Okay. Thank you. >> Good morning everybody. Um, I would like to call uh this hearing to order. This is a code compliance hearing for the city of North Miami. Today's date is May 6, 2026. I am Raphael Suarez
Rivas, a special magistrate for the city of North Miami. The purpose of this hearing is to determine if a code violation exists at your property as observed and cited by a code compliance officer of the city. If the city is not able to prove the case, then I will dismiss the case and you might be able
to leave. These proceedings are being recorded. Therefore, all persons who are speaking should do so one at a time and ensure that all testimony is clearly audible on the recording device. If English is not your primary language, then please inform me when your case is
called, 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 should come forward to the podium on the left side of the room. When asked, please speak
directly into the microphone and say aloud your name, your business or mailing address, and your relationship to the property. If you are not the property owner, an attorney representing the property owner, then you must present a notorized power of attorney affidavit. That's a
form 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's being heard today. And do you understand what is required to resolve the violation? Please answer accordingly.
The city will present its case first. Then the property owner violator will be given an opportunity to testify on their own behalf, to bring forward any witnesses to testify, to present evidence and photographs, and to cross-examine city witnesses. Following the case presentation, I will issue a
finding of fact on the case. If I find that a violation of the city code 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 violations, I will impose a daily fine amount. For new
non-re repeat cases, my order will include an abatement date by which time you must resolve the violation and a daily fine amount that may be imposed at a future hearing date should the violation not be resolved by the abatement date. For appeals of civil uh
citations, I will enter a ruling either affirming or reversing the citation. If the citation is uh affirmed, I will enter an order assessing a civil penalty, court costs, and a compliance date. If the violator does not comply by the compliance date, uh the abatement
date, continuing fines and penalties will be assessed. If I find sufficient cause to postpone enforcement action at this time, I will table the case proceeding to another hearing date in the future. If you do not agree with my finding a fact in a ruling, then the property owner or the city may appeal an
administrative order to the case uh circuit court appellet division. 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 appeal any decision made by the special magistrate with
respect to any matter considered in these proceedings, then the person will need a verbatim record of the proceeding. This record includes a 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 this 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 and uh 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 a lean. Now, if you are
giving testimony today on a case, please rise and raise your right hand as the officer issues an oath. The code compliance clerk will announce any additions, corrections, and or deletions to the hearing agenda, and he or she will call the first case. though first
we will discuss preliminarily uh any changes to the agenda that we all know. But uh again, anybody who is going to testify today, please uh stand, raise your right hand and and affirm that the testimony you will give is a truth.
Anybody who will be testifying. >> Okay. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony 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. >> Officer, would you please give the pledge of allegiance?
>> Your right hand, please. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all
>> we have any translators. >> Okay, please raise your right hand. 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. Thank you.
>> Has everybody who is here who's going to testify been sworn in? >> Okay. I suppose so. All right. Um, looking at the agenda today, I'm going to go through it based on the notes I have and announce certain
changes to the agenda. If anybody uh wants to jump in and correct anything or add anything else, please do so. Again, this is based on the uh annotated agenda that I have. Uh the first change I see
is case number 14, August chiropractic uh dismissed. So that will not be heard. Um I also have case number 15, which is
BSD18 LLC, uh complied. So 15 is also dismissed. I have case number 16 again BSD 18 LLC complied. So that case is dismissed. Case number 26.
uh Citadel Plaza LLC. Uh that case is uh tabled and postponed indefinitely. Uh it will be uh renoticed if it is to be heard later. So that is tabled from the agenda today.
26. Case number 29, Elila LLC. Um, CPK CPK 20256 is tabled for 90 days till uh I believe
that is August 13th at the same time at the same location. Uh, case number 30, Elila LLC, C E G MP 2025041
is uh tabled for 90 days till uh I think uh August 13th uh same time, same location. Uh let's see. Uh, case number 36, Heisel Alvarez, uh,
etc. 2025 O009 is uh tabled or postponed for 30 days uh till I think that's June 17th case number 48
William E. Prevatel, Eileene M. Prevatel, and William R. Prevatel. Uh, I'm showing compliance. So, that case is dismissed from this agenda. >> Those are the only changes I have. Are there any others? >> No.
>> Okay. So, uh, let's proceed to call the first case. >> Okay. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for participating in today's special magistry hearing. I will review and process by which today's hearing will be conducted. Make sure your devices is all
on mute unless you are giving testimony on case. If you would like to speak on behalf of a case once the case is called, you should step up to the podium. Before giving testimony on your case, please state your name, your property address, and your relationship to the property in question. If you wish
to have an interpreter assist you during the proceeding, please indicate this when the case is called, your magistrate. That concludes the instructions. >> Okay. Thank you, sir. >> Um, >> want to call the first case. >> So, we will uh start with case number
one, hopefully. >> No, we're starting with case number 17. We're doing the people that's present. >> Okay. All right. >> Okay. Case number 17. So, case number 17, 18, and 19, and 20. Would you like me to call each
one by one or? >> Yes, we'll move through them rapidly, hopefully. But yes, call each one one by one. I think that's better for the record. >> Okay. Okay. Case number 17, Brie Porterfonio, MF property owner. Case number MHVIO 2024 000056.
And the officer on this case is Brantley Daniels. And the prop the person representing the property is Amron Sensor. >> Okay. Officer. Uh >> sorry. This person has a power of attorney as well. >> Excuse me. >> A power of attorney.
>> He has a power of attorney. >> Correct. >> Has it been reviewed? >> Yes. >> Has it been found acceptable? >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. Um thank you. Uh we'll hear from uh as announced earlier, we'll hear from the code officer first, then we'll hear from uh the respondents
representative and um when you go through the case, please remember to um put all evidence into the record. Uh I'm going to accept all exhibits unless there's an objection and they will be made part of the record on all cases.
>> Good morning. >> Good morning. We're on your honor. Officer Daniel, city of North Miami. I issued a violation uh against the property 1820 Northeast 142 Street in reference to a business
tax receipt that was not renewed. I initially cited the property back in June 26, 2024. I'm showing that proper notice was given. I have my um affidavit of posting
property appraiser, the Sunbiz, the certified mailing And I have a screenshot showing that the business tax receipt is still currently expired. As of this morning, when I
checked the um the records, I did not see any um current application at this time for their business tax receipt. >> So, they have not had a uh BTR since 2024.
more or less >> 2023. Your honor, that is correct. Yes, >> 2023. >> Yes, sir. >> Um, how much time uh in your estimation um
it should be pretty straightforward to get a BTR, but how much time uh if any do you think that they should to obtain that? >> Good morning, Rafael Pedong, licensing manager. And so they have a certificate of use application on file which is nearing completion. They simply have to close out a few permits. So once that
has been completed, the BTR processes very quickly. So I would say probably another 30 days. Okay. I asked particularly because it's been a seems a pretty substantial amount
of time that they haven't had a BTR. Um, okay. Is there anything else? >> No, that's all I have to add on these two cases. >> Okay, sir. Uh, name, address, relationship to the property, and tell us what you want to say. >> Sensor, um, 16850 Northeast 8th Avenue.
I'm the property manager. Um, I just want to request a little more time. As you just said, we have application. I'm just waiting. I'm the part of the process right now. I'm supposed to get a call from inspector to come inspect the actual property just to move forward from CU and then get the BTR. I'm just waiting on that call. They
were supposed to call last week. Still didn't come. If I could have just a little more time, we'll have it complete. >> Okay. Thank you. Anything else? >> The reason it took long was because this um
they didn't want to they didn't want to give it to us before we close out any open permits. And there was a open permit from before the property was acquired and we were having a hard time figuring out how to get that closed. That was very timeconuming. That's just the reasoning for for why it took so long.
>> I I appreciate that, but I think it's standard practice to close out open permits before you get a BTR. Um you know I um I uh having heard everything I unless the city wants a further enlargement um I am going to
find that uh there is a violation of not having a uh business tax receipt is required by uh city code and regulations. I I find that the period of time in which they haven't had one is has been substantial. Uh I I know that there's circumstances here, but it's
been since 2023, and I would give them um 30 days to comply uh which is uh on or about June 17th and um I would hope that that is sufficient time based on on the city
testimony. What would be uh the recommended fine uh for this uh particular violation if they don't comply in time? If they if if they do not comply in time, the fine is up to $250 at your discretion.
>> Okay. So again, it has been an interval of three years. You said $250 per DM. Is that what you said? >> Okay. So if if you have not complied by June 17th, so you do have another you're going to have another you're going to have that time till June 17th. But if
you don't, there will be a daily fine assessed of $250 a day. Okay. It's been three years. Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much for coming in. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> Okay. M >> and you have you have two other cases
here. Let's see. >> Okay. Magistrate, the next item we will be calling is item number 18. Same property, Brie Portoino, MF property owner. And the case number is MHVIO 2024 000053. And the officer on this case is officer
Brentley Daniels. and the representative of the property is Ammerson Sensor. >> Good morning everyone. Officer Daniel, City of North Miami. I originally cited um the property 14030
Biscane Boulevard for window screens uh that were missing uh throughout the entire property back on June 26, 2024. Here's the notice to appear
affidavit of posting property appraiser page. Sunbiz. Here's the mailing. And these are the pictures as of March 31st, 2026. Pictures that I've taken I've taken of
the property on the east and west ends without uh the window screens being present. That's it, your honor. >> Okay. Uh, all exhibits are accepted in into evidence and made part of the record. Uh, the window screens, I take
it, are required by code? >> Yes, sir. >> And, um, how long um for them to be permitted and in installed in your estimation or any any representative of the city? Well, I mean, I believe he had
I mean, the violation has been open for almost two over two years. So, in my um in my estimation, he has um enough time he had enough time, I should say, your honor, to place those screens to install them, I should say.
>> So, um in in terms of um an abatement date, uh you think 30 days is more than sufficient? >> Yes, sir. Um sir, please again state your name, uh relationship to the property, uh
business address, and anything else you wish to say. >> Emerald Sensor, 16850 North Avenue, property manager. Um, regarding these windows, it's pretty it's it's a big building. Um, it's not a reason not to have the screens, I know,
but what keeps on happening is every time we get them installed, different units are missing screens from tenants taking them out. I do feel like I'm working on a real big push, which I believe I could call for inspection already by tomorrow for it. Just have to
make sure it's all done. Um, but I'm just having a hard time because people keep on removing it. I'm going to have to apply some sort of fine on the tenant if it happens in the future. >> Okay. Uh madam city attorney, what is the recommended fine for this?
>> Uh special magistrate, the recommended fine is up to $500 a day at your discretion. >> Okay. Um, you know, I think again I I based on the evidence, um, I do think that, um,
there is a violation of the failure to have or in place the window screens that are required by uh, city code and other regulations uh, throughout the entire building on the east and west side respectively. And I I do so find I again find that here uh
despite whatever circumstances that exist that have been related to me, it is a prolonged period of a violation and that it's over two years. So uh I am going to afford you again uh 30 days to comply.
That's till June 17th. Uh if there is not compliance, and that is full compliance by June 17th, there will be a daily fine of $250 a day um for this particular violation, separate
from the others imposed. Um and um you know, you have to you have to bring these things to closure. Okay. >> All right, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 19. Same property Brie Porterfino MF property
owner case number MHVIO 2024 000058 and the officer on this case is Brentley Daniels and the person representing the property is Emerson Sensor. >> Good morning everyone. Officer Daniel 80
of North Miami. Uh this violation is for the certificate of use opened against 14030 Bgame Boulevard. It was issued back on June 26, 2024.
Here is the notice to appear the affidavit of posting property appraiser. Sunbiz, the letters that were sent out
via certified mail and um screenshot showing that the certificate of use is still expired at this time. And like most other cities, uh the
certificate of use is required uh by the code for you to be in business in the city. Correct. >> That is correct. Yes. >> Okay. And um by your estimation, what period of time would be taken to cure this?
>> Um basically the permit open permits have to be closed. But once that's done, the certificate of use process is at its completion already. So it's really just a matter of closing out the open permits. CU will be finalized. They can begin the BT application. It it'll all
move very quickly from there. >> Okay. So you think 30 days is sufficient. >> I think 30 days is sufficient. >> Okay. Um Okay. All exhibits are admitted into evidence. Um sir, again, not to be redundant, but you know, you're here for
all three cases. Please repeat name, uh, relationship to the property, business address, and tell us what you want to say. >> Amron Sensor 16850 Northeast 8th Avenue, property manager. Um, the CU is basically hand in hand with the BTR. So,
same situation basically because I can't get the BTR without the CU. It's basically one one full. Uh, >> okay. Madame city attorney, um what is the recommended fine for this particular violation of no CU?
>> The recommended fine for no CU is up to $250 a day at your discretion. >> Okay. Uh I find based on the evidence that um there is um
proven a violation of no certificate of use is required by city code and regulations for this business. Uh again despite the circumstances uh this violation goes back uh over two years. So it's been a in my estimation a
prolonged period of time. uh the violator will be given uh 30 days to comply. Uh that is till honor about June 17th. Uh they have not complied by that date. Um and I I I try to follow uniformity whenever practicable. Uh
there will be a daily fine of $250 a day uh assessed. Um if there is no compliance by that date. So, uh, you know, please, um, you know, uh, put the high water boil or
whatever you need to do on on whoever's working with you on this so you can avoid, um, the fines. >> Thank you. >> I think there's one more. >> I just think there's one more with the screens. There was another one, right? >> Yes. >> Yes, there is.
>> Oh, there is another one. >> Yes, sir. >> Yes, there is one other one. Excuse me. >> All right, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 20. That's Brie Porterfino, MF property owner, case number MHVIO 2024 000055.
And the officer on this case is Brentley Daniels. And the person representing the property is Emerson Sensor. >> Good morning everyone. >> Hi, >> Officer Daniel. City of North Miami. I issued a violation
for the sliding door screens. on June 26, 2024. Here is the notice to appear, permanent action report, affidavit of posting. Sure, we got all the
affidavit of posting the letters that were mailed out via certified mail. Notice of violation. This is the annual housing inspection log that um I used when I conducted the annual
housing inspection. And here are the pictures as of March 31st, 2026 of the sliding door screens, east and west, I'm sorry, the sliding
I'm sorry, the sliding doors that did not have a screen on the east and west sides of the property, respectively. >> Is there anything else? >> No, your honor. >> Okay, sir. 1685 North 8th Avenue, property manager.
>> I do want to point out this one and also the previous one. It's the violation is on the entire building. However, it's not really the case. There are lots of screens on the building. There's just periodically lots of areas that are missing and every time there was a
reinspection or so, there might have still been missing some, but it was other units, other buildings because we kept them fixing and other stuff kept on falling out. I just wanted to point out that thing. >> Otherwise, it's the same thing as the screen situation.
>> Well, what I want to ask the code officer on this particular building that is cited there, um, which is 1820 Northeast 142nd Street, there are sliding door screens missing. >> Correct. Yes, your honor. >> And and you did a reinspection and they still were not there.
>> Correct, your honor. >> Okay. Um, what is the recommended fine for this particular violation? Is it the same as the uh >> window? The recommended fine is $800 per day at your discretion. Up to 100.
>> Up to $800 per day. >> 100. >> Up to $100. Correct. Right. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, you know, I I um having listened to the evidence, I find
that uh there is u proven a violation of several sliding door screens missing at uh this address that are required by law. and I do so find um I'm going to give you 30 days till June 17th
uh to abate or to cure this violation. If not, there will be a daily fine of $100 per day uh imposed if you have not cured or corrected the violation uh by that period. Um and uh please work
diligently and all this because um you know um violations can occur but you know you have you have multiple ones. So you know be mindful of that please. >> We'll do >> um all right. If there's nothing further on 20 then uh that that concludes case
number 20. >> Thank you. >> Thank you your honor. >> Thank you. Thank you for coming. >> All right magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 23 and 25. They're the same property. So, I'll be calling item number 23 first. That'll be
Centilia Group LLC, case number CN US 2026 000021. And the officer on this case is Haimey George. And the person representing the property is Raquel Castillo.
