask you the county has suggested the end of February I feel that that is not sufficient time just because of the eviction process okay and do you have a a thought as to what would be appropriate um if you would agree to perhaps 60 or 90 days cuz I've heard that that kind of lines up with the eviction process um but again you know that whatever you feel is is due um because we intend to leave here today and and get over to the house and tell him you know we just left this hearing this is where we are get this stuff cleaned up so I don't want to propose to him a lengthy amount of time because that could just add to the complacency wait until the last day like you let me let me ask the county any objection to 60 days to yes the end of March we would move for a continuance instead your honor for 60 days to see if they can get this uh situation squared away okay um and then we can always bring it back at that at that time we don't have we've heard everything we wouldn't have to hear it again so we would go to the end of April um continue with to the not the end of continue it to the April um understand what the county is that's actually a a generous offer from the county because and and I would tell you uh actually what I told the other earlier gentlemen I've heard the evidence and I've heard the testimony I would find based on that the the two violations based on the evidence that I'm seeing so of course we're not so I'm not adjudicating it today but but I don't need to hear more evidence to to do that correct so so if I continue this to the April hearing which is April 16th April 16th okay so I'm going to continue this to um let me just JW a note here continue to 416 and either by that time you will have cured the issue come into compliance correct or or I'll adjudicate it that day okay okay so um okay I I think that's you'll get an order continuing it with a new hearing date okay so with the continuation um does that mean that the 575 is still due today or is that is the whole no it's withheld it will be withheld until it's adjudicated let me just ask you um do we have good contact for you all do we have good we have got email and so if we email you an order continuance order you'll get it yeah I can share with him he's got email and I have your email as well we can give everything Maria okay all right good so that's how we'll we'll send it out and I probably within the next day or so I'll get the order out to the county okay okay thank right okay good luckk you thank you for your time oh and by the way at least for the for the short while I am dismissing the charge of 91 uh 34A which was the generally inoperable vehicle so that that um that charge is gone that leaves you with uh 67201 a weeds and 67201 B trash okay okay and and um V's going too so okay all right everything's going okay good well thank you very much all right thank you sir okay uh let's see all right five is the black Kee rum case okay it's the enf 2024 04736 respondent is black Cane Rum I can't wait to hear how that name comes about um we're gonna it's a violation case uh and we're going to hear from the county officer counselor is going to testify again you've been sworn in officer counselor yes and then I'll hear that part of the case and then it'll flip over to you all okay um my name is Chris counselor I've been sworn in I am a co-compliance investigator for Martin County the respondents black Kane rum are present the case concerns the property at 9700 Southwest Fox Brown Road in which is located within Indian Town located within Martin County Florida this case was not generated from an anonymous complaint according to the official records of the property prer of Martin County the property owners are black Kee rum a copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is County exhibit one on April 30th 2024 officer Frank Marcos inspected the property at the time he observed a commercial structure built without a permit at the time he photographed the property the photographs accurately show what he saw then and as marked as County exhibits two and three two and three that's his basically his hanging but this is the structure in question back here okay and that's an exhibit two okay got it exhibit three is like a door hanger yes okay uh based upon the investigation officer Marcos issued a notice of violation to Black C run rum on June 7 2024 marked this County exhibit four the signature uh in the notice of he cited the following Martin County code violations section 105.1 follow building code permits when required as adopted by section 21 .1 General ordinances to obtain a permit for the commercial structure and the notice of violation respondent was given until July 8 2024 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County Code Enforcement I took over the case in November 20 on November 26 2024 I reviewed the case and a permit had not been issued for the building a screenshot of the property's permit history is County exhibit 5 basically permit was applied for but was waiting on applicant which basically means has not been issued uh since compliance was not achieved a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on November 26 2024 and is marked as County exhibit 6 the return receipt was not received so on January 3rd 2025 I posted the property a photo of the poting in the aid DAV the posting our counties exhibit s and8 seven is my posting on the front gate and a is my affidavit posting uh no call or letter has been received in Time s therefore I went to the property again on January 14th 2025 and saw the decided violation had had not been corrected at the time I