Hey, hallelujah. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Good Morning. We're going to go ahead and get started with the May um magistrate hearings for code enforcement.
Um my name is Sheri Setfin. The way the process works is that the county will present its case first. If um the county will present any evidence or testimony that it has, you will be permitted to cross-examine any witnesses of the
county, but you will not be permitted to present any witnesses or evidence of your own until the county has closed its case. Once the county closes its case, then you will be permitted to present any witnesses or testimony that you have or evidence. I will make a decision here
today. Um, if you are here for a first-time violation and you are found in violation, you will be given an amount of time to come into compliance. And if you do not comply in that time period and it is a first-time violation,
you stand to have a penalty imposed of up to $250 a day. If you're here for a repeat violation, you stand to have a penalty of up to $500 a day imposed. If you have an agenda in front of you, please don't pay attention to it because
we don't follow it in order. The agenda is just there to um set the uh stage for what will be heard today. We kind of jump around and um yeah, we kind of jump around. Is that
better? >> Okay. Sorry, I was too far away. Usually I never have a problem being told that I can't be heard. Um so um we'll jump around based on um our own
rhyme and reason. So just bear with us if you have signed in and even if you haven't signed in, you will be heard um and be called. So I'm going to start first with the consent agenda. Um the way the consent agenda works is
if you are on the consent agenda, I've been given the information. Um, I have reviewed the information and I make a decision based on the recommendations that are on the consent agenda. There is one item that I need to pull off the consent agenda. 2478 CESM
Jose Castanada will be pulled and heard separately on the um under old business. the remainder of the consent agenda. If there is anyone here on the consent agenda that would like to be heard,
speak now or forever hold your peace. >> I have the consent agenda copy, so I don't know. >> Okay. The consent agenda um contains the case 2555 Michelle Maddox
25360 Laura and Shelley Williams 25471 Julio Surus Pazada 25550 Raymond Holton
256 602 Thomas Barbarie 2580 Tammy Corbett. Those are the only uh matters on the consent agenda. Okay. Hearing none, I'm going to approve
the consent agenda as recommended. Okay. The next item that I'm going to call, we have someone on Zoom for a lean reduction. That case is 2243 CESM
Gabriel Gable Gailort. >> Good morning. >> I think you're on mute. You're you're >> I think he's going. >> Do we have to unmute him or does he Oh, >> okay. Try again. >> No. Do you have the little microphone
icon? Is it crossed through on your side? If it is, you need to click on it. I think you've done everything. Wait, what? Speakers. >> I think it's on his end. >> He's going to pull it back and try to see what's going on.
Just Just We have some >> he's >> can he call in on the phone. >> Well, I can see if I can get on the calendar. Oh, you didn't you didn't put me on it, did you?
>> Yeah. Add me cuz I may be able to put it on speaker on my phone because I have a feeling it's just the interaction. >> We have the Here's the phone number. I'll send it to him. >> Yeah, >> we can see him and he can call in that way we can get this underway. If not, do
you want me to just go to someone else while we're trying to get it worked out? >> I think it's only going to take us a minute. >> It's fine with me either way. >> Read in the county part portion while we're waiting for him or do we want to wait for him total? >> Probably wait for him total.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. Good morning, Abel. Can you hear us? Yeah, we can't we can't seem to hear you. Is it possible maybe you can exit the meeting and then rejoin or or please feel free I uh also uh I
placed the phone number in the chat and it there's also a conference code there so you can call in without using this uh application if you want. In the meantime, I can hear you swear in any county witnesses that will be providing testimony.
>> Jay Shannon. >> So, any county witnesses that will be providing testimony, if you'll please raise your right hand at all in this entire today, not just Okay. Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give to be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Okay. Let the record reflect that all county um employees providing um testimony today have been sworn. >> Hello. >> Oh, there he is.
>> I'm here. >> Okay, perfect. Good morning, sir. How are you? >> Good morning, judge. How are you? Okay, >> thank you. So, we're here um on a lean reduction request. I'm going to go ahead and let
the county start and then um we'll hear from you. >> Thank you. Thank you, Judge. >> Good morning, Ricardo. It's John. >> Good morning, sir. Able. Yeah. We're going to start with
case number 09-107-CEBB with the Best Way Investment Incorporated with Ricardo Padron as the registered agent. >> Wait, >> where's Abel Gable? There's Abel Gabbert. >> I'm sorry. >> Yes. >> 22-43-
CESM Abel Gabbert, Maria Gabbert. The property is 1365 North County Road 426 in Ovido. The uh case was originally heard by a special magistrate on May 12th, 2022 and an order was issued giving the respondent a compliance dated July 15th.
Affidavit of non-compliance was filed by an inspector after reinspection on July 22nd, 2022. On April 13, 2023, the special magistrate issued an order extending compliance to July 13, 2023. An affidavit of non-compliance was then
filed by the inspector after a reinspection on July 17, 2023. On July 11th, 2024, the special magistrate issued an order imposing cost fines leans due to non-compliance and with a fee of $50 per day to continue to
acrue until compliance was achieved. In addition to the cost in the amount of $91787 are hereby imposed to be paid before September 11, 2024. On July 15th, 2024, the administrative cost of $91787
were paid to the county. An affidavit of compliance was filed by the inspector after a reinspection of August 12, 2024. On April 10, 2026, a request for reduction application was filed by the applicant and a fee of $100 was paid to
process the application. I am missing page 18. There it is. The requested action in this case is that the applicant, Abel Gabbert, is requesting a full RA waiver of the remaining acred fee of $1650. And at this time, the county is in full
support of that request. Has the county incurred any additional costs um other than the administrative costs that were already paid? >> That is no. >> Okay. >> Mr. Gayboard, do you have anything you'd like to add? >> I I don't have I don't know what to say,
miss. Well, I I try to do as much as I can as far as the to apply for this guy. I am disabled. I'm very low income. I gave Alexi Valley all the necessary information as far as how much I get from social security. I am, you know, I
don't have a job. I have not working ever since I became disabled for many years. >> Okay. And the um the the property is in compliance at this time. >> Property is in compliance at this time. >> Okay.
I'm going to um go ahead and wave the fines um that have acred to this date. Um and based on the fact that you had paid the administrative costs for the county's time and there are no additional costs that have been incurred
um that is is the basis for my um waiver of all of the the fines and lean at this time. >> Thank you very much, judge. Thank you. God bless you all. Thank you. >> Thank you and have a nice day. >> Once an order >> once an order is signed, able we'll get
you a copy of that uh and we'll file the ling release >> and get you a copy of that as well. >> Thank you very much. Have a beautiful best day. God bless you all. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Byebye. Bless you all. Bye.