>> Good morning. Officer Jamie for the city of North of Miami. Uh this property uh property 2095 Northeast 121st Road. I opened this violation on May 22nd of 2025. >> This is
the permanent report. This is the u the notice of violation. the notice to appear which was mailed out. It's a property appraiser page. Um as you can know on the property p page there's the tennis court and the
pergola the um the tennis court and the uh cover structure up top on the roof. This was generated for for this year. It's a some biz for the business.
The certified male. >> So this is for um 23, right? This is for number 23. Um, loud music disturbance reported by a North Miami Police Department. >> Okay. Yeah. All right. So,
this this is the police incident report which the police report says. Incident was on March 27 of this year at 4:35 in the morning. >> March 27th of this year. >> Yes. March 27th of this year.
Police officers responded to a call which they stated that they observed a a line of cars congesting the entire block of 121st Road to the dispatch location, which is 2095 Northeast 121st Road. Uh there was the officer reported
that there were over 500 people standing at the front of the residence and on the road on a roadway attempting to gain entry to a party that was being hosted at the dispatch location. So we we have received multiple police reports on this property. So, this this
one is for the the same day, but at 7:25 in the morning, police responded and um upon arrival says that they could hear very loud music coming from the rear of the residence. Contact was made with the representative of the home who were notified of the continued violations of
city of North Miami ordinances. This is my affidav. >> Okay. uh all evidence including the police report and all other evidence will be uh accepted and made part of the record. Uh what I want to ask you officer relative to this particular
violation in case number 23 is u loud music disturbance. It's a noise violation. >> Yes sir. >> And can you briefly explain to me the nature of that violation? uh you know uh per the code this this exceeded the the range or was audible to
the officer when it couldn't have been at the time something like that that I need to hear. >> Yeah. And um and in our city code under the nuisance code chapter 12 dash I believe is
14 or 15. Um, it's it basically says for uh anything that's allowed in this case between the hours of 11 pm to 7 a.m. nothing loud of that nature can be should be heard from the property.
>> And at what time was was um >> between the hours of 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. >> Right. And at what time was >> uh the uh the first uh incident report it it noted the the officer noted it was 4
>> it was 4 in the morning. I I'll tell you the exact time. >> That's what I that's what I'm asking. >> Yeah. 4:37 in the morning. >> Okay. So 4:37 in the morning within the within the covered time.
>> Yeah. >> By the the noise ordinance. Um administrative notice is taken of the city nose or noise ordinance as uh cited. Um anything else right now? >> That'll be all. >> Okay, ma'am. Uh name, business address,
relationship to the property, and then tell us what you want to say, please. >> Okay. My name is Rael Castillo. The property is located at 2095 Northeast 121st Road.
my relationship. I I'm the person who handled all the permitting in these cases. And >> you have a power of attorney that you submitted, right? >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. And your business address? >> A1
North Bay Short Drive. >> Okay. Miami. >> Go ahead. Go ahead. >> Okay. First, under the name of the owner, we want to apologize for all this noise. And that's what I can tell you at this
time. They were celebration and they want to apologize for this. >> Okay. Uh is there anything else? >> No, I don't have nothing else. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for coming and for your your testimony.
Um I find that uh this violation has been proven. Uh there was as documented in the police reports um loud excessive uh music and other noise emanating uh which occurred between uh the hours of
11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. That is on or about 4:30 a.m. And the violation has been proven uh by its nature. This is not an ongoing violation. There can't be an abatement date on this, but I do find a violation and the order is going to have to reflect that there is a
violation. Okay. Uh on on the cited date. All right. Uh what is the recommended fine for this violation? >> The recommended fine is $250 per day up to at your discretion. >> Okay. the uh the violation is imposed at
uh $250 for the date in question since u the the hour was on or about 4:30 a.m. Uh, and of course, like with every case, when the city prevails, there's a $100, uh, you know, administrative fee is
announced at the beginning of the hearing, but I'm just reminding you of that. And, um, by the nature of this violation, and I know that there's form orders and whatever, but this is not an abatement situation. This is a violation that's been proven that occurred in the past, and the order is going to need to
reflect that. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Thank you. You're going on. Okay. The next case that we have is uh involving this property is uh case number 25
and that's Sentinella Group LLC CBR 20250250. And this one is an after the fact building permit for covered structure at the tennis court on the roof of the property. So let's let's hear about that case please. >> Yep. Uh good morning officer Jamie for
the city of Miami. Um great. How you go back? Okay. So, this vi this violation is for uh a tennis court and a cover structure on the roof without permits.
This is the permanent report. It's the the notice of violation that was opened June 25th of of last year. >> Yes. >> This was the notice to appear that was
mailed out the affidavit of posting >> the property appraiser page. I would like to note that this page was generated May 22nd, 2025.
And on the roof here, there was no tennis court or the cover structure. >> Okay. >> Some business. Okay. >> Uh this is my posting of the property.
So this is the angled view of that same year. This uh that was generated May 22nd of 2025 and this is of this year generated January 1st. Oh well I don't know it says 2025. I don't know why but
the tennis court is there and the the cover structure and they don't have a permit for for both. That photograph above shows the tennis court and the covered structure. >> Yes, sir. >> And there was no permits issued for either of those. >> Yes, sir.
And that is and this is my the certified mail that was mailed out. That's and that's everything. >> Okay. All evidence is accepted into the record, including the photographs and um
the permit I think I I know the answer to this, but I'm going to ask you for that. Uh the permit is required separately for the tennis court and for the structure, right? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Thank you. Um anything else right now? >> That'll be all. >> Okay.
Um, my name is Raquel Castillo and representing the property located at 2095 Northeast 121st Road. My business address is 801 Bickl Bay
Drive, Miami, Florida 33131. And and the person who is handling the permit. Okay. Basically now the owner want to solve this situation. He hired
a an engineer. I have here a letter from the engineer that is working in the plans. He's going to request a permit to demolish the pergola to demolish the pergola and to legalize
the tennis court. So, so the um the work that you're going to do is to de and you need a demolition permit to demolish per >> and you're going to seek an after the-act permit for the tennis court.
>> Yes. Um, does anyone uh including you does anyone have an estimation as to how long it will take to accomplish this work, the demolition and the after the-act permit for the tennis court? Okay, they already hire a GC
and in this process we are thinking about 60 days at least to process everything because the engineer is working in the pls and then we have to pull up the
permit at the city and make the work. Um, madame city attorney, what is the um, well, to me after the fact permit, to me it's analogous to unpermitted work. What is what is the fine uh amount for this?
>> The fine amount for this is up to $500 a day at your discretion. >> Okay. So, um having uh heard the violation and um
having um heard the testimony, um I I do find that the violation has been proven and that uh an after the-act permit is uh required for the structure of the pergola and the tennis court that is on the roof.
um that's required by law and I do so find that there was a violation. Uh the based on the testimony again, I'm going to give 60 days till July
uh 16th to cure or uh abate this. Um and and I want to ask you ma'am what what is um what is the exact usage of this building? >> That's a residence until my
understanding. >> Okay. Uh how how many people in in the residence? >> I don't have that information. I'm sorry, your honor. Um, well, I guess what I'm getting at is is
because it's it's hard to um the rooftop uh tennis court and the roof sometimes you see that in Miami and apartment buildings and condominiums. So, what I'm trying to get at is it multif family? Is it >> No, it's a single residence. >> This is a single family residence.
>> Yes. >> This is not a multifamily residence. It's not >> This is single family residential. Yes, sir. >> Okay, that's what I needed to know. All right. Uh, so the violation has been proven. Uh, the respondents will be
given 60 days till on or about July 16th to correct the violation. Uh, both as to the pergola and the tennis court. If not, there will be a fine per day of $350 per day that will be imposed um
until there is a cure or correction uh commencing uh on or about July 16th if you haven't corrected and cured the violation by that time. Am I clear? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> All right, magistrate. We'll be moving
on to the next item. Item number 24, Camelli Gaylord, case number CBPR 202500 221. And the officer on this case is Jonathan Lamestry. And the prop person representing the property is Camille
Gilliard. >> Good morning. I'm Camille Galard and this is Juan, my contractor. >> Thank you. um you'll have an opportunity to to speak uh but the order first we
hear from code then we'll hear from you. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> And um go go ahead. >> Okay. Good morning everyone. CO compliance. >> Does does uh you don't Well, she's speaking English. You mean does the contractor need a translator?
>> Yeah. >> Do you need a translator? I am going to explain for for her for her for you. What? >> But you don't need a translator. It sounds to me like you don't. >> No. >> No. All right. Yes, I understand what
you're going to um so Okay. And thank you. U go ahead officer. Go ahead. >> Good morning everyone. Co- compliance officer Jonathan Leststery. And this case is being heard for the first time. This is in regard to
the property address is 14951 Royal Oaks Lane, uh, unit number 21108. Uh, this is in regard to the owner changing the floor inside the unit without a permit on file. Um so the situation is that um the tenant below contacted the city of
North Miami Cocoa points department uh informing us that uh the owner above unit 21108 uh changed uh the soundproof flooring without a permit on file which is causing a nuisance to him uh due to
the sound. Uh the floor is not soundproof and of course it was changed without a permit on file. Uh with that information, uh we opened the notice of violation on March 20th, 2025. Posted the notice of violation on March 20th,
2025. And I also mailed the notice of violation to the property owner via property appraiser. As you can see on on the on screen, um this is the permanent action report, the notice of violation that was opened,
the notice to appear for the property owner, the affidavit of posting, the property appraiser page, the posting of the notice of violation at the property, and the notice to
appear. Uh this is showing that there was no permit on file as of final reinspection date. And of course this is the email that the complainant uh Mr. Leonel dos Santos sent to our department stating uh the
flooring has changed inside the unit. This is what uh this is the before picture and this is the after picture. Mr. Dos Santos provided this information to our department and with that information we open the rules of violation.
>> Yeah, >> that's all your honor. >> All right. All evidence is accepted into the record and made part of the record. Um and I guess officer to ask you the obvious thing even though it's interior flooring as I understand per the applicable codes a permit is required for the flooring.
>> Absolutely. >> Okay. Um now let's let's hear from >> magistrate. They have to be sworn in. >> You weren't sworn in earlier. >> Yeah. >> Were you sworn in? >> Yeah. >> They were sworn in. Oh, just the Okay. Just the witnesses.
>> Okay. You were sworn in. >> Yeah. Just the witnesses has to be sworn in. The ones on the side, >> right? Well, we're only concerned with this case at this moment. So, >> okay. >> You know, >> here for the case. >> They're Oh, they're here for this case. Okay. They're here. All right. All
right. I I understand. >> Well, you'll have a chance to speak. And then, thank you for clarifying that. I didn't uh if you haven't been sworn in, you need to stand up, raise your right hand, and take the oath. You understand? Yes. You if you want to speak. >> Yes, I want to speak. >> All right. The officer is not here. Uh,
I will administer the Okay. >> Officer Carter. >> Officer. >> Officer Carter. >> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony 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. >> Thank you. Uh you'll have a chance to speak after the respondent. Um go ahead. uh name, address, relationship to the property, and and
then say what you want to say. >> I'm Camille Galard. I 14951 Royal Oaks Lane, apartment 21108, Miami, Florida, 33181. I'm the owner of the property. And we bought the property in 2023 in August.
And I hired a contractor that was referred to um from someone in the building, and he was repainting everything. And basically he was like, "Oh, I can redo the floors for you." And that picture of the wood isn't what that those were the old floors how it was
when we moved in. And then he did the floors and I didn't know that we needed permits. And then what happened? >> Yeah. I I want to to >> All right. First name, >> business address. >> Yes. >> Relationship to the property.
Afterwards, you can say what you want to say. >> Yes, your honor. Oriana. I'm a certified residential contractor. I going to be helping her to comply. She wants to comply. That's the main thing. Um, and we have the receive as she say the
previous contractor told her that he will do the whole work. He had the receive of everything here. The material is not what we see in the pictures. We have pictures here um for you if you want to see it. Do you want to introduce them into evidence? >> And um
>> we we can't if you're going to show me something, it has to go into evidence. >> Cabinets, >> right? Evidence. In other words, you can't just show me something and take it back. If you want >> it to be considered, it has to be kept here. >> Yes. >> All right. >> It can be. But we want to comply. That's
the main thing here. We're here to comply. >> And I provide >> Okay. And uh okay. Okay. >> Give them what you want. >> Yeah. And you don't have to give me the
whole book, but whatever you want in the record, you can. Um Can I add something? But notice the vibration moved in. Okay, I'm going to um accept into the record. Um >> I forgot something else. The pictures.
The real pictures. >> The the real Okay. >> Do you want those made part of the record or you you introduce? Okay. Yeah. Go. Okay. I'm going to uh accept into the into the record uh the defendants
exhibits which consist of uh a uh a sketch of the unit and its components. um a a similar document uh generated from Renaissance Trading.
uh my condo plans. Uh what appears to be identifying uh product information for the flooring, the price of the flooring,
and various uh before and after photos of the flooring in the unit. And um if there's no objection from the city, these will be accepted into evidence and made part of the record as a composite exhibit from the defendant.
Here they are, Gregory. Um, okay. Um, go ahead with what you want to say. >> Yeah, your honor. The main thing is I'm here to help her comply. And she the only was changed in the bedrooms, not
the whole apartment. That's why the pictures are there. You can see the the original flooring in the pictures and only in the bedrooms. You see the new floor. >> Um before we could close on the
apartment, there was a noise complaint and we because of the tenant from below us. He's here behind me right now. But I feel like the common denominator is him because with the old tenant that used to live in my apartment, I met him right before I moved in to do when I was doing
the inspection and he warned me about the tenant downstairs. Basically saying that he made his life miserable because he would call the cops on him and call security on him so many times that there was a noise complaint from the city before we could close, which also delayed my closing on the unit.
Okay. Uh, understood. Um, so, uh, you know that, um, I appreciate the fact that a prior contractor did this work for you and probably represented that everything was on the up and up, but, um, you know, he needed a permit and he apparently didn't
get one. That's if that's an issue in terms of that contract, that's an issue between you and the contractor. The city's not involved in that. You know, that's something that if you feel you have some kind of remedy or right or something, that's something you have to
take up with that contractor uh who did the unpermitted work. But it's it's sadly it's on your unit. But I I understand what you're saying. And you're saying it was only in that one portion of the apartment. >> Yes. >> Okay. Is there anything else you want to say right now?
>> Um, no. >> You want to complain? That's it. >> Yeah. We just want to get an after the fact permit and be done with the situation. >> How long uh would it take um to get a permit for the flooring?
An estimation >> um from the building department. Uh they would have to apply with them. Um they would have to show plans. uh soundproof flooring as well. Um I would probably say maybe 60 days 60 to 90 days.
Have you have you complied? I mean, have you No, of course you haven't complied yet, but have you applied to the building department or are you in the process of going don't don't make motions to me. Speak. >> Uh no, today we're going after this we're going to the
>> Okay. to get everything for so I can do what I got to do. >> Okay. And you have the required documents to pull a permit. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um what would be the recommended fine for
this? >> Uh the recommended fine is up to $500 a day for building without a permit at your discretion. But we do have the other residents who want to testify as well.
