I think there was that that signage is it's definitely far enough away to alert you that there is a speed zone coming or there's a monitored speed zone coming. So we say that's about 50 feet. I would say it's clo it's at least 100
feet just from my eyeballing that it's it's a lot closer. So, in order to let me tell you how I eyeballed it. That truck that's sitting at about right where that signage is is probably about somewhere in the neighborhood of
20 feet, 18 ft long. I could fit five of those trucks between that speed limit sign and where the warning monitor monitored speed zone is Florida Department. So, that's how I eyeballed 100. Florida Department of Transportation, which has our safety in consideration, but they suggest to 300 to 500.
Yes. which is a suggestion, but it does not mean that that I cannot uphold a citation issue if that's signed. I appreciate your arguments, though. They were well made. Anything else you'd like me to hear? No, sir. Okay. I I do find that there is a
violation here. Um, and based on that finding, I am going to uphold the citation, order the citation, uh, plus cost of $8949 for a total of $18949 cents, be paid within 30 days. As you've heard from the others, you will receive a letter beyond this. If you'll stick
around, we'll get you the written order, but you'll also receive correspondence in the mail with the payment instructions. From my understanding, yes, sir. It'll be become a citation, actual citation if it's not paid. Correct. And so, will I have a opportunity to appeal it. At that point,
you can appeal my decision here today to the circuit court. So, your your appeal period begins with this written order. Sounds good. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you. Notice number 58225002258. Victor George Hernandez, petitioner.
Give me one second. Okay. Good afternoon, Sergeant Collie S. Claw Police Department currently assigned to the traffic division on May 29th, 2025 at approximately 12:43 in the afternoon. A 2019 white Kia bearing Florida
registration Delta Yankee 00 Sierra Victor was traveling northbound on Michigan Avenue near Michigan Avenue Elementary. As the vehicle entered the school safety zone, it was captured on camera and radar doing 38 mph in a posted 25 mph zone. The evidence of this
case was forwarded to the St. Cloud Police Department for review. On June 6, 2025, Officer Manning reviewed the evidence and found probable cause to believe that infraction did occur and a notice of violation was sent to the restaurant owner, Victor George Hernandez.
On 8:26, 2025, I reviewed all the evidence and I found probable cause to believe that there was a violation of city ordinance 20248. Once again, this case was reviewed a second time because the initial reviewing officer had retired from the police department. And this is the
evidence that I reviewed at the time to come to that conclusion. And this is the notice of violation that was sent to the the owner. So here uh instant happened on 529 at 12:43. It's got the vehicle information on there along with the the registered
owner. A couple still photos. This is not the reduced speed limit. So it is posted 25 mph zone. And to the right is Michigan Avenue Elementary. It's actually their walker's gate that is about to pass. Um, see 38 by 25. Vehicle continues through
and then there's a closeup of the license plate verifying that we got the right car. Uh, next will be a video of it or not. I don't know. I don't like this thing. Might need you to help me.
There we go. It says a normal school day and school is in session at this time. Just while while we're on the video, you might just let me see it one more time. Okay. Uh camera radar log showing that it tested itself before and after the
violation all on the same date. a certification for the radar itself that it was calibrated within a year of this violation. The administrative hearing showing that the owner of the vehicle requested a hearing today.
And based on the testimony and evidence presented in this case, it's determined that the petitioner or the authorized individual was the operator of a 2019 Kia with a Florida registration of Delta Yankee 00 Sierra Victor. They were driving 38 miles an hour in a posted 25
mph uh school safety zone. This is a violation of the city of St. Cloud city ordinance 202448. Recommend to issue an order denying the petitioner's appeal and order the petitioner pay within the next 30 days $100 fine and the 89 and 49 cent
administrative costs. Is Mr. Hernandez present? Good. And how are you? Good. Hey, you were sworn earlier, correct? Yes. And if you start by stating your your your name for me for the record, and then you can let me know what you'd like me to hear. Victor George Hernandez. Okay.