photographed the property the photographs ACC what I show what I saw then marked as can exhibits 9 and 10 with a screenshot of the permit status as exhibit 11 so exhibit 9 the structure still there 10 just a side view of the structure and exhibit 11 shown that the permit still has not been issued okay I request that all counties exhibits be received into the evidence based upon the testimony the evidence I request that the respondant black Cane Rum be ordered to comply with the subed provisions of the Martin County Code by February 28th 2025 if not in compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per day until the violation is corrected the count has inced the cost of $575 500 75 hours conducting today's investigation that concludes okay um if you'll Raise Your Right hands do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so I hope you got I do and your full names and relationship to the property um I'm ignasio uh Rodriguez I'm the owner and she's Joan Rodriguez my wife okay she's the co-owner all right and I I don't dispute anything that the count is saying it's it's all true um it All Began because of a misunderstanding I thought that I was a exempt and actually um we did confirmation of that in in January of last year but then like three months later I think uh maybe it was D showed up and they told me that that area was not a exempt but I had already put the building up thinking that I was I was a exempt so anyway but I that's fine I wanted to get in compliance I applied for the permit and they came back with a number of issues that I I didn't have a lot of this information because I didn't plan on having to get a permit so I immedi we had a a hearing here sometime in I think in July or early August and we met in this building and everybody was you know very gracious that told me everything that I needed to do and I immediately hired a they one of the things that they insisted on was a site plan so I immediately hired matters engineering um which they they do this sort of thing and they said that they could get me the site plan they could get me the the plans for the concrete uh slab I already have the plans for the building so we could get uh in compliance the first thing that they asked me to do was to uh get a surveyor and I went back to to my regular surveyor and they agreed that they would do it but it took them like a month before they got out there when they finally did it they did it wrong and then they gave the wrong information back to matters matters had to send them back out to get the right elevations and that kind of thing um and then it's been in Mother's Hands I have sent them several uh updates on on the things that we need to do in the in the sitemap and they you know said well you're going to need this many parking spaces and all of that and I'm you know I'm full compliance with all of that but the the problem is that they didn't give me this site plan until last week and it was all wrong a lot of the things that we had talked about was not there so I redid another site plan uh with the details I needed to to be there um and they agreed that they were going to mod ify the site plan you want to show us that we can put it down on the screen on the tablet there so we agreed that we're going to do the site plan more according to this because I need to bring in the sugar cane through here process it here and then the tractors need to be able to move around so we need to be in compliance with seven um parking spaces which we're going to put five here and two on this other side but the site plan we just met yesterday to in and went over the details of this and you know I'm I'm at their Mercy for them to to come up with a site plan and you know to comply with the and they have the preliminary hearing on the site plan so that we can get all in the same page so that I can get in compliance okay do do I understand I mean I'm I'm kind of piecing this together do I understand that that you're going to manufacture rum yes where the name comes we're going to do things a little different than than other people are doing it we're not going to use molasses we're going to grow our own sugar cane black cane some of it will be black cane that's where the name from well we're going to grow our own sugar cane in the land adjacent lands I also own uh land on the other side of this site so there will be agricultural land just not this this particular s we're going to be making um rum with uh oranges and mango and the different types of sugar can but it's all going to be grown on site and then everything except the rum will stay on site so everything that as you know you probably I don't know if you know but about 2/3 of a mash when you when you make the the the fer fermentation about 2/3 of that is waste and 1/3 distill to 40% alcohol that waste is going to be processed and brought back into the land so that we don't lose any minerals and all the things that we would lose if we remove that waste permanently from the land I got it okay that's sure so um I mean I I know they want me to finish this by by favor I'm still at the mercy of these other people I have all met with them Fire Marshall I got uh the uh two companies working on the design so I I don't know if I can finish this by by end of February well I mean what basically what the county is saying is you need to obtain a building permit um for the structure and if you just got the site plan wrong um yeah hopefully they'll they'll get site plan needs to be approved right that yes by growth management apparently the respondent has been talking to growth management and the building department