Okay, the next case is 2420 CEB Barbara Frederick's me. >> You folks can sit here at the table. Can you please raise your right hand? 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. >> Can you state your names, please? >> Barbara Frederick's >> Ryan Rogash. And can you um tell me your affiliation with the case? >> I'm the property owner. >> Okay. >> And I'm the contractor. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> So, at this time, we'll hear the case 2420- CEB. The property owner is Miss Barbara Frederick's who's in Chambers at this time. The property address is 230 Scarbor Cove in Longwood, Commission District 3. The property was originally cited for
remains of rubble of a structure. The case was heard by the code enforcement board on March 28th, 2024 and an order was issued given a compliance date of April 25, 2024. Affidavit of non-compliance was filed by
the inspector on May 13, 2024. On June 21st, a letter was received from Rebuild Florida stating that the respondent had applied for Rebuild Florida housing repair replacement program for Hurricane Ian through the administration of the Florida Commerce
Agency. On June 27th, the code enforcement board issued an order finding non-compliance and imposing a lean and fine in the amount of $3,200 for 63 days of non-compliance and to continue a fine of $50 per each day until the property was brought into
compliance. An affidavit of compliance was filed by the code enforcement officer on March 25th, 2026. The administrative cost to process this case for the clerk totaled $10048.
On April 10th, 2026, a request for reduction of lean was filed by the respondent and the fee amount of $250 to process this application was paid. The requested action on behalf of Miss Barbara Frederick's is requesting a full waiver, the total acred lean of $22,450
plus the administrative cost of $10048. And the county is in full support of this request. As you may know, during hurricanes and Rebuild Florida gets involved in a property, it can take years sometimes, as it did in this case. Miss Frederick's
did everything that during this time that she was able to do with her limited resources and she was basically at the mercy of Rebuild Florida. At this time, we're pleased to announce the house is not only in compliance, but it's an asset to the community.
So, she paid us $250 for the application that more than covers the admin cost and we support this request. >> Okay. Do you have anything you'd like to add? >> Um, this is my contractor. if you could talk. >> Yes, Ron. Thank you for this
opportunity. First off, I'd like to start off that uh Miss Frederick's has been on fixed income for over 12 years now and was unable to on her own accord be able to keep in compliance.
She did submit an application to Rebuild Florida on 4:15 2024 of which uh she received correspondence back and the uh program, excuse me, Rebuild Florida did their initial assessment, the damage assessment on the
property on uh 51 of 2024. After they did the research, they actually awarded the project to to us, my firm as a contractor on 729. Um, excuse me, excuse me. She was awarded
the new house on 729 and we as a contractor was chosen for the project in September 17th of 2024. >> So, she was awarded the the house two days after code enforcement entered their order. Okay.
>> Unfortunately, >> the the board >> um we were given the project in September of 2024 between uh I met with the uh homeowners association in um November 17th to get their strict
requirements. Those strict requirements required revisions to the original awarded house that had to add uh various things to make it HOA compliant. That took some time which went back to the state which went back to the architects to redesign and redraw the house. We
received a new set of plans um in February of 2025 of which we then had to submit uh a new budget request the same day to the state to go over the overap exception of the
budget. It took roughly uh two months for them to approve the overcaper budget and then uh we were issued a a permit to demo the uh said property on 718 and we completed the demo on 723. So we were a
few days away after we got our issuance to get her into compliance. And as you could see the timeline did not go very expediently uh to help which did not work in anybody's favor. But we did move as fast as we could with the information we had and acted accordingly.
>> Okay. Do you have anything else you'd like to add, ma'am? >> I don't think so. >> Okay. Um based on the uh fact that you have paid the um the application fee that covers the administrative costs
that have been incurred by the county in this matter. I'm going to um wave the entire lean of $22,450 and the administrative cost of $148. >> Thank you so much.
>> Thank you. Have a nice day. >> I already did. We can just make sure it's been on here. Okay, it's on twice. The next case is 2414 CEB Teresa Barton.
>> There should be two cases. >> It's 14 and 15. Oh, okay. Yes. Okay. If you'll go ahead and raise your right hand, please. 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.
>> Good morning. We're going to hear cases 2414 CEB and 2415 CEB. The property owner is Terresa Barton who is present in chambers at this time. The address is 809 Cherokee Circle in Sanford, Florida, Commission District 2.
The violation cited at the time for case 2414 was uncultivated vegetation. The case was originally heard by the code enforcement board of March 28th, 2024, and an order was given to the respondent for a compliance date of April 27, 2024.
Affidavit of non-compliance was filed by the code enforcement officer after reinspection on May 3rd, 2024. On May 23rd, an order finding non-compliance and imposing lean was issued in the amount for $1350 for 27 days of non-compliance with a fine to
continue to acrew of $50 per day until compliance achieved. On July 30, 2024, payment towards the acrruing lean was made in the amount of $1,750 to continue to acrue until brought into compliance. An affidavit of compliance was filed by
code enforcement on after reinspection on June 6, 2024. The administrative cost to process this case was $110.81. On April 24, 2026, a reduction request application was filed by the respondent
and the fee of $250 to process this application was paid. The requested action for case 2414 is the respondent Theresa Barton is requesting a full waiver of the acred lean of $300 plus the acred administrative cost of 11081
and the county is in full support of this request. Would you like to rule on 14 and then we'll do 15? >> Absolutely. >> Okay. >> Do you have anything you'd like to add? >> Just that I purchased the home on May 30th of 2024. I was not the owner when
all these problems existed. >> Okay. Um, I brought photos and a slideshow, so they have everything if you need to see any of that. Um, we purchased the home on 5:30 and one of the photos that I provided was the day that the dumpster and my whole family
was there, which was 5:30, same day, 5:31, 6:30. We cleaned that yard up as fast as humanly possible. Now, the second one we're about to talk about is the roof, and that's a more complicated issue, but this just vegetation problem. Um, we were out of compliance for less
than two weeks. It took us two weeks to get the yard cleaned up from the day of purchase to June 14th, excuse me, June 11th when we got the compliance um affidavit. >> Okay. I'm going to um note that you've
paid an application fee in the amount of $250, which is more than the administrative costs that um um it that have been incurred by the county for processing the violation. I'm going to wave the uh acred lean in the amount of
$300 and um I will not charge administrative costs of 11081. Okay. Thank you. >> Right. So now we'll move to case number 24-15-CEBB. Property owner named Terresa Barton. Property address 809 Cherokee Circle,
Sanford, Florida. Violation was remains in rubble of a structure. The case was originally heard by the code enforcement board March 28, 2024. Order issued given a respondent compliance date of April 7, 2024. Affidavit of non-compliance was filed by code enforcement after a
reinspection on May 3rd, 2024. on May 23rd, 2024, an order finding non-compliance imposing a fine and lean for the amount of $2,700 resulting as 27 days of non-compliance with a fine of
$100 a day to continue until compliance was achieved on a on July 30, 2024, payments towards the acrewing lean was made in the amount of $3,500 with a $100 per day fine continuing to acrew until brought into compliance.