>> Yes, thank you. No, I know they were they were sworn in. Um, all right, let's let's hear from uh whoever else is here who wants to uh address this case and um uh uh Miss Gallard, you have to just move
aside a second so they can approach the podium. You need to give your name, your address, um, and, um, what you know about this and what you want to say, please. >> Yeah. >> On the mic. On the mic. >> Sorry. Good morning, Johanna. My name is
Leonel Dos Santos. I live in 14951 Royal Oaks Lane, uh, North Miami, apartment 2008. So, our only complaint is the noise that we hear from from the the from the ceiling. So, it's been going on for a while. They mentioned that it was
previously like that, but the the the the floor was already changed before cuz usually on those buildings, they're supposed to be carpet. They were delivered by with carpet. So, they firstly changed the floor with wood tiles and they changed again. as as mentioned that's our only issues is the
the noise that we hear and we can hear at night we I have a son my wife we work on the weekends also that's the only complaint we have is the noise that we can hear at night at night and during the day also but uh mostly at night because we want to sleep and go and go to work that's only >> what is the nature of this noise that you hear >> we hear like boom boom boom for every
footstep we even make like the the management come to the unit to our unit and the unit above they witnesses they witness this and they have an email and everything they say we can't hear anything. You drop something, we going to hear the the I don't know the pen or whatever. That's my only issue. That's
the only thing. That's the only thing we were complaining about that noise. >> Have you made any other complaints against any other unit owners in the property? >> Yes, before because we we could hear everything also because of the wood tiles. >> You you made complaints as to the prior
owner of the property. >> No, I made complaints to the the management which they told us to what I'm getting at as to the prior owner of this unit. Did you make complaints as to the prior? >> Yeah, because of a of a party going on at night, they were doing karaoke. >> Have you made complaints about anybody
else in the building? >> No. No, only my the the apartment above and we were on two different apartments. Just to mention, we were on tower one, no issues. We were on 24th floor, no issues. Only when we came to this apartment, we could hear everything.
>> Do you want want to say something? >> Is there anything else you want to say? Go ahead. No, that's it. Probably my wife, she can say something also. >> Yes. Uh, yes. Yes, she can. Name, address, speak into the mic and say what you want to say. >> Good morning, owner. So, my name is Vanessa, apartment 149512108.
Same thing basically just about the noises. You know, we can hear every footstep. So, we just complain about the noise. You know, everything can be resolved will be the best. I just want to sleep. That's it. >> Been like that for years now.
>> Just one thing to mention also. They say that the the picture was like fake or whatever. They were all taken from Zillow or the real estate's website. They public. Everything is public. Whatever I send by email, it's public. It can be verified. That's the only thing I wanted to add.
>> Okay. Okay. Thank you for coming in. I understand. >> Thank you. >> How old is your son or your daughter? >> 13. 13. >> 13. Okay. >> My son. >> Okay. Um >> just wanted to say it's mostly on the bedrooms, his bedroom and our bedroom.
The noise come from the bedrooms mostly. >> Okay. No, you have an opportunity to either ask them questions if you want to or if you want to say something else because of what they said, you're able to do that either way. And if there's somebody else here, if you've been sworn
in, have you been sworn in? Then come forward, give your name, give your address, and briefly say what you want to say, please. >> Good morning, your honor. I'm sorry for the hat. I've been recently operated. Um, I wasn't going to say anything,
however, I just felt implied to. My name is Mary Hendrickson. I reside at 14951 Royal Oaks Lane, Miami, Florida. And as the tenants's previous statement, um it is an error that he said that these
bedrooms are only carpet. Um I previously worked on the project when it began in 2023, selling the units as pre-construction. I'm a real estate broker, so I'm very familiar with what used to be called
Biscane Landings. The floors in the unit are original marble. When the owners were purchasing, they had the right to pick for either carpet in the whole unit or you could put the
traventine tile in the living areas and carpet in the bedrooms or you could pay an extra 20,000 at that time to have the entire unit with traitine. There is a structural issue in the building and I
there is um proof in in the files that there's many floors. We hear the people from above. We also lived in tower 1. Tower one before the developers were going bankrupt is a better building. It was constructed better as opposed to
tower 2 which is 14951. We can get into a lot of structural issues, but I just wanted to clarify that that this is not specifically just that it's the bedrooms. And I don't think that any floor would appease to him because the other floor wasn't good
enough and this floor isn't good enough. Unfortunately, my daughter was 25 when she purchased the unit and was deceived a bit. Now she wants to make it correct but uh this has been going on where he calls security all the time at 5:30 8:30
it's not just in the evening there he they have called security at 8:00 9:00 at night when she's had friends over having dinner and I have been present to that so this has just been it's you know the big ongoing battle and then with the
previous um tenant that lived there for six years he still lives in the building I'm sure that I could ask him to come as well as to testify that I don't think any floors will be sufficient for this tenant. And my daughter has spent over
$250,000 in total in between the assessment fees and what she put down what she put into the unit decorating the unit to live in peace. And since day one, she has not lived in peace. So, thank you for your
time, your honor. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Um, so do you uh do you uh the daughter or the contractor want to say anything else? >> No, >> I just want to say that we're here to
comply. We're going to go and comply. Um so um the estimation here as to I'm going to ask the contractor because you're a contractor and the city can
chime in if they have anything. How long do you think it will take to get a a permit? >> It normally it takes like you say 60 days, 90 days. It could it could get but not because it's the process. It's the
process. They might go accept something. They might say this is not correct. We have to correct it. And between that it could take 60 days to 90 days. If we are if if if everything goes perfectly maybe 45 days.
Um has this property had any other violations? >> Not for me sir. Uh, not that I could think of. >> Okay. >> I don't know. >> Um, okay. So, I'm going to say uh just a word or two about this to just for the
avoidance of doubt, for clarity. So, what we're here on today is the unpermitted flooring. That's it. The noise complaints are not on the agenda today. That's not a part of this hearing. Hopefully, will never be a part
of a hearing. Uh I would uh tell you just you know for the sake of uh uh tranquility and and equinimity and civility that try to see if you can have some kind of flooring that that has a um
some kind of uh noise um impact u you know uh mitigation or something like that uh if possible to just avoid the issues you seem to be having. Uh, and I'm not opining on them one way or the other, but I'm just saying that's not
here today. We're not here on on noise. This is not a noise complaint. This is about building without a permit. Uh, based on the evidence I have heard, um, you know, it a permit was required for the flooring uh, by the code. Doesn't matter if it's 50 ft, 500 feet, it's the
same thing. A permit is required. Um uh I think that um this this is your residence, correct? >> This is not You don't rent this out or >> No, I live there. >> So I I think that the owner here appears to be acting in good faith and appears
to be trying to um correct everything. Um but I do find that there's a violation I do so find of um the unpermitted flooring. I am going to uh give the owner 90 days to comply.
Uh that's through August 13th. Uh that's full compliance and uh you know that's the outside date I can give you. If you can do it earlier, do it earlier. Obviously, um if if not if there isn't compliance by that date, there will be a $250 per day fine
imposed commencing on that date until there is full compliance. Am I clear? >> Yes. Yes, your honor. >> Okay. So, um I hope you do it even earlier than that and uh take into account the other factors yourselves. >> Okay. Thank you, your honor.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right, magistrate. We'll be moving on to the next case, which will be item number 31, Ferrer LLC. Case number CBPR 2025 00272.
This case was previously found guilty by Magistrate Smith with an abatement date of April 12, 2026. Fines were set at 250 per day plus $100 cost assessment. And the person represent the person representing this case is George Ferrer
and the officer on this case is Brentley Daniels. >> Okay. >> Good morning everyone. Officer Daniel, city of North Miami. The property was originally cited back
on July 11th, 2025 for a pergola that was installed without a permit. Here's my permanent action report. Here's the
notice of violation. Notice to appear, affidavit of posting, property appraiser, notice of violation posted at the property and the pictures
of the pergola in the backyard. and another posting from the original time that I opened the violation. I checked the system this morning as of May 6, 2026, and I did not see
anything on file as it pertains to an application for an after the fact permit. >> This case was heard by by magistrate um Smith. And what what period did he give them to comply with? >> Of the uh the date that I'm seeing here
is April 12th, 2026. >> And what fine did he impose? >> It was set at $250 per day plus $100 cost assessment. Okay. All evidence is accepted into the record, including a magistrate's
misorder. Um, and all other evidence. Uh, is there anything else you want to say? >> No, your honor. >> Okay, sir. >> Hi. Uh, your honor. >> Morning. >> Morning. Uh, my name is Jorge Fera. Um, I represent Fer LC. Um, the address is
1075 Northeast 131st Street. Uh my father lives at the property. I was given 60 days before to resolve all this even before the hearing. I was um I hired a company to resolve all these issues no matter how hard push him or how much I yelled. Then I finally got
plans two days ago. They promised they'll be delivering that because they need a wet seal and personally delivered that to the city because they couldn't do it all online. Um that's pretty much the story of u what's
going on. Um it looks like they are internal issues but you know that doesn't matter this morning. >> What issues >> the they the loss of an architect or something that they just being a bunch of excuses two days ago they provide me with a uh
complete plans and sets. Now they need to deliver that to the city. Um, I sent copies to Mr. Bradley yesterday on email, hoping that that'll alleviate some of the my excuses. But at this point, that's all I have to pretty much
that's all I got. Um, so you know, my my issue here is that when a another uh magistrate has heard the case and has already adjudicated it, I I feel like my hands are tied. I don't know. Uh, madam city
attorney, I I feel that I have to defer to the magistrate's ruling because there's already been another ruling by another magistrate. So, um, I am sensitive to what you're saying. I appreciate what you're saying. um you know um architects, engineers and
contractors are sometimes responsive, sometimes they're not so responsive, but um again that's not attributable to the city. You you have to >> understand >> hold their feet to the fire. Um I think you know based on the evidence this this
violation uh has been uh proven. Um I I think that um the pergola was done without a permit as required by law and regulations. Um, I guess what I want to ask is prior uh to the other magistrates's order,
there's already a $250 per day fine imposed. Uh, would that be from the first date of compliance, which was April 11th, or would I have the latitude to u make it >> uh it it would be my assumption that it
would would have commenced on April 12th? >> Yes. >> Which is the day that they expected it to comply. >> Okay. You know, I really think again that my my hands are tied when there's another magistrate who's already issued an order. Uh I do find that there's a violation. I adopt and reaffirm a
magistrate Smith's order. Uh the compliance date uh was not met. Um the fine is imposed of $250 per day uh starting April 12th until there is correction. And perhaps you can later approach the city about mitigating the
fine or trying to have it reduced or something like that. But uh again, the case is already I I I know we're hearing it again because I guess we were waiting to see if something had happened in the interim, but um uh >> I understand your honor. >> That's that's what the order is going to
provide. >> Okay. >> Okay. Appreciate your time. Thank you very much. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you, your honor. >> All right, magistrate. The next item we will be working on is item number 37 and item number 38. These two items go
together. I'll be calling item number 37 Helair Lewis Jean and W. Yanik. Case number CEG MP205 0001 04. And the officer on this case is Joseph De Sanchez.
And the person representing the property is Hiller Lewis, Jean, and Yanni. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Good morning, your honor. I'm officer Joseph Dangers with the city of North Miami. >> Good morning.
>> I'm here um presenting my case against the property 11:15 Northwest 126th Street. >> Go ahead. So basically um upon my inspection of the property,
I first noticed the property cuz they had a bulk pile. And then once I proceeded to further inspect the property, I noticed that um the property was uh needed to be painted. Uh I then proceeded to post the
violation, mailed out the violation, took pictures, posted the property, and this was back in um December of 2025. As you can see, there's some more pictures. >> This was approximately 6 months ago.
>> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Go ahead, >> your honor. Sorry. >> Yeah. Yeah, fine. >> Propy notice was given. NTA um um certified letter was mailed out and the NTA was posted and there still hasn't been any compliance met
with the property, your honor. >> Okay. Um all evidence that has been shown here and that is uh been presented is accepted into the record and made part of the record. Um what what specifically is is um the deficient or substandard
condition here? Is it the sophets and the fascia boards? >> The sophets? Yes, it's the the sophets and the facial boards around the property, your honor. >> It's two uh separate violations we're in concurrently also with the exterior of the property, the stains on the wall and
everything like that, your honor. >> But that's another that's the next case, right? >> Yes, your honor. >> Okay. So those sophets and fascia boards in your opinion are would are are deficient. They're they wouldn't meet code. >> Yes, your honor.
>> They're too deteriorated. >> Yes, your honor. >> And they have not been >> complied. No. >> Complied with or >> No, your honor. >> Is there anything else you want to say? >> No, your honor. >> Okay. Uh let's hear from the respondent. Uh name, address, relationship to the property, and tell us what you want to
say, please. >> Good morning. My name is El Luis Jin and also my wife Yanik Luis Jin and we are the property owner >> and um normally and I appreciate you being here but normally when you come
here you want to say something about what heard or you know I >> well >> what do you want what do you want to say? I'm sorry I didn't get the the the the letters because we don't live there and uh the violation was done by the
tenant and now we find out we come and then we are going to comply. >> What is is the property rented? Is that it? >> Yes. >> You live elsewhere? >> Yes. Um, your honor, also the I wanted to
state at the time that um I first started a property, there was a bat pile in front of it, they sent someone cuz I put a violation for the bat pile. They sent someone over there to remove the bulk pile. So, and I also told the
people that they hired to remove the bulk pile cuz it was so huge. I mean, to to put out the boat pile cuz I gave them a violation for outdoor storage. They removed everything. They complied with that when I closed out that case, but they placed it all in front of their property. So, they did, all those notices were given at the same time. So,
if they hired somebody to move the outdoor storage, there's no way they would not been able to seen the violations because every the violations, >> you're saying that the the violations were issued on the same date? >> Yes, sir. So the only the one that closed out was outdoor storage
>> because that was complied. But I also had to create a work order because of the outdoor storage. It was a pile that was over 40 cubic meters. How many cubic feet? Yeah, it was huge. So they cleared out everything out the backyard and everything. And I actually was riding by
patrolling. I seen the worker that they hired and I said, "Hey, that's a huge pile. You can't have that there." And they still proceeded to left it. and I then proceeded to create a work order for work pro to pick up the work order. So they complied with that one, but they didn't comply with anything else.
So I I feel like they Sorry. Yes, sir. >> In your opinion, officer, um >> this >> How long How long would it take to either replace or um
repair the sophets and the fascia boards? That's something that, you know, if you have the right person, you know, you can hire a handyman no more than a month it will take. And I there's plenty of time to to fix that. It's been 6 months. It's been since December, your
honor. And the first time I've heard from anyone was actually yesterday trying to but that was already too late. You know, >> madame city attorney, for um this kind of deteriorating exterior treatments,
sophets, fashion boards, is there a recommended fine amount? >> The recommended fine amount is up to $250 a day at your discretion. >> Um, is there anything else that you want to say? >> We're just going to go and comply.
Okay. Okay. I think that unlike some of the other violations we have heard today, this is pretty quick uh pretty easy to comply with. Um I do find that there's a violation based on the evidence of uh deteriorated sophets and fascia boards
here and I do so find uh you'll be given uh 30 days to comply uh which is uh June 17th. Um, this is rented out. Do you have it rented out to uh family or
>> or is it rented out to commercially to someone else? >> It was a family and then all those uh the inspector was saying does they move uh a lot of thing inside and they they they left they they they have one person
left inside. So what I was going to asking you if it's possible to give me 60 days yes because I have to deal with that person I don't know what would be its uh reaction and then I will comply
everything. Your if I would like to add um I feel like I'm comfortable with the 30 days and if some compliance has been met or some type of progress has been made then we can revisit that but at the time I I feel like there's only a resident over on it's a duplex. So the
other duplex is fine on that side. It's just the side that's emptied. Your honor. Okay. I think that um you know um one of the main um goals of code
compliance is for you to comply. This is a pretty straightforward violation. It seems pretty simple to fix. So I don't think this is something that involves uh contractors permitting uh you know um so I think 30 days is sufficient. You're
going to have uh till till uh June 17th to comply. Um if not and you said it was rented to family. >> Yes. >> Yes or no? That's >> it was rented to family. Okay. Is it still rented to family?
