Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. We are >> Good afternoon. We're going to go ahead and get started. Uh it's 1:35 p.m. Uh and
I am going to first of all ask for uh the roll call on Madame Chair and then just go over a few things if you could do a roll call for us please. >> Dennis Warren >> here. >> Katherine Townsen >> here. >> Mike Stein
>> here. >> Dudley Bates >> here. >> Craig Davis >> here. Thank you. And uh once I get back to my page here, uh we will start by uh the
standing for the pledge of allegiance. If you're here to testify possibly today, if you remain standing so we can get sworn in and then I'm going to go over a few things. So please stand. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Please remain standing if you're going to testify. >> The clerk will swear you in. >> Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to provide is the
truth? >> Okay. Let me read a few things and then uh we're going to go over a couple other things real quick. Good afternoon and welcome to the August 28th, 2025 hearing of the Semino County Code Enforcement Board. Before we begin, I would like to
advise everyone about the procedures that govern appearances before the Code Enforcement Board. This meeting is open to the public under Florida's government in the sunshine law. Therefore, every effort will be made to hear all persons having relevant evidence or arguments to
offer. It is required that every person who appears before the code enforcement board needs to be registered with the clerk. The cases where the respondents are present and signed in will be heard first. You will be sworn in or affirmed by the clerk. Once all cases where the respondents are present have been heard,
the code enforcement board will hear the remaining cases as they appear on the agenda. When your case is called, please be seated at the table reserved for the respondents. The county will present their case and then the respondents will be allowed to present their case. Additionally, please limit your comments
to only information relating to this case. Each party may question witnesses offered or excuse me on behalf of the other party. Additionally, staff members may question those appearing before the code enforcement board. The board will
then make their decision based on the upon the evidence and testimony as presented by both parties. All proceedings before the code enforcement board are electronically recorded. Please speak directly into the microphone at the center of the table and state your name clearly before
presenting your case. Should you need assistance due to a hearing impairment or language barrier, please inform the clerk uh upon registration. All cell phones and other electronic devices are to be turned off or silenced while inside the chambers. Thank you for your
cooperation. And before we get going, uh I would like to suggest a very minor re revision to the agenda as it is seen and we only have
one re well we have one case where anyone is present to speak as to that case. Excuse me. uh it would be three separate cases, one respondent's case and that's item number three, four and
five on our agenda which is on page three and four. I would like to move those suggest or ask for a motion move those to the front as the first item and then just go in order the rest of the agenda if I can have a motion that >> so moved
>> motion on Mr. Sin second by Mr. states uh to accept staff excuse me to uh accept the revised agenda putting items number three, four and five to the front of the list. All in favor say I. >> I oppose.
>> Okay. So that's what we'll do. Uh now that particular starting with the first one of those cases uh it's case number 25-47 CEB. As my understanding, the respondent is not here, but there
may be a witness that would like to speak to that and the other two companion cases. Uh, Officer Hill, is it officer Hill? His case. >> Okay. Uh, would you are you would you like for the for us to uh hear the
witnesses that are here? I guess it's a neighbor. I believe it's David Strain. Is that sound are you aware of that? >> It's a neighbor. Um, it's up to the board how they want to do it. can present it and then they can speak or however you'd like to do. >> Okay. So, you have no objection if we wanted to. Okay. Is everybody okay hearing the neighbor even though
respondent's not here? Okay. So, we'll start in this manner. Again, we're going to uh hear this case now. It's case 25-47 CEB. As soon as I can get to it.
Uh, and the case is uh let's see, James Mumper. James R. Mumper in Crystal Mumper, 1902 Long Pond Drive, Longwood, Florida, 32779. Uh, Officer Henson, this is your case
whenever you're ready, and we'll do the other two. Well, we'll hear the We'll hear the witness after this one. We'll do these one at a time, I guess. Okay. Small County Sheriff's Office Code Enforcement, Shannon Henson, North Region. Um, submitting this copy as a
presentation to the clerk as exhibit one. This case is 25-47 CEB. Respondent Crystal Mumper and Mumper and James R. Mumper. This property is 1901 Long Pond.
>> A 01 or 02 1902. Sorry. 1902 Long Pond. Uh the violation is seminal county land development code chapter 30 part 14 section 30.1419- I mean I all fence shall be maintained
in their original upright condition. I first inspected this property uh February 20th, 2025 since the first notice was February 21st, 2025 with a second notice of March 25th, 2025.
Compliance dates were March 10th, 2025 and April 9th, 2025 with follow-up inspections. Um March 4th, 2025, and the last one was yesterday, August 27th, 2025. The dilapidated fence remains on the subject's property. This is pictures
were taken by um officer Tam uh Joanne Tamulonus in February 2025. These were also taken by officer Tamulonus in March 2525 and April 10th, 2025 by officer Tammy
Lonus. This was taken by myself for the codeboard hearing that was scheduled for July on July 10th, 2025. And these were taken by myself July 23rd, 2025. and Officer Hill posted the property for
me um on August the 11th, 2025. And this was also by taken by Officer Hill for August 11th, 2025. And this was taken from me by me yesterday. And the fence is still down as you can see. The suggested recommendation by the code
enforcement officer is based on the testimony evidence presented in case number 25-47 CEB. It is determined that the respondents Crystal Mumper and James R. Mumper are the owners of record for the property record located at 1902 Long
Pond Drive located in Simol County and is possession or control of the property and is in violation of Seminal County Land Development Code Chapter 30 Part 14 section 30.14.19 I. and is further recommended that the code
enforcement board issue an order for the respondent to correct the violation on or before midnight of September 11th, 2025. In order to correct the violation, the respondent must remove or repair the fence to its original upright condition. If the respondents do not comply to the order with the order, a fine of $50 will
be imposed for each day the violation continues or is repeated after compliance. I mean after yeah after compliance. Um, the respondent must contact myself for arrangements to verify that the property is in compliance. This concludes my presentation. >> Thank you. Any questions for us or
Henson? >> Should we hear all three cases or what what's your >> preference on that? We we can is it >> So, my preference is that you hear all three cases and then at the end decide if you'd like to hear from the witnesses. >> Okay. Okay. Very good.