Affidavit of compliance was filed by code enforcement after reinspection on August 19, 2024. The administrative cost to process this case was $110.81. And on April 24, 2026,
a request for reduction application was filed by the respondent and the fee of $250 to process this application was paid. The respondent, Theresa Barton, is requesting a full waiver of the approved lean of $8,000 plus the acred administrative cost of $11081. And the county is in full support of this
request. And I after you make a ruling on this, I want to borrow the overhead and show you a massive success story. So, you're going to be impressed. >> I'm kind of looking at them right now at a little sneak peek, but wow.
Wow. Yes. >> Um do you have anything you'd like to add? You said this one was a little bit more complicated >> for me, Dad. Sure. Well, the biggest um three thing big things that happened. Uh number one, I'm a Simble County resident since 1995. This is my only rental
property. I bought it to um endeavor into real estate investing and fix it. I knew it was an absolute disaster, but this was part of the military. Um You need me closer? >> No, I was going to take the documents. Oh, they have it. You You have it all.
You want them green? >> Okay. Um, so, um, here you go. Um, so this house had good bones and they have them. They have them. Okay. Even with the tree having fallen in through it and been in it for the two or three years
before when the prior resident because it had Terzo floors from the 70s which are indestructible, I thought it was going to be a a reasonable purchase. A couple things happened. Uh the worst part was unfortunately we have 134 just in
permitted work and this is a very little inexpensive house. It's not 134,000 just in permitted work. The beautiful Terzo floor had to be cut because the entire drainage system one of the little secrets I learned is to get the video guy to come in and look and see what my
drainage system looks like before I do anything. It was a nightmare. It was the pipes were all gone. So, I had to destroy one of the reasons why I bought the house, which was the Terazzo, and that was another $20,000. So, the point was, um, yes, I knew I was taking a risk. I still like the house. I didn't
make any money on the house, but I don't care because I'm a long holder anyway. I don't really care. So, um, we uh, it did take us some time because we had to actually do full architectural drawings because the roof, it wasn't just the roof, it was the trusses. So, we had to
get architectural drawings. Then, we had to get permit approval. And then, because the opportunity, I said, I want a fourth bedroom and a second bathroom that I can make wheelchair accessible cuz I deal with elderly for my full-time uh um occupation. There's nowhere near enough wheelchair accessible bathrooms
in the entire state of Florida, much le county. So, we made it where it's wheelchair accessible. It's one of the things I could do to improve the community. So, um it it's beautiful house. It came out really great. I don't flip with duct tape and peanut butter. I Everything gets torn out. Everything
gets put back, right? And I go every day and check on it all during the construction. >> Fantastic. Well, it looks fantastic. So, I I think that once again, it's in addition to um the community and the tax base for Simol County. So, I appreciate
your efforts. Um, I'm going to go ahead and um since there was actually a it sounds like there was an attempt to pay part of the lean anyway at some point. And so that um in addition to the $250
well covers what the administrative costs for the county are into this matter. So, I'm going to um wave the total lean that has occurred at this point, the $8,000, and I will not be charging the 11081 in administrative
costs as well. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Do I need to do anything else or I'm done? >> No, you're good. You will get an order um with the reduction information um and then a >> both of them. >> Yes. and then a release of lean will
occur after that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you guys. >> Thank you, Teresa. >> Take care. >> Okay, let's go ahead and call um Mr. Castanada. Um 2478 CESM
Jose Castanada. Mr. Castanada, if you could please raise your right hand. Yes. 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. >> Thank you. >> This is you, sir.
>> Code enforcement officer Chris Smith. Um, this address is or the case number is 24-78- CESM. owners Jose Castana. This is 113 Oak Street, Altoont Springs, Commissioner District 3. Uh the
violation was for unpermitted construction. Uh this case was originally heard in the special magistrate on January 9th, 2025 and order was given for the respondent to comply by June 11th, 2025 with a scheduled meeting for June 12th, 2025. On June 12th, 2025, an order was given
for the respondent compliance date of September 10th, 2025 with a meeting scheduled for September 11, 2025. Uh, an affidavit of non-compliance was filed with code enforcement supervisor after reinspection on October 7th, 2025 due to seminal county ordinance changes and order was issued cancelling all meetings
for 2025 and continuing all remaining cases until scheduled meeting of January 8, 2026. On January 8, 2026, an order was issued continuing the case to the February 12th, 2026 hearing. On February 12th, 2026, the SM issued a second
amended order given the respondent compliance date of March 11, 2026 with a meeting scheduled for March 12th, 2026. On March 12th, 2026, an order was issued given the respondent a compliance date of April 8th, 2026 with a compliance hear of April 9th, 2026. On April 9th,
2026, an order was issued extending the compliance meeting till May 14th, which is today. The administrative costs for this case uh for the clerk totals $11248. So, with this, I'm in contact with the
health department. He's in contact with the health department. We're waiting on one document. um they re he mailed out documents and it seems to be um an ongoing situation with the health department with getting a certain document for the either a septic or
something. Um his he has a v he got the variance for the back portion shed that was um unpermitted construction. So he hasn't approved. They're just waiting on that document. Once that document gets put into building department e plans then he gets issued a permit. This whole
case is closed. How long do you think that will take? >> Um, I mean, we talked to him yesterday, the health department, and he I also relayed with uh Mr. Castanetta, and he said this he's waiting on the document, which they mailed to him. So, I would say no more
than uh a month or two weeks, two weeks to a month. I mean, it matters of when they get it, but he's got to take it to the building department, and then once it gets there, then I can communicate with the building department to expedite so that we don't have to deal with the fines, okay? continued >> Mr. G.
>> Yes. You know, I have in contact with the health department because two two months ago I have everything ready. The only thing is this letter that I need and uh they have a couple issues over there. Finally, this week the person Mr. Vasquez emailed me and called me yesterday who said, "Sorry, we have a we
have a short person, but we are ready to uh give you the letter." The only thing he's called me to understand what he need. I called, you know, he called me yesterday. and I explain and I send a couple paper that he need and say okay let me proceed to do the paper I hope so couple days I don't know how it went
>> okay so I I want to keep a handle on the case because we have been um this has been going on for a little while and I want to make sure that and I I do see that you are continuing to u follow up and follow through and I appreciate
that. Um, so what I'll do is I'll extend your compliance date to what is our next June? What's the June? >> June 11th. >> June 11th is the hearing date. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. Then I'll extend your compliance
date to June 10th. And then um we'll be back here June 11th if necessary. um if if you come into compliance prior to that, then the case goes away and so there's no need for us to do anything further. But um I do
appreciate you continuing to follow through because the county needs you to do your part and as soon as you get that letter, you need to get with Chris so that we can make sure that it gets taken care of on our end. Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Thank you so much. I think that's the fifth amended. I'm pretty sure. So, we'll need to check, but I'm almost positive it is. Okay. Okay. The next case is 251 176 David Robinson.