>> No. The part that uh the inspector is talking about they they they left. They walk out. I don't know where they are. Just didn't pay and they just disappear. >> You plan to rent it out again? >> Yeah. But we need to repay it first. >> Okay. So, the the fine that will be
imposed will be $150 a day. Um, if you haven't complied within 30 days, within a month, you have a month. And of course, $100 cost assessment as announced at the beginning that goes for all cases where the city prevails. That's the order uh on this. >> Okay.
>> Thank you, your honor. >> Thank you. Uh, you have another case. >> Yes. >> All right. Magistrate, we'll be calling item number 38. Same property. Heler Lewis, Jean, and W. Vani case number C E XP 2025
000081 and the officer on this case is Joseph de Sanchez and the person representing the property is Helair Lewis and W Yani. >> Good morning your honor. Officer Joseph Des Miami. Um um I'm presenting the case
for 11:15 Northwest 126th Street. This is for the exterior chipping and painting of the exterior of the property. Same thing, your honor. Pretty straightforward. Uh violation was given out in November the same day. Still no compliance has been met, your honor.
>> Okay. Go through the documents, please, quickly. >> Yes. Affidavit of posting, the violation, property appraisal. Um, this is the picture of the property. The posting proper notice is giving
basically the same pictures. This is the exterior of the property. These things on the wall. Certified mailing, your honor. >> Yeah, that's pretty much it, your honor. Just showing you the property.
>> Okay. Well, giving uh I'm looking at the pictures and um maybe the pictures just do not do the violation uh justice or it's uh where where is I mean I I do see other things there but in terms >> there's also a violation that um is just
not on the docket but um like it's for fencing and everything also but if you can um see all the stains the stains discolorations >> that's what I need to see. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's cuz I don't know why it's showing up like that, but if you see the actual pictures, you'll see stained coloration and paint chippings
all over the paint of the house. Yeah. >> And is that yellow stain condition repeated a few different places? >> Yeah. Um, let me see what's going right here. And you can see all the chipping at the
bottom of the the the base of the house if >> the chipping is at the bottom. Right. Right. >> Right. See it? I mean, you can't probably can't see it, but it's it's there. >> And and that has that is also part of this violation. >> Yes. Just to repaint the exterior
property to remove all the stains of the property, your honor. >> Okay. Again, this seems pretty straightforward to me as a lay person here, so to speak, but um or let's say not as a not as a handy person, a handy man, but um how how long do you think it would take to comply with this? It seems
pretty straightforward, but you tell me. >> Usually, I give 30 days per of of wall and fence violations because, you know, probably the first week you're looking for someone, second week, they're getting supplies and give them two weeks to actually finish the job. So, I feel
like a month is suffice also, your honor. As if if they're not finished within a month, as long as they show some type of progress, I'm fine with that, your honor. >> Madam, city attorney, is um the fine for this um same as um up to
250 or >> That's correct. >> Okay. Um from the respondents, please, let's let's hear from you on this. >> Uh it's the same we just need to go and comply.
So, >> okay. Thank you. Um, again, I whenever practical, I try to be uniform. I do find that um based on the evidence, including the photos on closer review, which has all been accepted into the record. Um, it has been proven by the
city that there are damage and stain and chipped building walls on the exterior, uh, faded, peeling, chipped paint, and so forth, including the fashcia boards. And, um, you'll have 30 days to comply
till June 17th. And if not, there will be a fine of $150 per day, same as in the other case, until there is compliance. um please uh get to work with your um
handy person or contractor or whoever to get this all taken care of in the next month so you don't find yourself back here. >> A $100 is assess announced at the beginning of the hearing for any case in which the city um has prevailed. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right, magistrate. The next item we
will be calling is item number 39. Israel Roman and his wife Mercedes Roman. Case number CBPR 2025 00331. And the officer on this case is Joseph De Sanchez. And the person representing
the property is Israel Roma. >> Go ahead. >> Morning. >> Good morning, your honor. Officer Joseph Dangerous with the city of North Miami. >> Yes. But I'm sorry. Excuse me. >> He needs to be sworn in. >> He has not been sworn in either. Officer, please swear in this witness.
>> Thank you. >> Please raise your right hand. 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.
>> Thank you. Yes, your honor. The case that we have at hand is the address is uh 1005 Northwest 125th Street. It's for windows installed without permit to obtain a after the fact permit for the windows that were installed.
On um the um October 31st uh 2025 is when I first noticed the the windows have been changed. Um, I noticed it because I previously cited a property for outdoor storage and stuff like that. I know the
um homeowner that has the property lives in um Georgia. I I spoke to them before they complied with that one, but comparing the from what I saw at that time and this time the windows has been changed. Um the reinspection date was uh 11:25 of 2025. No permit was applied for
and the windows were now removed. um on 12 or on December 3rd, 2025, a permit was applied for and it was uh denied on um December 16th. And um >> um no, I um they I spoke to one of the
building officials and they said that they didn't um bringing everything that they needed to have it to approve the permit at the time. Um >> but it was denied. >> Excuse me, sir. >> You said it was denied. >> Yes, it was denied. it was denied because they didn't have basically the
full packet. They just applied but they didn't give the rest of the stuff that they needed for the permit to go and get approved. And um on March 31st uh NTA was posted. Still compliance hasn't been met and the final inspections was um the 12th of April and still the permit was
not approved and the windows are still there. >> Okay. All exhibits that you showed were are accepted into the record and made part of the record. Is there anything else you want to add? >> No, your honor.
>> Okay. Um sir, name, address, relationship to the property, and tell us what you want to say. >> Uh my name is Israel Roman. Uh property address is 10005 Northwest 124 Street,
North Miami 33168. What do you uh you have something you want to tell us about this? Paul, I uh applied for a an after the-act permit and uh I'm acting as an owner builder
myself and um I had gone to uh Wells Fargo and uh got in the notorized uh form uh something notorized, but uh the city came back and told me uh that they
do the notary. So on one of the uh uh what do you call it forms the construction form uh basically I think there was a uh I had left out uh a dollar amount or something so that's like uh why that form wasn't kind of
approved and then uh um um they had um after about a week or two I guess it was about two weeks um I haven't heard anything or whatever. Uh so I went down and uh tried to find uh
what the status of the permit was and uh they couldn't find a permit because they had the the wrong address. They had instead of 10051224 they had 1005125. So anyway, but uh so they told me
basically they gave me a copy and they said that structural uh uh uh denied it. Uh you know I had given them elevations and uh the cost of the windows and everything. So uh when I tried to obtain basically what
structural what you know what structural is you know the house is only 76 years young. So you know so gone through several hurricanes. So I says, you know, what's structurally wrong with it or whatever, you know, basically I they I couldn't get a clear-cut uh uh answer.
Anyway, yesterday uh I flew in from Atlanta and went straight to the permit department and a young a gentleman there was telling me about the the the cost there and also there's a a missing form uh uh uh building permit application
construction cost a missing form that you know I didn't know and they had did they didn't tell me. So that's another form I had to fill. Also, I've been I've been working with a uh uh a structural engineer uh and he's
been contacting the the I think he's he contacted you, I believe. >> Yeah, he contacted me and I referred him to the building department cuz the building department would be able to tell him exactly what he needs to get the permit approved. So, you know, so he's been contacting them and and
basically uh uh I uh I don't have it on me, but he's already uh he has a wind calculation uh report, you know, ready to be sealed and signed over so I could, you know, give it to the city, you know,
so they could do their thing. And uh basically that's that's where I'm at right now, you know. How long do you think it would it would take to um get this permitted, officer? >> Um I'm going ask one of my colleagues
from the building department to help me out with that question. >> How long would it take to get uh the window permit approved? remember a name, address, and then >> officer co city of North Miami building department.
You were denied by structure and flood on 121125. They did send you an email on 12 20 1216 2025 and it told you something about the wind load. One of one of the reason you were denied because of the wind load of the
windows and you have to and another reason was your cost. the cost the paper that tells you how much tells us how much the job was. You're denied for your cost for the cost paper too. So those two things have to be turned in first so they could proceed with with processing
the rest of your permit. So with that probably about how long going back and forth cuz it's in structural and flood. It's probably going to take him another 60 days. >> May I uh say something?
>> Yes. Uh on the flood though, what what is the issue with the flood? >> What you said you went over there? You said I haven't got that. I just know that they the flood denied you call. No structure and flood. That's for the wind. The wind medic. >> Well, they say structural. When I went
there at the end, they showed me the structural that I haven't seen >> flood you know. Well, you know, do I have to get uh I as as long as I know the the house is not in a flooded plane. >> It's it's the cost affidavit for the flood. So that's why I'm saying the cost
>> cost of flood of of a replacement the property >> the cost >> it's the cost affidavit for the flood that's why you're denied on that >> it's a form that you need to >> it's a form that you haven't completed >> well
I haven't seen the form you know they haven't I went to go over there >> it's in the office and when you when you finish here go to the building department and ask them for the form they'll give it to Okay, >> just give them your whole give them the whole permit. This BSWSO2500380
and the address. They'll look at your comments and they'll give you everything you need and look like you might have it in your hand, but I'll look at it after that. >> Well, I mean, these are blanks. I mean, like this is the construction affidavit. Now, I'm doing the work myself. So, >> okay. >> You know, so basically, you know, I'm
putting the cost of the windows basically. Not my labor. I'm not including my labor. >> Okay. So to move things along, once we finish here, once we finish up here, we'll look over it back here and we'll help you out. And if we got to send you over to the office, we'll send you over to the office.
>> Okay. Is that fine with you, your honor? >> Yeah, that's that's fine. Uh, I think you know my observations here and again without just off-the- cuff observations because you know you have to decide yourself what you want to do that you know Florida law now gives you the privilege of being an owner builder and
and doing it yourself but you still have to comply with the codes and I know that sometimes those are technical things but if you have hired yourself for lack of a better word to do this you have to still comply with the codes. So, what I I
would encourage you to do is to go to the department after this hearing >> with your application number to find out exactly with specificity what it is you need, >> what is missing. It sounds to me like you have to attribute some cost to your work.
>> You can't just put zero. And it sounds to me like you have to give the wind resistance of the windows. >> That's what I've taken from it. But uh your your uh you know goal should be to comprehend exactly what you need so you
can submit a correct complete package. Am I clear? >> Yes sir. >> Okay. I think that uh the violation has been proven by the city. >> Um I think the owner does appear to be acting in good faith. Uh uh but um you
know uh the violation has been proven based on the evidence which has been accepted into the record. Um I will give the owner 60 days to comply. So you will have till July 16th
to comply. And is is this all window is was this a window or is it >> all the windows in the home? >> Seven windows there. There's one window that I'm not replacing. It's a little tiny little one behind the uh in the bathroom. That's the only one I'm not
replacing. >> Is Is this Is this your your homestead? >> No, >> it's not. You rent this? >> Yeah, there was a family member there occupying it. Yeah. >> Okay. But it's not your homestead? >> No. >> Okay. Um have there been other
violations on this property? Um, like I said, your honor before it was one before for outdoor storage, but he took care of that a while ago and then he complied with. >> Yeah, that that's been complied. There's nothing else open for this violation. As of uh two days ago, there was another
one, but that was compliant too. It was just for landscaping. That's it. >> Okay. So, it's it's all the windows in and the home. Uh so, um again, the violation has been proven based on the evidence accepted into the record. you have till
July 16th to comply. If not, there will be a $250 per day fine uh assessed perdium, you know, on that date until there is full compliance uh per the order. >> Uh July 16 or 15
>> July 16th, 2026. >> Okay. >> Okay. 60 days. All right. Okay. Clear. Clear. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. Magistrate, the next item we will be calling is item number 42, NMBB
Partners LLC. Case number CEZ CU 2025 00237. This case was previously found guilty by Magistrate Smith with an abatement date of April 12, 20, 2026. Fines were set at 250 per day plus $100 cost assessment.
And the magistrate, they have not been sworn in yet. Raise your right hand, please. >> Do you swear or affirm that the testimony 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. >> Magistrate, I would like to um request to dismiss the translator if Mr. Ross doesn't need it. No. >> Okay. Uh the translator is uh given permission to be dismissed. Thank you. Thanks.
>> Oh, I just wanted to submit these evidence. Okay. Go ahead, please. Ma'am, >> Shana Sanders, go compliance officer for the city of North Miami. I'm asking this case be um tabled if possible. It was just brought to my attention that the um
business owner has submitted his application and is pending in Durm. So, we are requesting um that this case be tabled for two months. >> Okay. uh this case uh will accept uh the owner's exhibits into the record. Okay.
As uh for the future. Um and uh Gregory, make please make this part of the city file for this case because they've been submitted by you today. I'm presuming you don't need them right now. >> Correct. >> Those are copies. So, uh,
this particular case number 42, North Miami Beach Partners LLC is continued or tabled for two months until July 16th. >> Okay. >> July 16th, which I think should be right
uh or or what um the next hearing on or about July 16th. Wait to hear from do we have a hearing date then? Okay. So, the the officer has requested that the case be continued for two months. I'm trying to see if there is
another hearing date that um that I could announce here. If there isn't, then you'll just have to renotice it. But, uh >> so the next hearing date, uh it would be in July. I don't have the thing with me. >> July 1st. >> July 1st. >> Okay.
Well, it's uh close to s close to Is that is that sufficient time? Because >> um he submitted to Durham, so I that that's up to me. That would be between him and Durham. >> U sir, what >> either way is fine. Um he's there's
there's no his certificate of his application can't move any can't move forward at this point because he is at Durm. So either way, we're willing to to grab more time whichever time. Well, I think in light of the circumstances, August 5th, if you don't have an objection, sounds reasonable to
me. >> August is fine for me. >> Okay. This case will be continued. That that means that you should have reached compliance by then. So, if you want >> Yeah, I would hope so. >> Yeah, you would hope so because if not, um because the city's asked for continuence. If not, again, there's a
there's a prior magistrate's order and I feel I I am bound by that. So, uh but for now, the case has continued till August. August. What was the date again? I'm sorry. August. >> I'll have the hearing date there in front, but I'm >> Okay. This case has continued till August 5th. Uh same time and place.
>> All right. >> Okay. >> And um hopefully by then um you will have sorted this out. If not, uh we have the other magistrates order to to consider because this was heard before. >> Um okay. when Miami date actually does
issue their approval because there's actually they have four steps in there. Actually, three of them are approved. Only one isn't and for whatever reason that's been going on since April 17.
Um, I mean, are you is City of North Miami notified when that's completed or do I actually >> Well, I I think the city is going to have to respond to that. I cannot um >> I cannot I cannot say.
>> Thank you. No, unfortunately, the agencies do not communicate with each other. It's up to the business owner to be on top of the county. And once you have the approval from the county, you come back to us with that county approval, your fire inspection permit, and then we can continue our process and granting your certificate of use.
>> Right. Okay. >> So, you just have to be on top of them, unfortunately. >> Yeah. Because uh one of the reasons I turned those papers in is city of North Miami actually took 4 months to do their approval
for the first part of the CU. And I've been hearing people say, "Oh yeah, the CUBTR process is fast." But it's not. And that wasn't waiting on me to submit any additional documentation or
anything. That's >> that's what the city of North Miami apparently required. >> Yeah. No, no one here in in the city has any control over how uh County Durm uh conducts its operations or issues its decisions. That's a separate agency.
Well, but what I was just stating is I mean this is the third hearing I've been to and four months of it was next door in the city of North Miami. I didn't submit any additional documents or anything.
City of North Miami went from December 3rd until March 11. um >> without asking anything more from me. But I have to keep coming to hearings and Miss Sanders has to keep coming back
looking for this thing. You know, I I don't know what to tell you. I mean, you know, uh the city has been gracious in granting a a tableabling because if the case was adjudicated today, uh based on the other order, a fine could be imposed.
>> Well, I understand that. But >> so I'm sorry >> you would have to tell me what is it I can do because I mean the purpose of proceeding is to compel me to do something. >> It's not for me to to advise you as to what to do, you know, except that you need to comply.
