violation exists at your property as observed cited by a court enforcement or court compliance officer of the city. If the city is not able to prove its case, then I will dismiss the case and you may leave. These proceedings are being recorded.
Therefore, all persons who are speaking should do so one at a time to ensure that all testimony is clearly audible on the recording device. If English is not your primary language, then please inform me when I call your case. We have a translator who will assist you during
the proceedings. When your case is called, the property owner, agent for the property owner, and any witness that you may have um should raise your hand and let us know that you are in the room. Um, if you are not the property
owner or an attorney representing a property owner, then you must present a notorized power of attorney affidavit in order for your testimony to be taken on behalf of the property owner. For new cases, you will be asked for the record if you
are aware of and understand the violation that is being heard today and do you understand what is required to resolve the violation. Please answer accordingly. The city will present his case first and then the property owner and or violator
will be given an opportunity to testify on their own behalf to bring forward witnesses to testify to present evidence and photographs and to cross-examine the city's witnesses. Following the case presentation, I will issue a finding of fact on the case. If
I find that a violation of city codes exists or existed at your property, then depending on the case type, I will set an abatement date for the violation to be resolved. Or for repeat violation, I will impose a daily fine amount. For new
non-re repeat cases, my order will include an abatement date by which you must resolve the violation and a daily fine amount, then I may impose at a future hearing date should the violation not be resolved by the abatement date.
If I find sufficient cause to postpone enforcement action at this time, I will table this case proceedings to another hearing date in the future. If you do not agree with my finding of fact and or ruling, then the property owner may appeal the administrative order on the
case of the circuit court. An appeal must be filed within 30 days of the date of the execution of the administrative order to be appealed. In accordance with Florida statutes, if a person decides to repeal any decision made by the special magistrate with
respect to any matter considered at these proceedings, then the person will need a verbatim record of the proceeding. This record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The cost of obtaining the verbatim record shall be
the sole responsibility of the appellant and it is recommended that persons who plan to appeal their case should provide their own court reporter at the proceeding. Pursuant to city codes, if the city of North Miami prevails in prosecuting a
case before the special magistrate, the city shall be entitled to recover all costs incurred in prosecuting the case. The current cost assessment amount is $100 per case. Once the city records an order that
imposes a fine and authorizes a lean against the property, then the city will charge additional administrative fees to record and release the lean. Madame clerk, >> good morning. Thank you. And now I have
our police officer to give uh administer the oath to our code officers and inspectors. >> We can hear you officer. >> I'm sorry. I was speaking to somebody in the lobby. I'm ready. >> Thank you. If uh all of our inspectors
and um officers, can you please enable your camera? Let me Sanders. There we go. >> Okay. Can everyone place your right hand over your chest, please?
I I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, >> one nation >> under God, >> indivisible,
>> with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. Um I believe our translator is also here. Then we'll move forward with the um
administer the oath to our Where is he? I saw him a few minutes ago. Is the translator here? >> It should be administered. Was it administered to the um officers? The inspectors pledge. Okay. >> Yes.
>> Our interpreters are present. >> I see one here. We can't see you. Sir, if you can please enable the camera so we can see you. Thank you. >> I'm here. >> All right, Officer Carter. Um, I believe we're missing uh one more.
>> Is your name Marisol Estrada? >> What's your name, sir? >> Oh, my name is Eric. >> Eric, we have to change your name. Um, that's not Marcel Estrada. I believe it's the company itself, but we have to change it to your actual name, sir.
>> Oh, I don't know why. >> Eric. And what's your last name? Eric >> is Delgado. All right, I should change it. 4 a.m. Right. So, in the meantime, um, we don't have any Creole translators, but I'm
guessing you are our Spanish translator. >> Yes, I am. >> Okay, go ahead, Officer Carter. It's okay. We can go ahead. >> Am I going to uh square in the translators first or the officers first? >> Uh, officers first and then we'll move forward with the translator. Thank you.
>> Okay. I I would say try to speak to the utility billing supervisor. Is your calling? >> Are all the officers on? >> Yes, they are. >> Okay. If everyone can raise their right hands, please.
>> Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you are about to give in these proceedings will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? If so, say aloud, I do. >> I do. >> Thank you. Now, for the translator.
Should I? >> Okay. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the translations which you are about to give in these proceedings will be accurate and correct to the best of your knowledge, skill, and ability? Say, I do. >> I do. >> Thank you.
>> You're welcome. >> I can um may I start reading? >> Yeah, because Thank you. Good morning and thank you for participating in today's special magistrate hearing. I will review the process by which today's hearing will be
conducted. Make sure your device is always muted unless you are giving a testimony on a case. If you are using two devices to participate in today's hearing, be sure your audio is only enabled on one device. When your case is called, if you're signed into Zoom, you
will receive notification giving your access to audio video so that you may give your testimony. If you are physically at the city hall and wish to give testimony, you must sign in with a code clerk and await a text message indicating your case is ready to be
heard up and receiving that message. You should immediately come to the code of compliance office to be provided with access to a computer. If you would like to speak on behalf of a case, once the case is called, you should click the raise hand button to be acknowledged.
Before giving testimony on your case, please state your name, property address, and relationship to the property. If you wish to have an interpreter assist during your case, please indicate that this when your case is called your magistrate. That concludes the instructions. I do have
your um abatement dates and uh um quite a few amendments on this agenda. >> Okay, I'll start with the abatement dates, please. >> All right, so 30 days September 15th, >> 60 days October 17th,
and 90 days November 17th. >> Wonderful. Thank you. All right. So, what are the um any additions or amendments? >> Amendments. Uh yes. Uh so we have case number five,
10, 11, 12, 13, and 27 have been tabled. >> All right. You're welcome. >> Okay. >> And case number 29 has been closed.
>> Okay. 29 is closed. And the others, is that for 30 or 60 days? >> Uh, item number five, >> the others are going to be 60 days because you we already started working on the September agenda. So, that means that they'll go to the October. So,
it'll be Yes, it'll be 60 days. >> Okay. Okay. Wonderful. >> All right. 60 days. >> Okay. If you're ready, you may call your first first case. >> Okay. So, we uh we do have uh gentlemen
outside on the lobby. So, we'll move forward with that one. That's case number 17. >> Okay. >> No, actually, my apologies. We're going to start with case number 17. Um give me one second.
I had someone that actually logged in and registered, but I don't see them log um here in the system >> for 17. >> Number 17, but um I'm I so I do have the officer here that I need him to um
finish early because he has uh some other duties that I need him to complete. So, if we can please go ahead and move forward with number 17 first and then we'll move forward to the other one. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Case number 17.
My apologies. Let me share. Are you able to see my screen? >> Yeah, I can. >> Amazing. So, K case number 17, Dr. Real Estate Properties LLC AEN20500 00002 is the case number. The officer
for this case is Mr. Real Casem. >> Good morning. Um, >> good morning, >> Mag Street. The case is for property 1055 Northwest 126 Street. The case is based off of
the animals being at large without being restrained or on a collar or on on a leash. Apparently, we had a resident walking by the property and
four dogs pretty much kind of chased her down the block. And she complained and she actually sent us some video also that the dogs are like loose and running
without any proper supervision. Since then, I've spoken to the property owner and I've spoken to the owner and the owner and I've gone out to the property.