I was not the I'm the registered owner, but I wasn't the driver. And the driver was actually a mobile mechanic that was testing out my car. When he came back, I didn't know anything about it until a couple weeks
and I got the notice and I tried to call him. It was the phone is no longer active. So basically, I have no way of getting in touch with this guy. I even went back to the part store cuz that's where I met him and nobody seen him for weeks and
supposedly went to Puerto Rico back to Puerto Rico or something. So I'm stuck with this and it wasn't even me. So, you heard me earlier discuss the affidavit for non-ownership or or excuse me, for ownership but not being the driver. And I know in the notice that's
provided, it references that. Why did you not submit the affidavit to the city? I didn't even know about it. I didn't know about that. Okay, let me ask the if you get just to step to the side and ask the officer a question if you wouldn't mind coming up, officer.
the notices that go out on the violations, do they have instructions for an for a driver who was not the or for an owner who was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of issuance? Yes, there's a there's a second page to it and it has a phone number they can call and speak to a representative of
your mobility as well. And and I have seen the full package. So that is that is my recollection of it. Are is it your testimony today that you did not receive that second page? I think what you have there is your notice of today's hearing,
but when you got the original notice of the violation, do you remember receiving a second page that gave you? Because again, because this is a statutory program, my hands are tied, as you've heard me say over and over again at each one. And if that affidavit is not
submitted, then I have to hold the owner responsible for that violation. I didn't know about it, I guess. Anything from the city? No, sir. No, sir. Based on the evidence testimony, I have no choice today but to uphold the
citation. I am sympathetic to your predicament and even more so since you cannot track down the driver to say, "Hey, you owe me $189." I tried every week, right? Yeah. Hours and hours and hours trying to find Did he Was he a solo guy or did he work for somebody?
I was getting parts from the part store. But did he work for the part store? No. Oh, way of getting around it. Well, I I I am sorry, but again, should it ever happen again, hopefully it will never happen again, but submit that
affidavit. Submit that affidavit. So, if I would submit it, it would have been it would have been him. They just like you saw in that last case, that process. That's exactly what it had with yours. they would have dismissed your citation, issued a new citation to the person you said was driving the vehicle at that time.
Yeah. If you don't know the driver, so when you got your violation, it comes down here tells you right here aid and you got the website listed on multiple times here where you can go to get more information on as well.
But no, I didn't even see it. I'm busy with my life. I guess it is. Yes, sir. Thank you for your time, Dana. If you'll stick around, we will get the order to you. And like you've heard me tell the others, you'll receive instructions in the mail that will let you know how you can pay that.
paid. And if I may, Mr. Smith, just a little bit off topic, I did find the FDOT regulations on signage, and it's done based on speed limit on speed zones. the 35 or less speed zone, which is what all these are, requires a sign of 100 feet
away from the area, you know. So, um that's that's under the FDOT's U sign standard stable. Thank you. I believe the other two the other two cases have all have been paid. Okay. So, if we can go to the uh the
last code enforcement case, the second one Case number 2025-535 Broadick Street Homes LLC. Owner, location of violation 1514 Ohio Avenue, St. Cloud, Florida.
