All right. Good morning, everyone. I'm going to call to order the Martin County Code and Horseman Magistrate hearing for uh March 18th, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. If you'll please stand, join me in the pledge of allegiance.
I pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. >> Hey, please be seated. I see we've got a couple folks in the
audience. I'm going to try and take your cases first so that you don't have to um sit around all morning. >> All right. Your honor, if we might, we have one application before we begin. >> Yes. Go ahead, Mr. Tui. >> Number two on the docket, ENF20251000511.
Uh, continuence from last uh month's hearing. Uh, it's come into compliance and needs to be removed. >> Oh, excellent. Good. Okay. Great. So, we don't need to hear that case today. All right. Good. All right. So, the first case I'm going to call is the
Valente case. It's ENF 2026 010372. Respondent is Michael A. Valente. Your docket says that um Officer Switzer is going to testify, but Officer Sprdley is going to testify. So, do you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm testimony you're about to give will be
the truth, old truth, and nothing but the truth? So, I'll help you. >> I do. >> All right. And Mr. Valante, nice of you to raise your hand. But what's going to happen is we're going to hear from the county first, presuming they make what the law calls a primopaccia case, meaning that
everything I can use and accept and evidence. Uh, I'm going to call you up. I'll swear you in at that point. And uh, and then you can tell me what you need to tell me. If you have any evidence you need to present, you can do it at that
time. If it's just a matter of needing additional time to comply, um, make sure that we all know that upfront and then that'll make short work out of it. Okay. All right. So, Miss Bradley, whenever you're ready. >> Okay. My name is Rachel Sprdley and I've
been sworn in. I'm the nuisance abatement coordinator for Martin County. The respondent, Michael A. Valente, is present. This case concerns the property at 8868 Southeast Hobbridge Avenue, Hope Sound 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 Michael A. Valente. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit one. >> Okay. And um yeah, Mr. Valente, I forgot
to tell you, you can watch the monitor and you're going to see all of the evidence. At the conclusion of the evidence, the county is going to ask me to admit it into evidence and I'm going to see if you have any objection first. So, >> on January 23rd, 2026, Officer Kelly
Switzer inspected the property. At that time, she observed multiple cooking appliances and trash in the front yard. At the time, she photographed the property. the photograph accurate accurately shows what she saw then and is marked as counties as exhibits two and three.
So that's exhibit two and then exhibit three. Based upon the investigation, Officer Swiss Switzer issued a notice of violation to Michael A. Valente on January 27th, 2026 and is marked as county's exhibit 4.
In the notice, she cited the following Martin County Code violations. Section 67.201B, nuisance declared trash, etc. General ordinances Martin County code. In the notice of violation, the respondant was given until February
17th, 2026 to come into co to come into to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so. So, and there's the second page of the notice of violation. >> Mhm. >> Compliance was not achieved and a notice
of hearing was issued by certified mail on February 23rd, 2026 and is marked as county's exhibit 5. The return receipt was not uh returned. Therefore, on March 3rd, 2026, Officer Switzer hand delivered the
notice to appear to Brian Valente, the brother of the property owner. The affidavit of hand delivery is marked as county's exhibit six. Okay. Um therefore she went to the property again on March 17th, 2026 and saw that
the site of violations had not been corrected. At that time she photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what she saw then and are marked as count as exhibits 7 through 10. So there's seven. Exhibit eight. Still got some stuff up here over here.
Exhibit 9. And then exhibit 10. I request that all of the county's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the testimony and evidence. I request that the respondent, Michael A. Valente, be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by April 30th, 2026, 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 I request that the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion
of today's hearing. And that concludes my testimony. >> Okay, Mr. Valendi, come on up to the podium. >> Yes, sir. Thank you. >> If you raise your right hand. >> Do you swear a firm testimony about to give will be the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth. So, I hope you got it. >> I do. >> And your full name? Michael Valente. >> And your address? >> 8868 Southeast Hob Ridge Avenue, >> Hob Sound, Florida. >> All right. Good. And you are the owner of the property? >> I am.
>> Okay. All right. So, um, you've heard the county's testimony and the exhibits that they've presented 1 through 10. Any objection to any of that? >> Uh, no objection. Just some remarks if I could. >> Okay. So, without objection, I'll accept
that into evidence. And Mr. Valaining, what have you got to tell me? >> Um, uh, just some remarks about, um, how the county has dealt with me. Um, the county has been very fair with me uh, over the over several years. Um, I've been dealing with some issues that the
county worked with me on clearing um, debris. Um, they've been aware of some of my issues being disabled. I live with a disabled brother. It's very difficult, at least in the last six months, despite me cleaning up and clearing things out.
And just briefly, some of the photos that were taken kind of implied that there are things sitting around currently that were shown. For example, that first picture that showed cooking items. >> Yes. >> Unfortunately, those >> exhibit two.
>> Yeah. Those were um >> were in front of you, maybe. >> Yeah. Those were there for approximately four to five days before everything was removed including everything in that photo is gone. Um without disputing
anything for for example I understand that even if it's there for a day I can be cited. Um everything that is that has been posted at least uh photographically except for those little brown little
items on the side are are gone. Uh, I've been aware of it. In fact, >> 10. >> Yeah, I believe the last photo. >> Okay. And what are they? >> They're um actually county um circular
um not not trash cans, but they're circular decorative things for four for uh they came from the county. I bought them. And what I did was include >> trash can covers. >> No, they're they're these brown almost like baskets. >> Okay. And what I did was before I became
a little unhealthier, we had a heart surgery. But before that, I used to take some of my items, which still might be shown, but very decorative. Like one of them, for example, is a fire a fire um um a fire, not extinguisher, a fire
hydrant. And I would take them from the county when they would release them, and I would do artistic things, keep them in the backyard. Those were supposed to be moved to and I was going to do something decorative with them. Everything that I do that what I considered decorative ends up in my backyard so nobody sees
them. Um I understand that things that are extraneous like that um aren't considered art to a lot of people. But in the meantime during the presentation everything was fair and and and proper. But the reference to and how bad that
looked uh and mentioning February 17th uh those at least those cooking things were gone by the 17th. >> They were I see that in exhibit 8 >> on the 17th. >> On the 17th of March uh there's an exhibit 8 and you see at the
end of your driveway those cooking things are gone. I don't know what the umbrella is but >> Yeah. Well, that was an umbrella. It's gone too. that was there uh for my brother who like I said he's on disability so when he comes out I have nothing to put him under when it's raining and so what I did was and this
is not very nice I printed out this morning at least a current picture of the front of the house and the side of the house this is not to I don't know if it's to to do anything other to present that I'm in compliance today because if they if the county was to come today
they might say to me hey um there's something that they don't like. Um, for example, they would the only thing they'll see, at least as far as I can tell, is those brown things. So, I may be in compliance today, but I'm also aware that I have to be in compliance
going forward. Um, and so what I did was besides the two photos I took, I did a print out of my personal situation, basically describing why it's been tough for me to maintain this. And I'm continuing moving forward to try to not
just do the the front area, but we're also working on uh the backyard, which is fenced, but um uh also is in need of constant bulk pickups to get rid of things. So, I'm >> okay. >> I'm aware. >> Just look at these photos for a second. >> Sure.