The dogs are not there and the property owner let me know also yesterday that the dogs have since been removed from the property. Okay. Tell me about notice. So, we send the notice of to appear on
June 27th, 2025. And we also have the video that unfortunately I was not able to um add to the agenda because it doesn't >> let me attach a format. It doesn't let
me attach it, but I do have it available if you would like to see it. You're indicating you cannot play it here. >> No, I I No, that's what I'm saying. I can actually play it here. It's just that unfortunately the format doesn't let me upload it to our agenda previously, but I can actually play it
today. >> Yeah, you can. Absolutely. >> Yes, I want to see it since the um individuals not present. Okay. Um, I here's my issue. Um, the person who censored the video
has to be able to testify in terms of who owns the dogs. >> And um, I I I can't make a ruling without the full context. I I don't know, you know, who these dogs belong to. I don't have someone who's present
who can testify that um you know they saw these dogs with this owner you know went into this house after they were chased down. I I understand your testimony, Inspector Casemir, that you spoke to the owner and they informed you
that the dogs are no longer there, but it's it's based on what's being presented to me. It's not enough for me to be able to make a ruling. >> I also have one of the uh inspectors of the area that's actually on here today
that he would like to testify if you'd like. >> Okay. >> Inspector Dange. >> Hello. How you doing, Majesty? >> Morning. >> Very well. >> I'm fine. Um so the dogs that's uh in the picture, they actually do belong to
that homeowner. Reason being because my mom lives two three houses away on the same block and they're always loose outside. It's uh they have a couple of uh Dutch hound mixed dogs and the neighbor uh next door
has a little uh black and white like furry dog and they all join in and come out together and just be up and down the block continuously until um they're excited. now not so much so but that's
been going on for quite a while now. >> Okay. Based on your own based on your own um observation. >> Yes ma'am. >> Okay. >> My mom's been living there for like 34 years and um that those people are
renting a property that's been there for I believe like around five years. old now. So, >> and um >> so you have personally observed these dogs. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. >> Neighbor's dogs running loose in the neighborhood with no leash. And you know
for a fact that it belongs to that property and doesn't >> Yes. It's the the the brown and white dog the the the the white the white and black dog there's there's like four dogs in total. But the ones that look like hot dogs and most of them are look like they have the long shape. They're belong
to the 1055 house. the white and black dog. I don't know if that's in question. The white and black furry dog that it's uh that house address 1025. It would be two houses over and that dog comes out and joins the other dogs that
are already out and then they just hang out cuz the owners don't actually walk the dogs. What they do, they just open the door or the gate and the gate >> dogs come out >> and then just let the dogs come out. So if somebody's walking by, they'll just run across the street or something like that. Sometimes when I have to walk my
dogs that I keep at my mom's property, >> you'll see them running around. And also, so my mom's lives like uh like I said, three four houses down within the same block. >> Okay. All right. So based on the unrebuted testimony of the two officers,
then I will make a finding that the violation did exist. But now you're telling me that the dogs are no longer there. Correct. Which means that portion of the case has been rectified. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. So, what is it that the city's asking me?
>> Is it to adjudicate so that if >> I'm sorry? >> Adjudication with a onetime fine. >> With a onetime fine. >> Okay. All right. So, based on the un under unreed testimony of the code enforcement officer, I find that the
violation did exist. I also find good notice given proper notice the owners have failed to appear here by find in favor of the city enter an adjudication. Um since this matter has been rectified there will be a onetime fine of $500.
>> Next case. >> Thank you majesty. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, next case is case number 14 and 15. Would you like me to go one at a time? >> Yes, please. >> Case number 14, Crystal Bay Investments
LLC, CF O202300499. inspector for this case is Miss Shana Sanders. And I'm so sorry. My apologies. Let me um unmute. I'm trying to unmute his He's here in
person at the lobby. >> Okay. >> He needs to be slowing in. >> Yes, I'm trying to unmute him and it's not letting me. Give me one second. I'm sorry. Is there someone there that can assist you?
>> Yeah. Give me one second. >> The man out there needs help, Greg. Can you hear me? >> There we are. Good morning, sir. Yes. >> Good morning. >> Please raise your right hand. >> Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony? >> One second.
>> Yep. >> Okay. His hand wasn't raised. I didn't think he could hear you. >> Thank you. Please. Uh, do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in these proceedings shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, help you God. Please say
I do. >> I do. >> All right. Good morning, sir. Please state your full name in relationship to the property. >> My name is Roelio Rodriguez. I am I'm I'm the owner of the property. >> Thank you, sir.
Inspector >> Dana Sanders, City of North Miami Neighborhood Service Department Inspector. Um, these both cases are for property address 12275 Northeast 6th Avenue. The first case is for failure to obtain the business tax receipt. Um, and
if if you don't mind, we can kind of um hear them together because they co they kind of go coincide with each other. You can't get one without the other. >> Understood. and allow allow madame clerk to to um list the um second case as well. Madame clerk, you can read the um
second one into the um record. >> Number 15. >> Number 15. Yes. >> Okay. Case number 15. Investments LLC CECU 202300827. The um officer for this case is also Miss Jana Sanders.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. So for the second case, um, number 15, CECU 202300827. I'll start with that one since that was that's what you have to obtain first before even applying for the certificate of use. I re I in initially inspected
the property on June 28th, 2023 while doing a um annual housing inspection. At that time of doing the annual housing inspections, um we make it a habit to go ahead and check the lensure for the property. At that time, um I looked in
the system, looked at Sunbiz, um and there was no business tax receipt um for this um apartment building. I have given um over two years for them to make contact with me and to apply. I spoke
with a a a a woman about a year ago and I do apologize. I mean, it's such an old case, but maybe a year, year and a half ago, who stated she would do what she needed to do to obtain the business tax receipt and certificate of use. Here we are two years later, two plus years
later, no business tax receipt in or certificate of use has been obtained for the um small apartment building that's located at this property. >> All right, Mr. Rodriguez. >> Yes.
what's going on. It's been it's taking two years. >> Um I can only speak for myself. I've I was only made aware of this this weekend when I saw a um certified letter. Um, on
Monday I contacted um I didn't get her last name, okay, but I contacted a person named Anna at I think um community something. She instructed me as to how I was to obtain the business
tax receipt to later obtain the certificate of use. You know, I've owned this property now since 2011. I I don't understand quite frank look I understand that not knowing is not an
excuse but I just didn't know. So nobody you know you guys send me all kinds of licenses and bills and stuff and I pay them. Um I don't know who you the officer spoke to. Um,
I can only tell you that the minute that I received this and I where I was made aware of this because actually this this letter was sent some like a month before I >> One second. Are they vacuuming near you? >> My apologies. They're not vacuuming.
They're outside cutting the cutting the lawn. This is at the city. They're they're cutting the grass outside. So that's what you're hearing the the blower. >> Okay. >> You want me to wait? No, I'm going to mute mines while while you're talking. >> Okay. Okay. So, so again, I I I received
this um I I I saw this on Sunday. On Monday, I called Anna. Um she instructed me as what I'm supposed to do. I have everything jotted down here. I've already uh have the form that I have to
fill out that I believe is for the um business tax receipt. Um, I'm gonna go ahead. I'm already in the process of doing that. Um, um, the the only thing that I have to figure out
how I get is my warranty deed. So, I guess I'm going to call the attorney that did the closing or figure out how to how to get that. Um, um, and I and I believe that that's in order for me to obtain a tax I u, oh, I have a tax ID
that I know. So once I do that, I'm supposed to, I guess, bring that over to the to here and then uh a gentleman by the name of Raphael will take over to do the uh certificate of use. That's my understanding. That's what I intend to
do. >> Okay. Did Did you have an a a company, a property management office that was taking care of that for you in the past? I I don't understand how because obviously you've had it in the past because if you've only been out of compliance since 2023,
then that would mean that you've had it before. It's just that it was never renewed and it just probably fell through the cracks. >> I to be quite honest with you, I don't know. Um basically, look, this is
I have a job. It's what I do. I had a a a family member taking care of things obviously fell through the cracks. I honestly I thought I had I never had it. That's what that's what I I thought that
from 2011 when I brought this to right now I hadn't had it. As a matter of fact, you may want to check your records because I believe that's what Anna told me. >> Yeah. And magistrate, he never obtained it. He doesn't have it. Um this isn't for a failure to renew. This is a
failure to obtain it. >> Oh, okay. All right. Um, what is the city asking? >> Um, I I'm asking for an adjudication um possibly with a short abatement date. Um, this has been over two years. You
know, I understand he it he's stating he it was just brought to his attention. However, um and I'm looking here at the date that I opened it in at the um date that I did the inspection. This has been >> ending ending and allow me to to make
the allow me to to make this right. >> 60 days, please make the best within 60 abatement day to the list as of recording in progress. >> Okay. All right. Bye.
