okay we're going to go ahead and get started my name is Sher Setin i am the magistrate for Semino County um the way the process works is the county will present its case first um it will provide any witnesses and evidence that
it has you can cross-examine any witnesses that the county has but you cannot present any evidence or witnesses of your own until the county has closed its case once it has closed its case then you will be permitted to present any evidence or witnesses of yours for
um your case i will make a determination here today if there is in fact a violation you'll be given um an amount of time to come into compliance if you're here for a first time uh violation on the particular um code that
you're being charged with and you are found to have violated the code and you do not comply within the time period prescribed you will stand to have a penalty of up to $250 a day imposed if you are here for a repeat violation for the code that's being charged against
you you stand to have a penalty of up to $500 a day imposed against you if you do not comply within the time period prescribed if you have an agenda in front of you please uh bear with us we kind of go uh we have a method to our
madness so um we go in our own order but you will be called if you're here and you've signed in um and your case will be called even if you're not signed in so um make sure that you do get with the county though and let them know that you're here okay i want to announce at the beginning there are three cases that
have been continued by the county and will not be heard um 2472 CESM Erlin Rodriguez and Mandy Ray Hernandez 251 CESM Andre Lancaster
2525 CESM Kip and Heidi Huds Hudzos okay thank you okay so the first case that we're going to call if if I called your name you certainly
may okay it will not be heard today but you will receive notice of a a new date thank you okay thank you thank you okay let's hear 2519
cesm Stacy and Anthony Lacassio if you'll have a seat up here please sorry uh 25-8 a copy of the presentation for you okay before we go any further I want to go ahead and swear in all the county
witnesses who will be providing any testimony today if you'll please raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony that you're about to give to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you cara will you be giving testimony today nope
okay um okay sir and can you please state your name for the record anthony Locass sorry I'll pass off the mic you're fine okay can you raise your right hand please do you solemnly swear affirm the testimony you're about to give to be the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes thank you good afternoon ruth Goldstein with the building division jason Rucker and Brent Griffin are also inspectors on this case and will be providing
testimony case 2519 CESM is for the property located at 219 Stevenage Drive in Longwood which is owned by Stacy A and Anthony D lacassio the violation charged is seminal county code chapter 40 appendix A section 105.1 description of violation is
installation of concrete block wall without the required permit the next slide is the case summary shows that the initial inspection was conducted on March 25th 2024 a notice was sent to the respondent on March 25th 2024
the compliance dates and extensions that were given were April 8th 2024 and May 16th 2024 follow-up inspections as shown both on site and via the computer are on the slide and the results of those reinspections are that the violation
remains on the property this slide shows that the property is owned by Stacy A and Anthony D lassio from the property appraisers website this slide shows a copy of the certified return receipt uh for the notice of this
hearing it is signed uh by the owners this is a photograph of the violation the concrete block wall this was taken April 1st or sorry April 4th
2025 the next slide is uh March 12th 2025 these were inspection photos taken then and the next slide is from March 12th 2025 as well and these photos are from March 25th 2024 and April 30th
2024 this slide shows uh the permit applications that have been submitted for this parcel the most recent one was from 2013 there are no permit applications for this scope of work submitted at this time
this is chapter 40 in which they are in violation of based on the testimony and the evidence presented in case number 25-19 CESM it's determined that the respondents are the owners of record of the property located at 219 Stevenage
Drive in Longwood Semino County as determined by the property appraisers records they are in possession or control of the property and in violation of the seminal county code chapter 40 appendix A section 105.1 it's further recommended that the
special magistrate order the respondents to correct the violation on or before May 8th 2025 in order to correct the violation the respondents shall obtain the required permit for the cited violation if the respondents do not comply with
the order a fine of $50 will be imposed for each day the violation continues or is repeated after compliance uh the respondents must contact the inspector to verify compliance this concludes my portion of the presentation and I can introduce
Jason Rucker and Brent Griffin to uh to enter this into the record okay and who will will Brent Griffin be the um inspector u moving forward for contact purposes yes okay
okay would you like to um submit the electronic case file into the record as evidence i have presented a copy of this presentation to the clerk and request it be entered into the record okay can you state your name for the record please
i'm Brent Griffin okay rim County okay do you have any objection to the electronic case file that's been presented here today being um submitted into the record no ma'am okay it will be accepted and is that the county's case this concludes our presentation okay yes
sir i didn't say I'm sorry no would you It's your turn oh uh if if I may I'd like to request a ruling by the magistrate that the structure needs to be permitted in the first place i've went through the definitions of 105 and everything on the
county website the this structure that we're discussing is a concrete block wall that's not loadbearing serves no purpose other than to divide a sideyard from the pool and from portions of the backyard doesn't support anything