>> No questions yet then. >> Okay. Uh, so you can that we're going to go ahead and let you present case number 25-48 CEB. Again, unless Hansen, whenever you're ready. >> Smol County Sheriff's Office, code enforcement, North Region, case number
2548 CEB, respondent Crystal M. Crystal Mumper, and James R. Mumper. I'm submitting a copy of this presentation to the clerk as exhibit one. Click. Uh, this property is located at 1902 Long Pond. The violation charged is
Seminal County, Chapter 9595.4 defined as in 95.3F, stagnant or foul water. I first this property is first inspected February 20th, 25 with follow-up notices
uh February 21st, 2025 and second notice for March 25th, 2025. Those compliance dates were March 10th, 2025 and April 9th, 2025. The follow-up uh violation of inspections were March 4th, 2025, and
the final one was yesterday, August 25th, 2025. The results of the inspection was stagnant or foul water remains on the property. This was taken by officer Tamulonus uh February 2025
and March 25th, 2025 by officer Tamillonus. And this was April 10th, 2025. And this was by myself for the last code board hearing a scheduled hearing for it was July 10th, 2025.
And this was taken by myself July 23rd, 2025. And this was taken yesterday. I mean, I'm sorry for the posting day. Cara Hill took these and that was August 11th, 2025. And this was taken by myself yesterday,
August 25th, 27, 2025. The suggested recommendation by the code enforcement officer is based on the testimony and evidence presented in the case number 25-48 CEB. It is determined that the respondents Crystal Mumper and James R. Mumper are the owners of the
property rec located located at 1902 Long Pond Drive located in Simol County determined by the property appraisers records and in possession or control of the property and a violation of the Simol County Chapter 95 section 95.4 for as defined in 95.3F,
stagnant or fail foul water. It's further recommended that the code enforcement board issue an order for the respondents to correct the violation on or before midnight of September 11th, 2025. In order to correct the violation, the respondent must remove or clean the
the stagnant foul water from the pool. If the respondents do not comply with the order, a fine of $250 will be imposed for each day the violation continues or is repeated after compliance. The respondent must contact myself to verify compliance. This concludes my presentation.
>> Thank you, Mr. S. >> Yeah, that that last photo um from yesterday, that is um stagnant foul that I'm seeing, right? That's not some kind of cover. >> It used to be a cover. I did actually speak to the owner yesterday for the first time and he said it what had cover
on there a long time ago but it must have fallen in and all that's there. >> Thank you. >> Uh any other Mr. Bates? >> The pool enclosure there is intact. >> No.
>> No. So that pool is open to the >> No. The county the county had a a company come in and fence it. So that was it's safeguarded from the community. >> Okay. All right. Okay. Uh
any any other questions? The is this the the I'm looking at the violation here that's in the Is this the regular foul water violation for pools that we use? I got sort of lost in it and thought it was we was looking at trash until the very end of it when I
read that. Is this this is >> Yeah. >> Okay. And so since the it's secured, we're not addressing that. Is that uh or is that the next? I know we have one more. >> Well, the first case was for fence because the fence is down and that would
secure the pool if they had that, but their screen's down and they don't have a cover. So, >> thank you. Uh then we'll move on, if there's no other questions, we'll move on to uh the third and final one for this respondent, case number 25-49 CE, which is James R. Mumper and Crystal
Mumper. Same address. >> Simol County Sheriff's Office, Code Enforcement, North Region, whose case number is 25-949 CEB Crystal Mumber and James R. Mumber. I'm submitting a copy of this presentation to the clerk as exhibit
one. This property is located at 1902 Long Pond in Seminal County. The violation charge is seminal county code chapter 95 section 95.4 as defined in 95.3A. rubbish. The first inspection was done on
February 20th, 2025 with notices of February 21st, 2025 and March 25th, 2025. Those compliance dates were um March 10th, 2025 and April 9th, 2025. The follow-up inspections began began a
March 4th, 2025, and I inspected it yesterday on August 27, 2025. And the result of the follow-up inspection was the rubbish still remains on the property. This picture was taken by officer Tammy Lonus uh February 2025
and officer Tammy Lonus on the same day. This one is taken March 25th, 2025. And this was taken April 10th, 2025. This one was taken by myself uh for posting on July 10th, 2025.
And this was taken by myself on July 23rd, 2025. And this was taken uh by officer Hill um August 11, 2025 for posting. This was taken yesterday by myself uh August 27th, 2025.
The suggested recommendation by the code enforcement officer is based on the testimony and evidence presented in case number 25-49 CEB. It is rendered determined that the respondents Crystal Mumper and James R. Mumper are the
owners of of the record owners of record of the property located at 1902 Long Pond Drive located in Simol County determined by the property appraisers record and they are in possession or control of the property and in violation of seminal county code chapter 95 section 95.4
as defined in 95.3A rubbish. It's further recommended that the code enforcement board issue an order for the respondents to correct the violation on or before midnight of September 10th, 2025. Midnight. September 11th. Yeah, sorry.
2025. In order to correct the violation, the respondent must remove all rubbish from the property. If the respondent do not comply with the order, a fine of $100 will be imposed for each day the violation continues or is repeated after compliance. The respondents must contact myself to verify the compliance. This
concludes my presentation. >> Thank you. Any questions for officer Hansen? >> Yeah, this case was supposed to go before the board in July. Is that correct? >> And you said you did not have contact with this owner before very recently. Can you first of all describe your
efforts to get in touch with the owner here and then what happened when you did finally? Officer Tamalonus had the case first and she did actually make contact with this person through email and he did email back and then I got nothing and then I found the email that she had sent it to and I sent an email. But just
yesterday I got the phone number and I made contact with him over the phone. >> And what was the response of the homeowner? >> Um he asked how he could stop the fines and what his date would be and I told him it was going to be in September and it had to be done by that day or the fines would start the next day and it
would be every day. Did did did he offer any kind of excuse? Did you get any kind of indication of why this property was like this? >> It it came down to them from a uh his wife's father, I guess, passed away and so they've they've given stories before I heard
that they were supposed to come down and fix things up and haven't yet, but he said he was going to try and get it in compliance before that. >> So, this is an outofstate owner then, your understanding. Correct. Thank you. >> Just for the record, who is he? What's his name? >> Mr. Mumur. I'm sorry. James Mumber.
Okay. >> Any other questions about any >> officer? Officer Henson, did is the whole This has been going on almost six months. >> Is that approximately the time that they inherited this property then or was it going on before they got it?
>> Just for my knowledge hearsay that it's been a long time coming that the neighbors have said that it's been sitting there empty for a long time. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Davis, pull your mic down. Mr. Davis, pull your mic down just a little bit. Thank you.
>> Any other questions? >> No. Okay. Uh at this time, since the respondents, I don't believe are here still. Uh we will see if the uh I believe we have at least one witness
here. Mr. Strain, are you here today? Do you still would you like to speak to this? Uh you're welcome to come up as long as you've been sworn in. If not, we'll get you sworn in when you get up here. >> Sworn in. And uh we'll check if there's anybody else after he gets through. Uh right at this table here, sir.