>> County has no objection, your honor, >> but would like to comment once you uh enumerate who's who with them. >> All right. And and I'm sorry again, Mr. Valenni, these photos were taken by you. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Just this morning. >> And this morning? Yeah.
>> Okay. >> Unfortunately, those bushes that are brown got whacked by the frost. So, that doesn't make it look very nice, but yeah, >> at least that's what I took. >> I I understand. >> Okay. I did a print out of something that's
may not matter to the county but just explaining why it's been difficult me for physically for financially to do a lot of the work but I printed out a whole something that >> I don't know whether one whether you actually want that in evidence public
record >> if you may you may not I I mean I I have no reason to >> I understand >> dispute and I don't think the county does. >> We would object as being irrelevant anyhow. So, I think it should be explained. >> And if it's irrelevant, why why do it?
>> These these, however, are not um these are relevant and and the county has no objection. I'm going to mark these and accept them into evidence as respondents one and two. Okay. So, I'm going to put those into
evidence for you. Uh that's helpful. >> Now, >> and uh the comment county would like to make your honor, which what you've marked is respondance one, I believe, the picture of the front of the house. >> Yes. >> Yes. Which is uh identical to pretty
much exhibit 8. If you note, the debris in exhibit 8 behind the trailer uh is still shown in the picture. Respondents one. >> Well, I see the umbrella, but I >> just this one. Yeah. eight >> and in and >> yeah,
>> if you look behind the trailer, you see the white items laying on the ground >> and the respondent's photo shows the same whatever that >> Okay. >> Well, I would I would I will dispute that. Uh that is not the same. And to say that that picture shows the same, it's not accurate. What you're actually
seeing in my photo is a pressure cleaner which was used to help clean that area. So, yes, that is out. But I will dispute that the county's um statement that the the same it it's the same image or the same situation. It is not
>> actually and thank you. But I I would tell you that from from my perspective and I think that's ultimately going to be the one that counts is the fact that it's not really in compliance until the
county goes and inspects it and says it's in compliance. total agreement. And as I what's not been mentioned is I did speak to Mrs. um I'm sorry, the woman who was scheduled to be here, >> Miss Switzer. >> Yeah, she did tell me some things except for the fact that I'm liable for u money
owed um uh today, but she didn't tell me that. But she I did ask her about compliance and having somebody come out to assess it yet again to see if I'm my opinion of being in compliance is is accurate or not. Okay, >> I'm not questioning the >> and I would do that soon because um I
based on what I've seen I'm going to find that at the time violations did exist on the property. Um notwithstanding that it may be in compliance today, >> right? >> And uh order you to comply by uh
April 30th. That should be easy. failing which um a fine in the amount of $100 per day will acrue. But I am going to award cost in the case because of having to be here
and do all of this. And those are chunky. They're $575, which is what the county has determined are their their costs for the >> um I you could have avoided some of that
by uh entering into a stipulation with the county, but it may not have helped because it it doesn't look like you were that close to compliance until today. So, >> and as far as money goes, what about inability to pay and what situation?
>> You have to really speak with the county about that. Uh the the order uh requires it. Um and there are ways that you may be able to um mitigate that, but you
need to talk to the county about it. Okay. All right. um we'll get a copy of the order out, but in the meantime, make sure you're in contact with um the code office to get an inspection and and hopefully you get cleared out and you're
good to go. >> Thank you. >> Okay, good luck. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um next case is uh the Mitsler case. It's ENF2025120457. Uh Richard and Luciana Mistler. M I Sl.
And okay, we got somebody here for that case. And sir, you saw how um the case before you just proceeded. >> Yes. >> We're going to do the exact same thing here. So >> just hold off. You're welcome to stand
there if you like. Um, I'm Well, since you're both going to testify, I'm going to go ahead and um and swear you both in um including Officer Joseph. If you'll raise your right hands, do you swear or if testimony you're about to give will
be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, I'll help you God. >> I do. I do. >> And I'm and I'm sorry, I'm looking at the wrong page here, Officer Shanahan, of course. All right. Um,
let's hear from um the officer first and then and then we'll turn to you. >> Okay. >> Go ahead, officer Shanahan. >> My name is Michael Shanahan and I've been sworn in. I am a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent, Richard S. Misler and
Luciana M. Misler are present. Thisa case concerns the property at 3850 Southeast Middle Street, Stewart, Florida, 34997 in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the property
appraiser, Martin County, the property owner is Richard S. Meisler and Luciana M. Misler. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit one. On December 23rd, 2025, I inspected the property. At the time, I observed
violations for debris, trash and debris, inoperable trailers, high grass, and abandoned boats in the rightway. At the time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as county's exhibits 2 through 8.
trash debris. >> Inoperable boat. >> What's inoperable about that? >> I Hang on just a second, sir. You don't get to talk until I swear you in. >> And you don't get to cross-examine until he's finished his his um presentation.
So save your questions because they're relevant and you can go back and and ask them again. Okay. >> Okay. I'm sorry. >> No, that's fine. Thanks. Go ahead. >> Or what we perceive to be inoperable trailers. Uh also maybe possibly in the
rightway. Uh more trash debris. Exhibit six. again. Um, more debris. More debris. Again, more debris. Based upon the investigation, I issued a
notice of violation to Richard S. Misler and Luciana M. Misler on December 29th, 2025 marked as county's exhibit 10. Oh, sorry. I'm sorry. I had 10. I had a nine. I have also included an aerial of property which further shows the violations of the counties which is
exhibit nine. Sorry. >> All right. In exhibit nine, that's a county view. Yeah. Aerial view of the county which shows all the, you know, >> it's the corner property. >> Yes, sir.