doesn't hold anything it does not attach to the main structure and I would take issue that it needs to be permitted in the first place since it doesn't fall under any of the uh descriptions described under 105.1 in the first place okay have you had any conversations with
the county with respect to your opinion i brought it up when the inspector was there Mr jason we had a good conversation he was very cordial everything uh most of this is just it's been sitting i didn't know if I was going to complete it or not i didn't know if I was going if when he said it
was going to be a permit I was inclined to just take it down but my initial was my I only started it because I didn't think it needed a permit in the first place okay and you're you're saying under 105.1 you don't believe that it falls
within the definition i don't I don't see anything under here that that freestanding wall that is not a it's not changing the occupancy of the structure it's not linked to the existing house it's not an occupiable or storage it's
not a shed there's a whole uh rundown of structures that are required to be permitted on the county website which I did look up before I began and a wall of this type purely a decorative wall uh was not listed
anywhere on there it's not a fence either hi hi Jason Recker Seminal County Inspector uh the first sentence any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct that is construction if you
had blocks stacked up like they come from the factory we wouldn't be having this conversation that is a wall that was constructed so that's in the very first sentence of our definition out of the seminal county code chapter 40
appendix A 105.1 i take issue with that magistrate that's part of the larger sentence which continues and is modified or change the occupancy of a building or structure i did not construct enlarge
alter repair move demolish or change the occupancy of a building or structure and I did not erect install enlarge alter repair remove convert or replace any impact resistant coverings electrical gas mechanical or plumbing
system and I would like to read the entire constitution now and uh declare myself uh habius corpus uh non-compassment thank you are you kidding me yes okay
well the silence was really getting to me there okay that was good i'm reading sorry i apologize i'm married to that man this is me she has nothing to do with I
understand why you didn't come and sit with him now I'm just kidding that way for 20 years sir so what do you have to say about um his response to it if you got to read the rest you can't just say any owner who
intends to construct because you do have to read the rest well I'm not an English major but the commons indicate what is the requirement for each item that could be a violation
so just because it says or changing the occupancy that's just an additional item along with these other items of how it was written into the Simil County Code
i'm not an attorney so Okay so you're saying and I tend to agree with this that that final modifier so meaning who intends to
construct enlarge alter repair move demolish or change the occupancy of finished and then each one of those things go to a building or structure correct so to construct a building inru
or structure enlarge a building or structure alter a building or structure repair a building or structure demolish a building and or structure or change the occupancy of a building or structure and then or to erect install enlarge
alter repair so I do um agree with that um that that's the interpretation so if you're intending to construct this wall then I believe it requires a permit if you are going to demolish it remove it
alto together then I think it doesn't require a permit because you haven't gotten a permit to construct it so they'd let you remove it without permits but if you are going to leave it there you do need to have a permit i have brought the required paperwork to file a
permit as necessary okay so do you think you can have everything um filed by May 8th i have everything right here i can file it today okay well then I'm going to let you do that so that you have some time we'll go ahead and um ask you um
ask you to make sure that you come into compliance by May 8th as requested by the county um there will be a compliance hearing on May 9th so if you haven't done it you know you you need to remain in contact with with um Jason
um so that you or Brent so that you make sure that you um they recognize that you're in compliance and if you um do not have the permit for the wall by May 8th you will have a penalty of $250 a day imposed now if if it gets returned
with requests for additional information or you know modify revisions am I considered in compliance as long as I'm actively working to make to secure the permit no however if you are doing all of those things and you come back before
me and they let me know that you have at all times kept in communication with them then I am absolutely going to recognize that and give you more time okay so either way we have to come back okay all right now only I to for
clarification I don't have to come back if I secure the permit if you secure the permit and the county is comfortable with that then they um do have fees and costs that are usually generated however if a person complies by the first time
that I give them the date they know that I like to see that and so you know you you need to be in contact with the county but um so it will be up to you and and your communications with the county on whether you need to return okay
that's all thank you thank you the next case is 2555 CESM Marabel and Elsa Marcato Musathesis
25 or 245 2455 is it still on okay ruth Goldstein Building Division this case was originally heard by the special magistrate on September
12th 2024 with an order that was issued giving the respondent a compliance date of November 13 2024 with a meeting scheduled for November 14th 2024 an affidavit of non-compliance was filed by the inspector after reinspection on
November 13 2024 on November 14th 2024 the special magistrate issued an order extending the compliance date to April 9th 2025 with a meeting scheduled for April 10th 2025 the administrative cost to process this case for the clerk
totals $151.92 the administrative cost to process this case for the inspector totals $55612 and the administrative cost to process this case in total $784 the building official has reviewed this