>> He was sworn in. He was sworn in. >> Okay. Thanks. And if you once you get comfortable, uh state your name and your address for the record. >> Good afternoon. My name's David Strain. I live at 1901 Long Pond Drive. We're uh live across
the street and two houses to the south of the uh house in question here. >> Thank you. And before we get started, just let you know, you heard the three cases, same respond, but three different issues we're looking at. That's what we're this board is going to be deciding today what to do with those. You've
heard them. You heard the recommendation. It's your opportunity to share whatever information you like. >> Okay. First off, I took pictures yesterday myself and um I can pass them to you one at a time. I want to say that
Long Pond Drive at this location runs north and south. Their house faces to the east. The first picture I have here is on the south side of the house. These bushes, you can't see the house because the bushes are there. The original owner
of the house had built a nice exercise area in the back and he also built the pool. I've lived there since 1986. I'm the original owner of our house and so I've seen things go on for a while. So the first picture is of the south side
of the house with the bushes that are there. Okay. >> Are you wanting us to keep these? >> Yes. >> Okay. The second picture I have is of the front of the house just um a little bit uh south of um or to the north of the
first picture. And this is the front of the house as it's viewed uh today. >> Holy moly. >> And the third picture is this front of the house just further to the north with
the uh notices up for the hearing. The fourth picture I have here I took of the driveway about two years ago. There was a water leak on not only their property but for uh the development at that point. Uh the
water company came out dug up the street but the pipe also ran up underneath their driveway. So, they dug up their driveway and you can see by looking at it, there's concrete here that the water company never re picked up, nor did they replace the hole that they made. So,
that's sitting in the uh current driveway. The last picture I have is of the north side of the house. On the north side of the house, the um is where the air conditioner uh heat pump is. To the best
of my knowledge, that's the original heat pump that was put in by Grater when they built the house back in 1986. And you can't see it because of all the vegetation. Also, you can there there's a portion of the fence you can see coming up that has been knocked down. I
three years ago called about that fence and nothing was done at that time. I think it was three maybe even four years ago that the fence was knocked over and reported it. And that's the picture of the north side of the house. Now,
this house has been owned by three maybe four people. To give you a representation of what happened here, um the first people moved out after four or five years, they moved to the other side of Markwoods Road. The next group of people came in. I don't know why they
left. They sold it. The next group of people that bought it were the Kelly's. Kelly's were older people. They came from New York. They used to come down maybe every two or three months. They'd say for a week to three weeks, then they go back up to New York. They passed away
in the uh 2000 somewhere between 2003 to 2012. Uh the husband first, then the wife. The house was left to the son and the daughter. The son wanted to sell it. The daughter said, "Uh no, I want to
keep it." So, our understanding is she bought the sun out, has the house now. They came in, I'd say five years ago, maybe, and they put windows in the front. They said the windows needed to be changed, and that was all they did. They had, at one time, the Kelly's had a
lawn service that came in, kept the house looking nice. And then somewhere in the last, this has been going on probably 15 years now. uh they've lost there's no lawn service. Nobody comes services the house. Nobody looks in on it. Occasionally they come
down, spend maybe a day, day and a half and then they leave. That's the most we've ever seen of them. So I don't know if they're aware of the condition the house is in today, but the last time I remember seeing them there was possibly
a year and a half, two years ago. So, uh, that's my recollection of what's going on. I wanted to let you know the thing, the other thing that I'm scared of is I have seen uh, personally snakes
in there. I have seen large rodents. I don't know if they're rats, large mice, um, other sort of, uh, animals. I've seen fox in there, and a couple of my neighbors have seen coyotes in there. And the thing that scares me on the
south side there's a new family there that have young children. And on the north side, the family there, they have young children, too. So, I'm a little concerned for the children as to what I've seen on that property and uh what
is uh presented there and the safety of uh the children. So, that's why I'm here. >> Thank you. >> Any questions? >> Any questions for Mr. Bates? Sir, is uh
from your very graphic pictures there and also in addition to these violations, it seems that the place is just completely overgrown grass trees, but especially the grass
that you're talking about with these various vermin and it appears to be quite high as well. Is that true? Is that >> That's true. I'd say the average height of that grass right now is probably 10 to 14 in.
>> And you can see by the pictures of the postings of what how high the grass would be. >> Right. Thank you, >> officer. Can you tell us why that is not a case that's included here as well? That is a case that was presented to the
code board clerk and it got misplaced and we wanted just to make sure we could go forward with whatever we had at the moment because this so um you know the case is pretty bad with the pool and the fence down so we wanted to go forward with it and we'll get the vegetation later.
>> So uh for the attorney then we have no ability to address the grass today. >> Nope. >> Thank you. >> Correct. >> Any other questions? >> Offer officer Henson. Did you indicate that they had indicated before that they
were going to correct these violations over the months? >> Um, I do have two emails. One that was received by officer Tamillonus that I can submit into record. I'd have to email it to um officer I mean u the clerk later and I have one for myself.
If you want me to read it or if you want to submit it into record. >> I was just curious maybe basically paraphrase >> this one. So, if they've acknowledged they're going to make an effort or if they just said, "Thanks for letting us know." >> I got one other thing, too.
>> I got one. >> While we're waiting, is there anyone else that was here to speak on behalf of this case? not think. Okay. >> Um, if I could, I'd like to say one other thing. >> Yes, sir. >> Just for your knowledge, there have been
people in our neighborhood that have tried to buy this house so that it could be fixed up and put into a proper position, and they have turned them down every time. >> So, the email that he had sent, Officer Tamulonus, he just um said that they're
looking for a remedy. they don't occupy the house and um they're contemplating on selling it or otherwise moving on ownership of the property. And then um he said it's not an easy job for them to do because they're out of state. >> What What was the date of that email? How long?
>> That one was March 8th. >> Okay. >> Okay. Anything else? M >> So do we need to address each one of these separately then? Well, yeah. As far as a motion motion in an order. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Uh so if we're at that stage, we'll start with the no other questions. No other uh >> nobody want nobody else want to testify. So we'll go to the first one. Uh 25-47 CEB.
Uh I'll call this the fence case. Uh where the fence was down. The recommendation is by September 11th compliance date or $50 a day fine going forward on that. That's the recommendation. >> I move the staff recommendation.
>> Second. >> Uh motion by Mr. Bates, second by Mr. uh Signance to accept staff's recommendation as presented on case number 25-47 CEB. Any discussion? All in favor say I.