Okay. >> Based upon investigation, I issued a notice violation to Richard S. Misler and Luciana M. Misler on December 29th, 2025, marked as county's exhibit 10. In the notice, I cited the following Martin County code violations. Section
91.34A, generally inoperable vehicles, general ordinances, Martin County code. Section 67.2 2011A nuisance declared weeds undergrowth general ordinances Martin County code section 67.201B 2011B,
nuisance, declared trash, etc. General ordinances Martin County Code and section 91.33 abandoned and rightway general ordinances Martin County code which has since been removed and the notice of violation of
respondent was given until January 19th, 2026 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 February 24th and is marked as
county's exhibit 11. The return receipt was not received. Therefore, on February 26th, I posted the property and the Martin County Administration building. The affidavit is marked as county's exhibit 12. A photograph of the posting is marked as
county's exhibit 13. I spoke with property owner Luciana Misler early in the investigation and she advised she would comp she would comply. I also spoke with Vic a Victor Misler who wanted some clarification of the violations. Communication with
the owner owners was frequent prior to the notice of violation going out. I had had no communication with the homeowners since mailing out the notice of hearing. Therefore, I went to the property again on March 17th, 2026 and saw that the cited violations had not been corrected.
At that time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as county's exhibits 14 through 20. Again, we can't tell. I mean, there's a lot of growth uh back here. We can't tell whether the tires are plated or not or
inoperable. Again, more debris tires inoperable or what we assume to be I request that all the county's exhibits be received into evidence based upon testimony and evidence. I request that the respondent Richard S. Misler and
Luciana M. Misler be reordered to comply with co cited pro provisions of the Martin County code by April 30th, 2026 and if not in compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per violation for every day the violation continues thereafter. The
county has incur incurred a cost an amount of $575 conducting this investigation and requested the county be reimbured at this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing. That's the end of my testimony. >> All right. I'm sorry. Tell me which violation you've cleared up.
>> Um I just don't understand any of the inoperable >> I'm sorry. I was talking to >> Oh, the um abandoning the rightway >> that's been cleared. >> Yes. Well, it's been removed. >> Okay.
All right. Okay. Go ahead, sir. Um let me just swear you in. >> I swore in with him. >> That's right. You were sworn in with Officer Shanahan. So, tell me your full name. >> Richard Scott Mesler. >> And your address? >> 3850 Southeast Middle Street.
>> Okay. All right. So, you're one of the owners of the property and um so what have you got to tell me? >> Um I'm just not sure where they keep getting this inoperable anything from and I don't know what was ever abandoned in the rightway. >> Okay. >> Uh
>> I think that's a technical definition. What happens is if if you uh continually park something in the right way, >> I mean, I was told it has to be six feet from the road from the last time I was here cuz I've been here before. >> Oh, okay. I
>> And then I was also told there's no code for boats in Martin County. And then he's trying to tell me there's a code for boats in Martin County. He's trying to tell me a boat can't be over 25 feet. Can't be nowhere but in the front yard, which last time I was here, they told me there's no code for boats in Martin County. Well, there are there are
>> and to confirm that boat ain't 25 ft. The one in this picture right here, it's only 24T rampage. There's a the black boat is only a 24ft TCraft. The only boat in my whole yard that's over 24T is the blue one and it's in my front yard. >> Just for clarification on that.
>> All right, that's irrelevant because that that violation is not charged. >> Yeah, it's it's no longer there. So, you don't need to worry about that part of it. What we do need to worry about is that there are some uh inoperable
uh boats and inoperable also has technical definition. It's not just that you can >> I mean I was told as long as the trailers have air in them and the the trailers are usable then there's long as no tires are flat and there ain't no tires missing off the trailer then there's everything's fine. >> They've got to be tagged. They've got to
be they've got to have current registrations and that's >> I mean I I got all that. I just don't put them on there cuz they just get stolen. But >> Okay. Well, but that's the that's the definition. >> So, it just needs a tag on the trailer. That's it. >> Exa current tag. Yeah.
>> And current registration for the boats. >> Okay. >> All All of that's got to be current. And then you still have the issue. >> I mean, if the boat's on a trailer, technically it should be a trailer thing, not a boat thing. A boat only has to be registered if I put it in the
water. >> I >> They're titled. They're all titled to me, but they're not they don't get used. So I don't >> and I'd have to go check it myself. But I believe that if it's on the trailer, >> Yeah. >> it's got to have its current registration. >> Just the trailer does. The trailer and
the boat's two separate things. >> I I hear you, your honor. The the county's position with these things usually is that any boat on land is inoperable. It could be brand new. What What defines inoperable is the trailer it's sitting on. If the trailer is operable, then it's if if the trailer is
inoperable, if it has a flat tire, if it's missing a tire, then it's an inoperable vehicle. If the trailer has the tires on it and they're fully inflated and it's ready to roll, it's not considered inoperable. We brought the the president the evidence here, from what we can see from our position, the tires on these trails are either
sunk into the ground to the point that they they can't roll or they're flat. Um, and the one trailer doesn't have any tires on at all. That's the basis of the inoperable charge on. >> All right. No trailer with no tires on it. I don't have a clue what you're talking about. And every one of them have air in them and are operable. >> Okay.