>> Well, can I just make up my own CU and put it on the wall then? >> I I suppose you're being glib, but No, you can't. >> Yeah. Well, I am being glib because the the one I'm supposed to have in four months, I don't still don't get it. Even
though I've done everything I'm supposed to do. >> I mean, it's not it's not for me to advise you, but again, perhaps you should be explaining uh your plight to the county. >> Okay. >> All right. as a you know because uh they're the ones directly involved with this as opposed to
>> well now I'm waiting on the county but >> right >> the first four months was city of North Miami >> well I'm I'm just a magistrate sir >> okay >> well but I think it would be I wanted to
make sure you're aware that then that's how the procedure works >> I know that it's an inconvenience and I know that when they're continued um you know you have to keep coming back and I'm sorry for that. But again, the other alternatives uh could be less
beneficial. Have the case actually assessed. >> Is that legal? I don't know. >> Yes, it is legal because there's been a prior order and there was a compliance date. Okay. So, again, thank you for coming in, but you know, uh the case is
not being heard today. Thank you. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Good day, sir. Okay, bad street. Um, that's the last case for that for everyone who's present. So, I would like to request a break if that's okay with you.
>> Okay. How long? 10 15. >> Uh, 10 10. Well, let's go in between. You said 15, you said five. Let's go 10 minutes. Okay. >> 10 minute break. Okay. >> Thank you. He did. No, he did. He had
>> a little back. relaxing out. So, I think Oh, no. start. >> We're ready to start. >> Yes. >> Okay. Good morning. Um, the magistrate hearing is back in
session after a brief break. Let's continue with our cases, please. >> Okay. The item I will be calling right now is item number one. That's 126 West Dixie LLC. Case number CECU 202500298. And this case is um the officer on this
case is Bley Daniels. >> Good morning, your honor. >> Good morning, >> Officer Daniel. City of North Miami. I issued a violation to 12625
West Dixie Highway for a an expired certificate of use. It was originally cited on October October 15th, 2025.
Here's my permanent action report. This is the notice of violation. The notice to appear affidavit of posting. Here's a screenshot showing the expired
CU expired as of 9:30 2024. and a second notice to appear. The original affidavit of posting and some uh other Oh, and here's the
notice that um notice of violation that I posted to the property as well. And the most recent notice to appear was posted. I know the that picture is a little bit blurred, but I believe that
date is March 31st, 2026. And as of this morning, when I checked the system, I did not see an active application. Anything else? >> No, your honor. >> Okay. Um, all evidence is accepted into
the record. Uh, I think the violation of no CU has been shown. Um, and again, just for the record, to be sure, this expired on September 30th of 24, so almost 2 years ago.
>> So, this business applied as a commercial property owner, has not been issued their approved CU because they needed to have applied for a BTR as well. They were informed on May 14th, 2024 what's needed to proceed and they
have not been back since. So they 2024, >> right? It's been over two years. Yeah. Almost two years. >> So again, this is um uh there's no respondent present, though they've been noticed. Um this is a not a short interim time. What is what is the fine?
Uh again, please refresh my recollection for this. Madame city attorney for the expired CU >> up to >> uh special magistrate up to $250 a day at your discretion. >> Okay. I think um the violation has been
proven of no CU. It has been a fairly prolonged period of time. Um a fine is assessed of uh $250 a day. uh though they are not
here I think because of just uh as I understand it the system logistics here they will be given 30 days to uh comply. Um if they have not complied within 30 days which is uh the shortest period I see here which is June 17th a per DDM
fine of 250 per day will automatically start at that time uh until there is compliance and the $100 cost is assessed. Thank you. All right, M. Item we will be calling is item number two. >> That's 1302 Northeast, 125th Street,
LLC. Case number CF LR 2025 00091. And the officer on this case is Shana Sanders. >> Shannon Sanders, city of North Miami co- compliance officer. um was looking over my files. I believe this is a new case
um this is a new case for failure to obtain the business tax receipt. I originally observed this violation um in 2005 September 22nd to be exact whereas I visited the property the business um spoke with a gentleman who
identified himself as a business owner um explained to him that he needed to get his certificate of use and business tax receipt. He stated that he would move forward with doing so. Um, here we are a year and a half later. As of my last reinspection, there is still no
business tax receipt on file for um, this business. I am showing that um, certified mailing was mailed out by the administrative staff. I as well um posted the property with the notice to
appear for this violation as well. >> Okay. Is there anything else, Officer Sanders? >> No, it's not. >> Okay. Uh this is a default situation. Did you want to say something, sir? >> Yes, please. This business was has had
owed for four years of licensing fees. They finally came into compliance with the fees at least on March on April 10th. However, they still are operating without a barberhop license and without any stylist registered. So, as a result,
we have not released their licensing because there is no state license on file. So, they are still considered delinquent. >> And for a barberh shop, uh yes, there has to be at least one. So for a barber shop, it has to be the barber shop establishment license issued
by FDPR and then each barber has to have their own individual license >> and that's required by state law. >> State. Yes. >> Okay. Um and this business is operating.
>> Yes, it is. >> Yes. >> All right. So uh all again this is a default situation. So all evidence shown on the uh electronic agenda is accepted into the record and made part of the record. Um they have no BTR on file.
That's been demonstrated. Uh they will have 30 days to comply uh which is June 17th. Um and again the fine for this madam city
attorney is is up to 250. >> That is correct. All right. So uh if not um after that date a PDM fine of 250 per day will be assessed plus the $100 in uh the administrative costs are hereby
assessed violation having been found. Thanks. >> All right, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 13140 Northeast 10th Avenue LLC. Case number CBPR 2024 00184.
And the officer on this case is Gabriel Morales. >> Good morning, Magr. Uh, >> this is this is a watertight weathertight thing. So, please be sure to show the exhibits and the pictures on the >> This is uh I think you said case 13. It's actually number three. You were
reading number three. Greg, >> go ahead. >> It's for number three. It should be for a U building permit required. >> The case number 13. 13. >> Number three.
>> Okay. I'm sorry. I thought you said >> three. >> Three. All right. >> Yeah, I'm going straight down. >> I read three. >> I heard 13 as well. That's >> I heard I heard 13, but no matter. That's fine. >> No worries. >> Read number three. >> Okay. Yeah, he read number three, but before Yeah, before he Yes, you're
right. You're right. Correct. Okay. Correct. All right. No. >> All right. Inspector Morales with the city of North Miami code compliance. >> Um, this violation was issued on February No, my apologies. Uh, December 20th of 2024 uh by uh one of our
officers in the office, Jonathan Lestri. Um, I took over the case and um and the property had a um a reinspection on a final reinspection or not a final just a
reinspection um in January. Uh but the owner had um someone reached out to us and had requested an extension. We provided them that extension to February 7th of 2025. Um then after that they requested a second extension which uh
was then granted to them um because they were waiting for the survey of the property. Um and uh then after that I didn't hear from them again. >> When did the second extension end? >> The second extension
um sorry my apologies. So we gave them one extension. Sorry. So, okay. >> The the original uh reinspection was January 9th of 2025 and then they requested that extension and then it was
extended to uh February 7th of 2025. >> Okay. Um >> anything else? >> No. So, uh this is the uh permanent action report. This is the notice of violation,
a notice to appear, affidavit of posting, the property appraisal, um, Sunbiz. Uh, so the violation was issued for um
putting up the fence without a permit. So, they needed it after the fact. As you can see there, that wooden fence. This is a posting at the property. This is from the original uh violation when we first received the complaint.
This is the notice of violation. The mailing see it was mailed to the um to the address on Sunbiz. And that's it I believe. Yes. Okay. All evidence is uh accepted into
the record. made a part of the record. Um I think the violation has been shown. This is a default situation. Um again, was this uh this particular fine of the unpermitted fence like any other unpermitted work up to two uh madam city
attorney up to two I should probably have it written out but up to uh 250 >> up to 500 >> up to 500 okay does this property have any other violations
>> it did have. Yes, it does currently have some pending violations from another officer that was previously with us for um I believe parking on the grass. >> Are those violations still open? >> Yes, they are. I checked today. >> Is this a a a residential home or is it
a >> residential? Yes, single family home. >> It's a single family home. Okay. Um not a commercial property to your not >> No, sir. No. >> All right. Um I think the violation has been shown and
um it's been demonstrated and I so find and um there's been no prior adjudication on this. So again they will have 30 days to comply which is June 17th. It's it's pretty um simple to get a permit for
this isn't it? I mean >> yes for offense. Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. So um a fine will be imposed of 350 per day. 350 per day uh commencing uh immediately after June 17th if um no
abatement or cure has been done by then and the $100 costs are hereby assessed. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number four. >> Okay. >> Three Horizon South Condo, Inc. Case number MHVIO20500134.
This case was previously found guilty by Magistrate Smith with an abatement date of April 12, 2026. Fines were set at 350 per day plus $100 cost assessment. And the officer on this case is Brley Daniels. >> Good afternoon, your honor. Officer
Daniel, City of North Miami. I opened a violation for um cracks on the eighth floor of unit 815.
I opened the violation back on August 6, 2025. As you can see, this is my permanent action report. Here's the notice of violation that was issued.
The notice to appear affidavit a posting Miami date property appraiser. Sunbiz. Here's the mailing that was issued
via certified mail. That's me posting the original violation. And at the time, um, I was allowed in the unit. Um, I took a picture of the door.
This is the original uh original picture of me posting the violation. And that was on this specific date uh which was the last date I was able to
gain or I was allowed access into the unit and I was able to take uh pictures of of the cracks and as of today I have not as of the
final reinspection date I should say your honor um no compliance has been met and and I have not been able to gain access into the unit from July 24th of that year, 2025.
>> Have you tried to gain access? >> I have. Um, even just to get into the building, you need, you know, well, you'd have to actually live there. So, someone would uh need well, I would need to gain access with either a tenant or
someone who lives there to gain entry into the building. and then I can go inside and um go into the elevator and to the eighth floor, but I'm not able to, you know, gain access into the unit without, you know, the unit owner being present.
>> And and but you you just have been unable to do that and uh but in any event, >> yes, sir, >> they were noticed. They're aware of this and you haven't been advised that it's been corrected. >> Correct. Yes, your honor. >> Okay. Um I think the violation has been
shown uh about uh building occupancy violation. There are cracks in the uh unit 815 of um 1465 Northeast 123rd Street. I hereby uh
adopt and affirm the order of magistrate Smith and um the fine is set at uh 350 per day. Uh the fine is to commence
uh either immediately or on um the abatement date of April 12th, 2026, whichever uh is sooner. uh and and the $100 costs. Thank you. >> You're welcome, your honor.
>> Okay, magistrate, the next item we'll be calling is item number five 590125 125th LLC, case number CLG 2025 00001. And the officer on this case is a Steven
Dorval. Good morning, Officer Steve Dorbal. Uh, present um presenting this case with uh against 590 Northeast 125 Street LLC. That's um 7-Eleven. First case we have here would be the um
you have the notice of violation for the um the lighting on the premises on the property. When was that notice of violation? >> This notice of violation was on the 14th of November of 2025. >> Okay.
>> Here's the notice to appear. This the affidavit of posting. This is Sunbiz. Here's the uh when the certified letter was mailed out to the property owner. And these are the pictures of the
lighting. And then here back here, you also have this that's a light pole that's actually laying down on the floor right here. This is actual picture of the property. And there's another picture of the light pole.
>> And the light pole is part of the light violation of the lighting violation. >> That is correct. >> Okay. And has there been a reinspection or do you otherwise know that this is not? >> Right. There was a reinspection that was done on the
I did a reinspection on the uh I can I have it here. I done a reinspection on the 20 on the actually no on the 17th of April. That was when I did my final um reinspection on the 17th of April. when I was in contact with um I've been in
contact with uh Patrick Beverly or Heley I think it is. He's a property manager. He's out in Chicago. Um called him several times, had several conversations with him. He saw not an electrician. The electrician was asking me questions. I said, "Hey, I'm not
electrician. So you're at the property. You should be able to figure it out." But nothing has been done as of yet. >> Okay. Anything else? I mean there's more violations on that property, >> but they're not on the docket for today. >> Yeah, they're on the docket. It's a lot.
>> They're back to back. They're back to back. >> Okay, that's okay. Yes, but that's another case. We take each case separately with separate violations. >> Um, anything else on this matter with the lighting >> and nothing else? There the matter hasn't been resolved.
>> Okay. Um based on the uh evidence or record which is all admitted including notably the photographs uh I do find that there's a violation for um insufficient or inadequate or um no lighting on this
property and I do so fine. $100 cost is hereby assessed. Uh they are given um there was no prior order on this right? >> No. >> Okay. They are given 30 days
to comply. Uh June 17th. Madam city attorney, is there a different uh fine schedule for the insufficient lighting than the other violations? >> Yes, there is. For in for electrical issues, it would be up to $500 a day at your discretion.
>> Okay. And this is commercial property? >> Yes, it is. >> Okay. Uh the fine is here by imposed at $500 per day. uh effective after 30 days after June 17th. There hasn't been um cure. Uh this matter has been um pending
since last fall. Uh and uh that's that's the order on on on this particular case. Thank you. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number six. The same property 590 125th LLC. Case number C E
XC2025 0000007 and the officer on this case is a Steven Dorval. >> Yes, officer Steve Dorval. Uh this case is um against 590 Northeast 125 Street
LLC. Uh this case right here is for the exterior of the building. Here's a notice of violation. >> When was that issued? that this it was issued on the same exact day as um on 113 2025.
>> Go ahead. >> Okay. Here's the uh notice to appear the affidavit of the posting the uh Sunbiz, the certified letter.
Here's a picture of the exterior of the building. And I did do a reinspection on the uh 2nd of April for the exterior of the building. And that's when I made I did my final inspection, I should say, 2nd of April of 2026. >> And there had been
>> nothing at all. And >> done. >> No. And as you can see in this picture here, we also had a a busted out window. I contact the property manager just as well about that matter. Same thing, no resolution. So for the
busted out window, I end up getting a doing a work order. So the city went out and sent someone out to cover that, close that window. And he also wasn't um under was telling me that um they're getting ready to get a tenant. So in so many words like the
tenant should be responsible but I said unfortunately I have to deal with the property owner. >> Right. Yeah. Right. You were telling him what they should know as a property manager but perhaps correct you didn't but um yeah that's that's correct advice.
>> Uh anything else uh on this? >> Nothing else. >> Okay. Um okay. Um madame city attorney, what what is uh
the the fine scale on this on number six? >> For number six, the fine scale is up to $250 a day. >> Okay. The violation has been shown. All evidence in the record is accepted. They
will have 30 days to comply. Uh if not, a fine of um $250 per day uh will be assessed until there is compliance plus the $100 administrative
cost. Um it is so ordered. Thanks. >> All right, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number seven. The same property 590125th LLC. Case number CEO DS 2025
00276. And the officer on this case is a Stevenson Dorval. >> Yes, your officer Steve Dorval. Case is against 590125 LLC which is uh case was um started on 1113 2025.
Here's the um permanent action report. The notice of violation. Here's the notice to appear affidavit of posting.
This is Sunbiz certified letter. Here's the uh picture of the outside of the building where they had outside storage. Go to that prior picture a moment. Like to me that looks like is that outdoor
storage or is it debris? Not that either the same thing. >> That was debris and outdoor storage they had. >> And what's the outdoor storage component there? The metal uh things or implements or metal >> the shopping cart stuff like that. >> Right. >> With things in them.
>> Correct. >> Okay. All right. Go ahead. Go ahead. And this picture doesn't give you a a good look, but where it's kind of dark at, there's a lot of debris and um um outdoor storage there. >> All right. But you can you can supplement this by saying you witnessed the debris.
>> Yes, I witnessed debris. Correct. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> It's more This give you a better view. >> I see. Uh same thing. He um for this situation here, he did send out a landscaper
to try to clean it up, but he didn't do much. And I called him back and actually uh sent him pictures showing that the landscaper didn't do much. >> So, it's still substantially the same. >> Actually, we we oursel the city removed
the shopping cart and stuff. We did that oursel. We had a the homeless that was when we were the with the um homeless with PD and homeless uh from city of Miami. They came out and help us remove some of that stuff.