Mr. Robinson, can you please raise your right hand? 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. >> So, good morning. >> Good morning, >> code enforcement officer Jamar Jackson.
The case number is 25176. Respondent's names Mia Robinson, David L. Robinson, Arthur L. Robinson, Erica Robinson, Cheryl M. Jefferson, M. Thomas Ship, Jamil R. Ship. Parcel ID 321931300
0460 000000. Address 2811 East 20th Street, Sanford, Florida with an unincorporated Simino County with no homestead. Violations cited are as follows. Chapter 95.5
section 107 Abatement of structure 109.1.1 unsafe structure 109.1.3 structure unfit 109.1.5 subsection 5 hazardous structure 109.1.5
subsection 7 dilapidation decay of dwelling 109.1.5 subsection 9 remains after demo 109.5 unauthorized tampering 109.6 Transfer of ownership. 109.8 Prohibited Occupancy.
109.9 Restoration of Aatement. 110.1 imminent danger. 110.5 cost of emergency repairs, 111 demolition, and 111.3 failure to comply. The description of the violations are dilapidated unsafe
vacant structure. on the dates observed. The dates that it was observed, the initial inspection was August 27th, 2025. Notice was mailed to a respondent on August 28th, 2025. Compliance date of
November 10th, 2025. Follow-up site inspections were September 26, 2025, October 8th, 2025, November 10th, 2025, December 18th, 2025, January 22nd, 2026,
February 24th, 2026, and my last inspection was May 11, 2026. Results of the inspections were all violations still remain at the property. Violations are explained here. abatement of violation which is 107 repair or
demolish the dwelling within the time frame specified in the order or the county would demolish the dwelling with all cost being assessed as a lean against the property. 109.1 unsafe structures obtain all required permits to restore structure to livable
safe condition with passing final or demolish under permit with passing final. 109.1.3 unfit structure. Repair or demolish the dwelling with permits. The dwelling shall be maintained in good repair,
structurally sound and sanitary so as not to pose a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare of the community. The dwelling shall remain unoccupied until violations are corrected by repairs or demolition. 109.1.5 subsection 5 hazardous structures.
secure, repair or demolish the dwelling with permits with within the time frame specified in the order or the county would demolish the dwelling with all costs being assessed as a lean against the property. 109.1.5 subsection 7 hazardous structure, repair
or demolish the dilapidated dwelling with permits. The dilapidated dwelling shall be maintained in good repair, structurally sound and sanitary so as not to pose a threat to public health, safety or welfare. The dilapidated dwelling shall remain unoccupied until all violations are corrected by repairs
or demolished 109.1.5 subsection 9. Hazardous structures under Simol County building or demo permit remove all associated portions of structure and debris thereof
with a passing final inspection. 109.5 unauthorized tampering. No signs, notices, tags, or seals affixed by the code official shall be removed without the authorization of the code official. 109.6.
Transfer of ownership. If ownership is transferred, the code official must be furnished with a signed or notorized statement from the grantee, transfer, mortgage e, or leasey acknowledging the receipt of such compliance order or notice of violation and fully accepting
the responsibility without condition for making the corrections or repairs required by such compliance order or notice of violation. 109.8 Eight prohibited occupancy vacant structure until such time it has been
made safe I'm sorry vacate structure until such time it has been made safe and habitable with passing final inspection 109.9 restoration of abatement repair or or demolish the dwelling have a licensed contractor
repair or demolish the dwelling under seminal county permit with a final inspection provide documentation on company's letterhead of findings and recommendation of his or her specification or demolished under seminal county permit 1110.1
imminent danger. A property will keep a imminent danger unsafe structure status until the property is restored or demolished under Simino County building permit with a passing final inspection. 110.5 cost of emergency repairs. Any
emergency repairs acruled by the county during the abatement process will be assessed as a lean against the property. 111 demolition. Ensure that the repairs are consistently being made to bring the property into compliance. If it is observed by the code official that there
is a standstill of progress spanning 24 months, the code official can order the owner or agent to demolish the property under seminal county building permit. 111.3 failure to comply. comply with violations cited under permit with passing final or the county would
demolish the structure with all costs being assessed as a lean against the property. The next eight slides are a copy of the compliance schedule that was mailed out to ownership with the compliance date of December 10th, I mean I'm sorry,
November 10th, 2025. is basically breaking down everything that I just explained. All of the violations that were cited at the property. This is the property appraisers uh record the property record card property record card showing the current owner of
this property. On the left, you will see the original deed for this property. On the right, you will see probate documents because this property is currently in a probate process, which should be ending sometime in the near future.
This is the title search results from my search to make sure all ownership was notified. Following photos you are about to see are true and accurate to what is observed on the dates noted. So the first three, the first photo is a
picture of the front of the property. Second picture is a left view of the property from the front right away. The third picture is the right side from the front. You also see a picture of my placer that was placed on the property. The left side front which is in a dilapidated
state. Left side of the home where a window is broken. Uh the glazing was broken were damaged. Uh you also see I did uh take a picture of the unsafe front porch which
is still in that state currently. This is another inspection of the property showing that nothing has changed. It is starting to deteriorate the exterior, the roof, the front porch, and there's a view of the front of the house from the rightway.
>> Was there a fire at all? >> No, >> it Okay. It just over time it started to this became a dilapidated structure. Over time it started to decay. Um as you see in this these photos is the property was posted for this hearing. Um that is
my uh notice of hearing in the front of the property. My last inspection went back to the property. What you see is the front of the property from the rightway. The rear of the property in a dilapidated state. Uh the roof and the right side exterior
walls are in a dilapidated state. The roof is starting to uh rot and that is the my last inspection of the property. These violations still are present. Based on the testimony and evidence presented in this case 25176, it is
determined that the respondent is Mia Robinson, David L. Robinson, Arthur L. Robinson, Erica Robinson, Cheryl M. Jefferson, M. Thomas ship J Rship the record owner of the property located at 2811 East 20th Street Sanford Florida
32771 in Semino County as determined by the property appraisers record in possession or control of the property and in the violation of seminal county code chapter 95.5 section 107 109.1 109.1.3
109.1.5 subsection 5 subsection 7 and subsection 9 109.5 109.6 109.8 109.9 110.1 110.5 111 and 111.3
At this time I would like to submit this digital and case file into evidence. >> Mr. Robinson, do you have any objection to what you have seen up here being submitted into evidence by the county? >> No, I don't. >> Okay. The evidence will be accepted.
It is um our recommendation is to comply with code section cited within 15 days or a fine of $250 per day thereafter. Also asking for a health and safety tag be placed uh 162.08.