>> Tires. >> So then that's just that's just a junk tire. But this trailer has both all four has I think it's a double axle. It has four operable tires on this trailer right here on this picture. Let let me just say to you that if that was the
case, you could have cleared this up without a hearing just by simply inviting everybody on onto the property to >> my other problem. The reason none of this is cleared up to be honest with you is I'm out of town usually from like Thanksgiving until March. I only that's
why I tried to ask for a longer extension and he said the furthest he could get me was February 20th and I actually came home like four days before that just because my boat broke down is the only reason I was even back home. Um I fish I commercial fish and I'm fish out of town usually from Thanksgiving to
March. That's when I make most of my money. >> Okay. >> And uh that's why none of this got taken care of to start with to be honest with you. And the only reason I didn't take care of it recently is because I still get this thing about a boat can't be over 25 foot. So, I'm like, if I'm going to wait till I go to court to see what
the deal is with this, cuz I've never heard of this before. And then he's trying to tell me that the the boat can't be over 25T. And I told him it's not. And then he's like, "Well, it's the the trailer and the boat can't be over 25." I'm like, "Well, there's either it's either the trailer or the
boat can't be over 25T. There ain't it ain't one thing." And he >> Yeah. >> So, be the trailer. But if all my boats are in compliance, which I believe they are, I could take care of the rest of this stuff, no problem. But I just don't want to take care of all this. And he's still trying to tell me my boats ain't
in compliance or any of that. >> Well, the county has charged and I can't see evidence that that those trailers are tagged. I does not look like they are. >> They're they're don't have the tag on
them, but I got the tags in the truck. I >> So, so even by admission that's >> and and all the registrations. Uh that black boat definitely has a tag on it. That's the one I use. I travel across. >> You ought to be able to cure that pretty quickly. >> Yeah, I could. >> All right. So then you still got the the
debris on the property and the trash and stuff to clear up. So I I think based upon your evidence and the counties uh one I'm going to accept into evidence the county's exhibits 1 through 20. We've been talking about
them and using them. Um, and I'm going to find that the violations that remain still as charged, which is the interoperable vehicle, the weeds and undergrowth and the trash
still remain on the property. But, um, I I hear what you're saying that you've got the tags for the >> for the trailers and that you can cure that pretty quickly. So, I'm going to find that the violations, the three violations exist. I'm going to order you
to comply by the end of April. Um, that's a matter of getting the county out to inspect and and check everything. And then, uh, if you don't do it by April 30th,
then starting May 1st, there'll be a fine in the amount of $100 per day. Sounds to me like you'll take care of that. um uh well ahead of that time >> y >> and then the cost I am going to award cost in the amount of $575 to be paid to
the county at the conclusion of this hearing. So and it is ordered and hopefully we don't need to see you back here again. So >> sounds like you'll take care of it. Thank you very much. Thanks for the
explanation. That's it. Oh, you have another. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. All right. Good. Um I understand we've we've got um um another case u with folks here and I'm going to take
that case next. It's um Oki's Place LLC and it's um ENF 2025 100007 uh 69 and uh let's see again officer Switzer
is not with us today but Officer Sprdley is >> actually officer Humphre is going to testify. >> Okay. All right. And I'm sorry, sir. Your name? >> Uh, Michael Humphrey. >> Michael.
>> Okay. All right. And sir, you're going to speak in for Oi's place? >> Yeah, I'm I'm I'm the trust holder. >> Okay. And what is your name, sir? >> Richard O'Connell. >> All right.
And when you say you're the trustee, uh, this is a corporation. So, how how do you fit into the Oki's Place LLC corporation? >> I own it outright. >> Okay. As an individual.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. All right. It's a bank that uh an old bank. >> All right. >> On US one. >> So, I'm going to I'm going to swear both of you in at the same time. If you'll raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, I hope you
got >> I do. >> All right. And so, we're going to hear from the county first. It's a violation case. Let's see what they've got and then we'll go from there. Okay. >> All right. >> And you can just follow along right in front of you. >> All right. Officer Humphre, whenever
you're ready. >> My name is Michael Humphrey and I have been sworn in. >> Humphrey. >> I am a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent Okei's place is present. This case concerns a property at 11400
Southeast Federal Highway, Hope Sound, 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 Oki's Place LLC. A copy of the property appraisers record
of ownership is county's exhibit one. On October 30th, 2025, Kelly Switzer inspected the property. At the time she observed overgrowth and trash. At that time, she photographed the property. The photographs accurately shows what she seen, then marked it as
counties exhibit two and three. Based upon the investigation, Kelly issued a notice of violation on November 3rd, 2025. However, the property was recently sold. Therefore, on November 14th, she sent out an amended notice of violation and is marked as county's
exhibit number four. In the notice, Kelly cited the following Martin County code violation. Section 67.201A, uh, nuisance declared weeds and undergrowth. Section 67.201 2011B nuisance declared
uh trash. In the notice of violation, the respondent was given until December 1st, 2025 to correct the violation and was informed to contact Martin County Code Enforcement upon doing so. On February 5th, Kelly conducted a
follow-up inspection. She found the front of the property was cleaned up. However, the rear of the property still had trash in overgrowth. Photos from her follow-up are marked as exhibits 5 through 7.
Exhibit 8 is the aerial showing the entire property to include the dumpster area. Compliance was not achieved and the notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on February 10th, 2026 and is marked as county's exhibit 9.
The return receipt was not received. Therefore, on February 27th, Kelly posted the property and the affidavit of posting is marked as county's exhibit 10 and 11. Uh, no call or letter from the property owner was received within the time
allowed. Therefore, Kelly went to the property again on March 17th and saw that the cited violations had not been corrected. At that time she photographed the property and the photographs accurately shows what she saw and is marked as
counties exhibits 12 through 14. I request that all county's exhibits be received into evidence and based upon the testimony and evidence I request that the respondent Okey's Place LLC be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by April 30th and if not in compliance by
then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 for each violation for every day the violation continues thereafter. Uh the county has incurred a cost the amount of $575 conducting this investigation and request that the county be reimbured
this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing. >> Okay. >> All right, sir. Um Mr. Okonnell, you've been sworn in. What have you got to tell me? Um I did get the notice in October
and there was um there was a transition period where prior owner and new owner upon receipt of the notice um Johnny Thomas here he maintains that property and we sent him out there and we moeded and cleaned it up. Uh obviously we
failed to close the gate to the dumpster. Uh but uh and that area behind, we can get a guy in there with a bush hog and cut that back, but I was unaware of it. As far as these this photo we have up, those are insulated metal panels that I'm staging on site,
and I intend to reuse those to build a a walk-in cooler/ freezer. So, I'm not sure why that would be an offense to anybody, and it's out of you can't see it from the highway. Uh but the two other areas closing the dumpster and the
uh getting in the back there with a weed whacker or something to that effect. Uh we we missed that and didn't didn't occur to me and I need to just walk it with John and make sure we understand the limits of the property. >> Mhm. >> As far as the freezer panels, I'd like to keep them there.