>> I opposed. And brings us to 25-48 CEB. We'll call this a stagnant or foul water case. Uh recommendation the compliance date by September 11th or $250 per day fine.
Is there a motion on >> move the staff recommendation again? >> Second. >> Motion by Mr. Bas Mr. Davis. Uh excuse me, Mr. Sin. Any other discussion? All in favor say I. >> I opposed. Motion carries on that one. And the last one, we'll call it the
rubbish rubbish case. Uh that's 25-49. CEB uh compliance date by September 11th is what's recommended. Recommended or I believe there's a $100 a day fine is what was on that one. >> Move the staff recommendation. >> Second.
>> Motion by Mr. Bates, second by Mr. Sonst recommendation as presented. All in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. >> That's what we've done. Uh, we've accepted. Sir, thank you so much for coming in. You and I'm assuming that's your wife. It takes time to do that and it's very helpful for us because usually
we got to sift through a lot of stuff. Very helpful. Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> All right. You can go back to the beginning of the agenda. You have that person signed in. >> Oh, okay. >> This uh another respondent has arrived. Probably got stuck in I4. Brings us to
number one on the uh on the agenda. So, we'll go ahead and hear that one first. Uh, sir, when I call you or whoever have the respondents, when I call you in, just come up to the table here. Stand here. I don't think you've been sworn in and just remain standing. So, we swear
you in. It's case number 21-07 CEB Palma Fernando and Palma Argentina J. Uh, this is repeat violation. If you're here for that case, if you could come up, please.
Again, this is off the repeat violation list. First case, okay. >> Thank you. And if yes, if you're going to testify, if you have not been sworn in, please stand up and raise your right hand to be sworn in. >> Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to provide is the
truth? >> Yes, I do. >> And your name, sir? Fernando Palma. >> Okay. And your address is >> Yeah. Same. >> And this is I'm sorry. His >> my father, Fernando Palma. >> Oh, very good. Okay. >> Does he need a translator? Is that why you're here? >> No, I was going to speak on on their
behalf, >> but he understands English. >> Yes. Okay. >> Great. >> Okay. Uh, this case belongs to Officer Hemingway. Whenever we're ready, we can go ahead. >> Okay. Good afternoon. Hi. Um,
>> code enforcement officer Shannita Hemingway. Similar County Sheriff's Office, South Region, case number 21 07 CEB. Respondents, Fernando and Argentina Palma. And I would like to submit a copy as
exhibit one case number 217 CB Fernando and Argentina Palma at 1062 William Street, Sim County. Violation charged seminal county code chapter 95 section 95.4 as
defined in 95.3A rubbish. There was a code enforcement board order issued April 22nd, 2021. I observed the violation on May 20th, 2025.
We sent a I sent a repeat letter to the respondent May 28th, 2025, and the follow-up inspections were August 12th through August 19th. The results of the follow-up inspection were that the rubbish was rem removed from the subject
property. I am going I do apologize. I have to read into record my initial inspection day. I somehow when I saved it from my my PowerPoint file to the shared PowerPoint file, one day is missing. So
my initial date of May 20th, 2025 is missing from the PowerPoint. The day I posted was August 12th, 2025. Uh, Deputy Copeland went back on August 14th and took pictures of the rubbish, which is like some shingles on the porch
and some vegetation, tree debris. This was taken on August 19th, 2025, where the rubbish has been removed. The suggested recommendation by the code enforcement officer is based on the
testimony evidence presented in case number 25 I mean 217 CEB. It is determined that the respondents Fernando and Argentina Palma are the owners of record of the property located at 1062 William Street located in Semino County as determined by the
property appraiser are in possession or control of the property and was in violation of seminal county code chapter 95 section 95.4 4 as defined in 95.3A and it is further recommended that the code enforcement board based on the
order finding compliance and imposing fine/lean issued on April 22nd 27th 2023 the code enforcement board issue an order imposing a fine in the amount of $9,100 for 91 days of repeat violation from May
20th 2025 through and including August 18th 2025 and the fine shall continue to acrew at 100 per day for each day. The violation continues thereafter. This concludes my presentation. >> Thank you. Uh see if anyone has
questions. I have one if when they get through. I'm just confused on the dates. I thought I was trying to follow you. I thought on my question specific to when this new event starts. That's what I'm trying to figure out. I thought I saw
you say that on May 20th it went out of compliance, but then it was corrected at some point and then on August 14th the deputy takes a picture and it's now back in violation. I may be wrong, but just piece together where this starts.
>> Yes, sir. So May 20th is when it was it's a repeat violation, so it's been in violation before. May 20th is when I went out and did my initial. It was out of compliance. Okay. >> I did the posting on August 12th, but I didn't get pictures of the rubbish.
>> So, it did not come I thought you had said it. So, it did not come. >> It did not come into compliance on August 12th. I just didn't get pictures of it. Got >> So, so do we have pictures from the original the May 20th date? >> I have them, but not in this PowerPoint. I have it in my original PowerPoint. So,
when I saved it in our shared file that we all like where Cara pulls from, it somehow got erased. So if needed, I can print it. I can forward it to maybe Julie or Alexis and have it printed out. >> The
Sorry, that's I'm back to my >> I mean, let me ask you the the one line I guess that's hanging me up now where you have two that says an affidavit of compliance. The one that says, "An affidavit of compliance on a repeat violation was filed by the code
enforcement officer after reinspection on August 18." Okay. And that brings us to where we're at. My apologies. Okay. I'm I'm good. I'm sorry. So, >> should should we hear from the
>> Yes, we should. Uh okay. Any other questions for uh the code officer? Seeing none. Uh sir, either one of you, this is your opportunity to speak uh on behalf of the violation as it uh pertains to this.