These violations pose a serious threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the general public. And because of these violations, we are asking for a health and safety tag on the property for securing the property until violations are corrected either by permit repair or by permitted demolition. This concludes
my presentation. >> Okay, let me before I I let you um give me some information. Uh Mr. Robinson, can we pull back up on the slides county code chapter 95.5
section 109 part six? So what is this? Um what was ownership transferred or something that >> ownership has not been transferred that is put in because in some instances properties get sold because of the state
that they're in. And so this is one violation that we have in place if it is sold that the new ownership understands what they're taking on and that the process is still ongoing that they still going to bring the property into compliance. I
>> Okay. So this is not a violation. So this this is just a notice that you all that's part of your code and this will be part of the responsibility. >> Absolutely. >> Yes. >> Okay. So I'm going to >> if he sells or transfers the property
they have to supply me a notorized statement from the grantee transferey etc acknowledging receipt of this compliance schedule and your order >> by fully accepting responsibility to carry out the compliance of your order >> right but this is not a violation >> it is not
>> so okay so I I do agree with you though that that is something that they would have to comply with 100% absolutely >> okay um all right Mr. Robinson, do you have anything you would like to add? >> Yes, I do. Um, there is a change of ownership. Uh,
this property was built maybe about 1930 by my grandparents. Um, the property is listed in air property and you know how complicated that can be. All the individuals mentioned except me
live in New York. They never lived here in Florida. Their name became part of the title because I tried to get a a demolition. I tried to I came here to request
uh a you know request the house be torn down. >> Mhm. Folks right here told me that if I tow that house down, they will put me in jail because that house belonged to
Retha Johnson, who's my grandmother. >> When did you um come? >> 2010. >> Okay. Okay. >> So 2010, they tell me I can't tear the house down because it's not mine.
All right. So he said, "You have to get this signed over to you." My grandmother died in 1978. My mother lives in New York, Rochester, New York.
My mother died in 2008. I applied for ownership of the property after I came here and I had to go through a probate. >> Mhm. >> Okay. I thought it was going to be a simple probate.
I had to do a probate for my grandmother who died in 78. I had to come back and do a probate for my mother who died in 2008.
All the meanwhile this house was u was it was dilapidated and there nothing I could do. I got caught up in another clause out of this area says there was someone living in that house. >> Is there anyone living in the house now?
>> No. No, no, no. This is maybe uh five, six, five years ago or so. >> Okay. >> But the folks that were living in the house is the one who demolished that house. I tried to get them out. You know what they told me? You can't make people homeless. You can't kick them out. So
now I'm stuck. I can't do nothing because of our laws, because of our system. So you do own a >> house looked like that for the past 15 years and no one
no one never complained about it until this young man came along. >> Well and I think what it is and he's not complaining about it. >> No no I'm just I'm just saying there were no no writeups. >> You have a different you have a different >> It was not an eyes sore. It was nothing.
>> Well it's probably been an eyesore for a while. And >> so he showed up. Well, he showed up because there's a new sheriff in town and there is a new process. >> I understood that and I got busy immediately. >> Okay. >> It doesn't look it it does look bad. I
agree. But it's not because I wanted to look bad or I wasn't doing anything to assist to make it look better. >> But your name is on it now. So you're able >> Hang on. Hang on. Yes, my name is on it after I got the
probate done for my mom, >> right? And so your name's on it. So >> So my name is on it and my I had to add my siblings. >> Okay. I I don't need the history of how
of how the title was derained. I I can see it. What I need to know is how long it's going to take you to either demo it or get permits to fix it. >> Okay. The request was that you know u I sold the house is sold but I can't the
title company can't complete the sale until we do another probate on a sister that's on that list that died. >> Again I'm not my concern. My concern is getting this unsafe structure cleaned
up. And I I it's very unfortunate. Um, I understand that you're trying to sell it and I appreciate that. >> You know, it's so the buyer requested to buy as is. >> Okay. Well, does the buyer is >> and and that clause that he's got in
there, the buyer agreed to that clause that once they obtained a property, they would bring it up the code. >> Is the buyer here? >> No. >> Okay. Well, that's a problem for me. >> Well, the buyer is not here because we can't complete the sale. So then you
don't have a sale. You don't you don't have a sale until you actually have one in the public records of Simino County. You You just don't You may have one in theory. You may have one that you've talked about
and you're providing testimony to me that something that someone else said they would do. I can't go off of that. What I have to go off of is the facts that are in front of me. >> Understand? And what I'm seeing is a very unsafe structure that is an eyesore
that is unsafe to individuals that could go inside it. Um it's an attractive nuisance to children. There are all kinds of things that are a problem with that structure. So the county has asked for 15 days. Can you get everything
accomplished that you need to to either remove the house or have permits for the house in 15 days? Okay. Now, what do we what would I go back and tell the person that >> I don't know. That's not my problem.
My problem is getting this house cleaned up. And sounds to me like you've had 20 years to do it, 15 years to do it. >> But I got caught up in the system. >> I understand. But you got caught up in the system until you did that first
probate. And then once all of these names got put on this house, you weren't caught up in the system anymore. Once your name became on this house, >> you owned it and you could have taken steps and just because no one complained about it doesn't make it okay.
>> I couldn't take any steps because my siblings are there and then one of those died. So now I had to go back. >> But when did she die? >> She died last year. OKAY. >> I HAD TWO. >> OH, OKAY. I got two today. Wait a second. One died in 201. >> Wait a second. So when did you take Let me speak. Okay.
>> When did you take ownership? When did your name get placed on this house? >> Okay. I And I don't I can't give you the exact date, but it was after um >> 2010. >> It was Yeah, it was after you know my
when my mom I got the probate completed for my mother. >> Okay. So around 2008 to 10 is when your name >> 2000 about 2010 2011 12. >> Okay. So you had from 2011 until your sibling died last year
>> and year before. No, last year in 20 >> and in 20. So So you had a good >> 10 years that you could have done something. >> Okay. >> And you chose not to. And just because no one complained about it doesn't make
it okay for it to stay in its dilapitated state. >> No, that that's that's not that's why I didn't do anything. >> Okay. Well, that's not okay to me. >> Okay. >> And so >> it was it was occupied and I was told by the sheriff and a
couple other places that I could not kick the person out. >> Well, I know that's not true. >> I know that's not true because I know that you could have gone through an eviction process. So, that again was a choice. >> Yes, ma'am. I tried. >> Had you Well, did you file a cause of
action in court? >> I didn't think so. >> I called Okay. I called the line. They gave me some forms and filled them out. >> But you didn't follow through. >> You didn't follow through. And you could have >> because that's how the system works. >> The person that was being evicted didn't
follow through. >> Well, you didn't follow through because you could have followed through with the eviction. And if you didn't file an actual cause of action in court, then you didn't follow through. And that's a problem.