>> But there is there is um outdoor debris and storage there >> as of right now. >> As of right now. >> Yes. It's still some stuff on the property, trash and stuff. >> Okay. That's what I'm trying to get. >> Right. There's still debris there. >> That that that the condition still exists there. >> The condition still does exist. Correct.
Okay. Uh, anything else? >> Nothing else. >> Okay. Uh, I think that, uh, this, uh, violation, uh, has been proven as to, uh, outdoor storage on the property. Uh, it is so
found. Uh, the $100, uh, administrative fee is assessed. They will have 30 days to comply, which is till June 17th. And if not, there will be a $250 per day or per DM fine
um imposed uh thereafter until there is correction. Um okay, magistrate, the next item we'll be calling is item number eight, the same property 590 125th LLC, case number CERT
TP 2025 000019. And the officer on this case is Stephen Den Dorval. >> This is Steve Dorval. Officer Steve Dorval. Case is against 590 LLC 125 LLC.
This case was on the 13th of November. Here we have the uh permanent action report, the notice of violation, the notice to appear, affidavit of posting,
Sunbiz, certified mail letter, and again, you know, it's trash and rubbish on his property. All evidence is accepted into the record. And even though this is a default and all evidence is accepted into the record, officer, what I want to
ask you is to distinguish this violation to me from the prior one. How is it different? The the difference is the other violation had an actual like shopping cart outdoor storage on the property compared to this violation which is just trash.
>> Okay. And that trash condition you did a reinspection and it's still there. >> It's still there. It it has not been removed or diminished or >> only only time anything was done there is when we went out and did something where we also had our um the work the
clean team. Yes, the clean team went out there. >> So the condition is still the same there. >> Still the same. >> Okay. Um I find that uh there is a violation of rubbish and trash on these premises. uh there will be 30 days uh to comply
uh which is June 17th. Uh if not, there will be a $250 per day fine and um the $100 uh administrative fee is also assessed. Thank you.
>> Okay, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 9, 590 120th LLC. Case number C KS2025 00004. And the officer on this case is a
Stevenson Dorval. This is officer Steve Doral. This case was um started on 113 2025. The violations written on 113 2025 for the uh striping lines for in the parking lot.
This is the um permanent action report. Notice of violation. Notice to appear aid of posting. This a sunbiz. This is the parking lot where you see
the stripes are are lighting up. It's not as visible as it should be. Here's a certified letter. front of the building. See if the line is fading right there. Uh I did do a reinspection
and it's still the same. Nothing has changed. >> The conditions still exist. >> Conditions still exist. Correct. >> And for this commercial property and this uh pave parking lot abuting it, um striping is required by code. >> That is correct. And the striping is
either deteriorated or not visible. >> That is correct. >> Madam city attorney, um this is Yeah, there occasionally I hear these striping cases but not all the time. What is the is there a specific fine for the striping on the parking lot or does it
just go with the failure to m you know? >> It would go with the failure to maintain the property, the exterior of the property and it would be up to $250 a day at your discretion. >> Okay. Uh I do find a violation based on all the evidence which like in all the cases accepted into the record. Um
there's a multiplicity of violations on this property. I can't avoid that. Uh so they will have 30 days to comply which is June 17th. And if not, there will be a $250 per day fine uh commencing thereafter until there is compliance and
$100 administrative fees assessed. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 10. the same property 5901 120th LLC case number CEG MP2025 001 0 and the officer on this case is a
Stevenson Dorval officer Steve Dorval. This case is against 590125 LLC which uh this violation was written on 1113 2025. Here you go. Here we have the permanent action report.
The notice of violation which the violation is basically the wiring of the um signs are exposed the electrical wiring. It's a notice of violation. It's the notice to appear affidavit of posting.
This is Sunbiz certified letter. As you can see here in this picture here, you have a sign right here. Right where the arrow shows to do it. Make a right turn is exposed the uh I can open the picture right. Oops. Sorry guys.
Yeah. Oops. >> Can you show that a little? Um >> yeah, I'm trying to show it. Oh, I think I went to the wrong one. One second. I change the case by mistake. That's 10, correct?
>> Yes. Yeah, I got it. Yeah, I got it. Thank you. As you can see, I don't want to touch the the screen. That's a sign right there that's exposed. The cover's not there, so the wiring is hanging out.
>> And then you have this light pole again that's down on the bottom end of the light pole. The wires are also exposed and hanging out. And this is the other sign. >> Okay. I have a question for you which is similar to another question. So case number five involving this property was
lighting. So how is this different from lighting? Because there there can be multiple violations but there cannot be redundant. >> The the difference is >> double violations. That's that's illegal, >> right? I understand that. The difference
is the lighting at night. There's no lighting on the property. So therefore, there's no way like for example, if PD gets get a phone call and they go on the property, they have to come with their to have their flashlights and stuff. But there the light pole in the back isn't working. The lighting in the front of the property isn't working. So
therefore, there's no lighting on the property. >> Okay. So that was case number five. >> Correct. >> So how is this case number 10? >> This is the electrical wires. Now you have wires that's exposed and hanging out. That's for safety issues. >> So, you're saying this is a public
health and safety in general? >> That is correct. >> Correct. Because this property sits on the corner of 125 and Northeast 6th Avenue, which is a very busy intersection. And you also have a bus stop that's right in front of the property. And uh I did also explain to
the property owner, the property manager that he he need to get this property secured because it is exposed and anyone could walk onto the property. Well, with commercial properties at night, not to be uh you know, too pmical here or anything,
but normally commercial properties at night, uh the the abuing parking is exposed. I mean, I don't there's not many commercial properties at night that are fenced off. I mean, they're generally open. >> They're generally open, but this property also have a chain link fence around it that's not that don't do much.
And there's a reason why there's a chain link fence there. And prior to the chain link link uh chain being >> the property is abandoned or because it's >> it's basically abandoned if you ask me it's owned by someone but it is abandoned not a chain link fence they have actual chain that's um hanging on some signs there I'm supposed and also
um the property uh manager he wanted me to get PD to go and secure the property for him and watch it at least three or four times a week. I said he would have to contact PD to do something like that. I can't contract a security company for him. >> Of course, of course not. You're that
you're definitely right on that. >> Right. And then if you go towards the back of the property where the broken fences at, the light is down, so it's basically exposed to anyone. And true enough, it is a commercial property, but it also should have lighting at night. >> So, but the distinction between this
case and the other case about the lighting is that this has to do with exposed electrical wiring. >> Correct. >> Which is a danger to the public. >> Correct. Okay. What is is there a specified fine for this violation, madam city attorney? >> The fine for
>> electrical wiring >> could be a building code. I don't >> The fine for uh electrical wiring is up to $500 a day at your discretion. >> Okay. Um I find based on the evidence
submitted including the photos and the testimony that the violation has uh uh been shown and demonstrated uh there is a distinction and that this involves exposed electrical wiring and conduits or what have you uh which is a a public
health concern. Uh they will have 30 days to cure or bait which is to June 17th. If not, there will be a $350 per day fine uh commencing thereafter until
there is a cure or correction uh plus $100 administrative cost. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we will be calling is item number 11, which is the same property 590 >> 120th LLC, case number CF AW 2025
00237. And the officer on this case is S. Stevenson Dorval. >> Officer Steve Dorval. This case is against 590125 LLC. This uh violation was written on 1113 2025
and this violation is for this is the um excuse me permanent action report. the notice of violation which is for the offenses. Here's the uh notice to appear affidavit of posting your sunbiz report.
It's the broken fence. You have a hole in the fence here at the towards the bottom. >> Mhm. I see it. And then you also have where someone actually broke the uh chain lock off the fence and they had access to the back of
the business. Here's the certified letter. As you can see, someone uh took a water hose and put to connected towards the back of the business and started using that water hose maybe to take a shower, drink some water. We don't know. And uh
when we did do when we went back on the property that was in December I believe with the homeless someone actually had a chicken in a in a cage back there. >> There was a chicken coupe back there. >> Yes.
>> Today. So, >> right. So, um we did release it by the way. >> Right. >> Not a poultry. Okay. and uh went back did the reins inspection same condition nothing changed
and I did ask the Mr. Patrick to try to secure the property. He has yet to do that. >> Okay. All right. Based on the evidence shown, uh, including the photos and the testimony, which is all accepted into evidence, I do find the violation of
breached or insufficient fences and walls on this property, has been shown. Uh, they will have 30 days uh to cure. And madam city attorney, unless I'm going uh overboard here in terms of the
fences and the and the wall, I will impose a daily fine after that 30 days of 250 per day. >> That is correct, Special Magistrate. >> And the $100 administrative cost. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 12. Same property
590 125th LLC. Case number Cel SC205 00296 and the officer on this case is a Stevenson Dorval. Officer Steve Dorval.
Uh this case was written u violation was written on 1113 2025. It's a notice of violation. Notice to appear affidavit of posting, sunbing. Uh he did send a landscaper out once
and it wasn't much done and I contacted him and I let him know that he sent him out again. That wasn't much done and he still have that issue. Okay. So, in in your opinion here today, the landscaping still does not comply with code and regulatory rules.
>> No, it does not. >> It's deficient. >> He's correct. He's not keeping up with it at all. >> And that's a separate um code violation for the condition of the landscaping. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Um based on the evidence all admitted into the record and the
testimony, I find that um the evidence has shown that uh there is u deficient landscaping, landscape violations um here as required by the code and regulations and um there will be 30 days
to cure till June 17th. Um, after that, is there a separate schedule of fines for the landscape violation that there is for the other >> it it goes up to $250 a day at your discretion. So, it's a different fine
violation, but it's they it's pretty much the same amount. >> Okay. So, um, for this one, uh, there will be a fine of $150 per day imposed after the 30
days. There hasn't been a complete cure and, uh, the $100 administrative fee is hereby imposed. Thank you. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 13. The same property 590 120th LLC. Case number CWC
2026 0002. And the officer in this case is a Stevenson Dorval. Officer Steve Dorval. Case is against 590125 LLC. This case uh violation was
written on the 2nd of April 2026 for having uh the broken window >> second the 2nd of April of this year >> 2026. Correct. >> Okay. >> Uh here we have here this violation is written for having a broken window
is a permanent action report. Notice of violation. Notice to appear affidavit of posting sun biz report certified mail.
It's a picture of the property with a busted window. And again, I did contact Mr. Patrick about this. uh he basically just put it on the the new renter,
whoever's going to be leasing the property. And I said, "Well, they're not responsible. They're actually not there yet." So, I have to he's my point of contact >> and they're generally not not responsible anyway. But, uh >> correct. And um I did advise him that
someone needs to come and board it up. I didn't get a response from him. I completed a work order and the city of North Miami went to the property and we boarded it up. >> So I guess that that you're getting to uh you know my question here. Has this
particular violation been corrected by the city itself? >> The city put a plywood board on there and closed it up. That's what the city did themselves. >> Okay. But that would that be a permanent solution or it would not be because >> it's a temporary solution for now until
the property owner does something to replace the window. >> I guess what I'm getting at wanting to So the question would be to to anyone that um does the boarding up of the window cure this violation or um or the violation still exists because boarding
up of window is just a temporary thing. That's what I'm trying to do. is a it should be a temporary thing because the business should at least have uh we should at least be able to see into the business so they could only cover about 15%. I want to say it's 15% correct Mr. Jenkins. Yes.
>> And because of the boarding up that 15% is not met or conceivably probably not met. >> It may not we haven't measured it to see but it because actually it has there's two boards. There's a board over this window here and there's one over
on the window to the left. Not the one in the middle. There's two boards there. So, currently there's two boards up >> this both boards. >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. B this is a default based on the evidence uh and the testimony and the
exhibits including the photographs placed into evidence. I think the violation has been uh shown that the um uh structure is not um weathertight or watertight because uh
there's exposed windows through which water and other things can enter. Uh so this is a newer violation than the other ones. So I am going to give them 60 days to comply.
So they will have till July 16th to comply for this one because uh this violation was issued last month. >> That's correct. >> All right. So they will have 60 days to comply. If not, there will be a fine of
$250 per day uh until there is compliance. Um and the $100 administrative uh fee is also assessed. And that's that's the order on on this case number 13.
>> Okay, magistrate. The next item we will be calling is item number 21. Curtis Henson, case number CEO DS2025 00267. And the officer in this case is Real Casemir.
Good evening, magistrate. Officer Casmir. And the property that I'm the property that I'm going over is 16:30 Northwest 133rd. And the property I'm going over is for
outside storage. Basically, we have the notice of violation here. >> That was issued when >> that was issued on the 14th >> of of
October 2025. >> Okay, go ahead. >> Here's the notice of violation. Here's the notice to appear, the affidavit of posting. There is a property appraiser. This is also the posting. >> Here's a violation.
>> I see. That's that's substantial. >> Uh-huh. >> Okay. Noted. Go ahead. I've I haven't had a chance to speak to the owner. I've knocked on doors
several times. No one's answered. I've of course I've left the postings. Nothing. >> You've tried to contact them? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. And you did a reinspection and this is >> same still here. Same same condition
>> as it was on that >> just like that. >> Checked it yesterday. >> Okay. All right. All all exhibits are accepted into the record. uh based on the testimony uh and the evidence uh
including the photos, I do find that um there's a violation here in that uh there is a storage of goods and materials outside um which is in violation of the code. Um what is what is the the the fine for the outdoor
store? >> The fine for the outdoor storage is up to $500 a day at your discretion. >> Okay. Um, well, this is a default, but I am going to note that uh based on the photos that you showed in your testimony,
this looks extreme to me. I mean, it >> it is it is they have um they also have like vehicles that are stripped apart in the backyard. So, it's not just small regular storage. It's >> like a junkyard.
>> It's it's an abundance. >> Like a junkyard. >> Like a junkyard. >> Yeah. Right. that I was going to actually say that that the based on the photography the the front of that um of that dwelling um >> and that's the rear of the property. >> Oh, that's the rear. Okay. Either way, the the rear of the property looks like
a junkyard. >> Um >> okay. Um violation has been proven. Um they are afforded 30 days to June 17th to uh
fully comply. and um the $100 uh fee is assessed and if they do not comply by that time again noting the substantial nature of this violation a daily fine of $500 per day is assessed.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we will be calling is item number 22. Claudinet Laurent and wife Marie Claudet. Case number CEO DS2025
0032. And the officer on this case is Stevenson Dorval. >> Good morning your honor. >> Hello. Officer Steve Dorval. >> Hello. cases uh against Claudette Laurent
at the location of 130 Northeast 128 Street for outdoor storage was uh case was written on 1230 2025. We have the permanent action report. The notice of violation,
>> the notice to appear property appraisal is the posting on the day of the violation. Here's outdoor storage that she has in the carport like lamps, some of everything.
I tried to have a conversation with the resident or whoever lived there. They just stood at the door and just watched me. Didn't say anything. No response. There was no You attempted to engage with them and they didn't. >> They just They had the door wide open. They just looked at me. >> But I mean, you tried to >> I tried to Yes. I tried to talk to them,
but they just looked at me. Just stared at me. I was like, "Okay." Posted, kept going. And when I came back to do a reins inspection, try to have a conversation again. >> They didn't have anything to say. >> Again, this this may sound like a dumb question and uh you know, but bear with me. So, you did attempt to engage with
them. I mean, you didn't just appear and post. I tried to have a correct I tried to have a conversation with him but I didn't get no response at all. >> Okay. Okay. All right. Go ahead. Go ahead. >> So this when I did my re inspection, my final section on the 13th of April 2026.