>> I the the freezer panels um I can they be stored inside? >> Well, the bank's pretty full up. I mean, I can tarp them. Uh, but they're secured and they're I'm not sure why it's >> the reason I asked that unless you've got an active building permit, it's not
a construction site, per se, and so you can't can't store building materials um outside. >> All right. Well, if >> I got till April 30th, I guess, to figure something out, but I can figure something out. I may
>> um >> I can clean that up. I mean, regardless. And I could get a storage bin. >> You can put them in the if you want to move them into the dumpster area once you close that. >> It's not It might be enough space. You know, it's worth looking into. >> And then you could just kind of throw a tarp over or something like that. I mean, we'd be fine with that. It'd be
behind the gate. So, >> I was not aware that uh I was baffled by the notices cuz there was no pictures attached and just some generic uh >> um uh citations that didn't have any substance to them. And I guess I didn't read it close enough where I could have
made a phone call and that's on me. >> Yeah, that's really the key to most of these violations is to be in touch with the county and then um certainly they'll come out and walk the property with you to show you what's
the violations are. So, okay. >> So, I will take care of the bush hog in this week. Uh, I'll figure out what I'm going to do with those panels and um it'll be cleaned up before uh April 30th definitely. And u >> Okay. So, um
I'm going to accept into evidence the county exhibits 1 through 14 based upon our discussion. Uh I'm going to find that uh violations do exist on the property uh both for 67201A which is
weeds and and 67201V which is trash and um order you to comply owner before April 30th 2026 failing which a fine in the amount of $100 per violation per day would acrue and I am going to award
costs in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion ution of this hearing. Hopefully you get all of that squared away. And >> do I need to call for a reinspection or do >> Okay, so that's on me.
>> And that's actually in the in the order. It tells you that you have to request an inspection by calling the number that's in the order. >> All right. It's at the back. So I will handle it. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Sounds good.
>> And I can pay out here on the way out or >> um What do you pay here? >> Don't know. Talk to Miss Bradley. >> Okay. >> She will tell you about the money. >> Miss Bradley, >> your publicity number one. >> All right. Um,
someone takes responsibility for her actions. I don't know if I can. I'm done. I'm out. >> All right. We're going back to the top of the docket. All right, the next case is the first
case. It's CNF 2025110125-01%. >> And the respondent is Jim Odira Colum. >> Wow. Say that again. >> Odira Col. Okay. And Uh, Officer Kasco, you're going to testify if you raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you're about to give will be the truth of the whole truth and nothing but the truth? So, I'll help you. >> I do. >> And whenever you're ready. >> My name is Deborah Carrasco and I have been sworn in. I'm a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The
respondent, Jim M. Odira Kalum, is not present. This case concerns the property at 701 Southwest San Antonio Drive, Palm City, Florida in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. According to the
official records of the property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is Jim M. Odira Kalumal. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is counties exhibit one. On November 13th, 2025, I inspected the
property. At that time, I observed a the fence with the front of the gate is in disrepair. That's me leaving the door tag. At that time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw in our marked discounted exhibits two and three. So, that's two.
And this is three. Based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to the respondent and on January 26, 20 26 on January 26 26 marked as count as exhibit 4.
In the notice, I cited the following Martin County code violations. section 21.99 XX3 structures general ordinances of Martin County Code. In the notice, the respondent was given until February 9th, 2026 to correct the
violations and was informed of the need to contact Martin County Code Enforcement upon doing so. I did do a reinspection on 226, which is exhibit 5. Still again showing the fence in disrepair the gate area.
Compliance was not achieved and a notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on February 12th, 2026 and is marked as county's exhibit 6. The return receipt was not received and on February 5th, 2026, I posted the property and the Martin County admin
building aidative posting and the posting itself are marked as county's exhibits 7 and 8. No call or letter from the property owner has been received within the allowed time. Therefore, I went to the property again on March 17th, 2026 and
saw that the cited violations had not been corrected. At that time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as count as exhibits 9 and 10. I request all of the county's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the
testimony and evidence. I request that the respondent be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by April 30th, 2026 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 the cost in the amount of 575 conducting this investigation and request the county be reimbursed this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing. >> Okay. Anybody here on behalf of the owner Jim Mur
Colum? uh looking out seeing no one without objection I'll accept in evidence uh county's exhibits 1 through 10 in this case and based upon that evidence find that violation as charge does exist and if if I'm looking at that correctly it
looks like one side of the gate is there one side is not >> right >> couldn't he comply just by removing the gate there's no there's no um requirement permit to have a >> Yeah, I've not heard from him at all.
>> Okay. All right. So So compliance looks like it can easily be achieved before um April 30th. failing which um I'm going to find uh find him $100 per day uh beginning May
1st and then um will award cost in the amount of $575 to the county to be paid at the conclusion of this hearing. >> Thank you. >> Um and and you did testify that you've
had no contact, right? None whatsoever. >> Okay. >> No calls, no emails. >> All right. >> Oh, well. All right. Um, let's see. Officer Joseph, have you got this case?
The the next uh the merc >> number two on the Oh, that's been that's complied. Sorry, I I just This is your case below. It's the Espazito case. >> Yes, sir.
>> Okay, good. So, this is case ENF2025120 598-01. The respondents are Vincent and Carolyn Espazito. You'll raise your right hand. Do you swear our firm testimony about to give will be the truth, old truth, and nothing but the truth help you to God.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Whenever you're ready. My name is Michael Joseph and I've been sworn in. I am a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondents Carolyn Espazto and Vincent V. Espazito are not present. This case
concern cons what >> uh it's just hard to hear and I don't know that the mic is picking it up. >> Maybe just closer to you. >> Yeah, you can do it that way too. >> Cool. This case concerns a property at
1680 Northeast Lark Avenue, Stewart, Florida, 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 owners are Carol Anne Espazito and Vincent V. Espazito. Copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is
county's exhibit 1. Okay. On December 31st, 2025, I inspected the property. At that time, I observed a garden hose and electrical cord running across the ground from an address off Northeast Senica to the above property. I also observed trash and debris,
shuttered windows, and high grass and weeds. While at the residence, I spoke with the property owner, Vincent Espazito, who stated they have been without water and power for 8 months. At that time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as county's
exhibits 2 through six. And number two, you can see the green garden hose. I do and three. You can see it across the grass. >> You may have to help me there. >> Right here where the cursor is. See it
going. >> Gotcha. Okay. >> And then exhibit four. You can see it going to his house right here. It hangs up. >> So these are what? Side by side properties. these trailers. Yes. One's
off of actual Senica and the other one's on Lark. So he's is the water in electric is coming from the trailer to the right on this picture. >> Huh. And who owns the trailer? Does he own the trailer, too?
>> He That's two trailers. He owns one of them. The water's coming from a different address. >> Gotcha. But he owns them both. >> No. >> No, he only owns one. The one in question is the only one he owns. The neighbor is providing him with power
and water. >> Oh, which is also a violation. >> Okay. Okay. Keep going. Well, in exhibit four, you can also see the high grass and weeds in the back and
the trash and debris and some of the openable windows for >> Yes. Exhibit five just shows you more more debris and six actually shows it going into the actual residence as far as the power
right in the door right there in the bottom corner the extension cord. Based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to Caroline Espazto and Vincent v. Espazito on January 6, 2026, marked as county's exhibit 7.