>> Um I I've been I've been taking care of the property, making sure that the grass stays down since the violation occurred um a few years ago. Um and we I was trying to repair the property too for them. Uh we took out a uh uh cuz the the
roof caved in is what happened. Um, we took off a re-roofing permit and we started doing it. And then, um, the inspectors that came in both gave me two different um, things that I needed to do to the roof. So, we ran out of money to
fix the roof, I I since I I I did a a a repairs to keep water from coming in, but it we still didn't need needed to get the shingles up and everything. So, that those shingles that were there were not rubbish. They were the um shingles that I was going to use to install the
roof. And there was tile there too on the porch, which is for the interior of the house cuz I'm removing the flooring. I injured my knee uh in April. So, I I wasn't really going too too much. I still went over there to cut the grass,
but I I I didn't go as much as I was before. And there was an issue with dumping in that property before. That was the rubbish from that was the previous violation. People kept dumping in there. Um and I kept removing it and I still do remove the the dumping that
occurs there regularly. Um officer um Sha Shandra Shandra Shenita >> Shenita, sorry. >> Um she informed me that the contact information for us is incorrect in public records. So, I didn't get on the the first time I I knew that there was a
violation was when I went to cut the grass and I saw that it was posted on the on the property and I contacted her as soon as I was able to and she informed me what needed to be done. I took care of it as soon as um she told me and um I'm going to try and get a
permit so I can put a fence around it to prevent uh the dumping that that that occurs there. Does someone live at the home currently? And if so, who, sir? >> So, that home uh was for my parents. They live with me right now because I
can't um I couldn't afford to to finish the the roofing because my uh and plus I had the knee injury. My knee is a lot better now. I still limp, but I can I can work again. So, I'm going to go and look and see when I can uh reapply for
the uh permit because I have to the permit has to be reinstated so I can do the roofing. And uh did your parents uh pay the $72,000 fine that was uh apparently imposed before the lean? >> No. >> Or is that still existing?
>> If you if you read the sentence before, it says it was reduced to administrative cost of $62423 which was paid. >> So the the 72,100 was reduced to 62423
and that's the amount that was paid. Thank you. >> Any other questions? Yes, sir. >> Where do you stand, sir? I know, understand about your injury and so forth. Where do you stand as far as bringing this property into compliance?
>> So, >> can you meet these dates or where where are we in that regard? >> Mr. Mr. debates. It's currently in compliance or >> it it's currently in compliance. It It is in compliance. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
This is Yeah. And this is something that you don't see very often. So, what's happened is there was an order, they came into compliance, they fell out of it. So, it's a repeat and then they came into compliance again. So, what you're being asked is to find them for the 91
days that they were out of compliance, but they're currently in compliance. If you look a little further into the notes, um, they've also provided you with administrative cost. Um, and so you have a cler administrative cost of $78.58
and you have an administrative cost of $12,147. So the total administrative cost is $2005, which is another option. >> All right. So they you are in compliance now. Yes.
>> Okay. Well, in that case, I would move that we uh move forward with the uh administrative cost of $2005. >> Are we I'm sorry, but we have I think we're going to have a witness on this uh
before we make a motion. >> Okay. >> Uh did you have something before we hear from witnesser real quick? >> I was going to say one more thing. Um, as far as the the 91 days, um, I, like I said, the public record is incorrect
there, so they couldn't reach us. So, I was unaware that we were in violation of any code until I I saw the the posted on the um until I saw the sign on the yard. And as soon as I saw the yard, I called right away to to get
>> Well, that that date isn't the date that date is just the date it went out of compliance. So you may not have been, but that's why the first time when you're out of compliance, you're warned. If it goes out of compliance again, fine start right away. So just so we're we're
clear. I do understand your position, but it's not a guarantee that we can reach you. They can reach you. >> Also, this is the original PowerPoint that has that slide, and this is um May 20th, 2025. to go along what he's saying though his
mail was returned and I did advise him to update his mailing address on property appraiser. >> Thank you. And I have a a question for you because I've heard uh the what we're dealing with is a removal of trash. I understand. >> Yes, sir.
>> And we've heard about a roof and a per he needs to get that trash gone to get out of violation. That's isn't that the what we're looking at? >> Yes, sir. >> But he's in compliance currently. It's been removed >> as of the as of that date. >> And it was shingles. I mean, I know it's
listed as trash, but it's shingles that he was actually using to repair the roof on this property. >> He did come into compliance on the 18th, not just for one violation. He came into compliance for two >> on that day. What the 19th?
>> Uh, can we get to witness Mr. S? I just wanted to know if we had a witness. >> We do. Uh, and we'll call that witness up. Uh, I believe there's a neighbor here. Um,
Anthony Wilson. Uh, sir, if you want to step up to where the code officer is here at this podium, we'd like to hear what you have to say. And just for the respondents, he'll be talking to us, we'll be talking back to him. So, uh, and >> he has to be swear.
>> You have to be sworn in. Raise your right hand so the clerk can swear in. >> Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to provide is the truth? >> The truth. >> And your name and address, sir? >> Anthony Wilson is my name. >> And uh, my property address is next to
the Palmer's is 221 Marus Street >> after my spring. >> Thank you. And uh, you're welcome to share whatever you'd like to share, sir. Well, first of all, I like to thank you all for for allowing me to come up and speak this afternoon and also the gentleman sitting in the back there. I
didn't know that we had to sign in in order to to speak. So, they he they enlightened me back then. I really thank for that. I want to be short, get straight to the point. I am one of the siblings
that is living the house that the Palmer have. It was a family. It was a familyowned house. There's uh two properties there. Back in 1958,
my grandmother uh signed part of her property so that my parent could build a nice little Jim Walter house on so that the five children, my mother and father, we could live so that we wouldn't have to keep renting.
in the house. It got into it got into a foreclosure. My baby sister went to my baby sister and some kind of way it got into foreclosure and I'm sorry about that. And that's how the house got away from
the family. It was hers and her husband. But my point is the house been sitting sitting sit. Now I cut my grass, try to keep my property up as small and everything just so it just so close together. We got a
driveway. That's how close it is. And I just go head on when I'm cutting. I just cut the driveway because it bring back so much memories to me and uh
sentimental value. So at this point I I understand the Palmer's so much fine violation code that they are in. I don't know how I hope that they can get out. I don't know how that they going to get
out of it because there is not much is being done to the property in the span of the time that you allow them to. You all are being very very leenish with them and that is good on their behalf and whatnot but it's very little bit of
progress making for what we need to do here. If they cannot keep the property up and go ahead on and um remodel the house so it can be livable.
My property is right adjacent to it and we are keeping ours on up the best that we possibly can to manicure it and make it looks good and all of the rest of the neighborhood is around there. Houses is being uh upgraded and remodeled all but
1062 William where my family it was a family house and it's just sitting there just it's a sore eye to the community. So my point is here that the house need to go ahead on proceed with remodeling.