Um, good afternoon. Alex Miller, code enforcement officer for the city of St. Cloud. At this time, I would like to enter into evidence the following items. Copy of the observation notice. Copy of the courtesy notice sent by regular mail. Copy of the notice of violation
sent by certified mail. Copy of the statement of violation and notice of hearing sent by certified mail. Posted at the property in city hall. Copy of the PowerPoint presentation. Affidavit of posting. Evidence of mailings. Copy of the code sections in violation. A
copy of the due to the property and and a copy of the costing cur of the magistrate funes respondent in violation in the amount of $355.38. And we do have a representative here. Thank you. On June 19, 2025, during routine patrol,
I observed that work was being performed at to the interior of the shed located in the rear yard of this location. There was a vanity box uh drywall pipes for plumbing and sewer connections. I spoke with the tenant and his son who were
doing work um during the doing the remodeling and they stated that they were not aware they needed a permit and but they will obtain the permit as soon as possible. I also inquired about the back porch on the property and I was advised that there was a permit on record. An observation notice was issued
to the tenant and a copy was mailed to the owner and registered agent and three photos were taken. Just walk me through these photos. Tell me what I'm seeing when tell me what you want me to see in these photos as you show them. So this is the when I arrived to the property, I was verifying another
violation and and observed that they were doing some underwork plumbing. Um, and they had some piping. They have dug the ground for a sort of connection. Black and the foreground of the Is that piping? Is that what is that what that is? Yes. Okay. And then and this those are the boxes
that were put in on the inside of the of the shed. Um, remodeling the shed on the inside. Okay. Um, on July 1st, a reinspection was performed and verified that there was no permits on record for the back porch and the shed installation and the interior
work performed inside the shed. A courtesy notice by regular mail was sent to the owner, an agent, and a copy was mailed to the tenant. Two pictures were taken. And what is it that you want me to see in these photos? This is just the back porch that was
installed without a permit. And this is the shed that was also installed where they were doing the inside renovation. The shed on July 18. I verified there was still no premise on record. A notice of violation by certified mail was sent to
the owner and agent and two photos were taken. On September 3rd, a reinspection was performed and verified that the property was still in violation. A statement of violation and notice of hearing was mailed by certified mail, posted at the
property in city hall. An affidavit of posting was created and two photos were taken. On September 12th, I verified that was still no permits on record and I took two photos. It is the city's recommendation that the
respondent be found in violation of allowing work to be performed prior to obtaining permits by the time specified. The city will recommend that the respondent be given until October 10, 2025 to obtain the permits or remove the structures or a fine in the amount of
$250 be assessed until compliance is met. The city will also request that the cost incur and bring in this case before the magistrate in the amount of $355.38 to be paid within the within seven days of the written not order by the special
magistrate. And this concludes my presentation. Okay. Thank you. I have no questions for you at this time. Castle. Good afternoon, Melody Kervani. On behalf of the owner, um thank you for
your presentation, Miss Miller. She's been a pleasure to work with. Um my client is removing uh the structures here and the back porch. So, as of today, the update that I've been given is that it's a rent to own shed. So, the resident had to contact the company to
have it uh remove uh the shed, which it is doing. But there should be no issue with bringing the property into compliance by October 10th. Okay. Just if if that's the case, then I will enter the order requested, but I will
advise you to advise your client. If something happens, let Miss Miller know as soon as possible if there's going to be any delay in that so that code enforcement is aware. And absolutely. Uh since my involvement, we reached out to Miss Miller and she was very prompt and we've uh maintained
steady communication since. Okay. Anything else? Not for me. Okay. So, with this a little bit different since I I don't know what's going to h I don't have an easy affirm. There will be an uh order that's mailed.
What is Let's see. You have a notice of appearance. So, that has their I got I'll get your contact info from the notice of appearance. So, I'll make sure you get an order, too. I'll copy you on the order that goes out to your client. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Any um administrative fines that my client has to pay for today? The administrative costs are $355.38.
Okay. That will be due within 7 days the date of my written order. But if you'd like to request more time, I can tie I can make that I can tie that to the October 10th. It may be easier for everybody. That would be wonderful. Um just to ensure the payment is timely made. So the 3558, correct?
38 355 38 38 and that will also be in the order. All of this will be detailed in the order that I mail out. Thank you very much. Yes, ma'am. Will we get an electronic copy of that order as well or no? The Do I have an email address? Yep. I'll email it to you. Thank you very much. I really appreciate it.
You're welcome. Let's go ahead. Uh my my thought on the two appeals with no petitioners present is I would like to hear the hear the presentation. I understood that those were paid prior to the hearing. So
they're just being pulled. They're just being pulled. Yeah. We we we apologize for that. We had to get confirmation from the company that handles the payment as to whether the fine was paid plus the as you know statutoily there's a $50 fee. So we we were able to confirm that finally this
morning I think and got it. Claudia had to track them track them down. No problem for me. So that leaves us with just one code enforcement case left. Two two case number 2025-441. Strada Trust Company owner location of
violation 1001 Ohio Avenue Mr. The other case, the other left has been null frost. Which one was being null prost is that Nathaniel Marres? Okay. So, just for the record, the Tora case has been null prost. And so we're moving that
removing that from the agenda. And now we are on strata trust. Correct. Yes, sir. You can. Thank you. Uh, good afternoon. Alex Miller, for enforcement officer for the city of St. Cloud. At this time, I would like to enter into evidence the following items. Copy of the observation notice. Copy of
the courtesy notice sent by regular mail. Copy of the notice of violation sent by by certified mail. Copy of the statement of violation and notice of hearing sent by certified mail. Posted at the property and city hall. Copy of the poweroint presentation. Affidavit of
posting. Evidence of mailings. Copy of the code sections and violation. A copy of the deed to the property. and a copy of the cost incurred of the magistrate find the respondent in violation in the amount of $31848. The respondent is not here.