case and is recommending that he's open to a 30-day continuence or to impose uh or to have the special match rate issue an order constituting a lean retroactively to April 9th 2025 at $50 a day which
continues to acrew until he is in compliance um the building official was open to a 30-day continuance based on the fact that the respondent has reached out to the building to the building department and is currently in the process of obtaining a permit so let me
get the building official to give me that um or the building inspector to give me that testimony about the continuence please this is the metal building brent was in a meeting just that he'd be willing to
continue at 30 days based on that yes i I take no objection to continue in this case for 30 days as according to the building official's request okay so and the and the building
official isn't here he's he's given you all I mean is what what I need to have testimony from the person rather than a note from the building official so it's got to be one or the other so okay if if he's
going to give testimony he can't give it through you all he has to give it himself but if if there is a reason that the county is requesting the continuance then you can testify to that if you have that information well then we would need to
So I can request a 30-day continuance because he has been working with us and I don't I don't mind doing that that Okay i Jason Ruckers Hill County Inspector okay we'll do that okay sir um do you have anything you want to add
no well I to be honest with you this this process has been um interesting to learn first of all my name is Dr yaser Musa i'm the husband of Marble Marcado Musa okay let me swear you in i apologize that's all right um do you solemnly swear affirm the testimony
you're about to give to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes ma'am thank you so the the process have been um a learning experience to say the least uh but the the county has been phenomenal and and and it's been a
very good conversation and and and continue uh knowledge passed through me because to be honest with you I don't know anything about this i just trying to learn um so yeah I I would appreciate if um 30-day continuence would be
um given to me by by your honor please so I can finish up and pay the the there was some corrections done that they were required and that's basically what what are we I think waiting for u Okay and
you think that you can accomplish that with within the next 30 days oh yes ma'am okay yes all right then I'm going to go ahead and continue um this matter for um to May 8th your compli new compliance date will be May 8th with a
compliance hearing on May 9th oh sorry i apologize may 7th is your compliance date and there will be a hearing on May 8th alexis yes ma'am
okay thank you thank you ma'am that last one I did at May 8th was the compliance date did I say I said compliance of May 8th too there but they but normally we were doing the day before so they've got to be
cognizant of that in the morning to check it okay okay okay the next case 2462 CESM Mount Zion Baptist Church of Midway yeah
I think yeah thank you all right yeah i mean you can scroll through it if you want okay hello sir how are you okay can I get you to raise your right hand please do you solemnly swear affirm the testimony you're about to give to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank
you ruth Goldstein Building Division this is for case 24-62 CESM this case was originally heard by the special magistrate on September 12th 2024 with an order issued giving the respondent a compliance date of November
13 2024 with a meeting scheduled for November 14th 2024 on November 14th 2024 an order was issued giving the respondent a compliance date of February 12th 2025 with a meeting scheduled for February 13
2025 an affidavit of non-compliance was filed by the inspector after reinspection on February 12th 2025 and on February 13th 2025 an order was issued giving the respondent a compliance date of April 9th with a meeting scheduled for April 10th 2025
the administrative cost to process this case for the clerk totals $188.15 the administrative cost for the inspector totals $57721 and the administrative cost in total for both the clerk and the inspector is $765.36
uh county uh recommendation is a special magistrate issue an order constituting a lean retroactively back to April 9th 2025 at $50 per day and continuing to acrue until compliance uh after recent review by the building inspector Brent
Griffin uh deter with the building official determined that they would be if Brent Griffin's here Brent Griffin needs to provide the testimony Just say that you're willing to give him 30 days i'm willing to give him 30 days if
you'll Mr griffin please state your name for the record i'm Brent Griffin with Seminal County Billing Division okay okay so um and sir if you'll state your name please for the record uh Johnny Perry and do you um think that you can
accomplish uh what needs to be accomplished within 30 days yes we uh been working on getting the contract done rof has been working with us yes we can get it done okay and so we've given a couple of continuances and
I'm I'm certainly fine doing that as long as you're continuing to work with the county and so any any requests of the county that are being made I need you to continue working with them okay okay okay i will um continue the matter
until May 7th with a um compliance hearing on May 8th yes ma'am okay thank you thank you next okay the next case
258 CESM1 1815 Lin Avenue LLC if you Oh you'll just have a seat sure okay okay sir can you please state your name for the record and raise your right hand yes my name is Andres Opina okay do you
solemnly swear affirm the testimony you're about to give to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do thank you ruth Goldstein Building Division case 25-08 CESM at 1824 Lake Street
lake Street the property owner is 1815 Lin F LLC yes on February 13th 2025 the special magistrate issued an order giving the respondent a compliance date of April 9th 2025 with a meeting scheduled for
April 10th 2025 the administrative cost to process this case for the clerk totals $1841 the administrative cost for the inspector totals $636.60 and the administrative cost to process this case for both the clerk and