has sort of been left out of the loop so my understanding is the building department doesn't know about any of this good stuff you've been doing okay so um County suggesting the end of February what are you looking at TimeWise I I don't know considering how slow these people have been moving I don't know maybe another month end of March my my and I'm going I'm going to put a fire on them as soon as I leave here well my my thought is that this probably is a minor site plan we're just in a April probably it better make it it's you know spond seems to be you know on top of stuff he's relying on third parties that you know has only some control over um April at the at the at the earliest the earliest and end of April yeah because once they present the site plan I'm sure you guys are going to come back with more changes and we're going to have to go back and forth you don't know what's going to come up so that's why you got to leave time we're trying but we're I mean I'm I'm trying I really am just it's it's it's a difficult process putting together a Distillery Drive you to Dr well the problem is if I if I order you to obtain your building permit by April 30th that's fine for everybody here but that doesn't necessarily light a fire under the building department or growth management I I mean you can take the order and show them um and I I'm inclined to Grant you at least until until that time I'm if I went out further then it's like five months let's let's say the end of April okay um to to obtain a building permit I mean that's really what you need to do because based again on what I'm hearing the the county has made its case that you built the building without a permit you didn't know you needed it but you did so yeah it was a misunderstanding I didn't I mean I even hired a lawyer that got a a letter from the county saying that I could build uh but he never send me the whole letter he sends me just a paragraph oh you are clear to build an A2 land a Distillery but he didn't send me the full letter until afterwards and I realized but you need a perit for the building and you need this and you need that and and the idiotic lawyer never sent me the whole letter until I requested it from him when I after talking to the to the uh code enforcement people right okay um anything else you need to tell me okay ask me whatever you all right um any objection to my accepting in evidence the Count's exhibits 1 through 11 in this case OB all right so based on that I'm going to find that it is appropriate to enter exhibits 1 through 11 into evidence and um based upon that evidence and your testimony in the counties I'm going to find that a violation as charge does exist on the property and I'm going to order compliance honor before April 30th uh 2025 failing which a finding the amount of $100 per day will acre and I am going to award costs in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county um at the conclusion of the hearing so instead of February it's going to be April 30th okay and I am going to mark your um drawing if you will let us keep it I'm going to mark it as exhibit a for okay that's a it's not a professional drawing they that's what they're going but we used it and we talked about it and any objection no objection all right it's now respondents um I I'll say number one because the county normally numbers their exhibits okay and that'll go into evidence as well okay so when do you think you're going to get in production as soon as I get that permit I'm I'm on it I mean I got a lot of things would do on the outside which I we've been assembling the stuff inside but we don't have electricity we just have an extension cord to run the drills and things like that all right well good luck thank you thank you all righty take care definitely hopefully by the end of the summer I'm making some rum that'll be good thank you your honor yes ma'am you want to discourage that no absolutely not okay uh let's see yep we're back at the top of the batting order it's uh the narelli case Maria narelli and it's case CNF 2024 90047 and officer M proti you're going to swear you in do you swear affirm the testimony about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you go yes sir okay oh your honor this is a stipulated agreement it is a stipulated okay yeah it shows as a violation case on the doc step okay and what have we got my name is Charles ambretti and I've been sworn in I am a code compliance investigator for Martin County the respondent Maria narelli is not present this case concerns the property at 2921 Southwest Brighton Way Palm City Florida 3499 Z 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 Maria narelli a copy of the Property Appraiser's record of ownership is County's exhibit one on September 3rd 2024 an expired permit application letter was emailed to the contractor of record a copy of that letter is marked as County's Exhibit 2 on September 6th 2024 I inspected the property at that time I observed a completed AC mini split without an issued permit at that time I photographed the property and left the door tag the photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as County's exhibits three four five and six exhibit 3 is a front-facing photo of the property exhibit four is the the door tag that I left the homeowner exhibit 5 is a photo of the mini split with the info tag matching the same model number on the application exhibit six is a top view of the AC mini split based upon the investigation I issued a notice of violation to Maria narelli on October 1st 2024 it's marked as County's EX bit s in the notice I cited the following Martin County