There's just All right. So, the last uh thing that we uh discussed was case number 17. Uh Miss Rivas, my apologies. Our um internet went on down citywide, but we're back up. I'm going to go ahead and promote
you as a panelist. If you can hear me, Miss Reeves, go ahead and accept that invitation. Please enable your video and audio. Miss Ravas, if you can hear me, please turn on your camera and your audio.
>> Can you hear me? >> I can hear you, but I can't see you. >> And there's also a nice in the background. >> Can you see me now? Yes, there you are. >> Thank you so much. >> Good morning. >> Good morning. Call the Did you call
that? Did you put it on on the record? >> No, not yet. Not yet. Um to make sure that it's recording first. It is recording >> and swearing, please. >> Absolutely. All right, Miss Rivas,
if you could please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this proceeding shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, I help you God. Please say I do. >> I do.
>> Thank you. And the case number, it's case 17 Real Estate Properties LLC. Case number is AEN L 202500002. The officer for this case was uh is Mr. Rainol Kazmir. Uh this case was heard
before, but because of uh issues that we've been having and technical difficulties, we're going back to it. Mr. Casemir, are you here? >> I can hear you, but I can Oh, there we are. Okay, >> you can hear me. >> All right, Miss Rivas.
>> All right, so um >> I can't hear anybody else. I don't know what's going on, but everybody can hear. >> You can hear us. >> I We can hear you, but you have to be able to hear us. >> We can hear you, Ray. >> Okay. Okay. >> But Okay. So,
>> are you able to hear us or No, >> no, that's the thing. I can't hear you guys. I don't know why. >> Take you You want to take off the um earpiece? Your earpiece? >> Yeah, I just took it off. >> That's fine. >> That's good. That's good.
>> All right. Just I just want to update Miss Revas. Miss Rivas, I did hear the case and I did make a ruling, but I would want to um have the officer testify again and then I will give you an opportunity to testify um because you know so you can have your
day in court. Um you may proceed um inspector. >> Okay. um the cases about um the dogs being at large um without a leash, without supervision, just being loose on the property and we had them chase a
resident, I guess, and they recorded the whole incident. But like I said before, I spoke to the owner and I spoke to the the rental the person that's renting the property, the tenant,
>> and they assured me that >> they're they have everything in control and the dogs are off the property and they're they're not there right now. >> Um, can you play the video for u Miss Reus, please?
Maybe call the main line. Okay, I can try 31. All right, Miss Reus. >> Yes. >> Is there anything you'd like to add you'd like to say? >> The only thing that I wanted to say is
that only one dog belonged to my tenant. >> The other two of the dogs belong to a person who was living on the house right across 1040. And the other one belongs to someone that lives like three houses
east of the house. And the dog apparently escape underneath the fence is not that they open the doors and and the and the dog the small dog goes out and um it was resolved actually the the tenant was
breaking the lease contract because he was not allowed to have a dog there. So, as it was said, everything was resolved because the dog is no longer in the property. And the person that used to live across the street, apparently, that
person moved out. >> All right. Um, I believe there was another officer who testified that at least two belong to your tenant. >> No, just one. and and the tenant is hasn't been there like five year. He said also with all due respect, it's
been only one year. >> Okay. Um the 1040 across the street, those people uh it's a Haitian couple that uh that's been living there for years, they never had any uh dogs at all. And the black and white dog, which I said to the magistrate, which I I told
her, which is that one dog that you guys didn't own, lives two houses over, which I I I did explain that to the magistrate. But the house 1040, they they've never had a dog. Um, >> and I' I've known that because I've been
living in the neighborhood for 30 years. And my mom lives on that same exact block. And every day, I mean, you're probably renting out the house. You don't know that your tenant has these dogs at their house. But even when I have to go walk my dogs, those dogs are
loose. So, you probably just don't know. But the 11040, >> they moved recently. Probably within >> Yeah, they Yeah, they moved in a couple months ago, but uh they never had dogs on that property. >> Oh, well, I was told that those dog
belong to those person that live in that house that it was recently vacant. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, They probably didn't tell you that >> and that's why those dogs are not no longer there >> and and the dog on my tenant is no longer visiting. Actually, who was
visiting is the the girlfriends dogs. So, >> yeah, there's a lot of people there recently. So, that probably was were their dogs that were there that day around that time period, but they they they were at that home.
>> Okay. So, what I did was intern adjudication, which means that I did find you um in violation. And um since I was told that the dogs were removed, I entered a one-time fee
of $500. >> Okay. >> Okay. And >> was I the only one being fine on this? because l as I said it's only one dog and uh the other one the the the black and white is also on the streets all the
time so >> okay I I'm only dealing with your case right now >> I see >> the officer did testify that the black and white dog did not belong um to your tenant >> and and the and the other two dogs didn't belong to my tenant either
>> um the in the inspectors testified otherwise your tenants may not be telling telling you the whole truth considering that they were not supposed to have dogs on the property. >> Okay. >> Um but the testimony is that the dogs are are belong at that um property. So
that's my ruling and um good luck to you, ma'am. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> All right. Byebye. >> Bye. >> Okay. Um sorry about that. Uh, we're going to go ahead and call call case number six and
seven. Um, I believe they're here to Mr. Bose. Are you
Can you hear me? I'm promoting you. to be a panelist. Mr. Hosway, >> we can hear you, sir. >> Okay. Can you hear me now? >> Yes, we can. >> Okay. Yes. This is Anthony Acasta.
It's We're calling about the property for Next Level Motors. This is case number six and case number seven. >> Yes. >> Give me one minute, please. >> Thank you. Of >> course. It's your name or is it Anthony?
>> No, my name is Anthony. >> All right. Mr. Anthony, can you please uh what's your last name? >> Acasta. A sa Okay. Anthony, Mr. Aosta, if you can please raise your right hand.
>> Okay, got it. >> I I can't see you, sir. >> Yeah, I I can I'm I'm a little disabled, so I My left hand doesn't work that good. Can you see it now? >> We're You're covering the camera with your thumb, so I'm not able to see.
>> Hold on. Hold on. Right now, can we see? can see you now. >> Thank you. We appreciate you. >> All right, Miss Cindia, before you swearing, enter um please list state the case for the round. You can swear in >> by all means. Uh case number 66 640
Northeast 128th Street. I'm sorry. 640 Northeast 128 Street LLC. Case number CF OB2024 000098. Would you like me to read number seven as well? Correct. Okay. Case number 7640
Northeast 128th Street LLC CECU 2024000080. In both cases, uh, the inspector is Mr. Jonathan Mistri. May I swear in Mr. Mr. Yes. >> Mr. Costa, my apologies. Go ahead and
uh, please raise your right hand. >> Got it. >> Thank you. Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this proceeding shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? So help you God, please say I do. >> I do.