the inspector is $7451 the recommendation is the special magistrate issues an order constituting a lean retroactively to April 9th 2025 at $250 per day and continuing to crew until in compliance
okay yes sir yes so um we've been working to get the plants uh from the contractor and that's pretty much what we So far we're probably 90 to 95% uh there and it's been a little bit of a challenge to coordinate with all the
different contractors because I basically hired a general contractor that pulled the main permit but then we also have to deal with the mechanical the electrical and they don't really seem to communicate well uh but that's pretty much what we have there and we're almost
ready to essentially submit those plans i think we're waiting on one one final thing from the uh the electrician so he has to go back to the property and give me basically one one final change and we should be able to submit so I'm thinking that hopefully within 90 days we should
be able to to get this submitted and and hopefully we'll get you know an inspector to go out there and make sure that everything is up to code and hopefully we'll be closed so even just to get the permit you think it'll take 90 days not not full sign off i would say the full Yeah yeah i would say
probably within a week or two weeks we should be able to submit those plans and hopefully within the 90 days uh from today we should be able to actually get it closed out have has the county had communication with them at all we have they do have a permit application in process which is shown on the screen um
this workflow this report was generated April 10th so just this morning there's a mechanical plan review comment there that he just testified he is actively working on and the bottom half of the screen shows that the it has been accepted the task has been accepted by
the applicant which indicates that they are currently working on it as recently as March 24th 2025 okay so then the plans that have been the copy of the plans that were provided to me are already in the county's possession that I cannot testify to i'm
not sure if those are exactly the ones that are in e- plan right now but I I do know that they have there's something there okay okay um and is this set that you brought today is it different from what the county is currently reviewing we have not submitted that to the county
yet okay no not yet um and I can certainly accept it into evidence but I can I'm I've taken your testimony and I've seen it if if you want to take these back you certainly can because you'll submit the actuals to the county i think that's probably a better process
if that's okay with you i do appreciate you bringing and showing your progress um do you all think that a 30 days would give him what he needs to um accomplish the the permit side of things if
the corrected plans address the comments that were submitted for the mechanical and the electrical plan review it it the review cycle typically takes a week or so okay okay and you think you can probably submit your finals within a week or so i would say yeah one to two
weeks we should be able to submit then I think um May 7th would give you the time that you need in order to do that so I'm going to continue to May 7th um noting that you haven't had any prior
um continuences and you really have only been working on this for a couple months so I do appreciate you um being diligent on that um okay so if you'll continue to stay in communication with the county I'll continue to May 7th your compliance
date meeting May 7th now with a hearing date set for May 8th okay thank you sounds good thank you thank you and I'll give those back to you thank you no one else is here that's all
everyone all right and we'll start over from the top all right 25005 CESM Sonia Herertado okay oh 255
please this is a new case right ruth Goldstein building division case 25-5 CESM is for the property located at 3408 Gleeves Court Apka which is owned by Sonia C herado the violation charged is Semino County Code Chapter 40
appendix A section 105.1 description of violation is installation of a minisplit AC unit without the required permit the case summary is as follows the initial inspection was conducted February 12th 2024 a notice to
respondent was sent February 15 2024 uh we gave them two compliance dates and extensions February 29th 2024 and March 21st 2024 follow-up inspections as shown both on site and via computer results of the reinspections were that the
violation remains on the property the screenshot is from the property appraisers website showing that Sonia Herertado is the record owner of the property this is a copy of the certified return receipt for the notice of this hearing
as signed by the owner the next slides are going to show photos of the mini split these in particular were taken January 30th 2025 it's that little unit right there by the red arrow and then a closer up shot of
it on the right the next slide are taken from a distance it's a little bit more difficult to see but it is still on the property as of April 4th 2025 this screen shows that no permits have been applied for or issued to correct the violation there are other
permits shown on this screen from 2023 to 2025 those are not related to the scope of work associated with this violation this is a copy of chapter 40 in which they're in violation of and the recommendation is based on
the testimony and evidence presented in case number 25-5 CESM it's determined that the respondent is the owner of record of the property located at 3408 Gleeves Court Apka in Semino County as determined by the property appraisers records they're in possession of and
control of the property and in violation of seminal county code chapter 40 appendix A section 105.1 it's further recommended that the special magistrate order the respondent to correct the violation on or before June 11th 2025 in order to correct this
violation the respondent shall obtain the required permit for the cited violation if the respondent does not comply with the order a fine of $50 will be imposed for each day the violation continues or is repeated after compliance the respondent must contact
the inspector to verify compliance this concludes my portion of the presentation and I can introduce uh Brent Griffin is the inspector i'm Brent Griffin Sim County Building Inspector i have presented a copy of this presentation to the clerk and request it