code violation section 105.1 Florida building code permits when required Incorporated by section 21.1 General ordinances Martin County Code for completed AC Min split without an issued permit an amended notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on December 17th 2024 and is marked as County's exhibit 8 the owner entered into a stipulated agreement with the county on January 13th 2025 to be in compliance by April 30th 2025 the administrative fee in the amount of $350 has been paid in full okay all right um so without objection I'll accept inevidence the counties exhibits 1 through eight in this case and I'm looking at the stipulation which recites um the facts as they were presented and note for the record that $350 has been paid to the county and uh that Marina relli has signed the stipulation electronically and officer Amber you signed on behalf of the county I'm going to find that it is appropriate to enter into the stipulation uh or enter into the agreed order based on the stipulation and um order compliance with the stipulation in agreed order thank you your honor M okay h okay uh next is Officer counselor it's uh the Steven Stanley case and it's enf 2024 uh 06 0573 responded as Steven Stanley correct and officer counselor whenever you're ready my name is Chris councelor I've been sworn in I am a co-compliance investigator from Martin County the respondent Steven Stanley is not present this case concerns the property at 23901 Southwest Martin Highway located within okobe located within Martin County Florida this case was not generated from an anonymous complaint cing the official records of the property appraiser the property owner is Ste Steven Stanley a copy of the proper appr record of ownership is County exibit 1 okay on June 26 2024 also Frank Marcos inspected the property at the time he observed an expired permit bl2022 110463 at the time he photographed the property photographs accur show what he saw then and so the expired permit letter will be exhibit two with his photage being exhibits three and four so this is the expired permit letter which is why officer Marcus is out to the property exhibit three is the structure in question an exhibit four based upon the investigation officer Marcos issued a notice of violation to Steven Stanley on August 1st 2024 mark this count exhibit 5 and the notice he set it for the following Martin County code violation section 105.1 Florida building building code uh section 21.1 General ordinances to renew his expired building permit and notice a violation respondent was given until September 3rd 2024 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County Code Enforcement upon doing so I took over the case in November of 2024 a review of the case showed the permit was still expired a screenshot of the permit history is County's exhibit 6 okay since compliance was not achieved a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on December 3rd 2024 and is marked as County exhibit 7 today's hearing date was my signature the return re seat was not received so on January 3rd 2025 I posted the property a photo of the posting in the Affidavit of posting or Markus count exibits 8 n Eight's the posting on the front gate of the property nine is my affid a posting no call letter has been received from the property owner therefore I check the permit status again on January 14th 2024 and saw the decided violation had not been corrected a screenshot of the permit status is marked as County exhibit 10 sh that the permit is still in an expired status I request that all counties exhibits be received into the evidence and based upon the testimony and evidence I request that the respondent Steven Stanley be ordered to comply with the CED provisions of the Martin County Code by February 28 2025 if not compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per day until the violation is corrected the county has incuded a cost in the amount of $575 conducted the investigation and question that the county being reimburse this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing and that concludes my testimony okay anybody here on behalf of Steven Stanley looking out seeing no one without objection or accepted evidence the County's exhibits one through 10 um officer counselor where is the concrete deck uh it's under said said structure okay so the the structure is not the problem yeah the permit the expired permit is for the deck the concrete deck underneath all right and what kind of building is that uh like a barn from a previous case it started as a pole barn so there's history to be reviewed on what's happened uh okay but then either somebody poured a concrete pad or like I said I have previous history with the case and I know that um it was the county sighting him to at the time there was a pole barn there and the permit that's expired is because we told him to get a concrete deck back in 2022 so that he got the permit to correct that case and now that permit expired so got you all right okay so um again without objection I'll accept in evidence Count's exhibits 1 through 10 in the case based upon that evidence and your testimony I'm going to find that a violation does exist on the property order compliance honor before February 28th 2025 failing which of fine in the amount of $100 per day will acre and I'll further award costs in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing thank you sir thank you uh let's see all right the next one is the Sergio V nativi living trust it's CNF 20241 0213 and officer Carrasco you're going to testify you've already been sworn in yes sir my name is Deborah