In the notice, I cited the following Martin County code violations. Section 21.121.2, openable windows, general ordinances, Martin County code. Section 67201B, nuisance declared trash, etc. General ordinances Martin County Code. Section
21.197 Supply General Ordinances Martin County Code. Section 21.222 service general ordinances Martin County code and section 21.122 doors general ordinance Martin County
code which that code has been removed and also section 67201A nuisance declared weeds undergrowth general ordinances Martin County code. In the notice of violation, the respondent was given until February 4th, 2026 to correct the violations and was informed of the need to contact Martin County
code enforcement. Upon doing so, I went back to the reinspect the property on February 19th, 2026. The property remained in violation. While on the property, I spoke with Vincent Espazito again and told him about county funded programs relating to power and water assistance. He turned down all
assistance. While at the property, I took photographs, and the photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked county's exhibits 8 through 11. Same applies. It's the green hose going across. >> So, basically no change.
>> No change. 10 shows the openable windows and some of the debris out front. >> Okay. >> Compliance was not achieved and notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on February 20th, 2026 and is marked as counties exhibit 12.
The return receipt was not received. So in February 27th, 2026, I posted the property at the Martin County Administrative Building. The posting photo and the affidavit of posting are marked as county's exhibit 13 and 14. Posting photo
and the affidavit of posting went to the property on March 17th, 2026 and saw that the sighted violations had not been corrected. At that time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then in Marus Countyy's exhibits 15 through 17 extension cord and water high grass
trash. >> Again, no change. >> Only difference was a new garden hose. I request that all the counties exhibits be received in evidence based upon the testimony and evidence. I request that the respondent Carol and Espazito and Vincent v. Espazito be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin
County Code by April 30th, 2026 and if not in compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per for every day the violations exist. $100 per violation for every day the violation continues thereafter. The county has incurred a cost in the
amount of $575 conducting this investigation and requests the county be reimbured this amount at the conclusion of today's hearing. >> All right. So, anybody here on behalf of the Espazito looking out seeing no one? Why did they
indicate why they didn't want any assistance? >> He he just doesn't want assistance. Okay. All right. And he understands the violation, right? >> He does. >> Okay.
Um I guess some folks can't be helped. >> He doesn't want any help, sir. >> Okay. So, nobody here on behalf of the Espazito. Uh without objection, I'll accept evidence. counties exhibits 1
through 17. Based upon that evidence and your testimony, I'm going to find that violations as charged do exist on the property. And I'm going to order compliance on or before April 30th, 2026, failing which a fine in the amount of $100 per violation per day will
acrewue and I'll further award cost in the amount of $575 to be paid to the county at the conclusion of this hearing. I don't understand. >> Thank you, sir.
>> Okay, Officer Shannan, you're back. >> Yes. >> All right. This is the Owenbrink case. It's case ENF2025110539. Jerome and Sarah Owenbrink and this is a stipulated case and you've been sworn
in. >> Yes. >> Go ahead. My name is Michael Shanahan and I've been sworn in. I am a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent Jerome C. Ownink and Sarah C. Ownink are not present. This case concerns a property at 8257 Southeast
Swan Avenue, Hope Sound, Florida 34 33455 in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. According to the official records of the pro property appraiser of Martin County, the property owner is Jerome C. Ownink and Sarah C. Ownink.
Copy of the property appraises record of ownership is county's exhibit one. On December 1st, 2025, I inspected the property. At the time, I observed trash, debris, boats in the Martin County right away, and accessory uses over 25 ft in
the property setbacks. At the time, I photographed the property. The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as county's exhibits 2 through five. This is just kind of more the debris in
that door tag here. Sorry. This shows a lot of the debris underneath here, over here by the side of the trailer here, underneath the carport. >> These are the boats that over 25 ft in the setbacks. There's one here. There's
one here. And then there's one right here. This is kind of in the front. That may be okay. And then again, this is just the trash and debris under the carport. >> Go back here.
>> Got it. >> I have also included an aerial of the property which further shows the violations and is county's exhibit six. This is the corner property. >> All right. And it's where you've dropped the pin, right?
>> Yes, sir. Okay, >> you can see the boats are sitting here and there's kind of trash all around property. Based upon an investigation, I issued a notice of violation to Jerome C. Ownink and Sarah C. Ownink on December 23rd,
2025, marked as counties exhibit 7. In the notice of violation, I cited the following Martin County code violations. Section 67.201B, nuisance, declared trash, etc. General ordinances, Martin County code. Section 3.201.
C2H, accessory uses by zoning district, land development regulations, Martin County code, and section 91.33, abandoned in the rightway, general ordinances, Martin County code, which has since been removed.
In the notice of the violation, the respondant was given until January 12th, 2026 to correct the violation and was informed of the need to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so. On January 21st, 2026, I did a follow-up inspection at the time I photographed the property. The photographs accurately
show what I saw then and are marked as county's exhibits 8 through 12. Again, the the large boats in the setbacks. Okay. >> Uh, this is more of just trash and
debris back here behind the house. >> All right. The travel trailer. >> Travel trailer. Um, I think with the county, we we talked about this this the um driveway there was put in in the past. So, we assume that that was an allowed
use back then. I mean, as far as the the length of the trailer or storing the trailer behind the house, >> but it's not being used for occupancy. >> Correct. It's not. He showed me that. >> Okay. >> But there was water um water and electric hooked up to it. He said it he
used it. You can see it right here that he used it to clean it out and to keep it from getting mildeo in it. 10 is just more of the debris back here. There's some back here. You can't really see it. >> Okay.
>> 11 again shows all the debris. And 12 again all the debris in the car uh carport here. Compliance was not achieved and a notice of hearing was issued certified mail on January 29th, 2026. It is marked as county exhibit 13.
The return receipt was not received. Therefore, on February 26, 2026, I posted the property and the Martin County Administration building. The affidav affidavit posting is marked as county's exhibit 14. A photograph of the posting is marked as
county's exhibit 15. I spoke with the property owner who advised he would comply prior to the hearing on March 18th, 2026. Therefore, I went to the property again on March 17, 2026 and saw that the sighted violations had not been corrected. At that time, I photographed the property.
The photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as county's exhibit 16 through 21. >> But you can see he has done some work, right? >> Yeah, he's done some uh cleaning up a little bit. Yes. >> Okay. And then yeah, some of the stuff has
been cleaned up back here. Boats still sit there. He's told me he's um selling the boats. So yeah, he's in the process. He cleaned up a lot of it in here. Actually put up some um screening here to kind of block out what he has in there.
And then again, the trash and debris still remains. again here. Back there was pretty much somewhat cleaned up, but it's still a little bit back there. I had mentioned it to him this morning. >> And then this this I found when I was
posting um the property as well, which he said he would clean up. >> Okay. >> On March 17th, 2026, I spoke with the homeowner Jerome Onbrink regarding the violations. and he indicated he would wouldn't be able to clear up the prior to the
hearing. Therefore, the respondent entered into a stipulation agreement paying $350 and agreed to come in compliance on or before June 18th, 2026. I request that all the county's exhibits be received into evidence based upon the testimony and evidence. I request that
the respondent Jer Jerome C. Ownink and Sarah C. own bring be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County code by June 18th, 2026 and if not in compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per
violation per day the violate every day the violations continue thereafter. >> All right. Um, okay. So, I'm looking at the stipulation and agreed final order. Um, and note that, uh, it reflects exactly what you just testified to, uh,
compliance by June 18th, and the payment of $350 in administrative costs, $100 a day if not in compliance. So I'm going to find that it is appropriate to accept the
stipulation and has been signed by Jerome C. Owen Brink and Sarah C. Ow and Brink on behalf of themselves and officer Shanahan on behalf of the county and therefore it's appropriate to enter the agreed order in this case.
Okay. All right. And uh the next one is the Keller case and it's also a stipulated case. It's ENF 202520406
and the respondents are Ernest Keller Jr. and Lorraine Keller. Um I guess both of whom have a life estate in that property. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. All right, whenever you're ready.
>> Excuse. My name is Michael Shanahan and I've been sworn in. I am a code compliance investigator for Martin County. The respondent Ernest Keller Jr. Life estate and Lorraine Keller Life Estate Danielle Keller are not present. This case was
concerns a property at 7921 Southeast Skylark Avenue, Hooktown, Florida 33455 in Martin County, Florida. This case was not generated from an anonymous complaint. According to the official records, the property appraiser Martin County. The property owner is Ernest
Keller Jr. Lifeate Lorraine Keller Life and Danielle Keller. A copy of the property appraisers record of ownership is county's exhibit one. Okay. On December 17th, 2025, I inspected the property and at the time I observed trash and debris. At that time, I
photographed the property. The photographs actually show what I saw then and are marked as counties exhibits two through five. Two is just the door tag. >> Three is kind of just a debris throughout the yard.
Four, again, he's got a bunch of pavers here. Um, can't really see it back here, but there's some stuff leaning up against the trailer and some things over here in the front yard. He's got a lot of knickknacks in this in this yard as you'll see.
And then all this um stuff in the underneath the carport. >> Okay. >> I have also included an aerial of the property which further shows the violations in his county's exhibit. That's the one with the pen on it.
And you'll see he's got I mean he's off Dixie Highway here. So you can see there's no fence here. So everything we can see from his backyard. So there's fence debris here, some other things over here, all along here, >> and then out front here. Pretty much everywhere.
>> Okay. >> Based upon the investigation, I issued a notice of violation to Ernest Keller Jr. Life estate Lorraine Keller at Life Estate and Danielle Keller on December 26, 2026, I'm sorry, 2025 marked as county's
exhibit 7. In the notice of violation, I cited the following Martin County code violation. Section 67.201B, nuisance, declared trash, etc. General ordinances, Martin County code. In the violation, the respondent was given until January 14th to correct the violation and was informed of the need
to contact Martin County code enforcement upon doing so. On January 15th, I did a follow-up inspection. At the time, I photographed the property. The photographs actually show what I saw then and are marked as county's exhibits 8 through 10 or eight.
Yeah, 8 through 10. Again, this is the front of the house. Bunch of things. Um, can't see him over here, but there's a bunch of things in the front here. Golf cart. I asked him what he was doing with it. Um, he just leaves it out there.
Um, again, just debris everywhere along the side. And then again out here, compliance was not achieved and an amended notice of hearing was issued by certified mail on March 4th, 2026. and
is marked as county's exhibit 11. The amended notice of hearing was issued because of a clerical error. The return receipt was not received. Therefore, on March 4th, 2026, I posted the property and the Martin County Administration building. The affidavit
is marked as county's exhibit 12. A photograph of the posting is marked as county's exhibit 13. I spoke with the homeowner's niece, Amanda, throughout the process of the case, and she advised she would help clean up and organize the property, but indicated the homeowner is an older
gentleman who likes to collect things. The niece indicated she was the only family her uncle had in the area and was going to communicate with his daughters to see if they could help. Therefore, I went to the property again on March 17th, 2026, and saw that the site
violations had not been corrected. At that time, I photographed the property. Photographs accurately show what I saw then and are marked as counties exhibits 14 through 20. Now, again, here's all the debris. Nothing's really changed too much. I
think she kind of stopped helping him because he was very argumentative with her. Um, again, trash debris. This is the backyard that I didn't have pictures of before. Um, you see Dixie Highway. There's no fence. Got fence
debris here. A bunch of debris here we that you can see from Dixie Highway again. More debris. More debris. And this is kind of the front of his house.