On May 13, 2025, while on patrol, I observed that new windows were installed at this location and there was no permit on record. I also verified that there was a revoked permit for an AC installation. The unit was installed in July of 2024 and due to the lack of
corporation from the owner, the permit was revoked from the contractor. An observation notice was issued to the owner to correct the violations. Later the same day, I called the owner and explained the violations and he stated that he will be obtaining the permits and requested that the mail be sent to a
different address. I advised him that I would send him a copy of the letter to the requesttor address. Four photos were taken the windows and they see that was installed in 2024. On May 29th, I verified that the
violations were not corrected. A courtesy notice by regular mail was sent to the owner. On July 12th, I verified that were no permits on record. A notice of violation by certified mail was sent to the owner. On July 25, I spoke with
the owner again and he stated that he was coming into in town and that and he will be obtaining the permits. Then on August 21st, a reinspection was performed and verified that the permits were not obtained. A statement of violation and notice of hearing was
mailed by certified mail posted at the property in city hall. An affidavit of posting was created and one photo was taken of the posting on September 12th. And again on September 17, I verified there's still no permits on record and two photos were
taken of the property. It is the city's recommendation that the respondent be found in violation of allowing work to be performed prior to obtaining permits by the time specified. The city will recommend that the respondent be given until October 10,
2025 to obtain permits or a fine in the amount of $250 be assessed until compliance is met. The city will also request that the cost incurred and bringing this case before the magistrate in the amount of $31848
cents to be paid within seven days of the written order by the special magistrate. This concludes my presentation. Go back to your slide. What's your Sorry, what's your administrative cost? 318. Yeah. So that's the slide.
Um this the affidavit is 38 the the tabulation is 31848. So the typo is in the slide. Uh just one question just make sure I understand what the work the work that leads to the violation is. So they installed windows without permits.
Yes sir. They had a contractor at some point who was working to that made an application. Did I No. So, the windows were installed without a permit. But back in July 24, I have cited the same owner for not having a permit for the AC installation, which
he obtained the permit, but because he wasn't um cooperating with the contract that the permit was revoked, so there is no permit on record for the AC again. Has the AC actually been that my next question was the AC. Has it actually been installed? Yes, sir.
Okay. Was it It's not installed where it was in that photo, though. That's not its installation location, is it? Uh, no. No, that was just when they were working on it. That was when I found a violation. I thought you were showing me that, but it has been installed. Yes, sir. So, the are the windows part of this or is it just the AC? The windows and AC.
Okay. So, the windows were done without permit. There was never any kind of application made for the windows. The AC was installed without permit. They tried to correct. Yes, sir. Now you say that the non-ooperation from
the owner so it was revoked. Was it revoked by the city or revoked or did the contractor by the contractor? The contractor revoked their application for the permit. Now I follow. Okay. Based evidence testimony provided I will find in favor the city find the respondent is in violation for work
without permits both for the air conditioning unit uh replacement as well as the installation of new windows without proper permits. Allow the respondent until October 10th, 2025 to obtain the permits. If not brought into compliance by that date, a fine in the amount of $250 per day will
be assessed until compliance is met. We'll also order the respondent to pay the administrative costs incurred by the city in the amount of $31,848. That amount will be due within 7 days of the date of my written order. Thank you. Thank you. Anything else from city? We have nothing further, sir. Thank you.
Anything clerk? Yep. Next meeting date. Next meeting date October 15, 2025 which will be held at the community development conference room. Thank you. Anyone has anything else? We are adjourned.