Carrasco and I have been sworn in I am a code compliance investigator for Martin County the respondent Sergio V nativi living trust is not present this case concerns the property at 1385 Northeast Flor Place Jensen Beach Florida this case was not generated from an anonymous complaint according to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County the property appraiser owner owner is Sergio V nativi living trust a copy of the Property Appraiser's record of ownership is County's exhibit one on October 14th 2024 I inspected the property at that time I left a door tag regarding the expired application marked as County's exhibit number two okay exhibit three is the notice of expired permit application I returned to the property October 29th 2024 and the girlfriend she's either the girlfriend or the wife confirmed the work was done but would not open the gate for me exhibit 4 shows what I saw at that time okay what are we looking at there I was just looking at the gate she wouldn't let me in she was standing right next to me but she wouldn't open the gate she did confirm the work was done and what work are we talking about the windows and the door okay but she did confirm the work was done correct okay based upon the investigation I issued a notice of violation to Sergio V Nativity living trust on November 14th 2024 marked as County's exhibit 5 in the notice I cited the following Martin County code violations section 105.1 permits when required by Incorporated by section 21.1 in the notice of violation the respondent was given until December 5th 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 December 9th 2024 and is marked as County as exhibit 6 the return receipt was not received on January 2nd 2025 I posted the property and the Martin County admin building the affid of posting is marked as County's exhibits 6 and 8 I'm sorry seven and eight S and eight yes so the Affidavit of posting and then when I posted the property okay got it no call or letter from the property owner was received within the time allowed however on January 9th of 2025 a revision to the application was submitted it was denied and is back to um the status is back to waiting on applicant on January 14th 2025 I did research on the permit again exhibit 9 shows what I saw which is the application uh waiting not that anyone's going to read that so what is there County change scanners or something I it's just like I I mean I can see it on the laptop but it's it's impossible to read it there I don't know okay I request that all of the County's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the testimony and evidence I request that the respondent Sergio V Nativity living trust be ordered to comply with the cited provision of the Martin County Code by February 28th 20 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 requests that the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing okay looking out anybody here on behalf of the Sergio V nativi living trust seeing no one without objection I'll accept in evidence the Count's exhibits one through nine in this this case based upon that evidence and your testimony I'll find that violation as charge does exist on the property and Order compliance honor before February 28th 2025 failing which a fine in the amount of $100 per day will acrew and I'll further award costs in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing thank you thank you and let's see next case is um the Scott Richards case it's enf 20241 11169 and officer Switzer you're going to testify if you raise your right hand you swear or affirm testimony you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so I'll you g i do ma'am whenever you're good to go my name is Kelly Switzer and I been sorin I'm a code compliance investigator from Martin County the respondent Scott Richards is not present this case concerns the property at 18912 Southeast Hill Crest Drive to Questa Florida 33469 this case was not generated from from anonymous complaint according to the official records of the property appraiser of Martin County the prop property owner is Scott Richards a copy of the Property Appraiser's record of ownership is County's exhibit 1 on October 29th 2024 I inspected the property and at the time I observed a vacant lot that had trash and overgrowth at the time I photographed the property and the photographs accurately show what I saw then and is marked as Cy's exhibits 2 through 4 there's some Tall Grass one two three is another angle of the property called GRS yep and then uh four is the trash on the side of the property exhibit five is the aerial showing that the lot had previously been cleared based upon the based upon the investigation I issued a notice of violation to Scott Richards on December 3rd 2024 the the notice of violation is marked as County's exhibit six in the in the notice I cited the following Martin County code violations section 67. 20101 a nuisance declared weeds undergrowth General ordinances Martin County Code and section 67. 