entered into the record okay i'll accept the electronic case file into the record i will find that the respondent has been properly noticed to be here today and is not present i will find that um the
county has presented evidence to show a violation of Simol County Code Chapter 40 um appendix A section 105.1 and I will
um set a compliance date of June 11th 2025 with a compliance hearing of June 12th 2025 or a fine in the amount of $250 a day will be imposed thank you the next case is
2526 CESM Jeffrey Felin sir can you state your name for the record please jeffrey Family i apologize for mis mispronouncing it do you so swear affirm the testimony you're about to give to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes it is thank
you ruth Goldstein Building Division case 25-26 CESM is for the property located at 313 Gary Boulevard in Longwood Semino County this is owned by Jeffrey Failen the violation charged is seminal county code chapter 40 appendix
A section 105.1 description of violation is installation of three sheds without the required permit the case summary is as follows the initial inspection was conducted December 7th 2023 notice to the
respondent was sent on December 7th 2023 the slide shows compliance dates and extensions that were granted and follow-up inspections as shown both on-site visit and via computer and the results of those reinspections are that the violation remains on the
property this screenshot shows the uh property is owned by Jeffrey Failen per the property appraiser website's records and this is a copy of the received certified return receipt for the notice of this hearing it was signed by the owner on March 13th 2025 and received on
March 17th 2025 the next several slides will show photos of the violation these were the three sheds taken on April 4th 2025 these were taken February 14th 2024 and March 25th
2024 and more photos from an inspection April 25th 2024 and July 18th 2024 these are aerial image the next set of slides are going to show aerial image to document the progression of the
construction on the property the slide on the left is an aerial image taken from December 31st 2012 that is a shed that was originally installed and permitted with the building department in 2004 the image on
the right is from January 17th 2015 which shows that the o the per the shed that was permitted in '04 has now been removed and new structures are being built on the property next slide the aerial image on the left is from May 12th 2017 the aerial image on
the right is from December 22nd 2020 showing three structures installed on the property the image on the left is dated November 16th 2024 and the image on the right is dated November 22nd 2024 to show these
three structures this screen shows no permits have been applied for or issued to correct the violation this is a copy of chapter 40 in which they're in violation of and the recommendation is based on the testimony
and evidence presented in case number 2526 CESM it's determined that the respondent is the owner of record of the property located at 313 Gary Boulevard in Longwood Seminal County as determined by the property appraisers records is in possession or control of the property
and in violation of the seminal county code chapter 40 appendix A section 105.1 it is further recommended that the special magistrate order the respondent to correct the violation on or before June 11th 2025 in order to correct the
violation the respondent shall obtain the required permit for the cited violation if the respondent does not comply with the order a fine of $50 will be imposed for each day the violation continues or is repeated after compliance the respondent must contact
the inspector to verify compliance brent Griffin is the inspector assigned to this case if he can come up here thank you i'm Brent Griffin Sim County Build Inspector i have presented a copy of this presentation to the clerk and
request to be entered into the record okay do you have any objection to the electronic case file being um submitted into the record no it's fine okay all right i will accept it thank you yes sir so I didn't actually build any
of this stuff uh I bought this house in November of 2022 all these structures were already in place so I didn't know that they required a permit that was the problem i went and got a fence permit so I could replace the fence and that's when I found out that these were a violation the reason I haven't done
anything about it is simply the cost so I spent over $3,000 getting a variance approved for this which they did approve the variance so they could remain where they are but they want engineer drawings that were like $5,000 to get for all three and I just don't have the money
okay so how long do you think it will take you to get what you need in order to get the permits i'll try for June 11th but I can't make any promises well I am not in the business of setting you up for failure i would rather the more time you can give
me the better is really where I'm at with it right now well and coming into compliance the initial time is more important to me than than getting it all finished right giving you a date the problem is I can't even apply for a permit without the engineer drawings because of the size of them and I don't
have any like you know purchase record of where they were bought or anything like that so I need to get an engineer in here and you have um do we have evidence that he has gone through the variance process on this um this
313 Gary Boulevard the all the variance um like the plaque they gave me is all posted on the property and everything okay so you're set for May for the hearing or for April so if you've posted it you're for this month no they gave
this to me i did this over the summer i got the variance done they told me the variance didn't expire the permit did but I never got a permit so I didn't think I was like under a timeline was the variance for the fence the variance is for the structures not the fence the fence permit has been closed out and and
taken care of so variants run with the property so they don't Megan Zenorski for the record um so variances don't expire so if the variance has been obtained then he just needs to apply for the permit can you all tell if he has