It's the pictures. Same thing. Nothing changed. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Nope. Nope. Nothing else. >> Okay. uh based on the uh testimony, the photos, the exhibits, all of which are
uh accepted into evidence, uh I do find that the violation uh does exist here. They are given 30 days to correct or to cure, which is till June 17th. Uh the violation having been found, the $100 fee is assessed. uh based on the
severity of this violation as I view the evidence uh per DM compliant of $250 per day will be imposed uh starting immediately after the 30th day if there hasn't been full compliance. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, magistrate. The next
item we'll be calling is item number 27. Danic Borange. Case number CEO DS202500290. And the officer on this case is Real Casemir. That was number 22. That was number 22
before. You keeping count? >> It's 27. >> 27. Is that >> 27? Yes. >> Bange. I think >> this is for property 1610 Northwest
129th Street. It's another one for outdoor storage. Also, this one was cited on December the 10th, 2025. As you can see, the notice of violation, the notice to appear,
the affidavit of posting, >> property appraisal, >> the property appraiser, my personal postings as for the notice to appear, and the notice of violation. and the violation. Uh what
>> it's like a whole bunch of boxes wrapped up right in right on right under the carport. >> Okay. So like outdoor storage boxes and is that a separate location because this looks different. It's the same one. It's >> the same one. That's a different time.
>> Yep. >> The same location, different series of objects, >> right? So, this one was on November the 20th, 2025, which was with the boxes. And this was on December the 9th, 2025.
>> And this is the front as opposed to the rear of the property. >> Yeah. This is the front of the house. >> This is visible from the street. Yes, sir. >> Okay. You did a reinspection? >> Yes, I did. And it's the same. >> And did you uh try to uh communicate when that happened?
>> Actually, I spoke to the to the son of the owner and I explained them the severity of it and that he was going to go to court. I gave him time. Nothing happened. Nothing changed.
I checked on it yesterday. Same >> it's still like that today. >> Just right. Just like that. >> Okay. Um anything else, officer? >> No. >> Okay. Um
based on the evidence uh the testimony and the photographs which are all accepted into evidence I do find that uh there's uh violation shown for uh outdoor storage uh for case number 27 on today's docket uh again based on on my
uh observation of the what what seems to me the weight or severity of the evidence here uh they will have 30 days uh to cure uh which is till June 17th. The $100 uh
administrative cost is assessed. And you said this is just to be clear, this is the front of the property. >> This is the front of the property >> from the street. >> Yes, sir. >> And a PDM will be imposed of 350 per day thereafter until um
there's correction. Okay. >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Magistrate, the next item we'll be calling is item number 28, ELR Development LLC, case number CEBPR 2024 000081.
And the officer on this case is Shana Sanders. special magistrate. Um, do we just call um case number CBPR 202400 081 for 1980 Northeast 124th Street? I'm going to ask that that case be
dismissed. I um he did indeed obtain the permit and he got his final inspection on Monday. So again, I'm going to ask that this case be dismissed. He has obtained the permit. >> Okay. Based on the city's testimony and
request, uh, case number 28 is hereby dismissed from today's docket. And, uh, that's the only action relative to this matter. Thank you. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we will be calling is item number 32, Gym
Investments LLC, case number CFY 2025 000070. And the officer on this case is Gabriel Morales. or 32, correct? 32. Yeah. Uh, good afternoon, Magistrate. Uh, Inspector
Morales, City of North Miami code compliance. I issued this violation. Well, no, actually, I apologize. And then um one of the other officers, Jonathan Lastry, issued the violation uh back on February of 2025.
Um and then um this is for multiple vehicles parked on the on the front grass or on the grass of the property. Just pull up here. >> I'd like to see some photos of this, please. >> Yes. Uh okay. This is the um action
report. Uh notice of violation, notice to appear, affidavit of posting, property appraisal, sunbiz, mailing of the of the notice to both
addresses or um that's on Sunbiz. This is for the final reinspection before the hearing um which was April 9th. You can see the Derick Ford vehicle there parked on the grass.
Then they also had um the Honda there. Uh this is also posting. And then uh when we first uh received the violation, this was the vehicle that was parked on the grass on the front of the property. So, there's been multiple
vehicles parked on the grass. >> Yes. So, the issue, >> not just one. >> Yes, multiple vehicles parked on the grass. The issue with this property is that they it seems like they buy and sell cars. Um, I can't confirm that, but they're constantly moving cars out off
the grass and then bringing new ones, but this u Ford um truck has been the one that's been sitting there the longest. And you did a reinspection and this condition with multiple cars on the property still exists? >> Yes, sir. Yes.
>> Did you try to engage with anybody there? >> Yes, I have engaged with the uh tenant there. Uh but they were very rude um and disrespectful. They actually ripped up the um the violations in front of me. >> I see.
And but there there has been that's pretty in your face. Uh there h there has been of course due notice and so forth the owner of the property. >> Correct. Notice has been posted and mailed um and per my final reinspection
on April of uh 2026 um no compliance has been met. >> Okay. Thank you so much. What uh madam city attorney for um the illegal uh parking? What is the um
what is the penalty schedule for that illegal parking in in areas that are you know um you know front yards or what have you site right? >> Yes. for parkings that are for parking vehicles in illegal spots, which is like you said, front yard and also vehicles
that are derelict, it would be up to $250 a day at your discretion. >> Okay. Uh I think the violation has been shown. All exhibits are accepted into evidence. Uh and the violation has been proven. There's multiple vehicles. They will have 30 days to comply, which is
June 17th. If not, there will be a $250 per day fine until there is full compliance and um the $100 fee is assessed as well. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> The next item I'll be calling is item number 35, Gem Investments LLC, case number CJNK 20250024. And the officer on this case is Mr. Officer Gabriel Morales. >> Good afternoon, um, Magistrate. Um,
again, Inspector Morales, uh, this is actually for the same property. Um, and this violation I issued back in June, uh, 18th of, uh, 2025. Um, per my um uh my reinspection of uh
July of 2025, um they did not comply. This is for storing junk items on the property. Um I'm just going to pull it up here so that you can see pictures. Okay, this is the permanent action report.
Uh, notice of violation, notice to appear, affidavit of posting, property appraisal, Sunbiz, mailing to both addresses on Sunbiz.
And this is uh for my final reinspection before the hearing. Uh you can see they still had um some of that junk on the they had this container and then on that front part of the picture it seems it's like um an attachment that goes to the
back of the truck that they just have stored there >> like some kind of some kind of object or implement >> you can see here it's a part it's it's part of the what I seem what I would assume is to cover the
the back um the back of the truck. >> Okay. And when was that last reinspection? >> This was on uh April of 2026. >> Okay. And the condition was still there. >> Yes. Uh the notice of posting
that came out backward. And then this is the day the original uh day I gave the violation. You can see there they had it covered with a tarp, some sort of tarp. Um >> but then >> the violation is not for the playground
equipment. It's for all those other uh >> No, it's more for the storage stuff. Yes, it's not for the playground. They just happen to have that uh inflatable there. But they had um you can see here that that container still there from the original picture um on the final reinspection. >> Remain there all the time between the
first reinspec the first inspection reinspection. >> Correct. Okay. Correct. >> Anything else? >> Uh no, that's it. Okay. I think that the violation has been shown. Um and uh it's
been uh you know almost a year since it was cited uh based on all the evidence and the testimony which is admitted into the record. Uh I do find that there was a violation here for miscellaneous junk items stored uh in the front side or rear of the property. Uh they will have
30 days to comply which is June uh 17th. If not, there will be a $250 per day fine until there's a cure and the $100 cost is hereby assessed. >> Thank you. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we'll be
calling is item number 33, Greenwich Association, Inc. case number CF OB 2023 00482. This case was previously found guilty by Magistrate Kazoo and must abate by
August 18, 2025. Fines were set at $250 plus $100 cost assessment. And the officer on this case is Shana Sanders. Shannon Sanders, city of North Miami co- compliance officer for this case. Um,
CFO 202300482. I'm going to ask that we table this case. I just had a conversation this morning with the licensing department and they advised me we were holding up or they were holding this BTR or
business tax receipt up due to the 40-year resertification. The building department just confirmed um this morning as well that they issued and approved the um 40year um late last week. So now the um licensing department
can issue this um certificate. So I am going to afford them the opportunity to notify them that um it's ready to be picked up and again ask for a this case to be tabled. >> Okay, that's fine. Per the city's request, this case will be tabled. Do
you want it table 20 particular future hearing date or just tabled indefinitely? >> Um we could just say tabled for one month. seen that it's ready. I've been in contact with um Greenwich Park um as well as the licensing department. Um so they're very much aware as to what's going on. They're ready to move ahead
with picking it up. They were just waiting for that. So I don't think it would take more than a month um for them to get it done. But for um records purposes, we could go ahead and say two because we've already started preparing for the June hearing. So, just in case,
let's say July, that way in case they don't, it'll um at least go on the July do the July docket. >> What when is the hearing date in July? >> That'll be 60 days. Let me see. >> July 1st, if I'm correct, >> correct? July 1st. >> July 1st.
>> Okay. This case is tabled for the request of the city until July 1st, uh, 2025, and no action will be taken on the case today. Thank you. >> And if I can, while I'm here, I'm not sure if it's right behind it. I have another case. Okay, go ahead. >> Okay. The next item that we will be
calling is item number 34, Greenwich Association, Inc. case number CE CU 2023 00807. And this case was previously found guilty by Magistrate Kazoo with an abatement date of August 18, 2025. Fines
were set at 250 plus $100 cost assessment. And the officer on this case is Shana Sanders. Shannon Sanders, City of North Miami code compliance officer. I'm giving the same testimony um as I did for the prior case. Um asking for this case to be tabled for two months.
Um it was held up due to the 40-year certification um pending. It was issued um late last week. Um so um it is now ready to be picked up. Um it's been processed. So again, I want to afford them the opportunity to notify them of
this information and um and have them come in to visit the city. >> Okay. Uh based upon the request and the testimony of the city, uh case number uh 34 is tabled until uh July 1st of uh
this year and uh no further action will be taken on this case today. Thank you. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 40, Juan C. Ramirez, case number CEGMP 2025
000052. And the officer on this case is Joseph de Sanchez. Good afternoon, your honor. Joseph Dangers with City of North Miami. The case that I'm presenting is against the address of 12455 Northwest 11th Avenue.
Basically, I cited them because of the the gutters and the the roof of the house were wellmaintained. I mean, well, um unmaintained. Sorry. >> Not adequately maintained. Right. Right. Okay, go go go ahead with your exhibits.
>> What number is it, Greg? >> Number 40. >> Number 40. Juan Ramirez. How about it? All right. So, here's the letter of um certified letter. Here's the notice of violation was to
please power wash and paint the roof. Also, repair the gutter. >> When was that notice of violation? >> Um, it was May 1st, 2025, your honor. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> The affidavit of posting
the property appraiser, your honor. There's the pictures of the violation. the posting also. It's another picture of the violation. Just more pictures of violations. No
compliance has been met that this is a notice to appear. The um only time they reached out with to me was yesterday asking me is there anything they can do? I'm like, well, you have ample amount of time to even if they would have just
hired a handyman to put up uh maybe a nail or something to fix the gutter for temporary just pressure off the roof, I would have been perfectly fine with that, your honor. But no compliance has been met at all. >> Okay. Is there anything else?
>> Uh no, your honor. That's it. >> Okay. uh based upon the uh testimony and the evidence which is accepted into the record, I I uh do find that uh there is a violation on case number 40 in terms
of power washing and painting the roof and repairing the gutter and touching up the door paint. Does this fall does this fall under the exterior maintenance of the property as well or is this a separate category? >> It would fall under the same exterior maintenance. >> Okay. Um this is a single family home, correct? Yes.
>> And uh no, this case does date to to uh last year. >> Yes, your honor. >> And the first time I've heard from anyone is yesterday. >> I'm I'm sorry. >> And the first time I've heard from anyone from the property was yesterday. >> Was yesterday.
>> Yes. >> Do they have other violations there? Have you know? They've had several violations, but eventually they comply. But I I I don't know why with this one, you know, they haven't. But it's a consistent thing with this home. It's
either the landscaping, the derelic vehicles in front of the house, you know, >> there's been multiple >> issues. Yeah. >> Okay. Uh I find that a violation has been uh shown on docket case number 40 in terms of the condition of the roof
and uh the gutter and the door paint. Um they will have 30 days to comply which is June 17th. Uh the $100 cost is assessed and if not there will be a PDM fine thereafter of 250 per day until
there is compliance. >> Thank you. >> Thank you your honor. Okay, magistrate. The next item we will be calling is item number 41, Moatar Hammad, case number CB NP 2025
0000 26. And the officer on this case is Stevenson Dorval. >> Good morning, your >> short. Good morning, your honor. >> Hello.
>> This is case against um Property address is 870 Northeast 142 Street. >> Yes. >> Uh this case violation was written on July 14th of 2025. This is a a unique situation with this
case because um it's a single family home where she had a tenant that lived in the main part of the house and I guess the landlord was having discrepancy with the tenant and the tenant called us you know saying that there was some violations or there was having some issues with rodents and
stuff. So when I went into the house realized that there's a uh I'll show you the pictures >> that there >> let's go through your exhibits and please point out in the pictures what you've >> seen there happened here.
>> Maybe something happened here. Hold on. It's showing me two. Um I don't know which one to click on. Which one to click on? Greg, I clicked on one and just let me see one. >> Okay. All right. Okay. Yeah, that's the right one. There's a permanent action
report. The notice to appear affidavit of posting property appraiser. >> All right. This is a picture of one of the additions that was added to the house. Unit two
>> that that's an unpermitted addition to the house. >> Right. Right. is only in cuz I'll show you at one second. There's another unit. So, it's basically three units in one home. >> And how many of them added illegally? >> Both of them are basically added
illegally because >> two two units added illegally, >> right? Uh where's the picture? I have a picture here that shows it inside the house. It should be here cuz I had it and oh, it's on the other link
>> where >> one second. Go back. It might be on that link. The um 41. Yeah. Try this link. Yeah, that's how Okay. >> Right. The second link. has a notice of violation,
>> right? Is a notice of it's not here. I have pictures of the other picture not there. I had it. It was on the files. It shows on the inside of the house where they put a um a sheetrock.
>> Well, you you observed it personally, right? >> Yes, personally. >> So, I I it would be preferable if the photos were here, but for whatever reason, they're not. Uh give me your testimony as to what you personally observed. I observe it personally where there's uh what she did was uh there's a
bar she has a bar door and she also put a sheetrock whoever owned the home put a sheetrock and block it so therefore you have no way to exit the house through the back door so that that back part of the house they turn into two different units which on one of my with this
picture here slightly you can see where the electrical where the um circuit breaker is at and you can kind of see that wall you see it. >> Yes. >> Right. So that that electrical work was done new and I did have um
uh one of the someone from building did show uh point that out to me just as well saying that that was place that was new and they didn't have a permit for that. >> They didn't have a permit for that. >> Correct. >> So two units have been illegally added there without permits.
>> Correct. And what is it with the um um sharing the electrical panel? That's a violation as well, >> right? So bas basically what the the resident the the renters's complaint also was the fact that he's paying the he was at the time paying the electric
electrical bill for everyone because he's under one um breaker. They didn't have um several um meters. They only had one meter. And who who was that person complaining? The owner or? >> He was complaining to me. >> The tenant. >> The tenant was complaining.
>> The tenant was complaining, >> right? The tenant was complaining. The owner lives in one of the back units. >> Have you ever had any communication with the owner? >> I tried knock on the door. No answer. Nothing at all. And then the tenant finally did move out. At the time, the tenant was in the process of moving out.
>> But the the situ You've done a reinspection and the situation still exists. >> I can't enter the home and I know for a fact the situation still exists. Are are you able to observe any of that from the street or No, it's not >> No, no, you have to go actually go inside the house. >> But you you took those photos and to the
best of your knowledge um that condition remains. >> That is correct. >> Is there anything else you want to add? >> Nothing else. >> Okay. Um uh based on the evidence uh and the
photographs uh and the testimony all of which are accepted into evidence made part of the record here I do find that um there have been uh two illegal units added building without a permit and there's certain electrical violations as well
but uh they're they're not um separately cited and um they look like a serious sound and look like serious violations to me. What is the maximum fine that can be given for this?