20101 B trash nuisance declared trash Etc General ordinances Martin County Code in the notice of violation the respondent was given to December 24th 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 a hearing was issued by certified mail on December 27th and is marked as County's exhibit 7 the return receipt was not received therefore I posted the property and at the administrative building the postings and the Affidavit of posting are marked as counties exhibits eight and nine posting and my affidavit no call or letter from the property owner was received within the time allowed therefore I went to the property again on December 14th 2024 and saw the cited violations had not been corrected at the time I photographed the property the photographs accurately show what I saw then and as marked as County's exhibits 10 through 12 and that's January 14th yes January 14th I'm sorry yeah so there's still more trash tall grass and then just another angle of the grass the trash is still there some yes some a lot of it has been cleaned up 10 correct okay all right okay I request that all the County's exhibits be received into evidence and based upon the testimony and evidence I request that the respondent Scott Richards be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by February 28th 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 this concludes my testimony all righty anybody here on behalf of Scott Richards looking out seeing no one without objection I'll accept in evidence the Cy's exhibits 1 through 12 in this case based upon that evidence and your testimony I'll find that violations as charge do exist on the property and Order compliance owner before February 28th 2025 failing which to find in the amount of $100 per day will ACR and I'll further award costs in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing okay next one is the Stuart Archer and Penny Lind Bergen Archer case yes it's enf 20241 0285 and that's also yours officer Switzer whenever you're ready okay my name is ky Switzer and I've been sworn in I'm a co-compliance investigator for Martin County the respondent respondents Stuart K Archer and Penny Lynn Bergen Archer are not present this case concerns a property at a vacant lot in hob sown 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 owners are Stuart K Archer and Penny Lyn buron Archer a copy of the Property Appraiser's record of ownership as County's exhibit one on November 13th 2024 I inspected the property and at the time I observed a vacant lot that had trash and debris in the front of the property at the time I photographed the property and the photographs accurately show what I saw then and is marked as County exhibits 2 through 4 this is a um not quite sure what it is to be honest the trailer abandoned trailer I guess there more trash and debris in front of the trailer and that's just another angle based upon the investigation I issued a notice of violation to Stuart K Archer and Penny Lin buron Archer on December 14th 2024 the notice of violation is marked as County exhibit 5 in the notice I cited the following Martin County code violation section 67201 B nuisance declared trash Etc General Oren's Martin County Code in the notice of violation was given until December 5th 2024 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 a hearing was issued by certified mail on December 11th 202 24 and is marked as County's exhibit 6 the return receipt was returned as undeliverable 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 s and 8 oh NOP oh oh yeah my posting is there in the very front another property and then my Affidavit of posting okay got it note call or letter from the property owner was received within the time allowed therefore I went to the property again on January 14th 2025 and saw the cited violations had not been corrected at the time I photographed the property the photograph accurately shows what I saw then is marked as County's exhibits 9 through 11 so there's a little bit more trash accumulating this is one angle from the front and this is the minute let's see so nine shows this is in front of the trailer yeah other folks are contributing to the file okay and 10 is the trailer with a chair yes 11 11 is the rear the the back angle got it I request that all the County's exhibits be received into evidence and based upon the testimony evidence I request that the respondents Stuart K Archer and Penny Lin B Bergen Archer be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by February 28th 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 this concludes my testimony anybody here on behalf of Stuart K Archer or Penny Lin Bergen Archer looking out seeing no one without objection I'll accept into evidence the Cy's exhibits 1 through 11 in this case based upon that evidence and your testimony I'll find that violation as charge does exist on the property in order compliance on or before uh February 28th 2025 failing which a fund in the amount of $100 per day will ACR 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 thank you okay all right Bell South telecommunications LLC my bell is back all right it's CF 20241 0436 officer SBI you're going to testify fine you've been sworn in yes my name is Maria espot and I have been sworn in I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County the respondent bellof Telecommunications LLC is not present this case concerns a vacant lot in the corner of Southeast Norman Street and Southeast Cino Avenue 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 Bell South telecommunications a copy of the Property Appraiser's record of ownership is County's exhibit one okay on November 20th 2024 I inspected the property at that time I observed a vacant lot with High Grass at that time I photographed the property the photograph accurately shows what I saw then and is marked as County's Exhibit 2 and here's all the high grass okay based upon the investigation I issued a notice of violation to bellof telecommunications LLC on November 20 2nd 2024 marked as County's exhibit 3 in the notice I cited the following Martin County code violation section 67. 