If not, it need to be torn down. I would hate to see it to be torn out. And I don't mean to to talk like this and hard. But that's where the point is. The uh the uh code enforcement officer lady, she sees it and everybody sees it. It's
a sore eye. >> Mr. Just I'm sorry to interrupt you, but just so we're clear. We're here for the trash issue that's in compliance now. So that even though I hear you, the house may have a whole lot of issues. I just want to make sure you understand what they're here for today. They've complied
with it has to do with the trash outside. Is that am I correct here? So just before you get too involved in the Okay. >> the other stuff. I'm sure there's many stuff. I don't know. >> Thank you for cooling me down. >> Yeah. Yeah. My point is the trash
here in our community in Winwood community the trash is being picked up on Tuesdays and Friday. We got yard waste pick up on Wednesday. I don't see that much trash. I mean once that once upon a time there was a stack
of shingles was out there in the yard. But if I'm if if I'm making a mistake, is any is any shingles out there in the yard now? >> Yeah, they've been removed. >> So the trash is pick up on Tuesdays and
Fridays. So if there's any trash, maybe need to pay a little school kid or somebody to say, "Well, hey, I give you uh x amount of dollar, you would just take the trash out to the curb to the road every uh Monday evening when you get out
of school or something." And then that way if any trash is around there, I haven't I haven't seen that much trash in the backyard or anything like that. There may be a little bit of debris back there, but it's not anybody dumping anything.
So, uh, I want to thank you all very much for allowing me to to speak. And to the Palmer's family, I hope that you all can get out of this debt here that you all are in with with the county with the coding for me. That's a lot. That's a lot of money. And I was hoping in some
type of way that if you all can't, I don't know what all of the procedures is and everything, I would love to try to have the house back. >> So, thank you for thank you for showing up today. We appreciate your testimony.
>> Uh, seeing no other witnesses to testify, folks, you have any other questions or is there a motion? Uh, let me try to recap where we're at here. >> Make that motion. >> Yes, sir. >> Yes. I would move that
we accept the recommended uh payment of in compliance of the uh administrative cost of $2005. >> I'll second that. >> Without the lean. Correct. >> Without the lean. Yes.
>> I'll second that. >> Well, what happens if they don't pay the le $200? >> I'm sorry. >> What happens if they don't pay the $200? Wouldn't that then become a $200 lean that would be put on the house?
>> So, you can't do it without the lean. If you're trying to impose the administrative cost, your order should read, I move to order that they pay the reduced amount of administrative cost, $200 with five cents within 30 days. And
then if they fail to make that payment within 30 days, it reverts back. Do you want it to revert back to the original amount or do you want it to stay at the 205 and then becomes a lean? So, you need to
have lean language in there. >> Okay. We asked the uh respondent here 30 days is acceptable to pay this $200. >> Yes. Yes, it is. So your 30 days is September, is it September 27th, 2025?
>> Yeah. Yes. >> Yep. September 27th, 2025. >> So, let me try try to recap here. Uh the recommendation is to not impose the $9,100
lean. However, uh reducing the amount owed to $2005 if paid by September 27th, 2025. And if not, it would revert back to a lean in that amount of $9,100. Is that correct?
My >> understand motion by Mr. Bates, second by Miss Townsen. Any other disc we really need to put the $9100 on these people that are already struggling so much? I mean, >> does it is it detrimental to
>> what's the impact? I mean, but I could take out the number if you want, but >> I mean, it's his motion. He's the one who made the motion. So, I'm I'm asking Mr. Bates. I'm not asking you. >> Go ahead. >> I would say yes, especially since they've indicated they could take care
of the administrative cost within 30 days. Well, what we're asking for an option to reduce the amount of the pending lean. >> I would I would vote yes on if this is
not paid within 30 days, then it would become a lean of $200, not a lean of $9,100. It's some It's some shingles in the yard while they're trying to fix their roof is what we're talking about here. >> And they moved as soon as they were properly. be I'll be glad to discuss my
my other side of the fence looking at it. He's already been down this road before. >> No, you're closed. >> We've been down this road before. He's been given a break before. He's been uh here we are again. Uh so that's why I'm on the oppos opposite side of the fence
on that. >> You don't have to change your motion. You got a second. You don't have to change your motion. >> Yeah. And it was I was just trying to uh the motion for Mr. baits that make sure I got it right. >> If I didn't, I'll change or you can change.
>> Well, I'm I'm amable to reducing the uh pending lean then to the $200 and whatever $2005. >> Okay. >> If that's agreeable with the rest of the
board. >> Okay. So your your motion would be to uh change the fine of the two administrative cost $2005 to be paid by September 27th or it then
reverts to a lean of $2005. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Everybody's understanding. >> If you need a second. I know Mr. Davis was the original second. >> I'll second it. Okay. Thank you. So motion by Mr. Bates. Second by Mr. Davis
to what I just said. >> All right. Uh, all in favor say I. >> I. >> Okay. Got >> raise your hands. Raise your hands. >> We're eyes. >> It was three to two. Where the eyes in
here? They're the naysay. >> I didn't. No. Can you just eyes raise your hand? >> Eyes raise your hand, please. >> Naz, raise your hand. >> Raise your hand. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, we it's what you uh you've got to have in compliance by September 27th. Uh or there will be a lean put on the
prop. Excuse me. It's in compliance. You have to pay the the fine by September 27th or there will be a lean on the property for for that amount, the $2005. >> It'll be that. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you for coming in. And uh
>> Wow. >> All right. >> But they weren't trying not to have a cup of we can be ripping through this. Okay. So, now we can get moving along. Is there anybody else? >> No, you're fine. Number two on page three. >> Oh,
>> number So, flip your Yeah. Number two on the top. Page three. >> Okay. Number two. Uh, on page three, uh, case number 25-45 CEB. Mark D. Severson and Vivian M. Severson. Hooen. Uh, excuse me. And
Andrew W. Hoochins. The address is 3331 Alina Court Winter Park, Florida 32792. Officer judges. >> Hello. >> Hi. >> Give one sec.
Okay. Are you ready? Okay. All right. Tamara Judges, Semino County Sheriff's Office, East Region Code Enforcement. For the record, I am submitting a copy of this PowerPoint presentation to the clerk as exhibit one. This case is case number 2524 CEB
respondent Vivian M. Severson and the property is 3331 Alina Court Winter Park, Florida. The violation is Smol County Code Chapter 95 section 95.4 as it defined in
95.3G unsecured swimming pool. My initial inspection was on 2212025. Notice to the respondents were on two, excuse me, notice the respondents were on 2212025
and 3172025. Compliance dates were 372025 and 3312025. follow-ups inspections are listed um starting with 22425 and the most recent was 827
2025 and the result was that the unsecured pool violation remains on the property. This was taken by me on 224 2025. This is taken from the neighbors backyard. So you're looking into the subject
property. This is again all my pictures are going to be taken from the um backyard of the neighbors. This is looking into the subject property and the arrow is pointing to the pool.