>> Up to $500 a day at your discretion. >> I find that there is a violation in case number 41 of um building without a permit to additional units. I think it it presents um not just a building but conceivably
an electrical and fire hazard. Um they're given 30 days to cure or bait. Uh that's June 17th. Um and the $100 fee is uh hereby uh assessed and uh if they have not cured
within the 30-day period, a $500 per day fine will be imposed until there's a cure. Thank you, your honor. >> Okay, majesty. The next item is item number 43, Pimentel Palm LLC, CEG GMS 2025
00007. And the officer on this case is Haimey George. >> Good afternoon, Jeremy. Uh, Officer Jamie for the city of North Miami. Uh, this property 1250 Palm Road.
Uh, it was a violation I opened for the driveway approach that was in this repair. This is the uh permanent action report, the notice of violation, the notice to appear that was mailed out.
Uh the affidavit of the posting property appraisers page some uh picture of me uh posting on the property. Another posting of the property. So this
is the driveway approach. Uh we I believe if I remember I received this as a complaint. Uh I've been in contact with the uh so they have a contractor that pulled a permit for the for uh to redo the driveway.
Um I believe they had to remove cement because there was too much cement. So they was like I think it's like 30% need to have like a a 30% cement or a concrete on the property. Right. So,
basically the contractor told me that they are going to uh remove this piece right here that's in this repair, but um they haven't done it yet. But they do have the issued building permit for the reconstructing of of the
driveway. So, that's the only reason why uh this case is being heard today is because it hasn't been um done yet. The that piece that's in disrepair, it hasn't been it's still in that same condition. When was that notice of violation issued by you?
>> It was it was issued March 5th, 2025. >> Okay. >> So, the situation has existed as it is for over a year. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. And do you know the progress that they've made with the contractor for repairing the driveway? He emailed me
today, actually this morning, and he said that within the next couple days, they're going to um I guess demolish that part or just remove that part, but they just haven't done it yet. >> And then they have to do the new work.
>> Yes. >> Okay. Um based on the testimony which is unrebuted and the evidence which is admitted into the record today, I do find that uh uh the driveway is in disrepair uh in violation of the code
and regulations and it must be repaired within 30 days which is uh June 17th and um that violation having been proved and found and if it's not repaired uh within
30 days, a per day fine of $150 per day will be imposed until it is repaired. Thank you, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 44, Sanusi Apartment Properties LLC, case number FY
RR 2021 000097. And the officer on this case is Shannie Prey. >> Good morning. Um, where we at? I don't know. Um, this case is uh FYRR 20210097.
It's 40-year reertification. My name is Christopher Coulson, dealing department officer. Oh, what's rolling now is the action report notice of violation. >> Previous inspector was Gary Beswick who opened the case. He no longer works for
the city anymore. It was open in 2021. >> 2021. >> 2021. >> This update, another notice of violation open. issued in 2024 by Shaunie Pressie.
The notice to appear affidavit of posting property appraisal page some biz permanent >> in the permanent a permanent receipt that they burn in um what 2023
>> 2024 fees were paid. >> Okay. So they want so they brought in the report. The report was submitted on um in December 25 December 2015 2024. That report was uh denied by the engineer which the engineer did their
report and that report was sent on December 3rd 2025. >> Do we know why it was denied? >> Structural repairs and electrical modifications. The repairs were not were never done.
So there's no compliance as of 220 as of 23 2025. We had sent out more notices at that time and they had not complied. We had gave them 150 days to do do so and they have since they did not comply. We denied them and we and we have pictures
growing up now of the building. It was posted. the building was posted. >> So, and as of all the final inspections and all the notices, everything we did, they're still not in compliance as of this day. >> So, the reason that the
engineer denied u the application was not because uh some let's say technicality was because the required work had not been performed. Is that >> Yeah, correct. The engineer has to go out. They have to get their own engineer for the 40 year and we take the report
from them but then after that the work has to be performed. So the work hasn't been performed >> lacking or >> Yes. >> Uh have you spoken to the owner or the representative recently? >> They have no contact. >> No contact.
>> But someone has reached out to them at some point. >> Yeah, that was a year ago. We haven't a year ago. Nobody has reached out or talked to us in in a year. Right. If anybody any of you that are here from building or you're welcome, but remember
your name and and just don't, you know, give your name before you start talking and your title. >> Yes, your honor. My name is Charles Evers. I'm the building inspector for the city of North Miami. >> Okay. We have had a recent change in uh
individuals that were handling the 40 years and they are no longer with us. We have a a heavy case load of non-compliance with these uh 40-year inspections and it
appears nothing has been done. We're getting ready again for here. Here's just one of the many that are on that have been brought to our attention to follow up and uh we're going to try to
bring these forward but we we need some uh compliance. We have brought one down to Miami Dade uh unsafe structures and we're in the process of working that. That was the last month we came here and
uh even the But it's not going to the unsafe structures w at this point. >> Not yet. >> But uh we're going through each and every one of them. >> And it's not making us look very good of having non-compliant structures in our
jurisdiction and we're going to try our best to uh move forward with these and we we need the court's help with >> well the magistrate. Yes. Is there anything else anybody wants to add? Well, there could be other violations at
these buildings that our great code in uh comp uh code officers have addressed and brought forward to you. But this is the 40-year reinspection documentation that is part of a structural electrical
uh inspection report that we're uh complied by the Florida Building Code to comply with. and uh you know >> we're trying to move forward with this. >> No, to be sure I uh thank you. Uh so on
case number 44, I think the violation has been proven. This has been pending for quite some time. Um the the 40-year uh reertification is uh crucial to the structural integrity of um these
buildings and to the public health, safety, and welfare. Um again because I I would find a violation today which I do find but because of as I understand that the procedural structure is set up here of uh the orders and so forth um I
I believe that I it's incumbent upon me to give a compliance date. Uh the compliance date I will give is 30 days uh June 17th 2026. If not, there will be a $500 per day per DM fine uh commencing
on that day until there is full compliance. $100 in costs are hereby assess and they are in violation as of today and and uh you know uh we'll have the fine uh commence in in 30 days if there hasn't been full compliance by that date.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 45, Skyline Insurance, case number CEGMP 2025 000091. And the officer on this case is Gabriel
Morales. >> Good afternoon, Magistrate. Um, let me just get on here. All right. Inspector Morales with the city of North Miami. Uh, this is for the
property um 1365 Northwest 128th Street. I received a complaint on a weekend that I was working um about a property that um that was in bad condition. And mostly the complaint was because the fence of
the property was in bad shape and they had an aggressive dog that would um would be able to get through the fence and then um harass I guess the neighbors in that neighborhood. Um so um I went to
the property and uh I issued a violation for general maintenance of the property. Uh that includes the fence um the overgrown hedges and bushes. Um um it was dirty and stained uh around the doorway and uh around parts of the the
property. Um and to secure also the fence to prevent the the animal from being let loose. Um all right. So this is the uh permanent action report. This is the notice of violation.
Uh notice to appear, the affidavit of posting, the mailing of property, property appraiser, Sunbiz, and this is uh for my final reinspection
before the hearing, which was on April of 2026. Um, you can see there part of the fence was still pretty damaged. Um, if you zoom in, they're kind of being held by these sort of like ropes and zip ties and stuff.
>> Is could a dog get through that? >> So, our dog or whatever >> not through here probably, but this uh so this gate doesn't close properly. They had it open there and then you can see here they they they kind of try to tie it up, but it's it's in bad shape.
Um from my understanding that dog actually has been removed from the property. Um one of uh the other officers uh that's animal control confirmed that to me. U so the dog is no longer an issue but you know the
violation's still there. And you can see um they have all kinds of derelic vehicles and bushes are kind of overgrown there. Um, so it's kind of hard to see on this picture honestly, but most of like the doorway
and the walkway there is pretty dirty. >> Is this is this structure residential or commercial? >> It's residential. Residential. Yes. >> Because it says skyline and Okay. >> Yeah. But it's a single family home. >> Okay. >> Okay. And you can see here they I mean they do keep that gate kind of open and
it doesn't it's being held by this little chain uh posting at the property. And this is the original day. You can see the the dog there. Original day of the of the inspection.
>> Okay. >> Did you speak to anybody there at any time? So, I didn't uh have any contact with anyone there until yesterday. I received a call from uh what it seemed to be like was uh the tenant or the
resident staying there. And um she mentioned to me that she hadn't been able to fix it and she wanted to be granted an extension. I informed her that unfortunately it was too late. Um, this was maybe 10 minutes before the end of the shift of yesterday and she just
had to come in and present present her case before you and as you can see no show. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Uh, nope. That is it. >> Okay. I think that um in case number 45 based on the evidence accepted into the
record and the testimony uh the violation has been found and the case has been proved. um and um they will have 30 days
to comply which is June 17th and um if not uh there will be a $250 a day fine and $100 in cost is hereby assess. >> Thank you. M state. The next item we'll
be calling is item number 46 Tar Realy LLC CEBPR 2024 00153. And the officer on this case is Jamie George. Officer Jamie for the city of North
Miami. This property is 1350 Biscane Boulevard. um for the business for night owl night owl cookies. Uh this case it was brought to us by um a complaint
from public works. They sent out a list of of different businesses that installed uh grease traps without permits. Um this is the permit action report. It's the notice of violation that was issued
January 29, 2025. Notice to appear which was also mailed out. The affidavit of posting the property appraisers page some biz. This is me giving um well posting at the
property at night out another posting of the property and certified mail. >> Have you spoken to them about this? >> So yes, I have been in contact with a representative for night out cookies. They have told me um I have in my notes
here. So they Miami day county had a temporary morator moratorum for this particular location. They couldn't get the permit because uh day county they had to do some upgrades to the sewer system which
is why they didn't have it initially uh but has since been lifted. So on March 24 of 2026 the uh representative he sent me an email. He told me that they were able to pay for the permitu
uh from like county side, right? They got the permit from the county. But I told him uh I said I replied back I told him, "Well, now that you have your permit or rather that you paid for the permit uh with the county, now bring approved uh plans to the city of North
Miami to get the permit for the city. But as of the final reinspection date, there's nothing on file." >> Remind me how long has this been pending? Uh January 29, 2025. >> January 29 last year. >> Yes.
>> Okay. When was the county moratorium lifted if you know >> that? I don't I don't know. But I know it has been lifted. >> Okay. Um because I know that when the county has a moratorum that uh you can't
they can't proceed with the per you know. >> Yeah. >> Uh all right. Uh based on what I know, I do find that there's a violation. Not knowing when the county moratorum was lifted, I'm going to give them uh 60 days to comply, which is going to be
till July 16th. >> Yep. >> If they have not complied by July 16th, there will be a $250 per day fine, and the $100 in um costs are hereby assessed as well. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Okay, magistrate. The next item we'll be calling is item number 47. Vita Reyes Lei and Rem Nicole Rees. Case number CF LR2025
00101. And the officer on this case is Jamie George. >> Officer Jamie for City of North Miami. Uh this case is the address is 12904 Bonan Road. Uh basically this is a a
single family home but they have their home registered as their uh location I guess like the the business. Um this is the permanent report the notice of violation that was issued
November 10th uh 2025. This is the notice to appear that was mailed out affidavit of posting the property appraiser page. Sunbiz
as you can see they have their the address the 12904 BA road listed uh registered as their uh the location >> of their business. And this is the uh posting of the property.
Another posting of the property and certified mail. So it's basically they just need to obtain their business tax receipt with the city of North Miami. >> And that's pretty simple to Yes. You
want to add something name? >> Yes. Uh licensing staff has attempted to to reach out. I'm sorry. Name and title >> Raphael Padrome, business licensing manager. Uh staff has attempted to reach out to the business owners by email in
2022 and 2023 regarding their delinquent balance and we have not heard back from them. >> They have a delinquent balance. >> Yes, quite a few years. I believe it's about three or four years that they owe. >> And let me ask you what is perhaps a naive question, but for my edification.
So, if you have a a home business, um, which involves, I guess, jewelry sales or, you know, uh, watches or what have you, you are you're still required by by local code and and law to have a business tax receipt >> and certificate of use. Yes.
>> Yes. Okay. All right. Uh, anything else? >> That'll be all. >> Okay. I think that the violation has been uh proven that they need a BTR um based on the uh evidence and uh
documents and exhibits and testimony which all admitted into the record. Um uh apparently there's other delinquencies with this particular business. So, uh, they will be given, uh, 30 days, uh, to comply. If they have not done so,
there will be a $250 per day fine. Uh, and the $100 in cost uh, is hereby assessed as well. >> Thank you. >> Y, thank you. >> Okay, magistrate. Next item is item
number 49, Winward Condo. Case number MHVIO2023 01 038. This case was pro guilty by Magistrate Smith. Must debate by July 24th, 2022 24. Fines were set at 350 per
day plus $100 cost assessment. And the officer on this case is Brent Lee Daniels. >> Did you say abate by July 20th of 2024? Correct. July 24, 2024. >> Okay. >> Good afternoon, your honor. Officer
Daniel, city of North Miami. Uh, this this has been an ongoing case. Uh, I originally opened the violation back on, give me one moment here.
June 1st, 2023. June 1st of 2023. Uh, here's my permit action report. It's pretty lengthy. The original notice
of violation. The notice to appear. Another notice to appear. Affidavit of posting. Property appraiser.
Sunbiz. This was the most recent notice to appear that was posted on April 2nd. And as of my as of my final reinspection date, same date, April 2nd, 2026, there has not been any improvement to
the rebar and the Stuckco >> um in and have you communicated with the owners or their representatives? Uh, I have, your honor, the I want to say the time that Magistrate Smith um was over
the case or presided over the case, the engineering there was an engineering report um that was submitted. I'm going through all the pictures here. Um, and they Okay, here's the engineering report um that was submitted, you know, saying
that um they have a um a company who they're trying to contract and to have them do the work, but I haven't heard from um the property ownership since then. And this is a
33page engineering report that was submitted and uh as of my final reinspection uh there has not been any progress. Another um affidav of posting notice to appear
another affidav of posting. So, I mean, in total, it's almost 3 years from the time I originally um opened the violation against the property. >> Okay. Anything else you want to add? >> No, your honor, that's it. in in your
opinion, if you know, I mean, I'm not suggesting that you need to know, but uh does uh the condition with the damage to uh the balconies with the stuckco and rebar deficiencies, could that present a a public safety risk conceivably or
>> uh well, according to the engineer report, um it does not it doesn't specify that those um like it's a safety hazard like the the tenants who are living there, they
know they can utilize it. You know, it's not a safety hazard, but I mean, there's still there's still work that still needs to be done that hasn't been done yet. >> It's not up to code, it's deficient, but I guess what I'm getting at a nutshell, if someone leaned against it, would they go falling over the rail? No, sir.
>> Okay. All right. Uh I think that based on the unrebuted testimony and evidence that has been shown today, this is a default. uh you know the permit violation for case number 49 has been demonstrated. I hereby readopt and
reaffirm u magistrate Smith's uh ruling and um the fine as imposed in the order of magistrate Smith is is hereby imposed and to my view and madam city attorney tell me if I'm incorrect but when again there's been a prior fine hasn't been uh
appealed it's it's uh the law of the case and that fine would start to acrue after the original abatement date of July May 20th, 2024. >> That is correct. Special members. >> Okay. All right. So, it is so ordered.
>> Thank you, your honor. >> Okay. >> Hey, magistrate, that concludes today's hearing. >> Is there any other business before the magistrate or anything else on anybody's mind relating to the hearings? >> Okay. So, I always wanted to bang this.
So, thank you. We are adjourned.