applied for the variance i think um that is is crucial to me from the standpoint of if he's gone through that process that's showing I definitely did get the variance like I said it's posted on the yard and everything okay i didn't know
that did you hear that i didn't know that was So he was approved in June of 2024 for a sideyard setback variance and another sideyard setback variance and a rear yard setback
variance for two accessory structures okay and then maybe is the third accessory structure not it's not necessary well they were all on that like that's why it was $3,000 i had to apply for it for every single one so everything that was supposed to be you
know needed a variance it's all on there so two sideyard and a rear yard so maybe that's right so it's two sides and a rear so that they were all covered for both the both structures okay um Okay then I um find that you have uh really
tried to go through this process in good faith and I understand the doing everything I can i just you know I didn't really plan to be paying this much money for something that was already there when I purchased a property and and that unfortunately is even though you buy a piece of property
and it has those kind of structures that's why you should run any kind of municipal search to find out nothing came up because there was no permit ever applied for so like when title did they did their research on it and everything showed fine because there was no permit issued
for it so it's not like it was an open permit or a violation there was No but when there's a structure on a piece of property that you're buying you want to make sure that it's permitted well that was my first home purchase so I wasn't aware of that going forward obviously now I am so absolutely okay so what I'm
going to do is I'm going to give you until October 8th so I'm going to give you six months to Yeah I think I'll be able to get it done by then get this taken care of um I think by having the variance in place you're showing um your
good faith and um I will um you'll have a compliance hearing on October 9th and if you do not comply by October 8th you'll have a fine of $100 a day imposed okay okay yep thank you thank you
thank you okay 2520 CESM Lai Foundation LLC oh goodness 2520 okay so tell
me okay whi which is who is who on chair for which ones are which I am 25-23 only cameron has the remaining three okay all right
perfect and Cameron were you sworn in okay good deal thank you good to go good to go so code enforce code enforcement officer Cameron Dair Seml County Sheriff's Office South Region this is case number
2520 CESM the respondents are Lai Foundation LLC Jackiea Pierce the registered agent and Tiffany N brown uh Liz Pendis the violation is located at 701 Blue Lake Drive in Longwood Florida
Seminal County the violation charge is S County Code Chapter 95 section 95.4 as defined in 95.3 F stagnant water my initial inspection was on August 16th 2024 the notices to
respondents were August 16th and September 3rd 2024 compliance dates were set for September 3rd and September 19th 202024 follow-up inspections were on September 3rd September 19th 2024 and yesterday
April 9th 2025 the results of the follow-up inspection is the stagnant or foul water violation remains on subject property this is an image taken by me on my initial inspection August 16th 2024 depicts or it shows the stagnant water
in the pool this is a follow-up inspection on September 3rd 2024 you can't really see the water but it is still stagnant this is a another follow-up inspection picture taken by me on September 19th 2024 the water has risen
due to the rain still remains stagnant and this is the most recent inspection as of yesterday uh April 9th 2025 depicting the water still remains stagnant the suggested recommendation is based on
testimony and evidence presented in case number 2520 CESM it is determined that the respondents Lai Foundation LLC Jackiea Pierce and Tiffany N brown are the owner's record of the property located at 701 Blue Lake Drive located in Longwood as determined by the
property appraisers records are in possession or control of the property and are in violation of Seminal County Code Chapter 95 section 95.4 as defined in 95.3F stagnant water it is further recommended that the special magistrate issue an order for
the respondents to correct the violation on or before midnight of April 25th 2025 in order to correct the violation the respondents must remove or clear the stagnant 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 respondents must contact me to arrange for an inspection of the property to verify compliance i would like to submit a copy of this PowerPoint presentation to the
clerk as exhibit one this concludes my presentation i'll accept the electronic case file into the record um so have you looked in the bankruptcy records because this is a suggestion of bankruptcy
um I don't see the Liz pendants that you're talking about i don't have a list pendants there's I don't think so wait oh okay so it appears to me like there was a
foreclosure act foreclosure action that was filed however the request for a motion for summary judgement was withdrawn and I'm thinking it was because of the suggestion of bankruptcy um and Tiffany Brown would not be the
owner she's a an attorney so the loan fund LLC is the Liz Pendons holder but you was notice sent to Tiffany Brown yes and was it sent to Tiffany
Brown with reference to the list pendants and there's been no um contact whatsoever by anyone no ma'am do you all have abatement abilities like a an abatement fund to go on and secure
something like this so the pool has already been secured yes oh it has been yes as of March 27th by you all by the county yes and the stagnant water is still present even after it being secured
what's um how did the county secure it a chain link fence with no openings just chain link around it okay my concern is whether I can lean property that is under a suggestion of bankruptcy
um so I'm going to find that the property is in violation well first I'm going to find that um the property owner has been properly noticed to be here today as well as the um mortgage holder
has been properly noticed to be here today as well uh and no one is present i'm going to find that the property is in violation of seminal county code chapter 95 section
95.4 4 um and then as defined in section 95.3F and I'm going to find that the property be brought into compliance