>> Thank you. The officer is Mr. Lamester. Mr. Lamester, please. >> Uh, Mr. Aosta, one second. What is your relationship to this property? >> Um, I'm a tenant. I rented the property. >> All right. Okay. Thank you, sir.
Okay, inspector. >> Good morning, everyone. Neighborhood service inspector Jonathan Lamestry, and this case is being heard for the first time. On April 27th, 2024, I opened a notice of a violation um for case number six um for the business not having a
business tax receipt. uh the development service department, our zoning department, uh they informed me about a auto dealership that was operating at 640 650 Northeast 128th Street in North Miami. Um the development service department informed me that um that area
is not zoned to have an auto dealership at the location. I posted the notice of violation on April 27, 2024. And I also sent a certified letter via property appraiser on April 27, 2024.
Um, as of and I apologize, uh, July 3rd of 2025, um, I also posted the notice to appear, uh, for the magistrate. Um, uh, and I apologize, uh, July 18th, uh,
for the final reinspection date, uh, the business, Next Level Motors, is still being advertised as a car dealership at the location. Um and um yeah, it's it's still being advertised
as an auto dealership um at the location and that's why I brought this case before you. Um I do have uh development services uh Raphael Padron. He is the he is uh he's the administrative uh coordinator for the business tax receipt
office. Um he could also give testimony if you need him to. Um but I have been working with um Next Level Motors. Uh they have one of the representatives has been uh in contact with me and with the director of development services uh
Debbie Love. Um and we're trying to find a solution to uh not have Next Level Motors. So they did open a new business at the location called Next Level Studios, which is a stu uh like a photo studio. Um and for Next Level Motors, um
they informed us that they have moved their operations out of North Miami, but the advertisement is still going on. Um but the owner or the representative has informed me that they did change their Sunbiz. Um and that they're changing their website to reflect that their
business is no longer in North Miami, but now in Halia. That's all. >> Okay. Um All right. Who did you want me to hear from first? >> Um, I don't know if Raphael Patron uh
will be able to give testimony >> from the development services department. >> Sure. Mr. Patron. >> Hi. I'm trying to get the video on. Okay. Basically, everything Jonathan said is accurate. Um, I do see that the owner or at least the representation for
the owner has been um making a conscious effort to remove all mention of the of the dealership aspect from North Miami. Um, but but but that's that currently the their business tax receipt and
certificate of use for Next Level Studio Shop, which is the business that did open in that space. We have the stipulation, no auto sales and vehicle storage is prohibited. Um, it's meant for photography,
podcasts, and photo shoots. That's all that the space is allowed for, has been approved for. >> Okay. >> All right. Um, Mr. Aost. >> Yes, ma'am. Yes. Uh, we understand what it was. We comply with all the necessary
agreement that they just said. Uh, Next Level Motor is no longer there. It's been moved to Halia. And all we're doing is Next Level Studio is for photo shots and pops and there's no cars inside the premises whatsoever. >> Okay.
All right. What is the city requesting at this time? Um, I'm requesting for an adjudication to to show to show that they were operating at the location and if they were to operate again um we could um hit
them with a fine or um you know at least it's on record that they were operating but at the moment they are no longer they are cooperating with the city to um to remove every mention of Next Level Motors in North Miami.
All right. Um, based on the testimony um, before me, I do find that the violation does did exist um, favor of the city entering adjudication. Um I also find that there's been compliance
and so as long as they remain compliant, a daily fine is just um an adjudication because if this matter comes back then now you become a repeat um violator. But Mr. Aosta I um good luck to you sir. If
there's anything if there's nothing else you're free to leave. >> Thank you ma'am. I appreciate it. >> All right. Bye. All right. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. PJ. >> My pleasure. >> I am so sorry I didn't get half of that.
I was cutting off. You found them guilty for both cases. >> That is correct. There is an adjudication. Um, and obviously co cost for today, but there will be a fine or a daily fine because they are already in compliance.
And um so the adjudication is for future um in the event that they revert back to um dealership then it becomes a repeat violation. >> So they won't Okay, understood. So it's
only it's only the the um amendment fee that >> adjudication cost adjudication court costs. >> Understood for both cases. Correct. >> Correct. Yes. >> All right. Perfect. Just wanted to be on the same page. appreciate you. >> Thank you. May Mr. Arosa, you you may
leave, sir. We appreciate you. >> Thank you. >> Have a good day. >> All right. Bye. Bye. >> I do have uh one other attendee here that she's not answering. I'm going to go ahead and try to see. Miss Edna Seno,
can you please accept my invite? I'm promoting you to a panelist. Miss Edna. >> Um, do we still have our Creole interpreter? Mr. Interpreter, can you just translate just in case there's a um
there's a language barrier? Okay, I will >> ask her to to join um >> Oh, there she is. >> Yeah, >> Miss Daniel, what what case number are
you here for, ma'am? >> The case number is M H Z I Z 202400 05 >> and the address >> 1469
Northeast 18th Avenue apartment 4 A4 >> it's number 31 Cindia on the docket if you can um enable your your video Please.
>> Yes. Um, do you see? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, it'll be number 30 and number 31. Actually, >> 30 and 31. Okay. All right. >> Do you see me?
>> We can see you and we can hear you as well. >> Okay. So my apologies. You said 14699 Northeast 18th A. >> Yes. 189. >> Thank you. So there is it's it'll be
case number 30 and case number 31. >> If we can Can we hear her for 31? She's only here for 31. The both of them are for center court, but she's only here for her unit um which is 31. Okay.
All right. Um, understood. Gase number 31, YMP Center Court LLC, MHVIO204 00075. Um, Miss uh Seno, uh, please raise your
right hand. >> Thank you. Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give in this proceedings shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? To help you that, please say I do. >> I do.
>> Ma'am, what is your relationship to the property? >> I'm just >> Okay. All right. >> You may proceed, Inspector. >> Hannah Sanders, neighborhood service inspector. Um, this one is for property address 14699
Northeast 8th Avenue. Um, this violation was brought to my attention February 9th of 2024. I >> services. This is Cindia. >> I'm sorry. Well, I was called out um regarding a unit that had leaking water
um at the property and the baseboards were damaged. At that time, I went out to the property, inspected. I met with um the tenants at the property. Um her parents I believe um resided there as well. They were there and showed me the
property. Miss Edna was at work. So she assisted with translating for me through them. However, at the time of my inspection, I did observe water on the floor. I did observe um the wall and the baseboards that was damaged. Um, from
what I visibly saw appeared to be, you know, water damage. I um cited the property. The m the maintenance man, the head maintenance man came up to the unit, met us. Um, we all agreed that some work
needed to be done. At that time, I gave them, I believe, about a week or two, maybe, you know, a little more to make the necessary repairs. Um, fast forward now to a year later, I understand. Um, and throughout this year, I've been visiting the
property off and on every few months because from my understanding, the wall and the baseboards have been repaired. However, there is leakage still happening there. Um they are at this
present time um since court has sent in permit applications to do some repairs to their walls and some outside work or something to that effect. However, this
unit is still leaking water as you're seeing in the pictures. You know, again, it was visibly repaired as per the face boards, but the water is still leaking every time we get a heavy rain. Um my last inspection after I posted a notice
to appear I visited the property again um um her mother brought to my attention again it's leaking saw you know small water damage. I did ask you know maybe on the next rainy day they can give me a call so I can see you know just how much damage you know steel and steel pears
has been made but it's still leaking. Um um I was hoping center court would be here to give testimony as well as to you know what's going on, why is it taking so long. um you know they've been instructed to possibly you know break down that wall or break into the wall
seeing that they do have permits to you know do some of that work but um still in you know the violation still remains um regarding the leakage of the water and the water that's you know coming into um the unit.