2011a nuisance declared weeds undergrowth General ordinances Martin County Code in the notice of violation the respond that was given until December 6 2024 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County Martin County Code Enforcement upon doing so compliance was not achieved and a notice of hearing was issued by certified male and regular male on December 17 2024 and is marked as Count's exhibit 4 the return receipt was not received therefore December 30th 2024 I posted the property in the Martin County admin building the Affidavit of posting is marked as Count's exhibit 5 no call or letter from the property owner was received within the time allowed therefore I went back again to the property on January 14 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 marked as County's exhibit 6 here's the high grass side view of it I request that all of the County's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the testimony and evidence I requested the respondent bof Telecommunications LLC be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by February 28th 2025 and if not in compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 for every day the violations continues thereafter the county has incurred a cost in the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and requested the county be reimburse this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing okay have you ever had any any contact from them I have not and the first time I went there the gates were closed to that um area you see there and the second time when I posted the property they were open so somebody body does pass by there at some point okay all right um and that's where you posted on the fence correct there is some equipment behind the fence that belongs to velf yeah I I can see that in exhibit six all right so anybody here on behalf of Bell South telecommunications LLC seeing no one um without objection I'll accept into evidence the C's exhibits 1 through six in this case based upon that evidence and your testimony I'll find that violation as charge does exist on the property and Order compliance honor before February 28 2025 failing which a fine in the amount of $100 per day will acre and'll further award costs in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing thank you so ordered you're welcome thank you go they've owned that property for long time the deed says 1984 okay let's see David Briggs and it's a fine reduction request and stipulation and agreed order okay so this is um case number 10 10- 00358 34 and the respondent is David a Briggs and it's a request for fine reduction stipulation go ahead um oh Miss Bradley I didn't swear you in yet no sir I think I swear everybody else in the room but you raise your right hand do you swear affirm the testimony about to give it be the truth old truth and nothing but the truth so you got I do okay what have we got okay my name is Rachel Spradley and I've been sworn in I'm the nuisance of Batman coordinator from Martin County this case concerns the property located at 18397 Southeast Heritage Drive to Questa in Martin County Florida on May 19th 2010 an order finding violation was issued by the code enforcement magistrate to David a Briggs for Section 105.1 Florida building code FBC required by section 21.1 General ordinances Martin County Code and section 21105 swimming pools General ordinances Martin County Code so exhibit one is going to show actually the new owner a Mr Gordon has taken over the property you know what's scary I signed that order MH you did 2010 you did a Exhibit 2 is a copy of the original executed order by you okay um compliance was required by June 24th 2010 on September 13th 2024 an Affidavit of compliance with accured fines was issued reflecting an outstanding fine in the amount of $519,500 exhibit three is the Affidavit of compliance with fines um Aaron Gordon is the current owner of the property pursuant to a warranty deed recorded in official record book 3445 page 1642 Martin County Florida public records the resp it has no remaining interest in the property step has determined that a lean reduction is warranted the current owners were not responsible for the violation however they brought the property into compliance and have offered to pay $51,900 to resolve the outstanding fine which has accured and exhibit four is um Mr Gordon's request for the reduction okay all right um and let's see exhibit three dat compliance and exib four okay and that concludes my testimony for this one so without objection I'll accept into evidence the County's exhib it's 1 through four in this case um and looking at the stipulation note that it recites um the facts as you have stated them and also note for the record that Aaron Gordon has signed the document electronically Miss Bradley I don't see your signature but um I'll bet you'd be happy to sign it I will be need a pen I forgot my pen this morning and had to get one from Miss Bradley thank you okay note for the record that M Bradley is now signed on behalf of the county and um so I'm going to actually date that for you oh I forgot I'm sorry 25 telling you now go ahead and execute the agreed recommended order [Applause] okay all right let's see all right there's another Briggs yes sir sir case okay this is uh case number 2023 enf 20233 0944 David a Briggs is the respondent and again you've been sworn so yes sir my name is Rachel Spradley and I've been sworn in I'm the nuisance baitman coordinator from Martin County this case concerns the property located at 18397 Southeast Heritage Drive to Questa in Martin County Florida on July 18th 2023 a stipulation and agreed final order was issued by the code enforcement magistrate to David a Briggs for Section 6720a