by April 25th 2025 as requested due to the health safety and welfare issues associated with the violation or I'm going to impose a fine of
$250 a day reserving as to whether a lean will be imposed um based on additional research that I will do um however we will have a
compliance hearing on May 8th to determine whether there was compliance by April 25th and at that time I will rule as to whether a lean can be imposed against the property
thank you thank you while I still have you 2521 CESM code enforcement officer Cameron Dar seal county sheriff's office south region this is case number 2521 CESM the respondents are the Lai Foundation LLC Jackie Pierce the registered agent and
Tiffany and Brown Liz Pendis the violation is located at 701 Blue Lake Drive Longwood Florida Seml County violation charge seml county Land Development Code Chapter 30 part 14 section 30.14.19 L fences all fences shall be
maintained in their upright original condition my initial inspection was on August 16th 2024 notices to respondents were on August 16th and September 3rd 202024 compliance dates were set for
September 3rd and September 19th 2024 24 and the follow-up inspections were September 3rd September 19th 2024 and yesterday April 9th 2025 results of the inspections were the violation of dilapidated fence remains on the subject
property these are images from my initial inspection on August 16 2024 depicting that the fence gate in some portions of the fence were uh dilapidated and temporarily secured
with orange mesh fence follow-up inspection on August 3rd 2024 and it shows the same thing follow-up inspection on August 19th 2020 24 it shows the same images and this is
a recent inspection of yesterday April 9th 2025 and it shows that the fence has become more dilapidated and a previous attempt to fix it with the mesh fencing has been done but not by myself and that's when I found out that the county
has secured the pool the suggested recommendation is based on testimony and evidence presented in the case number 2521 CESM it is determined that the respondents Lai Foundation LLC Jackie Pierce and Tiffany an Brown are the owners of record of property located
at 701 Blue Lake Drive located in Longwood as determined by the property appraised records in possession or control of the property and are in violation of SE County Land Development Code Chapter 30 Part 14 section 30.14.19L fences
it is further recommended that the special magistrate issue an order for the respondents to correct the violation honor before midnight of April 25th 2025 in order to correct the violation the respondents must remove or repair the dilapidated fence to its upright original condition if the respondent
does not comply with the order a fine of $100 will be imposed for each day the violation continues or is repeated after compliance i would like to submit a copy of this PowerPoint presentation to the clerk as exhibit
APS to approve it what about the um 812 United Court Aberdine Maryland address that's in the property appraisers records was not anything ever sent there these addresses aren't to that though
they're Davenport the Aberdine ones these were received and hers was received but this the registered agent okay that was just that okay okay i'm going to accept the electronic case file into the record i'm
going to find that the property owner was um properly noticed to be here as well as the attorney for the lean holder on the property has been properly noticed to be
here neither are present and participated in the hearing i'm going to find that um there is a violation of Simol County Land Development Code Chapter 30 Part 14 section 30.14.9 i'm going to
um find that for the health safety and welfare um of the citizens of Simino County that the property be brought into compliance by April 25th 2025 or a fine in the amount of $250 a
day will be imposed with the same reservation as to whether a fine can actually be imposed uh because of the suggestion of bankruptcy that's been filed and I'm going to um schedule a
compliance hearing for May 8th thank you the next case 2522 CESM code enforcement officer Cameron Jar Siml County Sheriff's Office South region this is case number 2522 CSM the
respondents are Lai Foundation LLC Jackiea Pierce registered agent Tiffany and Brown Liz Pendants the violation is located at 701 Blue Lake Drive Longwood Florida Seml County violation charge SEL County Code chapter 95 section 95.4 as defined in
95.3B uncultivated vegetation my initial inspection was on August 16th 2024 notices to respondents were on August 16th and September 3rd 2024 compliance dates were set for
September 3rd and September 19th 2024 and follow-up inspections were September 3rd September 19th 2024 and yesterday April 9th 2025 the results of the inspections were the violation of
uncultivated vegetation remains on subject property this is an image from my initial inspection on August 16th 2024 you can see the grass is over 8 ines in height follow-up inspection on September
3rd 2024 the the backyard remains in the same condition of being overgrown but it looks like the HOA or something had cut the front yard the county has not cut the grass no okay this is a follow-up inspection on
September 19th 2024 same date the uncultivated vegetation remains and this is a follow-up inspection of yesterday April 9th 2025 you can see the vegetation remains born
in a decade dead state but it still remains the suggested recommendation is based on testimony and evidence presented in case number 2522 CESM it is determined that the respondents Lai Foundation LLC Jackieetta Pierce and
Tiffany and Brown are the owners of record of property located at 701 Blue Lake Drive located in Longwood as determined by the property appraised records are in possession or control of the property and are in violation of seminal county code chapter 95 section
95.4 as defined in 95.3B on cultivated vegetation it is further recommended that the special magistrate issue an order for the respondents to correct the violation honor before midnight of April 25th 2025 in order to correct the violation the
respondents must remove all uncult uncultivated vegetation in excess of 8 in in height from the property if the respondents do not comply with the order a fine of $50 will be imposed for each day the violation continues or is repeated after compliance