>> Okay Madam Cena >> yes >> anything you'd like to add? Yes, everything she said is correct. They was trying to fix it, but it look like they covered the water still coming into the wall. They just like cover it and we
have problem with the mold and stuff like that. That's why we're not re we not we're not going to renew because we have we've been having problem for a long time here. So that's why we're going to move. Um yeah. >> Okay. Um
right based on the unreedited testimony of the quoting officer enforcement officer and the witness I find that the violation does exist. Um when did you say notice was um provided? I um the
notice to appear was hand delivered on I'm showing here August 1st of 2022. I hand delivered it to the assistant manager as well as posted it on the front door of the unit and um certified mailing was mailed out
by the administrative staff on July 9th. >> All right. I find good notice given proper notice. Owners have failed to appear hereby find in favor of the city enter an adjudication. Owners have 30 days by which to resolve the violation. If the violation is not resolved by the
abatement date, there will be a daily fine amount of $450. Um Msino, thank you for um you know your appearance today and your testimony. I do find that they are in violation. I do find that they had um notice for today's
hearing but has um failed to appear. Um and so um I do find that the violation exists. If they're if they don't fix the problem within 30 days they will have um daily fines of um $450.
Okay. Good luck to your parents. >> Sure. >> Thank you. Thank you, Miss Shendra. >> Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. So there we don't have any more attendees. We would you like um to continue with the regular agenda?
>> Yeah, but let's release the interpreters. >> Oh, yes, absolutely. I'm not sure, Mr. Nixon. >> Yes, >> you're free to go, sir. Thank you. We appreciate you. >> The Spanish. >> Yes, I'm here,
>> sir. You're free to go. Thank you. We appreciate you and your services. >> Okay. Have a great day everybody. >> Appreciate you. >> All right. Before we proceed, I need to take a a quick break. Let's do five minutes. I need to use the rest. >> Absolutely. Thank you. We'll be back at
11. >> All right. >> Recording stopped. recording in progress. >> All right, we're back on our record. >> We are back. >> Next case. >> So the first
Okay, we're we're going to go ahead and start calling case number one, >> 1320 Northeast 6 a Prestige and Prestige ESC Proper Management LLC, MHBIO 202300957.
This case was found guilty by Magistr Smith and um officer for this case is Mr. Janie George. >> Good morning. >> I'm George for the city of North Miami. This case was was heard previously by
magistr. Um I posted a notice to appear one second. A post notice appear July 3rd and they have not submitted an extermination
report with the city. All right. Um, >> can you put the list back up again because you have my entire screen so I'm not able to pull my >> Oh, I'm sorry. What What will you need? I'm sorry. >> The list. Oh, >> I'm not sharing it.
>> The agenda. Today has been great with the internet. That's all I'm gonna say. >> I'm sorry about that. Let's >> Okay, >> here we go. >> Great. So, the case was for them to
provide proof of u extermination, correct? The extermination report. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. And your testimony is that it has not been provided. >> Right. They haven't contacted me. I haven't heard anything from the property
owner. >> All right. Based on the unreuted testimony of the code enforcement officer. Um uh I find that the violations still exist. Also find good notice given proper notice. Orders have failed to appear. The daily fine amount of 350 is
hereby ratified. Thank you, magistrate. >> Case number two, 1320 Northeast 6 Avenue, Prestige and Prestige EST Property Management LLC, MHBIO 202300958.
This case was found guilty by Magistry Smith uh officer for this case as Mr. Jamie George as well. Good morning. Uh for this same same thing, uh same uh well, I'm sorry. This is the same property for different
violation, but yet they did work um at the rear of the property. It was found guilty by Magic Smith. I posted notice to appear July 3rd and there is no permit on file
for the work that was done. try to find the photos of all those. There we go. >> Based on the unreuted testimony of the code enforcement officer, I find that the violations still exist. Also find good notice. Owners have failed to the
um daily fine amount of 350 is hereby ratified. B number 3131 000 Sunrise Plaza LLC CF O B2023 00453 found guilty by Magistr Smith U. The
officer for this case is Miss Shannon Sanders. >> I'm sorry. Give me one moment. I apologize. What I did with my cases? Oh, right here. Oh my lord. If it was any closer. Um, this one is for the FOB. Shannon Sanders, neighborhood service inspector.
This is a um case that was already, you know, that was previously heard by the special magistrate as of my reinspection. Um, compliance has not been met. I am showing proper service was given. I posted the notice to appear at the
property on June 30th um 2025. Notice um was also mailed out on July 8th, 2025 by the administrative staff. Um I'm showing um the administrative coordinator
coordinator Raphael Padron is raising his hand. Um my testimony is that compliance has not been met. Um but I'll let him give additional testimony if he needs to. >> Okay. >> Yes. This business has come in numerous times to pick up applications and
process has been explained to him those numerous times. In fact, last week he came in and I handed it to him and I recognized him and I said, "I believe I've handed this information to you guys before. You need to take care of this." And all he said was, "Oh yeah, okay."
That was that was um that was that. But same thing, they haven't done it in in in in a long time. They haven't done what they needed to do. So, I just want to make you aware that they that the owner is aware because I've spoken to him at least twice in the in the two years.
>> All right. Yes, I appreciate that. Um your testimony based on the unreuted testimony of the uh both inspectors, I find that the violation um still exists. I also find good notice given proper notice owners have failed to appear. Um
the daily fine amount of 250 is hereby ratified and this is retroactive to the May 16th 2025. Madame clerk. Madame clerk. >> Sorry. Hi.
>> Hi. Do you you understand correct? >> Yes. Yeah. Absolutely. Yes ma'am. I was taking the notes on the on my agenda. >> Okay. All right. >> Case number four, 131000 Sunrise Plaza LLC CE ZCU 2023
00773. This case was found guilty by Mag Smith. The inspector for this case is Miss Shannon Sanders. >> Shannon Sanders, neighborhood service inspector. Same testimony. These um violations um you know coincide with each other. One was for the business tax
receipt. This one is for the certificate of use. Again, this case was already heard at the April magistrate hearing which gave a um which was found guilty. Asked them to abate by May 16th. Um again, same testimony as of my
reinspection. Um viol um compliance has not been met. >> All right. um >> um proper given same thing. June 30th of 2025, I posted a notice on No, I'm sorry. I hand
delivered it. I hand delivered the notice to the store clerk. Um and it was mailed out um by administrative staff on July 9th. >> All right. It's the same owners as the previous case. Correct. >> That's correct.
>> Okay. So, um I'll take the same um testimony that I heard from officer PJ as well. Um based on the unreuted testimony of the inspector inspectors, I find that the violations still exist. Also find good notice given proper
notice. Owners have failed to repair. Um the daily fine amount of $300 is hereby ratified. active to May 16, 2025.
>> And I'm just going to make sure, magistrate, um, because I'm I heard you say 300, but I'm looking at the paper. I'm showing 350. I just want to make sure, especially while it's being recorded. Um, um, Miss Alvarez, is it 300 or 350? >> 350.
>> 350. I'm actually writing down 350. And you said I said 300, right? >> Yes. I just want to make sure that you know >> looking at 350 >> this one case that they appeal in >> you know I I yes absolutely so yes um
350 that's interesting how the mind works because I I wrote down 350 I saw 350 and then I I I I said three next case is going to be case number Eight.