And then also the front of the house. On March 17th, 2026, I spoke with the homeowner Drew I'm sorry. um Ernest Keller uh and his daughter Kim regarding the violations and they indicated the violations wouldn't be cleared up prior
to the hearing. Therefore, the respondent entered into a stipulation agreement paying $350 and agreed to come into compliance on or before June 18th, 2026. I request that all the counties exhibits be received into evidence based upon the testimony and evidence. I request that
the respondent Ernest Keller Jr. life state Lorraine Keller Life and Danielle Keller be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the Martin County Code by June 18th, 2026 and if not in compliance by then be required to pay a fine in the amount of $100 per violation
per day for every day the violations continue thereafter. This is the end of my case. Okay. Um All right. So, I'm looking at the stipulation. It it recites exactly what you just testified to. So, I'm
going to find that it is appropriate to find that the violation exists and order compliance honor before June 18th, 2026, mailing which fine in the amount of $100 per day will acrewue and note for the record that $350
has been paid to the county uh in costs and that the stipulation is signed by Ernest Keller Jr. on behalf of himself and Michael Shanahan on behalf of the county. So, it is appropriate to enter
this agreed order and hopefully they come into compliance. Okay. And let's see where we are here. Uh, Miss Bradley. >> Yes, sir. >> Uh, you've got the last three cases. They're fine reductions, um,
stipulations. Okay. >> And so, the first one is the, uh, Lloyd Simon case. It's, uh, ENF20240259-01. And you've already been sworn in. So, yes, sir. >> Whenever you're ready. >> Okay. My name is Rachel Sprdley and I've been sworn in. I'm the nuisance
abatement coordinator for Martin County. This case concerns the property located at 6102 Southeast Oakmont Place Stewart in Martin County, Florida. On August 21st, 2024, an order finding violation was issued by the code enforcement magistrate to Simon Lloyd or
Lloyd Simon for section 21.105 swimming pools general ordinances Martin County code. So, exhibit one is the property appraiser showing the new owner of the property. Exhibit 2 is the original order that was
put in place on the property. Compliance was required by September 30th, 2024. On February 19th, 2026, an affidavit of compliance with acred fines was issued reflecting an outstanding
fine in the amount of $50,500 plus cost in the amount of $575. Pursuant to section 1.98B general ordinances Martin County code, no code enforcement lean shall be reduced to a value less than 10% of the total fine amount or 10% of the value of the
property, whichever is less. The portion of lean attributed to cost shall not be subject to reduction. Jonathan Herura is the current owner of the property pursuant to a certificate of title recorded in official record book 3465
page 1546 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 $5,50 to resolve the outstanding fines plus the $575 for the administrative costs for a total of $5,625. And exhibit three is the affidavit of compliance with acred fines that was
recorded. And exhibit four is the reduction request that came in. >> Okay. >> All right. Um Okay. So, looking at the stipulation, uh it recites
what you just discussed. I'm going to find that it is appropriate based upon your testimony and I am going to accept in evidence exhibits one through four in the case and see that the property has changed hands.
the new owner, Jonathan Perua, um is willing to pay the county $5,625 total to satisfy the uh the lean. I'm going to go ahead and enter the agreed order.
Okay. and it'll be paid within 30 days or it reverts. Okay, good. All right, so the next one is the Timco case. It's um ENF2025040 332-01. Respondent is Brian J. Timco.
>> Yes, sir. My name is Rachel Sprdley and I've been sworn in. I'm the nuisance abatement coordinator for Martin County. This case concerns the property located at 2175 Southwest University Street Stewart in Martin County, Florida. On October 15, 2025, an order finding violation was issued by the code
enforcement magistrate to Brian J. Timco for section 67201A, nuisance declared weeds, undergrowth, general ordinances, Martin County code. Section 67201B, nuisance declared trash, etc. General or ordinances Martin County
code. and section 91.34A generally inoperable vehicles general ordinances Martin County code. So exhibit one is the property appraiser showing that Mr. Timco is the property owner. Exhibit two is the original order
that was put in place on the property. Compliance was required by November 28th, 2025. On January 26, 2026, an affidavit of compliance with acred fines was issued reflecting an outstanding fine in the amount of 11,200 plus cost
in the amount of $575, which was paid on February 24th, 2026. Pursuant to section 1.98B general ordinances Martin County code, no code enforcement lean shall be reduced to a value less than 10% of the total fine amount or 10% of the value of the
property, whichever is less. The portion of the lean attributed to cost shall not be subject to reduction. Staff has determined that a lean reduction is warranted. The respondents were responsible for the violation and brought the property into compliance and have offered to pay $1,120 to resolve
the outstanding fine. So that concludes my testimony on that one. Exhibit three is the original or is the recorded affidavit of compliance with fines. And then exhibit four is Mr. Tempo's request for reduction.
>> Okay. And I do understand that he has paid the cost. >> Yes, sir. >> All right. So, I'm looking at the stipulation which recites everything you just testified to and find that it is appropriate
to uh reduce the fine to $1,120 noting that the cost of $575 have been paid to the county. Uh I will accept in evidence the county's exhibits one through four in
this case and note that Brian J. Timco uh Timco has executed the agreement and um Miss Bradley you have as well on behalf of the county and I'll go ahead and enter the
agreed order. Okay, let's see. Next is the Warly case. It's ENF202570240 and it's the estate of Donald H. Worley. >> My name is Rachel Spradley and I've been sworn in. I'm the nuisance abatement coordinator for Martin County. This case
concerns the property located at 3211 Southeast Clayton Street Stewart in Martin County, Florida. On September 17th, 2025, an order finding violation was issued by the code enforcement magistrate to Donald H. Warly estate for section 67201B nuisance declared trash
etc. general ordinances Martin County code and section 67201A nuisance declared weeds undergrowth general ordinances Martin County code. So exhibit one is the property appraiser showing that um Sam Jack Blackstone LLC is the current owner
and exhibit two is the recorded original order that was put in place. Compliance was required by November 28th, 2025. On February 6, 2026, an affidavit of compliance with acred fines was issued reflecting an outstanding
fine in the amount of $12,500 plus cost in the amount of $575. So, exhibit 3 is the affidavit that was recorded pursuant to section 1.98B, general ordinances, Martin County code. No code enforcement lean shall be reduced to a
value less than 10% of the total fine amount or 10% of the value of the property whichever is less. The portion of the lean attributed to cost shall not be subject to reduction. Samjack Blackstone LLC are the current owners of the property pursuant to a certificate of title recorded in official record
book 3533 page 1802. 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 $1,250 to resolve the outstanding fines which have accured plus the cost in the amount of $575 for a total of $18 $1,825 total.
And exhibit four is the reduction request. Okay. All right. Um, so I am looking at the fine reduction stipulation. Note that it recites exactly what you
just testified to. And uh without objection, I'm going to accept into evidence that county's exhibits 1 through 4 in this case. Stipulation has been signed by Alan Masraagi,
manager of Sam Jack Blackstone LLC, and Miss Bradley. On behalf of the county, we going to find that it is appropriate to enter the agreed order ordering uh the payment of $1825 to the county within 30 days failing
which the fine will revert. Okay. And um we do have the February 18th, 2026 minutes and I've reviewed those um find that um
they're accurate at least as far as I know. Okay. And um note for the record that they have been already previously signed by um Jillian Kane and John Colando on behalf of the county and and
uh now I have entered my signature as well. So uh that takes care of the February minutes. So let's see plus approved. All right. Um
let's see. Our next hearing is April when is our next hearing? >> 15th >> 15th. April 15th is our next hearing. And um I hope to see you all then. Thank you very much. >> Thank you.