There's another picture on 312 2025. This is on 312 again 2025. And that is the arrows pointing to the pool. This was on 331 2025.
This was on 421 2022 255. They had taken the fence area and just leaned it up. Um it was not secured. And then the arrows are pointing to gaps that a child could get into through the fence. This was my original posting for last
month. Um and I posted on 792025. This was um a followup on 7225. This was my posting for this hearing which was on 8:18 2025 and then my followup yesterday on 8:27 2025.
The suggested recommendation by the code enforcement officer is based on the testimony and evidence presented in case number 2545 CEB. It is determined that respondent Vivian M. Severson is the owner of the record of property located
at 3331 Alina Court located in Semino County as determined by the property appraisers records in possession or control of the property and in violation of seminal county code chapter 95 section 95.4 and defined in 95.3G
unsecured swimming pool. And it is further recommended that the code enforcement board issue an order for the respondant to correct the violation on or before midnight of September 11th, 2025. In order to correct the violation, the respondent must secure the pool by
surrounding it with a fence or barrier at least 48 in in height or above with the rest of the recommendation as well. If the respondent does not comply with the order, a fine of $250 will be imposed for each day the violation
continues or is repeated after compliance. The respondent must contact myself to arrange for an inspection of the property to verify compliance. Um, just if Carrie, can you just go back to whatever picture? That's good. Um, there are other cases that I've brought to
codeboard that are already running for um rubbish, uncultivated vegetation, and a stagnant pool. So, those are running and their fines are currently running. They were living out of a camper on the property that has since come into compliance. Um, because looking at the
pictures, obviously, there's other violations going on. So, I just wanted you to know that those are already running and those have already been addressed by the board. This concludes my presentation. >> Thank you. Any questions for us or judges? >> Have you had contact with the owner? And
what is where do we stand as far as getting that pool secured? >> Yes, sir. Um the owner is the mother. She has an adult son that lives in the home. Um this property was on the news. You can look it up on the news. So the
white part that you see is um due to the sheriff's office. We had to do a controlled explosion to the home because there were explosives being made in the home. They're not they're don't want to come into compliance. She has no need to come into compliance. They're just not
cooperative. >> Okay. How about some type of temporary or whatever we call it security on that pool to take care of that issue. >> The home is not vacant. There are um
people living in the home, the mother and the adult son who are there 247. So, it is their responsibility to do so. So, there are people living in the trailer and the home. >> The trailer has since been removed. They were living in the trailer, but they're not anymore.
>> Right. >> But we're we're not making any like we've done in other cases of having the county or somebody to temporarily secure the thing. >> So, when we temporarily secure them, >> so when we temporarily secure them, it's
because the home is vacant. That's why we're able to go on the property and secure them because the home is being lived in. We are not able to do so. >> Okay. >> Any other questions? >> I see the council over there is about to
speak. >> You can tag it. The board has the option of tagging it under the chapter 162 health safety welfare statute. and that brings it to the county's attention and then the county does whatever they
need to do or can do. But if that makes you more comfortable to tag it, >> when we make our motion, >> when you make your motion, I'll help you with the wording to tag it a health safety welfare concern. Okay. >> Okay. And before we get to motion, I
just want to remind the board that this is a frequent flyer that we're dealing with here that did come before us and uh expressed no interest in whatsoever in complying with what they were charged with violating last time.
And and I might also add that uh we do have a board specialist here in making safety violation motions sitting to my left. should we decide to go that route. If not, I'm happy to do so.
>> Okay. Anything else? >> Uh, no. I I'd like to move that uh we declare that this property uh is in violation of uh 162 and is a safety hazard.
Uh, I would also like to move that we accept uh staff's recommendation uh in terms of the unsecured swimming pool. Um, and that fine would be I believe if I remember right, if we could go back to that slide, I believe it was $250 per day.
>> Yes, that is correct. >> Second >> motion by uh Mr. S, second by Mr. Bates to accept that recommendation as presented. However, uh addressing this or including in this uh notice that
it is a life hate life, health, safety. There we go. >> Can I read the language, please? >> Please. >> All right. So, based on the testimony and evidence presented, this board finds that the respondent shall have until September 11th, 2025 to come into compliance. They'll come into compliance
based on the recommendation provided um on how to come into compliance. if they fail to make that September 11th, 2025 deadline, there's a fine of $250 for each day after that day that they failed to stay in compliance. Furthermore, this bond this board finds that the violation presents a serious threat to the public
health, safety, welfare, and it is ordered that by copy of this order, Semino County be notified of conditions pursuant to sections 162.06 subsection 4 and 162.09 subsection 1 of the Florida statutes. That's exactly what I'm
moving. >> Yes. >> Hang on to it. I'll >> second that >> as well. Everybody good? Motion was signed second by Mr. Bates. I think any other discussion question? All in favor say I. >> I opposed.
>> Motion carries unanimously. Uh thank you. Let's see where we're going after this. Looks like uh So you're on page fiveage, six, seven,
and eight are your lean cases. >> Yes. Going to the leans. Uh this respondent uh we think about three cases. The first one is 25-35 CEB uh Mabel Hill Harry Hill
McKini comma air comma Bernice comma Hardy comma Cheryl M address 2054 Cypes Avenue Sanford Florida 32771 Officer Henson
lean Shannon Henson, Semino County Sheriff's Office, Code Enforcement, North Region. This case is uh 25-35 CEB. Respondent is Mabel Hill, Harry Hill, Bernice McKenna Air, and Cheryl M. Hardy. I'm going to
give this submitting a copy to the clerk as evidence. Um, this property is located at 2054 Cypes Avenue and is charged with Simol County chapter Simol County Code Chapter 95
95.4 is defined in 95.3B uncultivated vegetation. This was in my initial inspection was September 12th, 2024. Um, on June 8th, 2024, that was the code board uh order and I did follow-up
inspections, June 11th, uh, 2025 and yesterday also, August 27th, 2025. And the result is the violation of unculted vegetation remains on the subject's property. These are some of the pictures from the beginning.
And this was in October 2024. And this was October 28th, 2024. And this was January 3rd, 2025. And April 23rd, 2025.