Andre Light Senko. Case number C SA202300000092. This case was found guilty by Magistry Smith. The inspector for this case is Mr. Jonathan Lamestry. >> Morning everyone. Neighborhood Service
Inspector Jonathan Lamestry. And uh this case is being heard for the second time. Um to give you an update on the status of uh the short-term advertisement. Um on May 23rd, 2023, I opened a notice of violation. Um after receiving a report
from the North Miami Police Department uh stating that there is an Airbnb operating at the location, um I opened the notice of violation on May 23rd of 20 2023. posted the notice of violation, mailed the notice of violation via property appraiser. Um they were found
guilty by Matt Straight Smith and they had to abate by May 16, 2025, the final set of $500 plus $100 cost assessment. Um on July 3rd of 2025, I posted the notice to appear uh for the special magistrate. And on July 18th, as of my
final reinspection, um the advertisement is still being uh is still occurring on Airbnb.com. anyone could make a reservation at the house and uh that's the property right there posted the notice of violation and
that is the advertisement that's still being shown on Airbnb do airbnb.com um and the advertisement still occurring >> based on the unreuted testimony of the code enforcement officer I find that the
violation still exist also find good notice. Given proper notice, owners have failed to appear. The daily fine amount of $500 is hereby ratified. Just double checking, making sure I'm saying it
right. >> Yes, ma'am. Okay. Next case is case number nine. Andre Lysenko CR2023 to 000052. Um this this case hasn't been heard before.
Um Jonathan, >> uh >> it's the same property, right? >> The same property. >> It is the same property. Magistrate Smith. uh he wanted this case to be tabled uh because he wanted uh more information, more proof that the rental
was occurring at the property. Um so the advertisement was found guilty. Uh but this rental um I would like >> but the rental itself. Okay, understood. Okay. So uh case number CDR2023000052 inspector for this case is Mr. Jonathan Lamester.
>> Yes. Neighborhood service inspector Jonathan Lester. Um, as the previous case, I opened a notice of violation on May 23rd, 2023 after receiving a report from the North Miami Police Department that a short-term rental was occurring at the location. I posted the notice of
violation and I also mailed the notice of violation via property appraiser. Um, Madame Clerk, can you go up um just one that one right there uh with the two women with the women below? Yes, that one. So, um, I posted the notice of
violation on May 23rd, 2023. Um, I also posted the notice to appear at the property on July 3rd of 2025. As of the final reinspection date on July 18th, 2025, I went to the property and I spoke to the two women um, that's on the on
the picture. Um, and they informed me that they were actually renting the property uh, that they uh, rented the property via Airbnb. So, at that very moment, uh they were literally uh having a short-term rental occurring at the location after speaking to the to the
two ladies uh to confirm that there is a short-term rental occurring at the property. >> And this was on July 18th. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. So, with the with the short-term rental, with the two women giving testimony to me saying that they are renting the
property via the police report and the advertisement that's occurring on Airbnb with multiple reviews, >> there is a short-term rental still occurring at the property. >> Okay. Where? Let me see the the um the police report and the reviews. Do
you have those? >> Yeah, the police report should be there. I remember attaching it. >> These are So, this is so this is an advertisement on Airbnb and yes, there should be reviews. Um, I believe there's >> scroll up.
>> No, I saw them a minute ago. >> This is the police report. >> This is the police report on May 2023. Uh, notifying. >> Yes. Okay, understood. Um, can you scroll
back to the um the reviews? I know I saw something. Keep going up. >> There we go. You're there. Very nice and clean. Definitely had enough room for every minute we had to stay. Great house. Lots of bed.
I see. I have. All right. Seen enough. Yes, ma'am. >> All right. Based on the unreuted testimony of the code enforcement officer, I find that the violation does exist. I also find good notice. Given
proper notice, the owners have failed to appear. Hereby find in favor of the city entering adjudication. Um, you said it's ongoing, right? This is still going on or was that a >> It's still ongoing. Um, I can make a reservation uh to host Airbnb. Um, and I
put the dates for August 16th and August 18th. So anyone could uh do the rental at the property if they wanted to. >> Okay. There will 30 days by which to resolve the violation. If the violation is not resolved by the abatement date, there will be a daily fine amount of like
$500. >> How much? I'm sorry. >> $500. >> Thank you. Okay. His number is case number 16, Empire Legacy Management, CE LDR2023000036. The officer for this case is Miss
Shannon Sanders. Shannon Sanders, neighborhood service inspector. This is for property address 65 Northwest 119th Street. This is this is a new case.
This is a new a new case um that was initially inspected on February 7th of 2023. Um actually I'm sure in February 6 of 2023 I initially um observed this violation. I believe a complaint was
called out to me and I went by the property. Um I sent out the notice of violation the next day being February 7th. Um I have not had any contact with anyone other than the tenant at the property who
um states that she'll pass on the message to the um property owner. Um, as of my last reinspection, some of the rocks have been removed and now they've actually even installed an asphalt um, driveway there. Some concrete or
asphalt. I'm not really familiar with the materials, but it's now concrete rocks and asphalt or concrete poured. Um, I am showing proper service was giving. I posted the property. I actually hand delivered it to the tenant
for the approach on June 30th of this year. Notice of violation was mailed out. Um the notice of appear was mailed out by administrative staff on July 8th. Um again as of my reinspection on the 22nd.
The driveway remains. No permit application has been submitted to the city and I have not had any contact with the property owner regarding this matter at all. Okay. Um, you're saying they poured concrete concrete on it from
>> Yeah. When I Yes. When I initially I apologize. When I initially inspected it, it seemed like it was like some broken up rocks and things of that nature. Um maybe some, you know, I don't some broken up um pavers or concrete or something that affect as you maybe see
in the picture there. Now, as you as I go back, I don't know if you can stop right there. Go back down a little bit. Now, this here, it shows us this maybe now some concrete poured um and it's an additional rocks. It seems like there was an existing driveway approach there,
but now um it's like a grayish black addition um to the existing driveway and rocks poured there too. I mean, um placed there as well. This is a better picture right there. some kind of they poured I
I think that's asphalt or something there as well. >> Okay. This is from 2023. >> Yes, it's been old violation. That why as I kind of looked when I you know I don't know if you noticed I hesitated saying oh I thought maybe this was already heard. I know we heard the case
originally for the driveway. Um but I don't know why um it wasn't attached but now we're hearing one for the approach um to the driveway. But yes, it's for 2023. I, you know, the city as well as I apologize for it being
delayed this long. Um, but yeah, um, compliance has still haven't hasn't been met since um, this time frame. >> Okay. Based on the unreuted testimony of the court enforcement officer and the evidence presented, I find that the
violation does exist. Good notice given proper notice. Owners have failed to appear here by finding f in favor of the city entering adjudication. Owners have 30 days by which to resolve violation is not resolved by the abatement date. There
will be a daily fine amount of $200 $250. Thank you. Next case is case number 18. Harry Berto Leon and Celesteei. Case number CBC BCR20230000006.
Inspector for this case is Mr. Jamie George. >> Good morning. This um this violation happens to be a repeat violation. Um, this particular case hasn't been heard, but they uh they've been cited for the
same violation before. It says that they they paid a a onetime fee back in September 2020. It says, no, 2021, I'm sorry. Uh, the onetime fine was $250, but I posted
notice to appear July 3rd and the bolts the well the jet skis. Yeah, the jet ski and I I don't know the bolt in the back was present at the time and they still don't have any variants uh administrative variance on file
to keep the boats on the property. >> Right. Um based on the under test I'm sorry you said you posted it when? July 3rd of this July 2025 >> when that picture was taken.