So, we find ourselves in this situation. I'm willing to give you more than 15 days. I need to know how long you need to bring this property into compliance. I'm not going to be unreasonable about it, though. So, don't tell me 6 months. I need something that is reasonable and
I need something that you're that's going to make you follow through because that's what I need to happen. >> Okay. Um, right now I got a lawyer who's working with the state of New York because those
siblings that died live in New York. I have to complete those probates before I could do anything with the house. >> Before you can sell it, not before you can do anything with the house.
Um, >> special magistrate. Yes. Yes, sir. >> Currently, nothing is in your way of getting a demolition permit. >> Correct. >> Demolishing the property and then selling the property because you are listed as a owner on this property. So,
that would be the conversation that may need to be had with the surviving ownership that demolishing the property and then selling the property would probably be the best route to go at this point. It'll be a quicker route than
waiting on the different probate cases to close out. >> Officer Jackson, let me ask you a question. Do you think that any part of this house is salvageable? >> No. >> Okay. So, that makes the decision for me even easier. How long does it is it
going to take you to get a demolition permit? The county is asking for 15 days. I will give you longer, but I need to know how long it's going to take you. Whatever you suggest, ma'am. >> Okay. Then I will give you 30 days to
get to demolish the house to bring it into compliance. um as the county has suggested. Um, while you are not in violation of chapter 95.5 section 109 part 6, I will make note that any
subsequent owner information must be provided to the county and any transfer of ownership must be given to the county um and must be given to that person so that they fully understand the nature of the proceedings that are happening on
this property currently. If you do not come into compliance with all of the code sections stated by the county within 30 days, I will impose a fine of the in the amount of $250 a day um to acrue daily.
Um from that um 30th day, let's go ahead and give an exact date. I don't think I have a calendar. I'm not. It's I'm like in the side.
Oh, yep. Okay. So, today is the 14th. I'm going to give you until June 10th, actually, to come into compliance. If you do not come to compliance by June
10th, you will have a fine in the amount of $250 a day. I'm also going to provide the county with the health, safety, welfare tag to enable them to take steps that are necessary to secure the
property and um make it as safe as reasonably possible in its current state and uh lean the property for any costs that it incurs in doing so. And um if we're back here in 30 days and
you have not complied and a fine begins to acrue, I will also be imposing administrative costs, all of which will be a lean against the property. Thank you. >> Letter today. Yeah, he's in permitting line right now
waiting to get it uploaded so they can issue his permit. >> So, the health department just gave the letter just now. >> Oh, awesome. Good to go. >> He's over there trying to get it issued right now. >> Great. >> Make them into compliance today. >> Okay, next case. Um, >> they could have done it two months ago.
>> Is it 2656? >> Should be 11 and 12. >> Oh, 11 and 12. >> Yeah, we have a gentleman here. Yeah, I have 11 and 12. What is the number? It's 0910. >> Yep. Mhm. >> 09107
and 1409. >> Those are oldies. >> Oldies, but uh goodies. >> Goodies. >> Yes, sir. Can you please >> No, your honor. >> Can you please raise your right hand? 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. Can you state your name, please,
for the record and your affiliation with the um property owner? >> Uh my name is Matthew Osborne. I'm the son-in-law of the owner, Ricardo Padrone. >> Okay. And the property owner is Bestway Investments Incorporated and Ricardo
Padron is listed as the president of the corporation. Is that correct? >> Yes, >> okay. >> So, first we'll hear number 11, which is case 09107- CEB. Property Owners Bestway Investments Incorporated. Ricardo Padron is the
registered agent. The violation cited at the time this case was cited was for the accumulation of trash, junk, and debris on the property. It was originally heard by the code enforcement board on August 27th, 2009. And an order was issued giving the respondent a compliance due
date of September 11, 2009, or a fine of $75 per day would continue to acrue until brought into compliance. Affidavit of non-compliance was filed by code enforcement after a reinspection on September 14th, 2009.
October 22, 2009, an order finding non-compliance and imposing a fine and lean was issued imposing a fine in the amount of $3,75 for 41 days of non-compliance to continue to acrew at a rate of $75 per day until brought into compliance.
Affidavit of compliance was filed by code enforcement after a reinspection on February 24, 2014. The administrative cost to process this case for the clerk was $9048. On April 28th, 2026, a request for
reduction application was filed by the applicant and a fee of $250 to process the application was paid. The requested action is the applicant Ricardo Padron is requesting a full waiver of the total acred lean in the amount of $122,025
plus the admin cost of $9048 and the county supports this request. A little background so that this all makes sense to you is there was a small narrow long commercial property off 1792 that
had two structures on it that were in front of what is now known as Lowe's. Uh the structures were as you will see in the the next case the structures were um not in the best of shape. U Mr.
Padron was not able to obtain permitting to do what uh to conversions to them or renovations to them etc. Ultimately the county stepped in and demolish those structures and there is a hard cost case of about 12,000 11,000 and some change
and speaking with Mr. Padron about getting these items corrected. his goal is is to have these fines and leans removed so that they could would be in a position to pay the actual costs that the county incurred in the demolition moving forward. So that's why the
county's in support of the request to wave these to enable him to be able to pay back the hard cost money spent for the demolition. Um I'll read in case 12 and then he can respond and we can go on
about our day. Um 1409 CEB again, Best Way Investments, Inc. Ricardo Padron, registered agent. Property is 6625 South US Highway 1792 in Fern Park. The property was cited uh again for the
accumulation of trash and debris and uncultivated vegetation. This case was heard by the board January 23rd, 2014. Order given to respondent compliance of February 21, 2014.
If continued or repeated, excuse me, after February 21, 24 or 2014, a fine of 250 a day would begin to occur. An affidavit of compliance was filed by code enforcement after a reinspection on
February 24, 2014. However, on September 8th, 2024, a repeat violation notice was filed by code enforcement. On October 23rd, 2014 meeting, a findings and fact, conclusions, and order on a repeat
violation not in compliance was entered imposing a fine of $11,500 for 46 days of non-compliance to continue to acrue at a rate of $250 for each day from September 8th through October 23rd and continuing to acrew at an increased
rate of $350 for each day that they continued or repeated past the 23rd of October. October 2014, an affidavit of compliance was finally issued by code enforcement November 29th, 2017. Admin costs in this case were $116.14.