And this was taken by Officer Hill when she posted the property uh for this hearing on August 11th, 2025. And then this was taken by myself yesterday, August 27th, 2025. The suggested recommendation by a code enforcement officer is based on the
testimony and evidence presented in the case number 25-35 CEV. It is determined that the respondents Mabel Hill, Harry Hill, Bernice McKenna, A and Cheryl M. and Hardy are the owners of the property owners of the record of property located
at 2054 Cypes Avenue located in Simol County as determined in property appraiser records and they are in possession or control of the property and in violation of seminal county code chapter 95 section 95.4 four as defined in 95.3b
and further is recommended that the code board the code enforcement board based on the findings of fact conclusion of law and order issued on April 24th 2025 I'm requesting that the code enforcement board issue an order imposing a lean in
the amount of 5,600 for 112 days of non-compliance from May 8th 2025 through and including August 27th 2025 5 and that the fine shall continue to acrue at $50 per day for each day the violation continues or is repeated after August
28th, 2025. The respondents must contact myself to verify complaints. This concludes my presentation. >> Thank you. Question for officer Henson. >> I have one. Has this property been condemned? >> No. >> No. >> He's there's still a person residing
there. >> Somebody's living in it. Oh, >> these people appeared before the board and said that they were going to fix this and never did. >> So, I'd like to move that we accept staff's recommendation. >> No, please.
>> Motion by Mr. S, second by Mr. Bates. All in favor say I. >> I's gone. Uh 25-36 CEB. Same respondents, same address. Uh, Officer Henson, whenever you're ready on this.
>> Sim County Sheriff's Office, code enforcement, Shannon Henson, North Region. Case number 25-36 CEB. The respondents, Mabel Hill, Harry Hill, Bernice McKenna Air, and Cheryl M. Hardy. This property is located at 2054
Cypes Avenue. The violation charged 254 Cypes Avenue. The violation charge of Simol County Code Chapter 9595.4 four as defined in 95.3A rubbish. This case uh was initially seen on
September 12th, 2024. Codeboard order date was June 8th, 2025. Follow-up inspections was from June 11th, 2025 to August 27th, 2025. The results of the follow-up inspection, the rubbish violation remains on the
property. These images were taken by myself uh and September 12, 2024 and my sergeant October 2nd, 2024. Myself, October 28, 2024.
January 3rd, 2025, April 23rd, 2025, August 11th, 2025, when Cara Hill posted the property and took the photos for me. And this was taken by myself yesterday.
The suggested recommendation by the code enforcement board is based on the testimony and evidence presented in the case number 25-36 CEB. It is determined that the respondents Mabel Hill, Harry Hill, Bernice McKenna, and Cheryl M. Hardy are the owners of the record of
property and located at 2054 Cypes Avenue located in Simol County is determined by the property appraiser records and is in possession or control of the property and is in violation of seminal county uh code chapter 95 section 95.4 is defined in 95.3A.
It is further recommended that the code enforcement board based on the findings of fact conclusion of law and order issued on April 25th, 2025. I'm requesting that the code enforcement board to issue an order uh imposing a lean in the amount of 11,200
for 112 days of non-compliance for May 8th, 2025 through and including August 27th, 2025. And that shall that fine shall continue to acrew at $100 per day for each day the violation continues or is repeated after August 28th, 2025.
Respondents must contact myself to verify compliance. This concludes my presentation. Thank you. Questions for officer Henson or a motion. >> Move that we accept staff's recommendation. >> Second. >> Motion by Mr. Sign and second by Mr.
Bates. All in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. >> Motion carries. And brings us to the last case here 25-37 CEB. Same respondents, same address. And Officer Henson, whenever you're
ready. Code enforcement officer Shannet Henson, Semino County Sheriff's Office, North Region. This case number is 25-37 CEB, Mabel Hill, Harry Hill, Bernice McKenna
Er, and Cheryl M. Hardy. This property is at 2054 Cypes Avenue. The violation charge of Simol County code chapter 95 95.4 four as defined in 95.3 C remains or rubble of a structure. Um
this initial case was open or inspected on September 12th, 2024. Code uh code board order was June 8th, 2025. Um with inspections and my last inspection was yesterday, August 27th, 2025. the
results of the follow-up inspection. The violation of rem remains of a structure rebel of a structure remains on the property. This was taken by myself September 12th, 2024. This was taken June 11th, 2025.
This was taken August 11th, 2025 by officer Hill for the posting. And this was taken myself yesterday, August 27th, 2025. The suggested recommendation by a code enforcement officer is based on the testimony and evidence presented in case
number 25-37 CEB. It is determined that the respondents Mabel Hill, Harry Hill, Bernice McKenna, and Cheryl M. Hardy are the owners of the property located at 2054 Cypes Avenue located in Seminal County is determined by the property
appraisers records and is in possession or control of the property and is in violation of seminal county code chapter 9595.4 as defined in 95.3C. It's further recommended that the code board code enforcement board based on
the finding effects conclusion of law and order issued on April 24th 2025. I am requesting that the code enforcement board to issue an order imposing a lean on the in the amount of 8,100 for 81 days of non-compliance from June 8th,
2025 through and including August 27th, 2025 and that the fine shall continue to acrew at $100 per day for each day the violation continues or is repeated after August 28th, 2025. The respondents must contact myself to verify compliance.
This concludes my presentation. >> Thank you. questions uh for officer Henson or a motion. >> I move that we accept staff's recommendation. >> Second. >> Motion by Mr. Sin and second by Mr. Bates. All in favor say I. >> I opposed.
>> Motion carries. Uh which brings us to the end of the cases. Brings us to the approval of the minutes of our June 26, 2025 meeting. Is there a motion to approve those minutes? So moved
>> second motion by Mr. Bates, second by Mr. Signing to approve the minutes uh dated June 26, 2025. All in favor say I. >> I opposed. >> And that carries. Just confirming our next meeting date September 25th, 2025.
If anybody has any issues, please let the clerk know as soon as you know. Any other issues? Before I ask for a motion to adjurnn, >> I'd just like to ask the attorney so I understand this. Anytime we have unsecured pools, we can make a motion to have it, I believe you said, tagged so
it becomes to the attention of the county to see what how they want to deal with it. >> Uh, you can tag something if you believe there's a health, safety, welfare concern that brings it to the county's attention. >> Okay. >> All right.
>> I don't want to say anytime you see a pool, every case is different, right? You have to assess each case individually. But if there's a situation that you believe um meets that criteria, then you can tag it under chapter 162. And I just want to bring up one more
thing. Don't forget that um you have a meeting in December, which is not the fourth Thursday of the month. So there will be no meeting in November. So after September 25th, you have October 23rd, and then it jumps to December 4th, which
I believe is the first Thursday of the month. So just looking ahead at the calendar and anybody have anything else? Move we adjourn. >> Second motion Mr. sign a second by Mr. B to adjurnn. All in favor say I. >> I
>> All right.