nuisance declared weeds undergrowth General ordinances Martin County Code section 21.99 accessory structures General ordinances Martin County Code and section 21.11 exterior structures General ordinances Martin County Code so exhibit one is the property appraiser also showing that Aaron Gordon is the current owner okay exhibit two is the recorded stipulation agreement that was put in place with Mr Briggs also signed by yourself yes um compliance was required by September 29th 2023 on June 24th 2024 an Affidavit of compliance with acred fines was issued reflecting an outstanding fine in the amount of $80,100 the Affidavit of compliances exhibit three Aaron Gordon is the current owner of the property pursuant to a warranty deed recorded in official record book 3445 page 1642 Martin County Florida public records the respondent has no remaining interest in the property staff has determined that a lean reduction is warranted the current owners were not responsible for the violation however they brought the property into compliance and have offered to pay 8,10 to resolve the outstanding fines which have accured and exhibit for is the same reduction request showing Mr Gordon agreeing to the 10% okay and that concludes my testimony for this one all right so without objection I'll accept in evidence the Count's exhibits 1 through four in this case based upon that evidence in your testimony I'll find that it is appropriate to um enter into the agreed order based on the stipulation that Mr um Aaron Gordon is that correct yes sir Aaron Gordon agrees to pay the fine um reduced fine in the amount of 8,10 and this is an agreed recommended order to the County Commission again I I note that uh Mr Gordon has signed electronically and Miss Bradley if you'll go ahead and sign and date that would be great okay so document is now executed and I will go ahead and approve and sign the agreed recommended order okay and let's see we've got one more case the wesak case Aaron and Jennifer wesac it's enf 20241 01099 and Miss Bush that's your case if you ra your right hand you swear or affirm testimony about to give will be the truth whole truth and nothing but the truth s you got yes sir I do all righty good whenever you're ready my name is Tama Bush and I have been sworn in I am a co-compliance investigator for Martin County the respondents eron and Jennifer wesac is not present the respondent has entered into a stipulation of agreement this case concerns the property at 1582 Northeast Marine Court 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 Aaron and Jennifer wac a copy of their prop proper appraisers record of ownership is County's exhibit 1 on November F I'm sorry on November 6th 2024 an inspection was conducted at the property and at that time I observed non-permitted work of a wooden structure at that time I photographed the property the photograph ACC shows what I saw then and it's Mark this count as exhibits 2 through 4 what is that I don't know I don't either bunch of pilings okay exhibit three additional uh building material and exhibit four h okay based upon investigation I issued a notice of violation to Aaron and Jennifer W wesac on November 7th 2024 mark this County's exhibit 4 and 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 and the notice of violation the respondent was given until December 9th 2024 to correct the violation and was informed of the 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 December 30th 2024 and is marked as Count's exhibit 5 on January 10th 2025 the respondent entered into a stipulation of agreement the owner agrees to come into compliance with the cited provisions of the Marton County Code by May 30th 2025 and if not in compliance with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per day for every day the violation continues thereafter the owner has paid the agreed administrative cost of $350 and at this time I request that all the County's exhibits be received into evidence and without objection I'll accept into evidence the Count's exhibits one through five in this case based upon that evidence and the stipulation in front of me I find that it is appropriate to enter into the agreed order u based upon the the um compliance date of May 30th 2025 the payment of $350 in administrative cost and um a potential fine in the amount of $100 per day um for failure to comply note that the um stipulation is signed by Erin wesac and Jennifer wesac and um officer Bush on behalf of the county and I'll go go ahead and enter the agreed order you're on just a correction for the record of scri is er there's actually six exhibits here number exhibit four appears twice in the list but oh yeah so we got four and 4 a yeah all right so one is the property appraiser two three and four are photos 4 a now is notice violation and five is the notice of hearing okay that'll work too still one through five how it is okay very good um thank you okay thank you all righty and um let's see I I note too that we've got a set of minutes for the December hearing which I have reviewed um and actually I I haven't reviewed them thoroughly and I and I note that that uh officer clond you haven't signed either I'm going to I'm going to withhold these and and just bring them to the February hearing uh Lord willing I'll be here and hopefully by that time I will have gone through them completely okay so so note that's going to be um to February hearing all right anything else to come before us today no you're honor okay great thank you very much we'll see you at uh the February hearing which is say again 19th the 19th of February okay very good we stand a jour