would like to submit a copy of this PowerPoint presentation to the clerk the uh electronic case file will be accepted into the record i'm going to find that the property owner and the attorney for the lender have been properly noticed to be here today and they are not present
or participating i'm going to find that uh the property owner is in violation of Simino County Code Chapter 95 section 95.4 4 as defined in 95.3b on cultivated vegetation um for the health safety and
welfare of the citizens of Simino County I'm going to find that the property be brought into compliance by April 25th 2025 or incur a fine of $250 a day with
a compliance hearing date of May 8th reserving again uh the possibility of not imposing a lean if um because of the suggestion of bankruptcy that has been filed and I will add that if the county does
uh in fact abate the um vegetation on the property that um com they would come into compliance as of that date um that the county has has abated
um and that is all thank you thank you all right 25 23 CESM Ruth Goldstein Building Division
case 25-23 CESM is for the property located at 701 Blue Lake Drive in Longwood which is owned by the Lai Foundation LLC the violation charged is seminal county code chapter 40 appendix A section 105.1 the description of the violation
is installation of exterior sighting replacement of windows and doors including reducing the size of the masonry openings with framing and demolition work of concrete masonry unit interior alterations including but not limited to mechanical electrical and
plumbing without the required permit the case summary is as follows the initial inspection was conducted April 12th 2024 with a notice to the respondent sent on April 12th 2024 there are multiple compliance dates and extensions provided by the county
follow-up inspections as shown both on-site visit and via computer the results of the reinspections are that the violations remain on the property this screenshot is from the property appraisers office website
showing that Lai Foundation LLC is the record owner of the property these are copies of the received certified return receipts for the notices of this hearing these are photographs of the exterior
alterations which were taken April 4th 2025 these photographs were taken during the inspection on April 12th 2024 which highlight the window replacements the CMU work and exterior alterations and these photos were also taken during
the inspection on April 12th 2024 showing the window replacements CMU work and exterior alterations these photographs were taken on the inspection April 22nd 2024 to show the interior alterations that have been
completed additional photos of the interior alterations taken April 22nd 2024 and finally exterior alterations which were taken May 13 2024 this screen shows that no permits have been applied for or issued in
relation to this violation no permits have been issu uh the permits that have been issued which are on the screen are not in relation to the scope of work completed this is a copy of chapter 40 which they're in violation of
the county recommendation is that based on the testimony and evidence presented in case number 25-23 CESM it's determined that the respondent is the record owner of the property located at 701 Blue Lake Drive Longwood in Semino County as determined by the property
appraisers records they are in possession or control of the property and in violation of the Semino County Code Chapter 40 Appendix A Section 105.1 it's further recommended that the special magistrate order the respondent to correct the violation on or before
April 21st 2025 in order to correct this violation the respondent shall obtain the required permits for the cited violation if the respondent does not comply with the order a fine of $50 will be imposed each day the violation continues or is repeated after
compliance the respondent must contact the inspector to verify compliance brent Griffin is the inspector assigned to this case this concludes my portion of the presentation i invite Brent Griffin up to complete the presentation
i'm Brent Griffin Simol County Building Inspector i have presented a copy of this presentation to the clerk and request it be entered into the record thank you the electronic case file will be accepted into the record i'm going to find that the property owner and the
attorney for the lender have both been properly noticed to be here today are not present are not present to participate i'm going to find that um the county has provided evidence of a violation of Simol County Code Chapter
40 appendix A section 105.1 um it appears to me that no one is living in the home so I'm going to um just um pro give them until May 7th 2025 to come into compliance
um with the permits and if not a fine of $250 a day will be imposed i'm going to set a compliance hearing for May 8th 2025 reserving
um ruling until that time obviously as to whether a lean can be placed based on the suggestion of bankruptcy that has been filed in this case thank you thank you okay okay and I believe we
have just one more under old business 2043 CESM Nviv Niv Nive Castillo sounds good to me um funny story i'll wait till we're off the
record my hair dye has exploded in my hair and now my greasy disgusting hair that hasn't been washed in three days is about to be all over the place i'm trying to not move any muscle in my body okay so could you um let me Have you
been sworn let me swear State your name for the record alexis B do you solemnly swear affirm the testimony you're about to give to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do okay um and so it's my understanding that the uh county is
requesting additional time to um finalize this matter um and are requesting a continuence of the compliance date to May 7th 2025 is that correct um the respondent is currently in compliance the county originally
thought that she was going to need more time before this current meeting so had already continued before she came into compliance so she has been notified to come here for May 8th meeting because the county was going to request
additional time from me at that time okay well it's a good thing I'm giving it to you right no I'm just kidding okay um yes I will continue the case till May 7th 2025 um the compliance date thank you
sorry all right that's it um we'll go ahead and set our next meeting for May 8th 2025 oh good stuff hey hey hey