On April 28th, 2026, request for reduction was filed by the applicant and the fee of $250 to process the application was paid. Requested action is the applicant Ricardo Patron is requesting a waiver of the acred fines in total of 290,450
and the administrative cost of $116.14. Thus far, the respondent has paid the county $500 in application fees. Uh the county is in full support of this request. >> So the code enforcement board increased
their fine that they had imposed But that's what I read. I wasn't there. Um housekeeping trying to clean up some old housekeeping. So >> So then there's a third case as well
which is a demolition matter. >> That is correct. And and that back then they were handled differently because the building department had an abatement officer who handled those type of things. >> Okay. And so you had the sheriff's office bringing trash, junk, and debris cases and the building department was bringing the abatement case before the
BCC. >> Okay. So sir, and I I certainly am going to give you opportunity to speak, but I'm inclined to wave both of these, but how do I have assurance that you're going to pay the the hard cost case? Is that
something that you all have the ability to pay right now? Well, >> he has a plan in place I think he'd like to tell us about. >> Yeah. So again, I'm speaking in uh power of attorney for uh Mr. Ricardo Pedro. Unfortunately, he's been diag diagnosed with cancer in the last couple weeks and
had some previous health issues, financial instability over the last however many years and um and being his son-in-law and knowing him up to this point, there was no way he was going to be able to address this on his own. Uh you know, given a few different circumstances or uh factors I'd like to
mention. But when he brought it up to me, I did a lot research report. So they were able to acknowledge the parcel as a lot split from a warranty deed in October 1982. So it's kind of a weird situation how that sliver of land, it's
only about 60 ft on frontage on 1792. Um, but the staff approved a site plan in November 1982 for US Panel Structures, Inc. Therefore, the staff will honor the split and deem it a buildable lot. So essentially my plan would be to build a couple offices. Uh
it's about 12,000 square ft on the property and we would end up according to my architect um I'm a licensed general contractor and a roofing contractor as well. Um and uh the ultimate goal would be to provide a uh what I would consider a prime location
for an office um off of Main Road and off of uh right next to Lowe's. Okay. uh at the same time maybe making enough space to have two other offices. Uh it would be a presentable structure. It would be a simple structure and it would obviously have to
you know confine to the requirements of parking and everything else and right away off 1792 because it's only a right-hand turn. There's no um is the median, you know. >> Yeah, it's a right in right out property. >> But overall, I'd like to uh I'd like to
mention one other thing. And again, I'm speaking on him. I wasn't there. Um, and I'm speaking for Ricardo. So, overall, the original plan, any negligence or whatever may have been shown over the years in terms of trying to solve the issues, um, he did spend money on trying to improve the properties from what he's
told me. He did spend up around 180 or $100,000 was what he had kind of estimated. The original owner, Mr. Joe Pontilo, was holding the note for uh, Best Way Investment. Not that all that matters, but Mr. Pontilo had some fees
before their actual purchase. Um where where uh Pontilo was holding the note for Mr. Padron to try to make improvements on those two buildings on the property. Uh his his plan was to do some type of quick service cafe and an ice cream shop. And that passage that
was through the property into what is now the Lowe's parking lot was uh blocked off at midway or while he was trying to go through the motions, get permits, and do what he had to do to improve the building, the property. And Lowe's put a curb there and it it was a
one-way street into the uh Lowe's parking lot. And once they set the curb, he was kind of amongst other, you know, reasons. Again, I don't know if it was negligence or what it was, but I'm trying to speak honestly here in his sake as well. Uh it it kind of screwed like screwed up his plan for the sake of
like having a right in right out one way essentially some type of culde-sac turnaround small parking lot that wasn't going to be conducive to his business plan. So whether it was the financial instability, some ongoing health issues that he's had for a very long time and and even more so now. Um my ultimate
plan would be to take this over. Obviously I did a lot of research report. But I figured with my architect, it was a buildable lot. Uh we can make something work on it and um and we're already kind of in cahoots with the gentleman that Ricardo has since defaulted with to come up with a different contractual agreement. Um
obviously that on the basis that this is all resolved cuz Okay. Of course. >> So the buildings are gone. Is that correct? This is a vacant piece plan. >> Yes, ma'am. They're gone. Um, and so and I I think that that's sounds like a really great plan for getting the property redeveloped, but I I still have
the out outstanding question related to how c can we be insured that that $12,000 plus dollars for the hard costs of demolition are going to be paid. What is the plan for having that taken care of? So, if that's going to be the um you
know, again, and I appreciate the consideration to wipe um you know, the wipe these fees that have compiled for some time, but if that's going to be the ultimate um sum that we're responsible for, then of course we're going to have to pay it because if we want to develop the lot or do anything, um it's going to
need to be paid. Uh it would end up being my responsibility at this point and I stand in front of you verbally telling you like, "Yes, we will pay it." Um, you know, I I I can't I can't tell you when we would start some type of uh improvement to have a taxpaying business structure property there. Um, but
overall, there would be two goals would be to clear title and be able to come up with a new contractual agreement with Mr. Pontilo. So then I then therefore I can move forward in terms of creating value with the property instead of it just sitting there and people throw trash and branches. So my quandry though
is that it never moves forward and then we've removed all of these leans. >> Well, the the abatement lean remains in place. >> I realize that. I I still think in order for these plans to get off the ground
that and and I I'd hate to tie this to that, but I almost feel like I I mean, do you if you if it's not going to be paid within maybe five years or something like that that we revert back
and I don't want to do that, but I I need to know I need some assurance that you all are going to pay that. I >> because even because you could still there are banks that will loan money or there are private individuals that are loan that will loan money without regard
to the fact that this lean exists, >> right? >> Um and so especially if you have a private investor right now and he's going to re um you know condition the existing
outstanding loan and repurpose it. you know, then he's he's not even he's doing that without consideration of this lane. >> Is a possible solution to to make it contingent on a 36-month period that the abatement costs be reimbursed to the
county or these fines will revert back. That gives them 3 years to address this problem. Mr. Padron had talked about doing a payment plan which we would accept and but based on his current health and being also being a cancer patient myself I understand financially
what he's facing. So I don't want to break the man down financially. Um but a 36-month period seems >> I'd be willing to go 60 months even if if that's if you but I you know if you think 36 is is enough to you for you.
Did you plan on getting this going in >> Oh, absolutely. In three years. >> Yeah. Well, this it will be paid. I'm wouldn't stand in front of you and tell you otherwise. And that's more so a matter of uh between my father-in-law, myself as well as my brother-in-law um as I've become part of their family and
turn the property asked me to, you know, come on board to try to situate. But yeah, no, of course. I mean, there would be no intention to not pay. I'm here and have already started the motions with my architect and everything to try to create something of value. So, yeah, I wouldn't intend on
putting anything on the back burner. >> Okay. And the county is um you've verified that they can develop on this property that it is going to be honored. >> It it is a developable property. Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. >> For certain uses, not a whole lot of lot a whole lot of them based on the
dimension and location, but it is a viable property. >> Okay. So then you can get me the um for our order, you can get me the case number of that other demolition case so we can kind of >> absolutely >> tie them. Okay. Then what I'll do is um
I'll note that you have paid $250 um in case 09107 CEB um for the application fee which well then covers the administrative costs that have been incurred in processing
um this matter. Um, and so for that I will reduce the $122,25 fine. I will not impose administrative costs. I will reduce it to zero provided
that the hard cost case for demolition of the structures is paid within 36 months. If it's not paid within 36 months, it will revert back to the original amount of $122,025.