>> Yeah. When that picture was taken. Yeah. I posted to >> We also sent a set of fire mail July 15th. >> Okay. Based on the unreed testimony of the code enforcement officer and the evidence presented, I find that the violation does exist. Also find good
notice given proper notice. owners have failed to appear hereby find in favor of the city intern adjudication. Um owners have 30 days by which to resolve the violation. If the violation is not resolved by the abatement date, there
will be a daily fine amount of $250. >> Is that 250? >> Correct. >> Thank you. Case number 19, Joseph and one corp. Case number CMDU 2024000015.
Inspector for this case is Mr. Jamie George. What's the email address? >> Good morning again. Um this violation uh was open back in October of last year. Uh we had received a complaint from the tenant at the time that there was um
visible mode in in the in the unit. This is a condominium. So, um I issued the violation to the the uh the condo owner, but I never received anything back from them like uh
>> you know, I I I haven't they haven't contacted me or anything like that. The the tenant has since moved out. So they the the the >> the unit itself is vacant right now but they haven't given me any report
>> for the mold. >> Okay. >> So this is a condominium and this is just one unit correct? >> Yes, this is one unit. Yes. >> Okay. Great. And um how many floors in the condominium?
>> Um if I'm not mistaken, it's I believe it's I want to say it's three, but I'm not sure. >> Okay. I'm just trying to see where where does this um unit falls.
>> The unit number is 114. >> First floor. >> Is that the first floor? The second floor, the third. >> Actually, it could be the 11th floor. >> You said 11th floors.
>> Yeah, cuz the unit number is 11:14. >> Oh, I thought you said three floors. >> Yeah, but I'm I'm I don't know. But yeah, it's it's 11 the 11th floor. I was just wondering if there's probably a bigger issue going on, but um I I'll
leave it at to the building officials. Um okay, because if there's a leak um meaning that more than one unit would be affected by it, but okay. Based on the unreedited testimony of the code
enforcement officer, I find that the violation um does exist. also find good notice given proper notice. Owners have failed to appear hereby find in favor of the city entering education. Owners have 30 days by which to resolve the violation. If the violation is not resolved by the abatement date, there
will be a daily fine amount of $350. Case number 20, Maria L. M clear 20240070. Officer for this case is Miss Jana Sanders. >> Jana Sanders, neighborhood service
inspector. This is a new case for um 2700 Northeast 135 Street. This is a new case that was brought to my attention by um a resident. Um they gave me several units and this um condo
that had did work without um permits at that time. I um inspected the property. Um had a few conversations with all of the residents that were if not most of the residents that's cited. Um I did
have a conversation with this um particular unit number on my initial inspection which was May 16th of 2024 whereas I brought to their attention you know what had took place and that I was just here to follow up and see you know
if if and what work was done. We did um converse and they admitted to having an emergency plumbing or sewer situation that went on. So they had to do some quick changes um which the city does allow within short time frames. However,
we do you know ask that you come and obtain the required permits. They did submit the applications to the city for the work that was done. However, the permit um application was denied. About a month later um a month later has
turned into a year and no further activity has taken place. So again, they have submitted an application after I inspected and had a conversation with them. However, that's where it has stopped started and stopped my minds of my reinspection. Again, compliance has
not been met. Um I am sure improper service was giving. I posted the property with the notice to appear on July 1st. Um certified mailing was mailed out on the 9th. Um but yeah, no permits for the work that
was done have been obtained. >> All right. Based on the um unreedited testimony of the code enforcement officer, I find that the violation does exist. Also find good notice given proper notice orders are failed to appear. I hereby find in favor of the
city enter adjudication. Owners have 30 days by which to resolve a violation. If the violation is not resolved by the abatement date, there will be a daily fine amount of $350. Thank you. Case 21, Ricardo and Lewis Costa,
CEBPR2024. Nope. CBPR 202500265. The officer for this case is Mr. Jonathan Demeestry. >> Good morning, neighborhood service inspector Jonathan Lameestry. On June 25th, 2025, I opened a notice of
violation uh correction. On June 26, 2025, I opened a notice of violation for a generator um that was um installed on the property without a building permit on file. Um the city requested that the property owner obtain a building permit
to have the generator um on the property. Um they have failed to do so. Uh I posted the notice of violation on June 26 and I also mailed a certified letter on June 26, 2025. On July 3rd of 2025, I posted a notice
to appear at the property and as of July 18th, 2025, um the final reinspection date, uh the generator still remains on the property without a permanent on file. Um so with this picture, you can see that uh there are cords um that are connected uh from
the generator. Um I will show you the generator. That's the generator right there. It's parked on the driveway and uh we received a complaint from the neighboring property saying that the generator's been there for years. Um and there's nothing that's been done about
it. Um so the reason why that uh this was open on a such short notice and this was brought to your attention uh now it's because we did open a violation earlier this year for the generator but we put the wrong code section in and that's the reason why. But they have
been uh the owners have been aware that the generator is not allowed and they have to obtain a permit um in order to have the generator on the property. >> Okay. >> All right. Based on the unrebuted testimony of the
code enforcement officer, I find that the violation >> does exist. Also find good notice given proper notice. owners have failed to appear hereby fine in favor of the city enter an adjudication. Owners have 30 days by which to resolve
the violation if the violation is not resolved. Um, let me ask, do do you believe there's a safety issue? Um, >> so >> generator or >> I I'm not sure. Um, I'm not a building
inspector. Um, but I have noticed that um I I've taken aerial photos. Well, not aerial photos, but I checked on property appraiser and I've seen um that the generator has been there for over 5 years. same spot, same position since 2020 that the generator's been there.
It's been connected to the building. >> Okay. All right. Um All right. So, there will be a daily final route of $250, 30 days, 250. Madame clerk, just in case. >> Thank you, madam. >> Yes.
Case number 22, Ricardo and Lewis Costa, CM IS202500226. Officer for this uh case is Mr. Jonathan Lamestry. >> Yes, Special Magistrate, Neighborhood Service Inspector Jonathan Lestri. Um
same case um but different code section. Um the generator is being stored on a trailer um in the driveway without city approval. Um we asked the owners uh via the description of the violation to remove the generator from the property or coordinate with the North Miami
building department for proper permitting of the generator uh before the reinspection date. Um, like the previous case, the violation was open on June 26, 2025, posted the notice of violation on June 26, and also mailed a certified letter um to the property
owner via property appraiser. On July 3rd of this year, I posted the notice to appear for the magistrate. Um, and as of July 18th, um, there has been no attempt to remove the generator. Um the generator is still installed um into the
property and it's still uh parked on the driveway um on top of a trailer. >> Based on the underbody testimony of the code enforcement officer, I find that the violation does exist. Also find good notice given proper notice. Um owners
failed to appear hereby enter adjudication. Honors have 30 days by which to resolve the violation. If the violation is not resolved by the abatement date, that would be a daily fine amount of $250. Oh, by give me one second. There's
someone that's actually Oh, never mind. No. Um, case number 23. Yes. Salm House Folding LLC. C E F LR202300417 who was found guilty by Magistr Smith.
The uh officer for this case is Miss S. Sorry, Miss Saunders. Miss Janna Sanders, my apologies. Sanders, um neighborhood service um inspector. This is a case for um previous compliance um property address
13155 Northeast 6th Avenue for failure to obtain the business tax receipt. Um as of my last reinspection on July 21st um the business tax receipt has still not
been obtained. I am showing that I gave proper service. I posted the property with the notice to appear on June 30th and certified mailing was mailed out um
by administrative staff. Oh, sorry. 78. I'm sorry. July July 8th. I wanted to make sure I'm saying it right. July 8th. Um but again as of my reinspection on 721 compliance has not been met. >> Right. Um based on the unrebuted
testimony of the code enforcement officer I find that the violations still exist. I also find good notice given proper notice or failed to appear. The daily fine amount of 250 is hereby
ratified. Thank you. Number 24, Salem Houseolding LLC, CE ZU2300782, found guilty by magistr. The officer for this case is Miss Shana Sanders. >> Janna Sanders, neighborhood service
inspector. Same property, same um if not corresponding violation. this case is for the certificate of use um not being obtained. Um I am showing proper service was giving. I posted the property with the notice to
appear on June 30th, 2025 and certified mailing was mailed out um to the property owner um by the administrative staff on the 8th of July um upon my reinspection on July 21st.
The certificate of use has still not been obtained um for this um apartment building. Based on the unreuted testimony of the code enforcement officer, I find that the violations still exist. Also find
good notice. Given proper notice, owners have filtered peer daily fine amount of 250 is ratified. you. Case number 25, Scott Andrew Galia LLC, C E F O B2300047
and6. The officer for this case is Mr. Jonathan Nestri. >> Good morning, neighborhood service inspector Jonathan Lamestry. On May 3rd, 2023, I I conducted an annual housing inspection at 1020 Northeast 127th
Street. Um, this property is a multif family uh commercial property and um one of the violations that we observed was uh the property owner does not have a business tax receipt, Scott Andrew Galia LLC. I posted the notice violation on
May 3rd, 2023. And I also sent a certified letter uh via property appraiser um to the property owner. On July 3rd of this year, 2025, I posted notice to appear at the property and we also sent a certified letter as well um
to uh the owner. As of July 18th, uh the final reinspection date, the property owner has failed to obtain the business tax receipt and the certificate of use. Uh there was nothing in our file stating that they applied um or it was issued to the property owner.
>> Okay. Based on the unrebuted testimony of the code enforcement officer, I find that the violation does exist. Also find good notice given notice. Owners have failed to appear hereby find in favor of the city and adjudication. Owners have 30 days by which to resolve the
violation. The violation is not resolved by the abatement date. That will be a daily fine amount of $250. Case number 26 cod and regalia LLC cezu 202300800. Officer for this case is Mr. Jonathan
Lester. >> Yes, special magistrate. Um, Inspector John Mastery Neighborhood Services. Um, this violation coincides with the previous violation. Uh, again, I conducted an annual housing inspection at 1020 Northeast 27th Street. And this
violation is in regard to the certificate of use. Um, I posted the notice of violation at the property on May 3rd, 2023. Sent a certified letter on May 23rd, 2023. And I also posted the notice of violation uh posted the notice to appear
for the magistrate on July 3rd of this year. Um and as of the final reinspection date on July 18th of 2025, uh the property owners failed to obtain the certificate of use. Nothing on file. >> Okay. Um based on the unreuted testimony
of the code enforcement officer and the evidence presented, I find that the violation does exist. also find good notice. Given the proper notice, owners have failed to appear thereby entering adjudication. Owners have 30 days by which to resolve the violation. violation is not resolved by the daily
fine amount of $250. Case is number 28. Thomas Loi CEBP PR 2024000068. The officer for this case is Miss Shannon Sanders. Janice Sanders, neighborhood service
inspector um um for Neighborhood Services Department. I'm going to ask that this case be um dismissed if not closed. Um, I spoke with the property owner this morning who brought to my attention that the
brought to my attention that the permit has been renewed. Um, we have been in contact over this past month. He's been going back and forth with his mechanic um or his contractor who installed this permit back in 2022. Long story short,
they finally resolved it and that um permit was obtained if not renewed and closed yesterday. Okay. So, I'm going to ask again that this um violation be closed. >> All right. So, 28 and 29th has been closed, Miss Sanders.
>> Yes. >> Understood. Uh, case number 30, YMP Center Court LLC, CEBPR 2024 0010 0. Officer for this case is Miss Jana Sanders.
>> Janna Sanders, Neighborhood Service Inspector. This is a new case for um Central Court Apartments um property owner being YMP Central Court LLC for property address 14695 Northeast 18th Avenue for building 3. This is a new
violation that was brought to my attention on um July 8th of 2024 whereas a um disgruntled um recently fired if not let go employee called me and wanted to bring to my
attention all the work that was done at centerport without permits. Um at that time I inspected the property. I see you laughing magistrate. I apologize. But yes, he um brought to my attention, you know, all the work that had been done,
you know, for the over the past few months. Um I did meet with the center court management as well as the um head um maintenance guy who did um confirm that some work had been done. They
stated that they did not know they needed permits and for some of the stuff it was emergency. It happened over the weekend. I gave them two weeks to visit the city and to submit some applications. Um that two weeks has come and gone and
here we are over a year later. Still no work has been um no permits have been obtained. They have stated a couple of times when I visited the property that um someone from the city has told them they didn't need work for the minor
repairs that was done. However, this was dealing with electrical and mechanical um things. Um, if I'm correct, I believe some AC units was changed, some plumbing was done, some electrical outlets, GFIs, and things of that nature, which I told
them I needed some confirmation in our email or some names or something stating who from the building department gave them that information. Um, as of my reinspection, I have not been provided with that information. So the violation
still remains and no permits have been obtained for the electrical work, plumbing, AC units that were all installed in building three. I am showing proper service was giving. I hand delivered um the notice to appear
and again spoke with the manager and the maintenance guide on July 1st of 2025. I'm showing here certified mailing was mailed out to the um to the property owners on July 8th. Um
but my reinspection on July 21st compliance has not been met. >> Right. Just to be sure do we do have someone from um one of building officials present. Correct. >> Or is she gone?
>> We have Mr. Christopher Pollson. Okay, >> Inspector Coulson. >> Uh oh. Can y'all hear me? >> Yes, we can. >> We can hear you. We can't see. >> Okay. Can't see. Oh, I'm sorry. The camera closed. >> You're trying to You're trying to hide.
>> Okay. >> They're part. >> All right. Okay. Um All right. Officer Sanders, you want to inquire? >> Um no. I I don't believe I need to, but I mean, we could put it on record. Um, this is a >> this is a this is a commercial building.
This is center court. They um I'm showing here they changed they did some electrical work, changed some um wiring, changed some GF GFIs, plumbing and piping work was done, mechanical work. They changed a couple of AC units in building three. Are building permits
required for um things of that nature? Building permits are going to be be required. It's going to be a after the fact permit and it's going to be they're going to need an engineering letter as well when they do submit everything to us.
>> Okay. Um well, I knew the answer to it, but um I think somebody told officer, Inspector Sanders, that it wasn't necessary. Something to that effect. >> Yeah, that's what they told. But yeah, this sent to court and this, you know, I hate to say that, but this Yeah, this sent to court. It's been a year. So
>> that's center court. That's center court. >> Okay. I just wanted to saying that they could not have gotten that information um you know from your department because typically that's that's needed. Okay. So
based on the underbuded testimony of the inspectors, I find that the violation uh the violations do exist. also find good notice. Notice owners have failed to appear hereby find in favor of the city intern adjudication. Owners have 30 days
by which to resolve the violation. The violation is not resolved by the abatement date. There will be a daily fine amount of $500. >> Does that conclude? >> That does concludes today today's agenda, Mad.
>> All right. Okay. Well, despite the whole um system breakdown, >> yeah, >> we still managed to have our hearing. >> Yes, we did. Thank you. I appreciate that. >> Thank you, everyone. Have a great one,
Madam City. >> You know, I always ask if you're getting some sleep, >> I am. Send you pictures so you can see. >> Yes, please. Yes. All right. Thank you everyone. Have a great one. Have a good
day. >> Thank you. Have a good day. >> Recording stopped.