Okay. And then in the second case 1409 CEB, I will find similarly that the $250 application fee has been um paid and covers the administrative costs incurred
in this matter and that the $290,450 fine will be reduced to zero provided that the demolition hard costs of the county that they've incurred in the demolition case are paid within 36
months. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, that is everyone that we have. So, let's start back over and call 2656
Christine Pets. Sounds good. Code enforcement officer Shannon Henson, case number 26-56. Respondents Thomas W. and Christine Pete R. Pets. Uh the parcel's 18,21 29502 0D
0000180. This is uh located at 3514 Glock Drive in Apaka, Florida. Uh and incorporated Simol County. Uh the property is homesteaded. Uh the violation cited is Simol County chapter 95.5 section 302.8
motor vehicles description of violation as inoperable vehicles. Uh the next one is chapter 35.5 section 308.1 accumulation of rubbish or garbage and the description is garbage included including but not limited to bikes,
toilets, tarps and loose trash. Um, Simol County chapter uh code chapter 95.5 section 302.71 accessory structures fence fences walls and the description of this violation is repair all broken or dilapidated fences
panels to in ensure a pool security. uh seminal county chapter 95.5 section 303.1 swimming pools description is the pool must be in a clean must be clean and maintained and des uh the next one seminal county chapter 95.5
303.2 Two enclosure description of this violation. It must be surrounded by a fence or barrier not less than 48 in within a self-closing self-latching gate on the inside of the gate.
Um I first went to saw this property on January 14th, 2026. It was initiated by myself. Um I mailed a I put a door hanger at that time. Um, I sent a notice to the uh respondent on January 29th,
2026 with a compliance date of February 20th, 2026. Um, a second door hanger was uh left after that uh inspection. I also went back on um March 3rd, 2026,
March 17th, 2026, April 14th, 2026, and then one of my associates went and checked the property on the 12th. uh and this resulted in the violations uh still remain on site. This here is the first uh the notice of
compliant or I'm sorry compliance schedule that was sent out on the 29th with the compliance of February 2026. And this is the second page. This here is the certified letter that was sent out. I didn't get the digital
copy back, but um I got get a signature for Christy Pets and I mailed Thomas's out too and did not get it got return mail on that one. Uh this is an copy of the property uh record card with
Christine's name only on here. And this is the deed with Thomas SW and Christine, our pets on it. And these uh following photos are you're about to see are true and accurate to what this officer observed on the dates noted. This is the front of the house on
January 14th, 2026 with the two inoperable vehicles. Um and this is the inoperable vehicle and the rubbish on the side of the property and the inoperable vehicle on another one with the side of the property. Um this is when I went again and left a
door hanger. Um and then just you can see the um in inoperable vehicle at the front of the house and inoperable vehicle and the rubbish. And there was also the rear fence on the 29th of January 2026 that's falling down
the side fence also. You can see there's a blue tarp in the back now. And um and then you can see also it's kind of hard to see through there. It's better to see through the naked eye, but there's a green pool. And this is um on March 3rd uh 2026.
This front of the house with the cars and you can see the on the side another blue tarp is being present and more rubbish and tarps in the back. And this one is also on the third. The broken fence is still there. The green pool's still there and the rubbish and the
fence, you know, is still a disrepair. Um this one here is from the 17th of March 2026. the front of the property, the inoperable vehicle, and there's a new tarp. It's the brown one. It looks more like a boat cover, and people were kind of climbing in and out of it. And there's bicycles. And you can also see
the green pool through the chain link. It's much better on this side to see the rubbish and such. Um, a picture through the broken fence, tarp, green pool, rubbish, and the dilapidated fence. Um, this was March 24th, 2026.
And this is the front of the pool with the inoperable vehicle. And I posted the property. It's the front of the uh posting and the back back of the posting. And this one was from April 17th, 2026. The front of the property with an
inoperable vehicle. The second one's still there, but it is under the carport. Um, but there's a lot of rubbish and stuff showing that it's definitely not been moving. And then there's inoperable vehicle rubbish and more tarps, more bicycles and more people on the outside. Um tarp on this
one, same same date, uh April 17th, uh 2026. Tarps, the green pool and the fence. More rubbish, including a lovely toilet. Um rubbish and the pool and still another tarp against the house. This was also from um Officer Smith's
pictures and this was on the 13th of May. The dirty pool, the rubbish, the dilapidated fence all still exist. And this is also another picture from the 13th. The rubbish and the inappropriate vehicles. Based on the testimony and evidence
presented in case number 26-56, it's determined that the respondent is Thomas W. and Christine R. pets pets the record owner of the property located at 3514 Glacamora Drive Apakka Florida 32703
Simol County as determined by the property appraisers records is in possession or control of the property and is in violation of Simol County Chapter 95.5 section 302.8 8 motor vehicles section 308.1
accumulation of rubbish or garbage section 302.71 accessory structures fence walls and 95 uh5 section 303.1 swimming pools and 303.2 enclosure at
this time I'd like to submit this uh digital and case file into evidence. I will accept the digital and case file into evidence. Um, two questions are, um, you might have said, and if you did, I apologize. Is this a homesteaded
property? >> Yes. >> Okay. And, um, have you had any contact with him whatsoever? >> I feel that Thomas isn't around. Um, and I did speak to and and Christine either. I did speak to his son, Aaron. He
contacted me the first few times I spoke was trying to contact him and then just nothing because after I told him the things that had needed to happen. Um the I have seen that the Lucia County for some reason has put stickers on their property trying to get a hold of them too. So I what I found I can't find
anything on Christine or Thomas. >> Okay. I'm sorry. Go forward. >> No. Uh the recommendation is uh to comply with the code section cited within 15 days or a fine of $250 uh per day thereafter. Uh
162.8. These violations pose a serious threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the general public and because of these violations, we are asking that a health and safety tag on this property for the uh purpose of securing the pool if violations are not corrected. This concludes my
presentation. >> And uh one more question. the when the picture of the posting that you showed, that was a posting of the actual notice of hearing for today. Yes. Correct. Okay. >> I'm going to um find that Christine Pet
has been properly noticed to be here today and she um is not present. I'm um going to find that all of the violations cited um by the officer are um in fact
violations that exist on the property. And I'm going to find that the property does pose a health, safety, and welfare issue uh because of the pool um that is not being maintained properly. I'm going
to order that the property be brought into compliance within 15 days um after today or a fine in the amount of $250 a day will be imposed. And I'm also going to issue a health, safety, and welfare
tag and allowing the county to go onto the property to do what is necessary to safely secure the pool so it is not a threat to the welfare of the public. That is all. Thank you.
>> I think that concludes our cases for today. I'm going to go ahead and set our next hearing for June 11th, 2026. >> They're all signed. >> Yeah. What is
hearing of witnesses? >> What What are witnesses though? We're okay. We're adjourned. Okay, let's put Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.